Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity fitting together?

[Contarini]

In 23, I’d like to see the rejection of “technique” worded a bit differently. In saying that “genuine Christian mysticism has nothing to do with technique,” I think he’s rejecting a lot of the Christian mystical tradition. Given Ratzinger/Benedict’s longstanding desire for union with Orthodoxy, one might have expected that he’d have refrained from language that appears to condemn, among other things, the entire Eastern hesychastic tradition, which certainly gives technique a fairly prominent place. Wouldn’t it be better to say that genuine Christian mysticism cannot be reduced to technique, or that technique has only an ancillary role in genuine Christian mysticism?

In 26 he does admit that “the position and demeanor of the body” do play a role, so again I may be objecting to what he’s saying more for the way it can be taken out of context than for its meaning when carefully read in the context of the whole document. Indeed, in section 27 he refers to hesychasm respectfully, though he’s obviously rather wary of it. Of course one can’t argue with the claim that if understood inadequately and incorrectly, hesychastic “psychophysical symbolism” can become an idol. But obviously the same thing is true of more concrete methods such as Ignatian meditation. There seems to be some tension between his concern that not everyone using hesychastic methods are able “to pass from the material sign to the spiritual reality” and his earlier warnings about Gnosticism. (Though perhaps he’s here showing concern about the “Messalian” side of the spectrum.)

I really like this document taken as a whole. I think it gives very wise and healthy warnings about the way people can rashly rush into syncretistic spirituality without grounding everything in Christian revelation. I do worry that he maybe doesn’t give quite enough importance to the Christian apophatic tradition, but his job as prefect of the CDF was to police the boundaries, and he naturally does so not just as a Catholic but as a Western Catholic.

Thanks again for sharing the document!

Edwin

 

[Bookcat]

This document goes into it:

ewtn.com/library/curia/cdfmed.htm

Very important document…read also the footnotes.
(I love it!..I will let the document stand on its own…it is excellent)

 

[Michael19682]

What does the Church have to say about the Buddhist practice of meditation? I was introduced to it once, it is mainly controlling breathing, concentration exercises, etc. It is supposed to allow one to get control over one’s mind, emotions, etc. if I understand it correctly. It seems to be more physiological and psychological than anything else.

I join the others in their response to this concern. Excepting however–in so joining the response–that I believe any statement made by the Vatican dissuading these practices is indeed infallible for the following reason: these practices are invariable led and taught by those with close association and so-called lineage-linkage to the Buddha himself, and ultimately are an implicit and explicit encouragement to pay homage and worship [to] the Buddha. For the purposes of the Vatican, the Holy See of the Successor to Peter [currently Pope Benedict XVI, our Holy Father], to advise such practices without ample extrication from the deity worship so inextricably and invariably bound to these practices and their often anti Christian sentiment and philosophy, espoused in one form or another by the teachers, would be tantamount to distending the flock of the Church whose spiritual appetite it is his responsibility to tend and would give the (false] impression that the teachings of Christ are in need a of a greater explanatory method than is currently instituted for that purpose. Heaven help me for speaking so boldly and may God have mercy on me if I represent falsely the statement of the holy Father which I should have but didn’t take the time to read.

I’ve done many of those Eastern meditations and learned about my mind from them–a clear help for someone like myself–but it is a falsity to believe that Christian meditation cannot achieve the same aim. After all, if you truly believe that God is all powerful, all knowing, loving, and all forgiving, why dabble in such dangerousness–unless you are a true philosopher theologian and can know when you are being coerced, and stop at that.

Only my sense of Charity, however limited it is, would even remotely understand someone’s turning to these practices as a form of therapy in desperate situations. I did. However, I was coerced by those in authority over me at a hospital. Still, I sensed all along that what I was doing was incorrect and it caused a lot of harm to me. That’s my experience.

The Pope however, is definitely infallible in matters of moral guidance.

 

[hn160]

All that you said here only proves that you don’t worship our God.

Amen

 

[Sufjon]

All that you said here only proves that you don’t worship our God.

When I speak about God, I am talking about the only God there is, but He did say that many would not know Him. I would offer the idea that perhaps you should not be so sure as to who He was talking about when He said that. My sense is that there are a lot of people falling on their knees, making proclamations, citing dogmas, attending rituals and shaking their fingers at what others believe, when they should probably spend a little more time on what matters. Such people aren’t getting any close to God through these less meaningful things.

