Buddhism Dialogue at our church

[Gary_Sheldrake]

Please do not group me with this man. I have nothing to so with his post other than he saw an opportunity to strike and took it upon my heels. Either way you two deserve each other. Two sides of the same coin spinning through the air and squabbling to see who lands on top.

Good day -

Zachary

Good Evening Zachary: You seem to be have had a strong reaction to what I have said and the questions I have proposed that we ask ourselves. Why do you suppose you are having such a reaction? If we truly love Christ, then we should be able to know why it is we love Him, and we should in turn be happy to say why we do. I am simply asking if you would love Christ the same as you say you do if He had no heaven to offer you and no hell to send you to. If we cannot honestly say the answer is yes, then I would ask if you think it was love after all. I am not suggesting what the answer is. I am asking you what you think the answer is for you. Why does the question disturb you?

Thank you,
Gary

 

[buzzoff1031]

I must point out that it seems to me that many in this thread are confusing aspects of Buddhism and Hinduism. This is not surprising since one (Buddhism), in a manner of speaking, rose from the other (Hinduism). However, at its core, Buddhism doesn’t teach the Nirvana is another realm, a “heaven”.

Buddhism teaches that Nirvana is simply what is. In other words, you, me, the trees, the ocean, the planet, the galaxy, the universe…all nirvana. Good thoughts, bad thoughts, good and bad actions…all nirvana. Also, I don’t think any Buddhists believe that a human will ever “come back” as anything other than a human.

Finally, in regards to morals, it is not relativistic. Buddhism teaches that peace is attained by releasing the attachment to all desire. This means that one does not grasp at pleasant things nor push away unpleasant. One simply experiences what is there. Also, since Buddhism teaches that we are all interconnected, we will not harm anyone (including ourselves) since these actions (karma) will cause suffering, thereby eliminating peace.

Went on a bit of a tirade there, and I may have some things messed up. But I am keenly interested in Buddhism and have read a good bit lately. I just wanted to make sure things were presented fairly.

 

[rossum]

However, at its core, Buddhism doesn’t teach the Nirvana is another realm, a “heaven”.

Correct. The heavens (and hells) are after death and temporary. Nirvana may be after death but can also be during life, before death. The Buddha attained nirvana when he became enlightened at age 35. He died age 80. For 45 years he was living in the same world as everyone else, but at the same time in nirvana. Nirvana is not just another version of heaven.

Also, I don’t think any Buddhists believe that a human will ever “come back” as anything other than a human.

Rebirth in one of the heavens means rebirth as a god, not a human, for that lifetime. Rebirth in one of the hells also mean you are not human for that lifetime. Ideas about animal rebirths vary between schools of Buddhism.

rossum

 

[Vianneyizer]

Good Evening Zachary: You seem to be have had a strong reaction to what I have said and the questions I have proposed that we ask ourselves. Why do you suppose you are having such a reaction? If we truly love Christ, then we should be able to know why it is we love Him, and we should in turn be happy to say why we do. I am simply asking if you would love Christ the same as you say you do if He had no heaven to offer you and no hell to send you to. If we cannot honestly say the answer is yes, then I would ask if you think it was love after all. I am not suggesting what the answer is. I am asking you what you think the answer is for you. Why does the question disturb you?

Thank you,
Gary

I will not entertain such ridiculous questions. Perhaps you do not know why you follow Christ but do not put that on your brothers and sisters. You have clearly not heard a single word I said. I have nothing more to offer you, though I am forever the servant of Jesus Christ.

I apologize to everyone for derailing this post.

Oh Holy Spirit, guide our humble hearts -

Zachary

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

I will not entertain such ridiculous questions. Perhaps you do not know why you follow Christ but do not put that on your brothers and sisters. You have clearly not heard a single word I said. I have nothing more to offer you, though I am forever the servant of Jesus Christ.

I apologize to everyone for derailing this post.

Oh Holy Spirit, guide our humble hearts -

Zachary

Good Morning Zachary: If you read back through the thread, my question was to those who supposed that other religions were disingenuous in their intent because they sought rewards and feared punishments. When I offered a mirror to those who would say such things, it seems to me that they are refusing to even look. I am only suggesting that we look, because while you may think the question is ridiculous, I am pretty certain that Christ has the same question to ask of those who follow Him, and He didn’t think it was ridiculous, because He asked it of Peter.

“Simon son of John, do you love me more than these?”

Should we decline to answer Him?
Thank you,
Gary

 

[PJM]

=r_orem;12000413]A monk from a local Zen Buddhist Temple is coming to give a lecture on his faith to the youth of our Basilica which is home to around 17,000 members. I feel like our church is getting close to Universalism with the I’m OK your OK attitude among neighboring religions. I feel like we should be evangelizing to the Zen Buddhists who have no savior beyond themselves. What do you think?

You NEED to contact your Bishop and let him know what going on in your parish.

MANY souls ARE at risk.

God Bless you,

Patrick

 

[PJM]

=Vouthon;12001514]As Servant highlighted, I think what is important to understand is that there is no prohibition on a church being used for the purposes of interfaith or ecumenical dialogue, so long as it isn’t during the Holy Mass. Many Catholic Churches host interfaith events.

Allowing a Buddhist monk to speak in a Church, provided his intention is not to convert us but rather to enhance our knowledge of his faith, is hardly “indifferentism”.

Catholics have an understanding that our faith possesses the Fullness of Truth, nevertheless we do not believe that it possesses the fullness of truth in “isolation”. The Holy Spirit is active outside the Church, “planting seeds” and there are many whose hearts are spiritually with her even if bodily they are not. From this theological standpoint, Catholics can appreciate the truths and beauty present in other world religions, as genuinely arising from the presence of the Holy Spirit. We reject nothing that is true and holy, no matter what source it may come from.

Is this indifferentism? Does it undermine the fact that “outside the Church there is no salvation”? Hardly.

Friend, these are KIDS NOT able to discern.

NOT a PRUDENT idea. If there adults, MAYBE? BUT NOT KIDS

 

[Vianneyizer]

Friend, these are KIDS NOT able to discern.

NOT a PRUDENT idea. If there adults, MAYBE? BUT NOT KIDS

I must say I agree with this wholeheartedly. Very good point, my dear Christian. And let us never be afraid to go to our priests and bishops, as we would to Christ, with our genuine concerns for the people of God.

Christ the King, bless all men -

Zachary

 

[Tigg]

A monk from a local Zen Buddhist Temple is coming to give a lecture on his faith to the youth of our Basilica which is home to around 17,000 members. I feel like our church is getting close to Universalism with the I’m OK your OK attitude among neighboring religions. I feel like we should be evangelizing to the Zen Buddhists who have no savior beyond themselves. What do you think?

What do I think? Since the Catholic Church, in most cases, is not providing adequate catechesis for Catholic youth on the Catholic faith, why on earth introduce them to another religion?

 

[keithwoodcc]

Hello.
We had a series of lectures in our church over Advent. (in the place where the homily normally stands)
We were addressed by a Buddhist, a Hindu, a Sikh (a very big religious group here in the English midlands, many huge Sikh Temples), and a Muslim.
I confess that I was concerned and we had some very hash criticism from some our older parishioners. But for me it was refreshing to see that I could listen with an uncritical attitude and yet remain convinced that the faith to which I believe God has led me - late in life - is the faith vouchsafed by Our Lord to Peter.
(I also serve as parish inter-faith representative, and I am more concerned that by doing so I am suggesting that Catholicism is just another denomination which certainly do not believe, but I guess that that is for another thread.)
Blessings,
Keith

 

[nmgauss]

What do I think? Since the Catholic Church, in most cases, is not providing adequate catechesis for Catholic youth on the Catholic faith, why on earth introduce them to another religion?

Why is it so important to provide adequate catechesis? If young people decide to adhere to Islam or Judaism or Buddhism, that is their choice. Why try to persuade them otherwise?

 

[Servant19]

What do I think? Since the Catholic Church, in most cases, is not providing adequate catechesis for Catholic youth on the Catholic faith, why on earth introduce them to another religion?

Dear friend, this very act is providing a fundamental part of the catechesis to the youth.

There was a time when black people attending our functions was frowned upon. How important was it for youth to see racial diversity represented in the Church?

The Catholic Church acknowledges religious diversity and finds the Truths in all religions as beautiful. Why deny the youth this opportunity to see this verity for themselves?



.

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

Hello.
(I also serve as parish inter-faith representative, and I am more concerned that by doing so I am suggesting that Catholicism is just another denomination which certainly do not believe, but I guess that that is for another thread.)
Blessings,
Keith

I wonder if the representatives of the other faiths that you work with are having the same concerns working with us. As you know, most faith traditions have the opinion that everyone else simply has a belief system, while they in fact have the truth.

 

[Matthew_Light]

As you know, most faith traditions have the opinion that everyone else simply has a belief system, while they in fact have the truth.

I think this statement is the “real truth”.

That is, when we see that everyone has a belief system, that we are all the same in that way, that the things that make us one are much more important than the beliefs we allow to separate us from one another. “Real truth”.

Arguing about religious dogmas - means we don’t really understand what Jesus came to say.

 

[Auntie_A]

Dear friend, this very act is providing a fundamental part of the catechesis to the youth.

There was a time when black people attending our functions was frowned upon. How important was it for youth to see racial diversity represented in the Church?

The Catholic Church acknowledges religious diversity and finds the Truths in all religions as beautiful. Why deny the youth this opportunity to see this verity for themselves?



.

A racial diversity does not change the common beliefs; a religious diversity can oppose or water down the beliefs of a certain faith.

The Catholic Church acknowledges religious diversity but does not wish to foster it within its church. Nor would any other church, even the Bahai, foster and nurture ALL ideas since some of those ideas run counter to the general tenets of belief. The Catholic Church acknowledges an entire garden of beliefs but does not adhere to those beliefs that run counter to its own.

I also disagree with the statement " finds the Truths in all religions as beautiful" and would amend it to say “finds the general Truths in common of most main religions as beautiful” since there are some truths and beliefs that run counter to Catholic belief.

What a wise church might nurture and foster is a discussion of common tenets and differences. This would not be a full-time activity for ANY church; it might be a course on Comparative Religion as seen thru the eyes of that particular denomination, however.

 

[Auntie_A]

I think this statement is the “real truth”.

That is, when we see that everyone has a belief system, that we are all the same in that way, that the things that make us one are much more important than the beliefs we allow to separate us from one another. “Real truth”.

Arguing about religious dogmas - means we don’t really understand what Jesus came to say.

Jesus argued religious dogmas all the time. He did put dogmas into priorities and perspective, however, stating that the two most important things are to love our God and to love one another, but he did not neglect or reject the Judaic dogma. This is important to remember since many people dismiss His dogmatic teaching and ONLY focus on His words on love. As beautiful as His words on love are, it is good to remember that Jesus did not come to abolish the Ten Commandments…since, at the heart of God sending us these Commandments is the true love of God for His people.

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

I think this statement is the “real truth”.

That is, when we see that everyone has a belief system, that we are all the same in that way, that the things that make us one are much more important than the beliefs we allow to separate us from one another. “Real truth”.

Good Evening Matthew: I love the way you said that. It’s profound. The things that make us one are indeed more important than the beliefs that separate us.

Thank you
Gary

 

[nmgauss]

Good Evening Matthew: I love the way you said that. It’s profound. The things that make us one are indeed more important than the beliefs that separate us.
Thank you
Gary

Why do you suppose that separatism (us vs. the other guys) is so popular? Why is there animosity between Catholics and Protestants? Why have the Irish in Northern Ireland divided themselves into warring camps based on religion?

In sports, rivalries become established between college football teams. When I was in college, our motto was “Give em the axe!” That is basic to human nature. The Serbians vs. the Austrians, the Muslims vs. the Christians, the Russians vs. the Ukrainians. The South vs. the North. Where does that get us?

 

[Gary_Sheldrake]

Why do you suppose that separatism (us vs. the other guys) is so popular? Why is there animosity between Catholics and Protestants? Why have the Irish in Northern Ireland divided themselves into warring camps based on religion?

In sports, rivalries become established between college football teams. When I was in college, our motto was “Give em the axe!” That is basic to human nature. The Serbians vs. the Austrians, the Muslims vs. the Christians, the Russians vs. the Ukrainians. The South vs. the North. Where does that get us?

Good Evening Mgauss: We may be of the same mind on this. Separatism arises from group identities. I have serious reservations about such things as flags, sports teams, nationalities, anthems, pledges and any such things. The reasons are simple, at least for me they are. The first thing that any sort of group does is to define who they are, and from there emerges the creation creeds, mottos and the like. In the process of defining who we are, we automatically define who is not us, and this has a dehumanizing effect on our view of others who are not us. These in turn are enablers for conflict and division rather than cooperation and unity. I am of the opinion that at this stage in our evolution as humans, we have reached a point where we need to start doing away with such things inasmuch as possible. This is only my opinion, but I think I have given it enough consideration to participate in a reasonably productive discussion on it for anyone inclined to engage.

The problem with group identities as best I can reason is that they obfuscate the truth about the nature of our relation to one another. We are not “us” and “them.” I think we are all part of one another. Even for those who have no spiritual inclination, it is clear that even on a plainly physical level, we are all one organism. People being organisms embedded in a larger organism that is the human race, which in turn is an organism embedded in a larger organism of creatures of all species, embedded in organisms of ecosystems, embedded in an organism that is a planet, and so on throughout the universe. I am offering the idea that we are one thing expressed as many, and I think this is a level of spirituality on which most everyone can relate. It is fundamental, real, accessible to common experience, and changes the playing field to the extent that we need to start taking down imaginary barriers.

Thank you,
Gary

 

[Matthew_Light]

The problem with group identities as best I can reason is that they obfuscate the truth about the nature of our relation to one another. We are not “us” and “them.” I think we are all part of one another. Even for those who have no spiritual inclination, it is clear that even on a plainly physical level, we are all one organism. People being organisms embedded in a larger organism that is the human race, which in turn is an organism embedded in a larger organism of creatures of all species, embedded in organisms of ecosystems, embedded in an organism that is a planet, and so on throughout the universe. I am offering the idea that we are one thing expressed as many, and I think this is a level of spirituality on which most everyone can relate. It is fundamental, real, accessible to common experience, and changes the playing field to the extent that we need to start taking down imaginary barriers.

:clapping::clapping::clapping: