What do you think?
Rate this book
Metamodern Spirituality #4
Building the Cathedral: Answering the Meaning Crisis through Personal Myth
The modern world is in turmoil. The decline of the old religious myths has generated profound psychological instability for many people, with nothing yet to take their place. The resulting “meaning crisis” lies at the heart of so much of our cultural tumult, and will continue to unravel society until we find a way to affectively reintegrate a sense of mythic meaning and common purpose back into our lives. Personal myth offers us a constructive way forward. Since Carl Jung first explored the idea in the mid-20th century, numerous psychologists and comparative mythologists have advanced the concept in fruitful ways. This book attempts to develop it even further—to show how the process of personal mythmaking can not only return a sense of meaning to our individual lives but also form the basis of genuinely edifying spiritual community. The task of reimagining the sacred calls each of us to do our part—a project every bit as bold as the building of the great cathedrals. What will you build with your life?
128 pages, Kindle Edition
Published March 25, 2021
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
October 26, 2021
It is now over a century since Nietzsche correctly diagnosed the spiritual hole at the heart of modernity; God is indeed dead. In my eyes, it is becoming increasingly clear that he, additionally, provided us with the proper solution - striving towards living life as art in its totality.
The death of God means many things. Partly, it means that the symbols of the abrahamic tradition, which are axiomatic and fundamentally underpins western civilization, no longer speaks to us. They are nongenerative, dead wood, unmoving, they are too far from modernity, such that their previous luminosity are unable to activate our latent religious imagery.
That is the issue this book centers around. It does not deserve 5 stars for its originality, but due to the ease by which she dances with, and around this central problem. The thread runs from Nietzsche through Jung and others, but rarely are authors able to synthesize and summarize the development with such fluidity as done here. Nietzsche's discovery was initially done through delving into the unconscious sea, fishing up truths which the rest of us would only later come to recognize. We have come to that point now, and books such as Building the Cathedral proves that. What was once poetically derived from the depths, some are now able to state clearly and explicitly. Hence my recommendation. This is a short, well-written book that makes accessible the central issue in the midst of our culture, restoring the dimension of the holy.
Building upon Jung and Campbell, two 20th century thinkers who, following Nietzsche, saw that the gravitational hole of nihilism had to be filled with something new. When the traditions and dogmas are unable to connect, we are to become, as Nietzsche said, creators of our own values. He might have been wrong in that ideal, values seem to be imposed upon us, they come from depths which neither reason nor creative imagination can reach. What we can do, however, is to become myth-makers. First of all to percieve and understand ourselves in terms of narrative and mythology, recognize that interpretations such as 'randomness' and 'chance', need not be accepted as if they were a priori, objectively and undeniably true. From there to regain an intuitiveness regarding which symbols speaks to us, to keep those who do, and discard those who do not. Flying across multiple traditions, taking what works and leaving the rest behind.
We are to become individualist religion makers, to take it upon ourselves to become sensitive, to listen to which symbols still evoke, to integrate them into coherent narratives, then ultimately to live by those narratives. Then, those who can, are to create mythologies that incorporates the new conception of the cosmos in which we live. Scientific truths and discoveries are to be translated as mythico-poetical narrative structures, something that engages the soul. It is not enough for them to be simply and formally stated, our poets must mold them, shape them into new forms, translate them into epics.
Moon is able to reflect and think about all of this, in an understandable, non-exaggerated manner. She is able to get at the core, by seeing how this core has been reflected in the likes of William Blake, Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell. Undoubtedly she has read JBP too, as his framework from Maps of Meaning exists implcitly throughout the text; the way in which ideas develop from embodied, through rituals, through narration, through mythology, through religion, and ultimately made explicit in philosophy and then science. Maybe the controversy still surrounding him makes such a reference to risky, but his integration of mythology and psychology, amongst other domains of knowledge, plays a significant role of this re-mythologization that is being traced out. If not, she is intimating the same framework that he provides, and a closer reading would prove useful. I think.
The death of God means many things. Partly, it means that the symbols of the abrahamic tradition, which are axiomatic and fundamentally underpins western civilization, no longer speaks to us. They are nongenerative, dead wood, unmoving, they are too far from modernity, such that their previous luminosity are unable to activate our latent religious imagery.