On another note, you used that word worship. I think God would prefer love rather than worship and veneration. That all seems like a barrier to me, but you should do as you see fit. I think it would be far wiser to share some genuine love for the person next to you rather than all the worship and veneration you could muster in a lifetime. If you are not genuinely caring about the person next to you rather than worrying about proving them wrong or inferior, that is a sure sign that you have seen Him and not known Him. But again, you’ll have to do as you see fit.

Your friend,
Sufjon

 

[Michael19682]

…

Your interpretation insulates your particular community from the words of Jesus. Not a very good interpretation surely.

Just the opposite. It is through our application and adherence to the words of Jesus that we have gained the true ‘insolation/consolation’ which they were intended to bring upon us, protection from the false community of evil, the world at large.

Why shield ourselves from the cleansing fire?

It is Insolation, not insulation. That’s the best answer I have at this point, unless you care to be more specific.

I should have said more precisely, "Jesus’ language can be adequately accounted for by the fact that He was dealing with. . . . "

Jesus’ sacrifice was infinite in measure. We need no accounting or attempted weighing or measure of it. We witnessed his resurrection and ascension into heaven. The Pope knows this as no other man can–issues of faith and sainthood aside, that is.

In other words, your application of the parable to the heathen seems gratuitous, especially given that such an approach can be shown historically to cause Christians to take precisely the same kinds of attitudes that Jesus is condemning in this parable.

I don’t see it as a matter of different approaches to the gospels. The gospels are everywhere apparent and they are truth omnipresent. To quote Augustine, “We do not come to him who is everywhere by moving from place to place, but by good habit and endeavor.” The gospels speak for themselves in their plain, simple style [which captivated Augustine, who was so well versed in pagan rhetoric and eloquence before his conversion). God allows non humility and other vanity for his own reasons. We cannot scrutinize his mind. I, for one, have enough of a problem with my own mind. If I were to suffer from a form of written obscenity, who would I have to blame but myself?

Judgment always begins with the household of God. It’s true that, as 1 Peter 4:17 points out, the judgment coming on those who imperfectly follow the Gospel implies a much worse judgment on those who reject it entirely.

John 20:23. Temporal judgment belongs to Peter and his successors through spiritus sancti. The only condition I know of for this forgiveness is that one asks with a contrite heart and with this holy spirit present (proceeds from the father and the son) (the latter who is present when 2wo or three are gathered in his name)(I don’t know how to explain the perfect act of contrition which I’m told can be made without a priest present).

We all follow the gospel imperfectly. 1 John 1:8-10.

That’s one way of putting it, if you are focused on authority. Another way of putting it is the way I did–that Jesus only speaks of Hell when addressing those who pride themselves on their covenant relationship with God.

True. I do focus on authority a bit to excess at times. That’s a personal foible.
But your point about speaking of Hell to those with a prideful covenant relationship with God is not exactly as I said:

Mark 17-31. Jesus loved this rich man. I don’t think it was pride that impelled this man to hold onto his riches and not our loving teacher Jesus. Rather sadness. Yet Jesus as rabbi goes on to speak and teach of [non Heaven] nevertheless in this passage. I would say the response about the difficulty of attaining heaven for the wealthy was made because the man insisted he had observed all the commandments from youth. Jesus’ point as I see it is that no one “knows” God yet, nor could they have through observing commands.

Perhaps that answers your point. I’m not sure it does. At any rate, one might derive some argument for purgatory from it–since if the rich are loved by Jesus but not bound immediately for heaven, then where do they go?

You think that the broader application falls on all who are outside the “right” authority structures.

Your meaning of Structure is what I don’t understand. If you mean that a person can’t have grace because he or she is not catholic…that’s nonsense. However, if you define structure as property without method of instruction–Bible without institute to teach it–then I might agree. We cannot separate instruction method from Bible, save in the case of miracle. Again calling upon Augustine who said that even the most divinely inspired brilliant interpreters of scripture must admit they learned at least the letters of the alphabet from other men!

Don’t you see how counter-productive it is for us all to stake out claims as victims? Why not, instead, look at how Jesus may be speaking a word of judgment to us.

At the final judgment when the Church and all men are called to their account of events we should all pray that we have been victims in conformity with Christ’s victimization. That victimization will save us as it is the only sure proof we have imitated him. It is known inwardly in the heart, I may add.

This passage is certainly devastating for the Episcopal Church–look at Bishop +Jefferts-Schori’s appalling statements about Episcopalians being better educated and more environmentally responsible than Catholics and Mormons in having fewer children.

I think going about having children as a hobby is insensitive to the needs of others. As for the pride you impute upon the statement of those men: all pride is folly, as you have pointed out–save taking pride in Jesus’ triumph.

