Can you be both Catholic and Buddhist?

[rossum]

Saint Brigit would never have been made a Saint in the Catholic Church if she worshipped pagan gods after a conversion. From the little I’ve read Brigit or Brigid was born Catholic.

From what I have read, she was born pagan and converted by Saint Patrick.

From the tone of your post, I get the feeling you might think that by pointing out Buddha is a saint by Buddhist standards that this would make him acceptable to Catholics. It doesn’t.

Erm… at one time the Buddha was a saint by Catholic standards. See the entry in the Catholic Encyclopedia for Barlaam and Josaphat. His feast day was 27 November.

rossum

 

[monkglenn]

If Buddhist Philosophy enable you to get rid of cravings of this world and help you to be a better disciplined person you will certainly be a better Catholic.However our Goal is to achieve eternal Glory in life after death by bieng a good honorable man who loves his neighbor.We must of course remember the words of Jesus Christ"No man can serve two masters"

The concept of serving someone, master or not, is not valid when applied to Buddhism. The term “master” is used to mean no more than HONORED TEACHER when referred to Zen Master or Roshi. There is not a god, or gods, not even a dog one is expected to obey or worship. The truth is what one seeks, and this truth is devoid of delusion such as worshiping a false God or Master.

The Buddha himself even said, if you hear a word, even from me or any other Buddhist teachers don’t believe it unless you find out on your own it is true. Basically self-reliance training is what Zen is. Thomas Merton speaks of this at length.

I understand your point, however, and if one were to go into Buddhist circles and find a guru or “deity” (like Hinduism does) then you’re exactly right.

There are people who go to Catholic church with the wrong intention, wrong beliefs and wrong goals, you and I know this. Some so called Catholics DO worship statues, no matter how we say they don’t…it is not supposed to be…but practice of this happens. It is not where you go or what you do that makes you saved or blessed or beloved by god, but rather what is in your heart. I always felt that Christ would love a person who sought him out and even if they did it using an idol, like a statue of the Sacred Heart, and thought that it was a transcendent object, I always felt that Christ could see past our educational and cultural inadequacies and embrace us when we asked him to in his name, and in the name of his Father.

I think the funny image is to see an American wearing Buddhist Robes trying to knock on the door of Saint Peter’s in Rome and the porter saying, “You can’t come in!!” That isn’t how it would be done.

If the Dalai Lama, in humor I offer this, came to Mass at Saint Patrick’s in NYC would they let him attend Mass? If when they offered the sign of peace, could he participate? If he was asked to stand up, like at a Baptist or protestant church meeting, and he stands up, is he the Dalai Lama or is he a guest…what do the roles and delusions have to do with where and when one opens oneself to God, the one true God?

He’d have to what, _____ , to go to communion? He’d have to “convert” and that would include for him what? Belief in God, Jesus, Mary? The Saints? What course would he take? What book should he read to learn to become a Catholic? Then, once he has done that, what about his upbringing as a Buddhist would we have to ban? That’s a really hard question. I make it a little humorous to take the bite out of it, not meaning it in a sarcastic way, but WHAT WOULD ONE HAVE TO RENOUNCE to be a Catholic?

hmmmm… let me go to my catechism and see what the rules are…

better yet, I’m gonna take the Canon Law book down from the shelf and brush up on this in Latin.

 

[Mystic_Warrior]

I have recently become interested in Buddhism as a philosophy. While I am a Catholic, believe in God (the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit), the Bible, and sacred tradition, I also find myself sharing some common beliefs with Buddhists.

I don’t consider Buddhism a religion although it’s usually classified as one. There are no God(s) or Goddess(es) in Buddhism.

I was wondering if I could be a Catholic-Buddhist without going against Catholic teaching. Any thoughts?

Mariah,

I wanted to also share with you my experiences with Buddhism so that you have more to consider. This also applies to a lot of posting about Zen Buddhism and Catholics who practice it.

When I began to study Buddhism years ago, I was a Sunday School teaching Baptist. I loved meditation, primarily “insight meditation” taught by the Theravada tradition. It was a wonderful help to me.

But once I got past the meditation aspect of Buddhism, I found that the beliefs and practices were the opposite of Christianity. Disillusioned with my Christian faith, I studied even more and settled into Chan Buddhism (Chinese Buddhism which went to Japan and became Zen).

I took my Buddhist precepts and refuge from a Zen Buddhist order. I was given a Buddhist name. Precepts are basically 5 moral guidelines to live by and refuge means relying on the Buddha, his teachings and the Buddhist community for liberation. I later settled into Japanese Pure Land Buddhism.

You can see the issue here. Either I was going to rely on Jesus, his teachings and the church; or the Buddha, his teachings and the Buddhist community. I chose the Buddha. For me it came down to that choice.

I’m not telling you what choice to make. But I believe that one day your heart will lead you down one path, not two.

Peace…

MW

 

[aicirt]

From what I have read, she was born pagan and converted by Saint Patrick.

Erm… at one time the Buddha was a saint by Catholic standards. See the entry in the Catholic Encyclopedia for Barlaam and Josaphat. His feast day was 27 November.

rossum

Like I said, if Brigid was a pagan, converted, but continued pagan practices, she would not have been made a saint and would be seen as a heretic.

Buddha as a Catholic Saint…think the key word here is “legend”. Didn’t he die around 483 BC? If that is true, how could he be converted before Christ was even born? According to the story, is Josephat the name Buddha supposedly took after his supposed conversion?

 

[Mystic_Warrior]

My dear Buddhism is not a religion at all. it is a philosophy that claims that all our problems come form desire. if there is something you want it will cause problems and friction in your life and you have to go through 8 steps to achieve the ultimate Nirvana (which is really nothingness). that’s a Buddhism in a nut shell. this was explained to me by a Buddhist convert to Catholicism. so if you want to merge the two to suit your needs that you’d be going against basic Buddhist teaching and definitively against everything that Catholic Church teaches. My dear you would be committing a sin again the very First commandment I think there was a conflict within you about this that’s why you did a smart thing in asking others for their opinion on the matter. i hope you will do what is smart and pleasing to God rather then jumping into something that you do not know what it is that your jumping into.

God bless you

DQ,

Craving, discontent or whatever you translate the Pali word “dukkha” into, is what continues the cycle of birth and death. Achieving the state of nirvana is what ends that cycle. The eightfold path is the path that must be developed and practiced simultaneously to achieve it. This is the Buddha’s basic teaching. It’s not like the 12 step program for alcoholics where you go from step 1 to 12.

Peace…

MW

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Hello,

Anyone can be both Catholic and Buddhist. It does not matter whether you are Catholic or boddhist. You must respect both.

Thanks
Mike Wilson

Why does it not matter?

And no, one cannot be both. Choose one or the other; but don’t lead people astray.

 

[SpiritusSanctus]

Hi. I beg to differ.

The center of Buddhism is not nothingness (an experience in Zen meditation), but an awareness of suffering – both our own and others’ – and how to deal with it. It calls for meditation, compassion, and insight into ways of acting that make life better lived.

As a Catholic, I find being rooted in Buddhism keeps me more calm and rational – as opposed to Protestant versions of Christianity (on TV) which lead me to a more emotional tack to religion, lacking stability of character.

Truth does not negate truth: I am proud to call myself a Catholic-Buddhist-Humanist.

Two different religions at the same time? That’s not how it works. Either you’re a Catholic or not, there’s no in-between.

 

[SpiritusSanctus]

Hello,

Anyone can be both Catholic and Buddhist. It does not matter whether you are Catholic or boddhist. You must respect both.

Thanks
Mike Wilson

It does matter. You can’t be both, and you can’t respect both.

 

[callmecharles]

hi. i think buddhism, is alot more complex than that. it goes beyond the self not existing, to nonexistence not existing its a pretty intense belief system. if however someone is looking for a more mystical path within catholocism, their priest can help them out. the rosary, contemplative prayer, first friday adoration with the rosary etc. can lead to some incredible mystical experiences, without having to add to the traditions of the Catholic Church, or leave her. Peace

Sorry for the delayed response. So many threads. hehe… perhaps I should limit myself to one or two at a time. It’s been several years since I’ve read any stuff on Buddhism, so forgive me if my recollections present any factual errors.

I’d been under the impression that ‘no self’ was the primary belief within Buddhism. That, indeed, our bodies consist of many ‘not self’ parts, and the path to enlightenment was realizing this truth and completely eliminating the desires of those ‘not self’ parts. The rest is mostly semantics.

One might say that saints and ‘awakened’ individuals walk the same path, doing the same things for various reasons- some similar, some different. Both seek some form of salvation. But since Christianity has that essential belief in the self, it can take its logic a step further. It aims for true love of God and man- from creatures whose primary focus is self preservation, no less…

Since Buddhism lacks the self, the bar (in my opinion) is a little lower. The belief system, in spite of having no self, is focused completely around saving that nonexistent self. Any progress stems from seeking enlightenment, which is ultimately a form of self preservation (again… self really means no self. lol.). There’s no God within Buddhism to demand true love, and how would we have that anyway if we don’t exist? Every good work under the sun would simply be a more admirable ‘not self’ part in action.

And ultimately, this is why I find the belief systems to be incompatible. One must either be a bad Christian(rejecting the concept of souls) or a bad Buddhist(believing in a self) to reconcile the differences.

“There are ways, but the way is uncertain.” - completely irrelevant Teo Te Ching quote.

 

[Ahimsa]

Sorry for the delayed response. So many threads. hehe… perhaps I should limit myself to one or two at a time. It’s been several years since I’ve read any stuff on Buddhism, so forgive me if my recollections present any factual errors.

I’d been under the impression that ‘no self’ was the primary belief within Buddhism. That, indeed, our bodies consist of many ‘not self’ parts, and the path to enlightenment was realizing this truth and completely eliminating the desires of those ‘not self’ parts. The rest is mostly semantics.

One might say that saints and ‘awakened’ individuals walk the same path, doing the same things for various reasons- some similar, some different. Both seek some form of salvation. But since Christianity has that essential belief in the self…

What does Buddhism specifically claim is ‘not self’? Matter (or body) is not self, because matter (body) (1) changes; (2) is composed of smaller parts; and (3) is not under one’s complete control (e.g., you can’t make your body avoid getting sick, or dying, at some point).

Likewise, feelings, thoughts, memories, perceptions, intentions…all these phenomena of the mind are ‘not self’, for the same reason(s).

Would a Christian claim that her body or her mind does not change, is not composed of smaller parts, or is under her complete and total control?

 

[callmecharles]

What does Buddhism specifically claim is ‘not self’? Matter (or body) is not self, because matter (body) (1) changes; (2) is composed of smaller parts; and (3) is not under one’s complete control (e.g., you can’t make your body avoid getting sick, or dying, at some point).

Likewise, feelings, thoughts, memories, perceptions, intentions…all these phenomena of the mind are ‘not self’, for the same reason(s).

Would a Christian claim that her body or her mind does not change, is not composed of smaller parts, or is under her complete and total control?

None of these things are the self. I’d imagine there are those who equate the mind with the soul, but I can’t really answer for them. hehe…

Inside of all these not self parts, deep down there, there is a true self, a soul. This gets into why we won’t be bored after a thousand years in heaven… the soul doesn’t answer to all of these ‘not self’ tendencies and notions that the body and even the mind feed to the soul.

The core essence of the soul doesn’t change. It’s always soul and never ‘not soul’. Of course it can come closer to God or further away depending on what it’s exposed to.

As far as I know (which isn’t very far, lol), the soul is not composed of smaller parts. The spark, the breath of life God gave us, surely has some base level of purity within it.

To a degree, the soul is under our control. We can never cause the soul to become ‘not soul’, so it is beyond our control in that respect. However, all souls choose either to embrace or to reject God, thus having a great level of control over the soul in the long run.

… if that makes sense. We’re talking about something neither of us can point to, and I’m honestly pretty confused

 

[Ahimsa]

We’re talking about something neither of us can point to…

That reminds me of a Tibetan Buddhist poem:
*
“Mind”, this universal concept, this most significant of words, being no single entity, manifests as the gamut of pleasure and pain in samsara and nirvana. There are as many beliefs about it as there are approaches to Buddhahood. It has innumerable synonyms.*
In the vernacular it is “I”; some Hindus call it “the Self”; the Disciples say “self-less individual”; the followers of Mind-only call it simply “mind”; some call it “perfect insight”; some call it “Buddha-nature”; some call it “the Magnificent Stance” (Mahamudra); some call it “the Middle Way”; some call it “the cosmic seed”; some call it “the reality-continuum”; some call it “the universal ground”; some call it “ordinary consciousness”. Since the synonyms of “mind”, the labels we apply to it, are countless, know it for what it really is. Know it experientially as the here and now. Compose yourself in the natural state of your mind’s nature.

