UFO Conjecture(s)

Friday, November 30, 2012

Teilhard de Chardin’s Metaphysics and UFOs

Copyright 2012, InterAmerica, Inc.


Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, as cognoscenti know, was a scientific theologian whose views are intricately metaphysical.

And in them lie a possible explanation for the UFO phenomenon, as we’ve noted much earlier here and at our RRRGroup blog.

The complexity of Teilhard’s thought is vast and presenting a succinct or concise account of it here would be sacrilegious, not to mention daunting.

Teilhard, a Jesuit priest, imbued his “philosophy” with a heavy, intrinsic infusion of the divinity of Jesus/Christ.

One has to set that aside and concentrate on the macro-quantum aspects of Teihard’s conceived reality.

Teihard proposed that the Universe we live in is actually The Mystical Body of Christ; that is, the Universe is the “biological” body of Christ.

Frank Stalter, at his Facebook venue, recently provided a link from Space.com which predicated the idea that the Universe operates like a brain:

That idea is a shallow concept when placed alongside Teilhard’s extensive musings, in such books as The Divine Milieu, The Phenomenon of Man, and popularized in “Let Me Explain.”

Teilhard states that Jesus/Christ is not only the Omega Point of the Universe, to which we strive (or should) to arrive, but is the all-encompassing Universe itself.

The “elemental particles” of this Jesus/Christ Universe are intrinsic to the living being that is Jesus/Christ.

When, for example, an evil outbreak of humanity occurs (a Genghis Khan or an Adolf Hitler or even a lone murderer), this body of Jesus/Christ is afflicted, as if a virus or cancer has attacked it.

The “soul” of the divine being that is the Universe suffers the same pain, except immeasurably so, as a solitary human being suffers.

We, the Earth, and our Solar System are comparatively quantum in nature but still inflict various vicissitudes, some good and some bad, on the divine body – the Jesus/Christ Universe.

Let me propose that UFOs may be considered intrusions like white corpuscles, which attack or support the health of the divine body, or that portion of it that we make up.

In the transcendental arena of Teilhard’s Universe the living creatures, the atoms or sub-atomic particles (humans) may be likened to skin cells or antibodies of a kind.

UFO may be likened to viral onslaughts that have been benign, so far, but presage a possible infection. The nature of which has yet to be determined or discerned.

In the Perennial Library paperback [Harper & Row, NY, 1957, Page 112 ff.] The Divine Milieu Teihard’s Part Three, entitled as the book itself…..


…is a dense compendium of mystical musings intermingled with hard science and theological underpinnings.

God (in the nature of Jesus/Christ) is everywhere and a concrete reality, composed of dense matter [Page 115].

In Section Two: The Nature of the Divine Milieu The Universal Christ and The Great Communion, Teilhard asks [Page 122 ff.] “Under what form…does the divine immensity manifest itself to, and become relevant to mankind?”

“Under what form, and with what end in view, has the Creator given us…the gift of participated being?

“The action by which god maintains us in the field of his presence is a unitive transformation.”

We are assimilated “into the omnipresence of christification” [Page 123]

On Page 125 is this “At every moment the eucharistic Christ controls….the whole movement of  the universe.”

“Across the immensity of time and the disconcerting multiplicity of individuals, one single operation is taking place: the annexation to Christ of his chosen; one single thing is being made: the mystical body of Christ…Hoc est corpus meum.” [Page 143]

Christ-Omega is defined in Let Me Explain [Harper & Row, NY, 1966]: Page 98 ff.


In The Phenomenon of Man [Harper Torchbooks, Harper & Row, NY] Page 81, Chapter One, Section A, Micro-organisms and Mega-molecules Teilhard’s discussion(s) of cellular life leads to the advent of man and his ultimate morphology.


The Psychogenesis of mankind is intrinsic to a validation, philosophically, of our existence as part of the mystical (the physical) body of Christ, as elaborated upon in The Divine Milieu.

I can’t do justice to Teilhard’s thought, so I suggest those of you with a metaphysical bent immerse yourself in his writings.

That we, UFOs included, are part of a cohesive existence that is tangible and real while transcendental in ways that boggle the mind could be helpful in determining what UFOs are, even if they, in the context, are only viral in nature.



  • Didn't someone (I forget who) try to implicate him in the Piltdown skull forgery?

    By Blogger cda, at Saturday, December 01, 2012  

  • Yes, Christopher.

    That hoax was magnificent.

    Teilhard wasn't involved, only initially supportive.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Saturday, December 01, 2012  

  • In stripping away the doctrinal context of theology and examining the cosmology of the conceptual models therein as a discernment has also been an interest of mine.
    Teilhard and Ibn Al Arabi ( 11th Century AD) have a great deal in common outside of the frame they hang their concepts on..one example from the Standford Encyclopedia that also seems to mirror modern physics as does Teilhard..

    "One of Ibn ‘Arabî's contributions was to bring out the full implications of the in-between realm, which in one respect is unseen, spiritual, and intelligible, and in another respect visible, corporeal, and sensible. This is precisely the mundus imaginalis, where spiritual beings are corporealized, as when Gabriel appeared in human form to the Virgin Mary; and where corporeal beings are spiritualized, as when bodily pleasure or pain is experienced in the posthumous realms. ( I think this is an important distinction)
    The mundus imaginalis is a real, external realm in the Cosmic Book, more real than the visible, sensible, physical realm, but less real than the invisible, intelligible, spiritual realm.
    Only its actual existence can account for angelic and demonic apparitions, bodily resurrection, visionary experience, and other nonphysical yet sensory phenomena that philosophers typically explain away.
    Ibn ‘Arabî's foregrounding of the in-between realm was one of several factors that prevented Islamic philosophy from falling into the trap of a mind/body dichotomy or a dualistic worldview.