 

[Michael19682]

A couple of correctives to the immediately above:

The resurrection was witnessed after the fact, of course.
Mark 10:17-31 is the correct citation.

 

[wisdomseeker]

When I speak about God, I am talking about the only God there is, but He did say that many would not know Him. I would offer the idea that perhaps you should not be so sure as to who He was talking about when He said that. My sense is that there are a lot of people falling on their knees, making proclamations, citing dogmas, attending rituals and shaking their fingers at what others believe, when they should probably spend a little more time on what matters. Such people aren’t getting any close to God through these less meaningful things.

On another note, you used that word worship. I think God would prefer love rather than worship and veneration. That all seems like a barrier to me, but you should do as you see fit. I think it would be far wiser to share some genuine love for the person next to you rather than all the worship and veneration you could muster in a lifetime. If you are not genuinely caring about the person next to you rather than worrying about proving them wrong or inferior, that is a sure sign that you have seen Him and not known Him. But again, you’ll have to do as you see fit.

Your friend,
Sufjon

It all sounds good to some. The Truth is that first we must Love God above all things.

what is a genuine love for the person next to you? why do you have to chose between God the Creator and the creature?

First, we Worship God then we love one another. I am carefull about this love because Jesus talks about a love among the Christians in the Church. He also tells us to love our enemies. He also warns His people to not mingle with the ungodly. There is a lot of talking about love lately, which I find very strange at least. It seems to me that this new kind of love tend to undermine One True God.

 

[Ciknay]

This reminds me of the hero archetype…

In which superman, harry potter, jesus, optimus prime all have similar stories and traits.

 

[CopticChristian]

A friend of mine lent me his World Religions(Huston Smith) text book. I ended up reading the chapters on Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism. The 3 religions all shared notable storys and teachings such as:

Mara trying to tempt Buddha (Jesus in the desert with the Devil)
The ideas of acceptance of God.
The stages of life (Sacraments),
The idea of letting go of material items to follow God or a deeper calling.
The 10 Commandments and Path of Renunciation (refrain from certain things for God)
Love, joy, and peace and a lifestyle free from guilt.

These are all deep basic ideas that all trace back to morality, and the idea of 1 God; living a better lifestyle. In a sense, they all seem the same on ground level. Is it possible to be Christian but agree and follow some Hinduist and Buddhist ideas?

Huston Smith is a methodist. He encountered many of the religions that he writes about experientially. In consideration that Methodism has a method then you can undertand his conclusions. He remained a Methodist after all of these experiences. He has a video series that compliments his book. It is worth watching.

If we are to believe as Paul says in Romans, God is impartial, The Gentiles have The Law and are a Law unto themselves and some are circumcised of the Heart, then we will see in Hinduism and Buddhists what Paul is talking about, not to follow, not to agree, rather to acknowledge what we see as “a law unto themselves”.

 

[Vouthon]

I would have answer NO. We have nothing in common them.

Then I would suggest that you are not currently in a state of complete submission to the teaching of the Magisterium of the Holy Catholic Church because it is quite clearly stated in the Vatican II document “Nostra Aetate” which is the Church’s OFFICIAL statement regarding the relationship between Cathoicism and other non-Christian faiths:

"…From ancient times down to the present, there is found among various peoples a certain perception of that hidden power which hovers over the course of things and over the events of human history; at times some indeed have come to the recognition of a Supreme Being, or even of a Father. This perception and recognition penetrates their lives with a profound religious sense.

Religions, however, that are bound up with an advanced culture have struggled to answer the same questions by means of more refined concepts and a more developed language. Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an inexhaustible abundance of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. They seek freedom from the anguish of our human condition either through ascetical practices or profound meditation or a flight to God with love and trust. Again, Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination. Likewise, other religions found everywhere try to counter the restlessness of the human heart, each in its own manner, by proposing “ways,” comprising teachings, rules of life, and sacred rites.** The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men**…The Church, therefore, exhorts her sons, that through dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions, carried out with prudence and love and in witness to the Christian faith and life, they recognize, preserve and promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the socio-cultural values found among these men…" - (Nostra Aetate) .

I would suggest you read the document in FULL here: vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

If any Catholic on this forum does not abide by or consent to the OFFICIAL teachings outlined above by the Magisterium of the Church in 1965 and promulgated by his Holiness Pope Paul VI - just as you did above - then they are proliferaing erroneous teachings regarding how the Catholic Church views other religions.

This is quite a serious problem particularly among so called “Tradionalist Catholics”.

It has always been the SACRED TRADITION of the Church that other religions have divinely inspired truth in them. This does not make them in any way equal to Catholicism or make them posses another salvific path. But it is a revealed truth of our faith nonetheless.

St Augustine wrote:

"That which is known as the Christian religion existed among the ancients, and never did not exist; from the beginning of the human race until the time when Christ came in the flesh, at which time the true religion, which already existed began to be called Christianity"

- Saint Augustine of Hippo, Retractions, Book One, Part 12, “One Book on the True Religion.”

In the Bible Saint Paul oft quoted from Pagan non-Jewish writers and poets whom he considered to teach inspired truths, such as in this passage where Paul quotes from two Pagan poets Aratus and Epimenides in his discussion with the Athenians:

"…While Paul was waiting for them in Athens…some Epicurean and Stoic philosophers debated with him. Some said, “What does this babbler want to say?” Others said, “He seems to be a proclaimer of foreign divinities.” (This was because he was telling the good news about Jesus and the resurrection.) So they took him and brought him to the Areopagus and asked him, “May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting? It sounds rather strange to us, so we would like to know what it means.” Now all the Athenians and the foreigners living there would spend their time in nothing but telling or hearing something new. Then Paul stood in front of the Areopagus and said, "Athenians, I see how extremely religious you are in every way…The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; and He made from one blood every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, so that they would search for God and perhaps grope for him and find him - though indeed he is not far from each one of us. For ‘In him we live and move and have our being’; as even some of your own poets have said, 'For we too are his offspring.' Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man…" (*Book of Acts) *

Paul presents the model for all interfaith dialogue. Do not insult the people but confirm and praise the good things present in their religion, the inspired truths.

(continued…)

 

[Vouthon]

God loves the diversity of peoples, with all their unique cultures and beliefs. This passage tells us that God in his plan of salvation “determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitations” and that he did this so that these different peoples, with very different cultural beliefs “would seek God” and actually find Him and arrive at an understanding of the Truth which is the One Truth which unites all people! Rememer that in ancient times religion was predominantly national so that each nation worshipped its own respective God and had its own customs and beliefs (ie Persian Empire = Zoroastrianism, Roman Empire = Roman Paganism, Britain = Celtic paganism etc.)

To show the Athenians that they actually worship the same God as Paul - a Jew - does without knowing it and to prove that God inspired parts of Athenian religion as preparation for the Gospel of Jesus, Paul quotes from two of their poets Aratus and Epimenides. These inspired men taught that:

1. In God every person “lives and moves and has their being”
2. That we are all children of God regardless of race, creed, social class or gender

In quoting these Pagan writers, Paul shows these truths to be innate to human nature and ALL cultures and faiths.

He then proceeds to show them how the Greek religion is FULFILLED, PURIFIED AND COMPLETED by the Christian revelation which represents the final stage/dispensation in the history of mankind and thus encourages them to become Christians and to set aside idolatry.

Nicholas of Cusa, was a prominent Catholic Cardinal living in the 1400s. He was widely considered to be one of the most influential Catholic theologians and philosophers of all time and he wrote:

"Diversity in creation and cultures is the language of God; the radical unity of the opposites. In God absolute unity is absolute multiplicity. It is you O God who is being sought in various religions in various ways and named with various names. For you remain as you are to all incomprehensible and inexpressible. When you will graciously grant it then sword, jealous hatred and evil will cease and all will come to know that there is but one religion in the variety of religious rites" (Cusanus 1401-1464)

He taught that religious unity would come about through the rites of the Catholic Church which would allow all people to live out their Christian faith in a manner which embraces their religious heritage prior to conversion to Catholicism and the socio-political and religious values and customs which are compatible with Christian teaching.

 

[CopticChristian]

Then I would suggest that you are not currently in a state of complete submission to the teaching of the Magisterium of the Holy Catholic Church because it is quite clearly stated in the Vatican II document “Nostra Aetate” which is the Church’s OFFICIAL statement regarding the relationship between Cathoicism and other non-Christian faiths:

"…From ancient times down to the present, there is found among various peoples a certain perception of that hidden power which hovers over the course of things and over the events of human history; at times some indeed have come to the recognition of a Supreme Being, or even of a Father. This perception and recognition penetrates their lives with a profound religious sense.

Religions, however, that are bound up with an advanced culture have struggled to answer the same questions by means of more refined concepts and a more developed language. Thus in Hinduism, men contemplate the divine mystery and express it through an inexhaustible abundance of myths and through searching philosophical inquiry. They seek freedom from the anguish of our human condition either through ascetical practices or profound meditation or a flight to God with love and trust. Again, Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination. Likewise, other religions found everywhere try to counter the restlessness of the human heart, each in its own manner, by proposing “ways,” comprising teachings, rules of life, and sacred rites.** The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men**…The Church, therefore, exhorts her sons, that through dialogue and collaboration with the followers of other religions, carried out with prudence and love and in witness to the Christian faith and life, they recognize, preserve and promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the socio-cultural values found among these men…" - (Nostra Aetate) .

I would suggest you read the document in FULL here: vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

If any Catholic on this forum does not abide by or consent to the OFFICIAL teachings outlined above by the Magisterium of the Church in 1965 and promulgated by his Holiness Pope Paul VI - just as you did above - then they are proliferaing erroneous teachings regarding how the Catholic Church views other religions.

This is quite a serious problem particularly among so called “Tradionalist Catholics”.

It has always been the SACRED TRADITION of the Church that other religions have divinely inspired truth in them. This does not make them in any way equal to Catholicism or make them posses another salvific path. But it is a revealed truth of our faith nonetheless.

St Augustine wrote:

"That which is known as the Christian religion existed among the ancients, and never did not exist; from the beginning of the human race until the time when Christ came in the flesh, at which time the true religion, which already existed began to be called Christianity"

- Saint Augustine of Hippo, Retractions, Book One, Part 12, “One Book on the True Religion.”

In the Bible Saint Paul oft quoted from Pagan non-Jewish writers and poets whom he considered to teach inspired truths, such as in this passage where Paul quotes from two Pagan poets Aratus and Epimenides in his discussion with the Athenians:

B] (*Book of Acts) *

Paul presents the model for all interfaith dialogue. Do not insult the people but confirm and praise the good things present in their religion, the inspired truths.

Me thinks that you and I agree. You elaborate the essence of what is true. I believe it is amazing that what you write is so consistent with Paul and to me that is the essence of the stream of thought found in the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church. Paul would have agreed with all of this. In a nutshell what is know about God can be seen in the world and we honor God by recognizing his work and are grateful for the New Covenant.

 

[Vouthon]

In fact here is Augustine’s full quote:

St Augustine wrote:

"That which is now known as the Christian religion existed among the ancients, and never did not exist; from the beginning of the human race until the time when Christ came in the flesh, at which time the true religion, which already existed began to be called Christianity…For this reason, I said: ‘In our times, this is the Christian religion,’ not because it did not exist in Former times, but because it had received this name in later times""

Blessed John Henry Newman called this “Universal Revelation”. Both as an Anglican and as a Catholic, he put forward the notion of a universal revelation. As an Anglican, Newman subscribed to this notion in various works, among them the 1830 University Sermon entitled “The Influence of Natural and Revealed Religion Respectively”, the 1833 poem “Heathenism”, and the book The Arians of the Fourth Century, also 1833, where he admits that there was “something true and divinely revealed in every religion”. As a Catholic, he included the idea in A Grammar of Assent: “As far as we know, there never was a time when…revelation was not a revelation continuous and systematic, with distinct representatives and an orderly succession.”

This was clearly taught by Clement of Alexandria, Justin Martyr, Tertullian and many other Church Fathers. Its clearly part of Sacred Tradition and actually Sacred Scripture so I would say that Protestants also have no excuse to believe otherwise

 

[Vouthon]

Me thinks that you and I agree. You elaborate the essence of what is true. I believe it is amazing that what you write is so consistent with Paul and to me that is the essence of the stream of thought found in the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church. Paul would have agreed with all of this. In a nutshell what is know about God can be seen in the world and we honor God by recognizing his work and are grateful for the New Covenant.

Amen dear brother!

 

[Vouthon]

I join the others in their response to this concern. Excepting however–in so joining the response–that I believe any statement made by the Vatican dissuading these practices is indeed infallible for the following reason: these practices are invariable led and taught by those with close association and so-called lineage-linkage to the Buddha himself, and ultimately are an implicit and explicit encouragement to pay homage and worship [to] the Buddha. For the purposes of the Vatican, the Holy See of the Successor to Peter [currently Pope Benedict XVI, our Holy Father], to advise such practices without ample extrication from the deity worship so inextricably and invariably bound to these practices and their often anti Christian sentiment and philosophy, espoused in one form or another by the teachers, would be tantamount to distending the flock of the Church whose spiritual appetite it is his responsibility to tend and would give the (false] impression that the teachings of Christ are in need a of a greater explanatory method than is currently instituted for that purpose. Heaven help me for speaking so boldly and may God have mercy on me if I represent falsely the statement of the holy Father which I should have but didn’t take the time to read.

I’ve done many of those Eastern meditations and learned about my mind from them–a clear help for someone like myself–but it is a falsity to believe that Christian meditation cannot achieve the same aim. After all, if you truly believe that God is all powerful, all knowing, loving, and all forgiving, why dabble in such dangerousness–unless you are a true philosopher theologian and can know when you are being coerced, and stop at that.

Only my sense of Charity, however limited it is, would even remotely understand someone’s turning to these practices as a form of therapy in desperate situations. I did. However, I was coerced by those in authority over me at a hospital. Still, I sensed all along that what I was doing was incorrect and it caused a lot of harm to me. That’s my experience.

The Pope however, is definitely infallible in matters of moral guidance.

So then it might be interesting for you to hear what Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI actually taught regarding Yoga and meditation practices from other religions:

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) once wrote:

“Just as ‘the Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in [the great religions]‘ neither should these ways be rejected out of hand simply because they are not Christian. On the contrary, one can take from them what is useful so long as the Christian conception of prayer, its logic and requirements are never obscured.”

Pope John Paul II once said that Catholics should seek to find and learn about some of the holy concepts from Indian religions which are compatible with our own:

"A great spiritual impulse leads Indian thought to seek an experience which would liberate the spirit from the shackles of time and space and therefore would acquire great value…In India particularly; it is the duty of Christians now to draw from this rich heritage the elements compatible with their faith, in order to enrich Christian Thought"

Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI are both holy and intelligent men - the former is now a Blessed and the latter is beyond doubt the greatest mind in Christian theology for a long time.

we should never seek to remove or destroy ANYTHING that is good in other religions and/or cultures:

"The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men" *(Nostra Aetate) *

Yoga, as a purely physical exercise, is most definetly one of the best things to have come out of Hindu culture/religion and so Catholics should, to my mind, embrace it wholeheartedly firstly because its good for our health and secondly out of love for our Christian brothers with an Indian heritage. We cannot be Euro-centric, we are after all the “Universal Church” and our Western civilisation stems in part from Ancient Rome and Greece, which were Pagan cultures who worshipped many Gods. We rejected the idolatry of these cultures but we most definetly embraced and incorporated EVERYTHING that was good in them into our own faith, which was originally Judaic.

Zen Buddhism and Taoism are remarkably “dogma-free” religions which means that it would be very essay for a Catholic to take good meditative practices from them and orient them towards Christ. Yoga is the same as well, so long as you don’t worship Vishnu or any other Hindu God but use it as a useful body exercise or even bring some Christan spiriuality into the practice eg begin and end your stretching exercises with the Sign of the Cross, Hail Mary and a Our Father etc.

This is not “syncretism” btw rather its embracing the good, divinely inspired truths and practices in all cultures/religions. It does not concern Hindu cosmology or theology, which from our perspective as Catholics has teachings (ie reincarnation) which are NOT divinely inspired but which rather reflect the musings of wise, intelligent men trying to grapple with parts of the Hindu faith that ARE DIVINELY INSPIRED.

 

[StevenFrancis]

A friend of mine lent me his World Religions(Huston Smith) text book. I ended up reading the chapters on Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism. The 3 religions all shared notable storys and teachings such as:

Mara trying to tempt Buddha (Jesus in the desert with the Devil)
The ideas of acceptance of God.
The stages of life (Sacraments),
The idea of letting go of material items to follow God or a deeper calling.
The 10 Commandments and Path of Renunciation (refrain from certain things for God)
Love, joy, and peace and a lifestyle free from guilt.

These are all deep basic ideas that all trace back to morality, and the idea of 1 God; living a better lifestyle. In a sense, they all seem the same on ground level. Is it possible to be Christian but agree and follow some Hinduist and Buddhist ideas?

I can’t speak to Hinduism, because I lack much knowledge of it. I am a Catholic convert from Buddhism, however. It was hard to let go. I remember in the early stages of discernment in RCIA, I often referred to myself as a “Buddhist/Christian”. In the end, though they share good moral code, (The eightfold path vs. the 10 commandments/sermon on the mount), they are strikingly different in their axioms and end game. Good works are still good works, and they are still for good purpose, but a “God” is wholly unimportant in Buddhism. It’s really all about you. In fact, it’s all about you seeking to cease to be you. To attain a state free of all attachment and thought. A state without description, concept of ego. Oneness with all, with attachment to none = nothingness. No more suffering.

Well, in Christianity, we are seeking to fully unite our physical being with our spiritual being. Our real self. Our eternal, real, tangible, self. To be our ego’s, but in the invited presence of our creator Himself. Complete attachment to ourselves AND God. And by being in the presence of God, in both body and spirit form, we are definitely not decentralizing into a mist of egoless unattached nothingness to end suffering. We end suffering by truly BEING in every sense.

While it is very complex, and I’m REALLY oversimplifying, Buddhists wish to NOT be as the state of perfection, and Christians wish to BE, in an eternal state of perfection.

So while we both appreciate and promote good works on earth, and have an admirable stance on morals, there are starkly different ends.

Different ends, similar means.

I find that all faiths tend to promote good morals. It’s a primary argument for natural law.

a loss of ego and attachments, and a blending into everything, which really is the same as nothing

vs. consciously feeling real eternal life with thought, love, and personality, in a perfected state of BEING.

It’s probably obvious to most around here, but it took me a LONG time to find the real difference there. They are actually polar opposite in all but works of charity, which are probably natural law for ALL of us to begin with.

 

[Vouthon]

Regarding cultural differences and customs unique to different nations:

"The nations, despite a difference of development due to diverse conditions of life and of culture, are not destined to break the unity of the human race, but rather to enrich and embellish it by the sharing of their own peculiar gifts and by that reciprocal interchange of goods. The Church of Christ, the faithful depository of the teaching of Divine Wisdom, cannot and does not think of deprecating or disdaining the particular characteristics which each people, with jealous and intelligible pride, cherishes and retains as a precious heritage. Her aim is a supernatural union in all-embracing love, deeply felt and practiced, and not the unity which is exclusively external and superficial and by that very fact weak. Nor is there any fear lest the consciousness of universal brotherhood aroused by the teaching of Christianity, and the spirit which it inspires, be in contrast with love of traditions or the glories of one’s fatherland, or impede the progress of prosperity or legitimate interests…But legitimate and well-ordered love of our native country should not make us close our eyes to the all-embracing nature of Christian Charity, which calls for consideration of others and of their interests in the pacifying light of love" (Summi Pontificatus, Pope Pius XII, October 12th 1939)

Summi Pontificatus teaches, that superior and inferior cultures do not exist and that different levels of development within and between nations are source for enrichment of the human race. Summi Pontificatus sees Christianity being universalized and opposed to every form of racial hostility and against racial superiority. There are no real racial differences, because the human race forms a unity, because “one ancestor [God] made all nations to inhabit the whole earth”.

It is thus poignant to think that it was written the same year that Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany invaded Poland and launched WWII.

**“What a wonderful vision, which makes us contemplate the human race in the unity of its origin in God… in the unity of its nature, composed equally in all men of a material body and a spiritual soul; in the unity of its immediate end and its mission in the world; in the unity of its dwelling, the earth, whose benefits all men, by right of nature, may use to sustain and develop life; in the unity of its supernatural end: God himself, to whom all ought to tend; in the unity of the means for attaining this end;. . . in the unity of the redemption wrought by Christ for all. This divine law of solidarity and charity assures that all men are truly brethren, without excluding the rich variety of persons, cultures and societies. In the light of this unity of all mankind, which exists in law and in fact, individuals do not feel themselves isolated units, like grains of sand, but united by the very force of their nature and by their internal destiny, into an organic, harmonious mutual relationship which varies with the changing of times…Such is the marvelous doctrine of love and peace which has been such an ennobling factor in the civil and religious progress of mankind. And the heralds who proclaimed it, moved by supernatural charity, not only tilled the land and cared for the sick, but above all they reclaimed, moulded and raised life to divine heights, directing it toward the summit of sanctity in which everything is seen in the light of God. They have raised mansions and temples which show to what lofty and kindly heights the Christian ideal urges man; but above all they have made of men, wise or ignorant, strong or weak, living temples of God and branches of the very vine which is Christ. They have handed on to future generations the treasures of ancient art and wisdom and have secured for them that inestimable gift of eternal wisdom which links men as brothers by the common recognition of a supernatural ownership” **

 

[CopticChristian]

So then it might be interesting for you to hear what Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI actually taught regarding Yoga and meditation practices from other religions:

Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) once wrote:

“Just as ‘the Catholic Church rejects nothing of what is true and holy in [the great religions]‘ neither should these ways be rejected out of hand simply because they are not Christian. On the contrary, one can take from them what is useful so long as the Christian conception of prayer, its logic and requirements are never obscured.”

