As a trained professional “mythologizer” I affirm humans as creatures who tell and resonate deeply to stories written with the deep poetic, metaphoric or allegoric meanings in our heart/body/soul/minds.  Often these myth last for decades or even centuries in one culture or many. They are called “Archetypal” to say that in fact they originate in the Universe , the sentient Kosmos itself as we “know” and experience it. They are our story and we connect with them because they carry images or forms or pictures in our minds with which we can relate and with which we are familiar, if only subconsciously or in of our dreams. They are ubiquitous and quotidian, common and daily.  In a movie recently one actor reminded another, “Movies are other people’s dreams.”  So it is with myth, legends and archetypes, and other states of mind.

As human we tell our stories; we love our stories; we elevate our stories into works of art and literature.  Hollywood, Bollywood and Disneyland are examples of huge industries built on story telling in myriad and diverse ways, styles, and genres. Collectively they reveal how critical this level of myth is to our human consciousness, from the earliest “dawn of civilization” to the present.

Clergy and coaches are commonly professionals who are both analysts or those that do critique of myth and their making.  I am one such coach priest.  The challenge to any who embrace ITo is to do this with compassion and insight to better communicate and understand our fellows and to expose logical fallacies as well..

To extrapolate hugely, the religion of tomorrow is the idea of how we update and continually re-create our own mythology. It is about transformation that includes and transcends yesterday’s meanings with today’s higher state of consciousness. IT is a map to overlay the territory of our psyches and use it to notice where the overlaps occur. As such it is a process that can go very deep and very broadly into my worldview while discerning others. What KW leaves out of his book, that I am currently reading, is the necessity of re mythologizing, as i call it. Perhaps he leaves that to others, as Mr. Dillard points out, the God language debate is complicated enough. But our mythic level of consciousness is not going away. I welcome the task personally and professionally to bring this awareness to each conversation I have, realizing we each have a gestalt of our past, the… Where we were when dimension, and the question I posed to Elfriede, what is it you want others to know about you, to ask about you?”