    The third world of imagination belongs to the microcosmic human book, in which it is identical with the soul or self (nafs), which is the meeting place of spirit (rûh) and body (jism). Human experience is always imaginal or soulish (nafsânî), which is to say that it is simultaneously spiritual and bodily. Human becoming wavers between spirit and body, light and darkness, wakefulness and sleep, knowledge and ignorance, virtue and vice. Only because the soul dwells in an in-between realm can it choose to strive for transformation and realization. Only as an imaginal reality can it travel “up” toward the luminosity of the spirit or “down” toward the darkness of matter."
    The implication that I think is interesting out of his very complex concepts ( for me to fully grasp) is this embedding of mundus imaginalis which may be at the root of experiential anomalies such as the ones we examine here. All of this ( Teilhard-Arabi) expands the scope of the topic(s) of UFO's into a completely unique and new context that most do not have the intellectual curiosity to explore and as a result, we end up with puerile comic book rip offs in the popular miasma that are circular feedback loops ( I like the term whirlygig) to the sociology and culture of reductionist "faith", shorthand for bias projections..
    An excellent post to provoke some out of the box ruminations.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Saturday, December 01, 2012  

  • "When, for example, an evil outbreak of humanity occurs (a Genghis Khan or an Adolf Hitler or even a lone murderer), this body of Jesus/Christ is afflicted, as if a virus or cancer has attacked it."

    This is an interesting idea, but in the larger scheme of things, a natural astronomical disaster like a supernova or asteroid/meteor strike, which could theoretically wipe out a complete planet-wide civilization, might be the better metaphor. It would certainly do more damage. Even then, nothing can kill the universe, at least not any time soon. The Big Crunch is only theory and none of us will live to see it.

    By Blogger Frank Stalter, at Sunday, December 02, 2012  

  • As a matter of circumstance (it seems) suspicion has fallen upon all the "Piltdown men" (as Millar memorably called them). Including academic and scholarly specialists drawn in - duped (of whom one was TDChardin, as it seems).

    If memory serves, the late evolutionary maven Stephen J. Gould, more than others who've commented, suspected TDC. I've always suspected, Gould's well known perspective on 'science 'n' religion' (TDC being a theologian) may have been a biasing factor.

    The same brush of suspicion has tarred all names involved (even slightly) at some point. And various gumshoes have found different suspects more likely to blame. To my knowledge, TDC's involvement is mostly reckoned minimal, and most have considered other parties as likelier culprits.

    As it seems, the 'guilty party' - forger of the fossils - had established collegial relations with key experts drawn in. The latter can be found irresponsible, for not having questioned the evidence more sharply and pointedly, on 'good relational' polity. Not so different from another famous hoax in the besotted history of anthropology (Castaneda / Don Juan).

    The biasing power of etiquette and human relations has echoes in UFO investigations, inherent challenges. The tenacity and impartiality of an effort can be compromised. Anyone seen that UFOS OVER EARTH Goes to Mexico episode (a wow example). Once buddied up with a witness, just to get close enough for in-depth testimony, relational factors can pose problems (Or'm I wrong, dya think?)

    In very recent years, more forensic-like (less rote anthro - sciencey) probes seem to have shown pretty convincingly, the prankster was Dawson. He was an 'independent researcher' without creds his more authoritative associates had, as professional specialists (his proximate marks I might call them).

    Dawson's 'easier targets' needed to ask harder questions at the time, document certain factual minutiae. Some professional irresponsibility (like UCLA anthro professors on Castaneda's 'research' committee) can be laid at their doorstep maybe - oh the humanity.

    Further pointing to relational challenges, one specialist DID ask hard questions at the time - and it undermined collegial relations with others who did not. Destroyed a friendship between two to them, of long standing. I wonder if anything like that's ever happened in the history saucerology (duh ... dya think?).

    My own feeling ... lessons of Piltdown seem largely unlearned, unrecognized to this day. And parallels play out, professional researchers not realizing when crosshairs are trained on their credibility, by certain interests wanting to avail themselves thereof. My impression, FWIW ...

    Good online reading, impressive for getting to the bottom of Piltdown, I think (actual opinions may vary):


    Interesting piece on TDC.

    By Blogger Brian Akers, at Sunday, December 02, 2012  

  • I remember back in the 70s, my then seminary drop-out boyfriend and our friends did a lot of undergraduate "philosophising" around de Chardin's views. I haven't heard anyone mention his name since then. His Omega Point could be the Singularity (that point where the evolution of human and machine intelligences merge) that the more tech-obsessed among us fervently believe is approaching.

    Anyway, interesting to see de Chardin mentioned in a UFO discussion. He probably would have enjoyed it.

    By Blogger purrlgurrl, at Sunday, December 02, 2012  

  • PG:

    I just got Micah Hanks book yesterday, for review (as you see here).

    He takes a view not unlike Teilhard and uses a quote from him to open a chapter.

    You'd like Hanks' book.

    If you'd like a copy, send me a note -- rrrgroup@juno.com


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, December 02, 2012  

  • Not a fan of Mr. Hanks.

    Will take a pass on his book. But, thanks anyway.

    By Blogger purrlgurrl, at Tuesday, December 04, 2012  

Post a Comment

<< Home