Pope John Paul II once said that Catholics should seek to find and learn about some of the holy concepts from Indian religions which are compatible with our own:

"A great spiritual impulse leads Indian thought to seek an experience which would liberate the spirit from the shackles of time and space and therefore would acquire great value…In India particularly; it is the duty of Christians now to draw from this rich heritage the elements compatible with their faith, in order to enrich Christian Thought"

Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI are both holy and intelligent men - the former is now a Blessed and the latter is beyond doubt the greatest mind in Christian theology for a long time.

we should never seek to remove or destroy ANYTHING that is good in other religions and/or cultures:

"The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men" *(Nostra Aetate) *

Yoga, as a purely physical exercise, is most definetly one of the best things to have come out of Hindu culture/religion and so Catholics should, to my mind, embrace it wholeheartedly firstly because its good for our health and secondly out of love for our Christian brothers with an Indian heritage. We cannot be Euro-centric, we are after all the “Universal Church” and our Western civilisation stems in part from Ancient Rome and Greece, which were Pagan cultures who worshipped many Gods. We rejected the idolatry of these cultures but we most definetly embraced and incorporated EVERYTHING that was good in them into our own faith, which was originally Judaic.

Zen Buddhism and Taoism are remarkably “dogma-free” religions which means that it would be very essay for a Catholic to take good meditative practices from them and orient them towards Christ. Yoga is the same as well, so long as you don’t worship Vishnu or any other Hindu God but use it as a useful body exercise or even bring some Christan spiriuality into the practice eg begin and end your stretching exercises with the Sign of the Cross, Hail Mary and a Our Father etc.

This is not “syncretism” btw rather its embracing the good, divinely inspired truths and practices in all cultures/religions. It does not concern Hindu cosmology or theology, which from our perspective as Catholics has teachings (ie reincarnation) which are NOT divinely inspired but which rather reflect the musings of wise, intelligent men trying to grapple with parts of the Hindu faith that ARE DIVINELY INSPIRED.

How do we embrace the good? Do we attend? Do we read? Do we ask questions?

I am not John Paul II or Benedict. I have read lots about Yoga, attendeded Zen temples and the like. There is no harm in an educational endeavor.

It takes time to understand that there are many Yogas with the same ultimate purpose, exposure to Hindu thought. Transcendental Meditation is a good example. Innocent enough, just meditating, however if you research this stuff, you will find that to become more involved and learn more you have to spend money and ultimately participate in a Hindu god ceremony and thus embrace Hindu thought.

Going to a Zen temple is innocent enough however, reading about Zen is not understanding or experiencing Zen. I cannot tell you how many hours I say, tapped on the back or shoulder while meditating because my posture was bad or sitting in front of the Roshi being asked “how do you realize God while driving your car” or other such stuff.

I understand that we should look for the good, the question is how, the question is how deep do we look, and what is the danger? For some no danger. For others some danger. Who can know. I believe caution is the best approach.

 

[Vouthon]

How do we embrace the good? Do we attend? Do we read? Do we ask questions?

I am not John Paul II or Benedict. I have read lots about Yoga, attendeded Zen temples and the like. There is no harm in an educational endeavor.

It takes time to understand that there are many Yogas with the same ultimate purpose, exposure to Hindu thought. Transcendental Meditation is a good example. Innocent enough, just meditating, however if you research this stuff, you will find that to become more involved and learn more you have to spend money and ultimately participate in a Hindu god ceremony and thus embrace Hindu thought.

Going to a Zen temple is innocent enough however, reading about Zen is not understanding or experiencing Zen. I cannot tell you how many hours I say, tapped on the back or shoulder while meditating because my posture was bad or sitting in front of the Roshi being asked “how do you realize God while driving your car” or other such stuff.

I understand that we should look for the good, the question is how, the question is how deep do we look, and what is the danger? For some no danger. For others some danger. Who can know. I believe caution is the best approach.

Dear brother/sister Coptic

Love in Christ to you!

Yes caution is needed as is a very wide knowledge of Hinduism and/or Buddhism. One has to really penetrate these religions to discover which facets are compatible with Catholic teaching and which are not. If a Catholic wishes to practice Zen then a good book might be “Zen for Christians” which was written by a Catholic nun. One needs knowledge of Zen Buddhism first so that one does not unwittingly do something (ie pray in the presence of a Bodhissatva statue) or recite the Bodhissatva vow, which would not be compatible with Catholicism (since we do not believe in Bodhisatva type beings and reject reincarnation although the concept is similar to Catholic saints and can be used to help Mahayana Buddhists warm to the concept of the Communion of Saints).

A thorough knowledge of Catholic dogma and of the religion in question from which the pratice/meditation comes, will stand a Catholic in good stead so that he can be faithful to the Church whilst engaging in practices from other religious traditions.

To this end I think it is perfectly fine to attend a Zen Temple to learn more about the practices of these people.