That is the issue this book centers around. It does not deserve 5 stars for its originality, but due to the ease by which she dances with, and around this central problem. The thread runs from Nietzsche through Jung and others, but rarely are authors able to synthesize and summarize the development with such fluidity as done here. Nietzsche's discovery was initially done through delving into the unconscious sea, fishing up truths which the rest of us would only later come to recognize. We have come to that point now, and books such as Building the Cathedral proves that. What was once poetically derived from the depths, some are now able to state clearly and explicitly. Hence my recommendation. This is a short, well-written book that makes accessible the central issue in the midst of our culture, restoring the dimension of the holy.
Building upon Jung and Campbell, two 20th century thinkers who, following Nietzsche, saw that the gravitational hole of nihilism had to be filled with something new. When the traditions and dogmas are unable to connect, we are to become, as Nietzsche said, creators of our own values. He might have been wrong in that ideal, values seem to be imposed upon us, they come from depths which neither reason nor creative imagination can reach. What we can do, however, is to become myth-makers. First of all to percieve and understand ourselves in terms of narrative and mythology, recognize that interpretations such as 'randomness' and 'chance', need not be accepted as if they were a priori, objectively and undeniably true. From there to regain an intuitiveness regarding which symbols speaks to us, to keep those who do, and discard those who do not. Flying across multiple traditions, taking what works and leaving the rest behind.
We are to become individualist religion makers, to take it upon ourselves to become sensitive, to listen to which symbols still evoke, to integrate them into coherent narratives, then ultimately to live by those narratives. Then, those who can, are to create mythologies that incorporates the new conception of the cosmos in which we live. Scientific truths and discoveries are to be translated as mythico-poetical narrative structures, something that engages the soul. It is not enough for them to be simply and formally stated, our poets must mold them, shape them into new forms, translate them into epics.
Moon is able to reflect and think about all of this, in an understandable, non-exaggerated manner. She is able to get at the core, by seeing how this core has been reflected in the likes of William Blake, Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell. Undoubtedly she has read JBP too, as his framework from Maps of Meaning exists implcitly throughout the text; the way in which ideas develop from embodied, through rituals, through narration, through mythology, through religion, and ultimately made explicit in philosophy and then science. Maybe the controversy still surrounding him makes such a reference to risky, but his integration of mythology and psychology, amongst other domains of knowledge, plays a significant role of this re-mythologization that is being traced out. If not, she is intimating the same framework that he provides, and a closer reading would prove useful. I think.
September 25, 2022
Pretty good, but…
I liked this book and especially the quotes by Campbell, Jung, and Edinger. They round out the author’s intent. However, I don’t see much new in what is being presented other than a regurgitation or interpretation of the previous author’s comments. There is not much instruction on how to conjure or get at your personal myth. A few pages of the book provide some ideas on how you can look at the patterns of your life, but I think other books do a better job of that - many of which the author quotes. Still, it is a concise compendium of Jung and Campbell’s thoughts on personal myth, in particular, which I appreciate.
I liked this book and especially the quotes by Campbell, Jung, and Edinger. They round out the author’s intent. However, I don’t see much new in what is being presented other than a regurgitation or interpretation of the previous author’s comments. There is not much instruction on how to conjure or get at your personal myth. A few pages of the book provide some ideas on how you can look at the patterns of your life, but I think other books do a better job of that - many of which the author quotes. Still, it is a concise compendium of Jung and Campbell’s thoughts on personal myth, in particular, which I appreciate.
October 14, 2023
Best of the series so far (I haven’t read Emergentism yet) - a refreshingly comprehensive overview of Jungian thought and it’s derivatives.
I’ve found that a lot of contemporary academic employment of Jungian principles tends to miss the mark - attempts to either strip collective unconsciousness from its “woo woo” sensibilities or views Jung as a Wild West of “woo woo” potential. Author’s hermeneutic is personal myth and meaning, and it serves him well.
About midway through I began to question the mythopoetic as the salvation of meaning, as I asked, “is subcreation ungrounded in actual transcendence REALLY enough?” But toward the end, as the seeds for Emergentism begin to be sewn, a really great section eschewed my grievances.
This section described the emergence of collective myth via sharing of personal & a sort of building process toward transcendent truth. The vision, then, seems to be to truly map the collective unconscious and discover what the “God in all of us” is.
Two points I’d love to see the author explore:
1. The current debates in analytical psychology re: the innnateness of archetypes. It’s annoying, but it’s happening either way.
2. Existing structures and identification of traits
On the latter, there is a concern with the concretizing of the dynamic mythopoetic process and a clear disdain for dogma that’s present throughout this entire series (especially Gospel). However, in identification of universal traits of this collective myth, it seems inevitable that dogmatic traits will emerge, even if they only exist in a dynamic flux.
The alternative, it seems to be, implies a shared myth which only has meaning-making power whilst its subcreators are actively engaged in subcreation, but which is lacking in power on its own. Meaning, “I’ll help to create and map out this emergent God, but when I’m not doing that, I’ll just go do drugs and watch TikTok.” In the absence of a convicting ethos, I fear that this deity will be a side project at best.
Especially if engagement with the transcendent is known by all subcreators to not truly be transcendent. Because the follow up question is, “why should I?” At an individual level, I think it’s harder to prescribe mythopoesis than at a societal level, where it’s obviously got merit. A lion without teeth just might not grip people as much as we’d hope.
I also think that the concretizing process of religion might be overstated. While there are certainly plenty of examples of this, over here in the Roman Catholic Church, we’re free to read both St. Francis and St. Dominic, Meister Eckhart and St. Thomas Aquinas.
The rich symbology that the author seeks is well present in St. Catherine’s spiritual experiences - she likens God to a great ocean and so forth.
Part of the appeal of this tradition, and part of (to my mind) some of the most impactful solutions to the meaning crisis is the engagement with both abstract and concrete.
Anyway, that’s enough words. I liked the book, I look forward to finishing Emergentism.
I’ve found that a lot of contemporary academic employment of Jungian principles tends to miss the mark - attempts to either strip collective unconsciousness from its “woo woo” sensibilities or views Jung as a Wild West of “woo woo” potential. Author’s hermeneutic is personal myth and meaning, and it serves him well.
About midway through I began to question the mythopoetic as the salvation of meaning, as I asked, “is subcreation ungrounded in actual transcendence REALLY enough?” But toward the end, as the seeds for Emergentism begin to be sewn, a really great section eschewed my grievances.
This section described the emergence of collective myth via sharing of personal & a sort of building process toward transcendent truth. The vision, then, seems to be to truly map the collective unconscious and discover what the “God in all of us” is.
Two points I’d love to see the author explore:
1. The current debates in analytical psychology re: the innnateness of archetypes. It’s annoying, but it’s happening either way.
2. Existing structures and identification of traits
On the latter, there is a concern with the concretizing of the dynamic mythopoetic process and a clear disdain for dogma that’s present throughout this entire series (especially Gospel). However, in identification of universal traits of this collective myth, it seems inevitable that dogmatic traits will emerge, even if they only exist in a dynamic flux.
The alternative, it seems to be, implies a shared myth which only has meaning-making power whilst its subcreators are actively engaged in subcreation, but which is lacking in power on its own. Meaning, “I’ll help to create and map out this emergent God, but when I’m not doing that, I’ll just go do drugs and watch TikTok.” In the absence of a convicting ethos, I fear that this deity will be a side project at best.
Especially if engagement with the transcendent is known by all subcreators to not truly be transcendent. Because the follow up question is, “why should I?” At an individual level, I think it’s harder to prescribe mythopoesis than at a societal level, where it’s obviously got merit. A lion without teeth just might not grip people as much as we’d hope.
I also think that the concretizing process of religion might be overstated. While there are certainly plenty of examples of this, over here in the Roman Catholic Church, we’re free to read both St. Francis and St. Dominic, Meister Eckhart and St. Thomas Aquinas.
The rich symbology that the author seeks is well present in St. Catherine’s spiritual experiences - she likens God to a great ocean and so forth.
Part of the appeal of this tradition, and part of (to my mind) some of the most impactful solutions to the meaning crisis is the engagement with both abstract and concrete.
Anyway, that’s enough words. I liked the book, I look forward to finishing Emergentism.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews