Back To God
Regarding “Nagel’s Untimely Idea” (May 17): Rather than use theism to explain consciousness, I’ve found it helpful to use consciousness to explain theism. As one who lost the faith of my childhood, I set out to regain it. So I needed a plausible explanation of God that did not depend on magic and mysticism. I started with the human brain, which is just a more advanced version of my cat’s brain. The brain is the source of consciousness. From what we can deduce, consciousness is organized bioelectrical energy. No, we have not yet figured out how this organized bioelectrical energy produces sentience, nor have we discovered precisely how to arrest the process of aging. But one day we will understand the secrets to both, and probably sooner rather than later.
In that respect, I agree with the views of Kenneth R. Miller, one of the three respondents to Thomas Nagel’s Mind and Cosmos. Human intelligence is astonishing, yet that intelligence emanates from the bioelectrical interactions between neurons contained in a structure the size of a loaf of bread. Imagine a brain as big as the earth, or even the universe. What is the nature of dark energy—most of the energy in the universe? If the multiverse theory is true, what about other universes, with different laws of physics, that don’t even permit the formation of matter, but that do permit the formation of other forms of energy? Imagine the comparative omnipotence and omniscience of organized energy within such a universe. It cannot be asserted that God can be explained by some variation on this theme, but for me it is at least plausible. And that was enough to start me on a journey of spiritual renewal, which led to my receipt of the sacrament of confirmation as a Roman Catholic this past Pentecost Sunday. At this point, it doesn’t matter whether or not my speculative hypothesis concerning a nonsupernatural deity has even a modicum of validity. I just needed a kick start, and that’s what did it for me.
LARRY WEISENTHAL
Huntington Beach, Calif.
Boston’s Bravery
I find Luke Hill’s analysis of the Archdiocese of Boston’s reconfiguration (“The Big Dig,” June 1) consistent with my own experience living there over the past two years. I recently returned to my home in Atlanta filled with deep love and admiration for the people of Boston, especially the priests serving the parishes and the Catholics who attend Mass every Sunday. I found the priests caring, wise, and courageous. The people’s faith in God and their love of the church is reassuring and inspiring. I was particularly struck by parents and children involved with religious education and youth programs who proudly celebrated First Communion and Confirmation. In a time when 85 percent of Catholics don’t practice their faith, these young people provide a glimmer of hope.
I have loudly advocated for putting effort into the New Evangelization. And I’m happy to read that others share my belief that the New Evangelization, in Boston and elsewhere, must begin by recognizing, honoring, celebrating, and loving both the people in the pews and those at the altar, those who still find God’s love and mercy most present in the church. They are the future of Catholicism. As grim as things may seem, I’m not sure that we fully comprehend the seismic changes occurring in the church in Boston, and in many parts of the country. There are no quick, painless, certain solutions. My fervent prayer is for God to bless and strengthen these beloved people.
(REV.) THOMAS SHULER
Atlanta, Ga.