It is not a void, for there is brilliance and wakefulness. It is not unity, for multiplicity is self-evident in perception. It is not multiplicity, for we know the one taste of unity. It is not an external function, for Awareness is intrinsic to immediate reality.

 

[lareinatortura]

Wow. .

Very heated post. I found this post to be very interesting, and I was compelled to read all of the posts, but I can’t right now because of my eyes. I can barely type. In any case, this question really seemed to push some “hot buttons,” which is understandable.

I have had a longstanding interest in Buddhism, but I admit I do not fully understand it. Thus, I am definitely not an authority on the subject. At the same time, I have to say I even struggle to fully understand my own religion–Christianity. (Before anyone thinks I’m a stupid chit. . let me just say this: I don’t know about any of you, but I find it extremely hard to fully understand that there is someone–or should I type “Someone,” because I am referring to God?–Who knows everything about us, and loves us no matter what? No matter what. People try to explain God’s love, and yea–I can sit here and parrot what they say, but every time l listen to the explanations, I am just. . well, blown away. All I can really say after that is: “Wow. . . .Really. . ?” But, do I believe * that God is here and that He knows everything, and that He loves us? -I do, I do, I do-oo. . So, in my opinion, it’s also difficult to fully grasp *Christianity, at times.)

I don’t know. All I can say is this: Both Christianity and Buddhism are complex in nature. Do they have some similarities? -I’d say so, but I honestly think those similarities have to do with how we are encouraged to treat and view other human beings. (Please don’t kill me! :stretcher

Again, I say a few similarities. (I can elaborate, if need be).

Does that mean the two (can) mesh? -Certainly not. I am compelled to mention something, here. It’s a little weird, but maybe there are some of you out there who can understand what I have to say.

I think there are a lot of people out there who seem to believe that all religions can, well, “blend.” That they “all fit together,” and that they “all lead to the same place.” (Especially these days! Thanks, Oprah. . Just kidding! ) I don’t think that’s true. I think that’s a bunch of “New Age”. . .****, frankly. My evidence for that? The differences between the many religions we find in the world. Let’s take Christianity and Hinduism into consideration. Waaay different. Do they have a few commonalities? -They might, but does that mean one can be a Christian and Hindu at the same time? Well. . .you tell me. (I think I should add some examples here, but I’m not sure what to say. . I fear I may be confusing everyone enough as it is. . )

I do have to say that I agree with a few of Siddhartha Gautama’s teachings–particularly those concerning the treatment of those around us; however, I do not look at those teachings in the same way I look at Christ’s teachings. I may see a similarity here and there, but I look at it this way (and please keep in mind, this is only my opinion. . and who am I? Well, no one, really. . ) :

Buddhism possesses some truth, but Christianity is *the *truth. I think that is possible. Setting labels aside, I once heard a pastor say that Satan intertwines lies with the truth to trick us. I picture him sort of baiting a hook in attempts to “reel” us in.

I am not making a case for or even against Buddhism. If you want to go be a Buddhist, go be a Buddhist. If you want to be a Christian, go on and be a Christian–because your personal choice is not my business. It’s not my business if you want to mix the two, either. . but, you’re the one that asked. .

Now. . honestly, I do not think is “bad” to have an interest in other religions. I think it’s a good idea to learn about other religions so that we may better understand others. BUT–big “but” here–if that causes you to doubt your own faith and it causes you to behave in ways that are not appropriate as a Christian, it may be best for you to stop looking into these things. You may be *looking *for something that you think you’re not finding in Christianity. You may, for whatever reason, feel unfulfilled. If that is the case, you may need to reconcile that in yourself, and stop looking around for something else to fulfill you. If it is your attitude–or something along those lines–is making you feel the way you feel, you’ll be unhappy no matter what label you place on yourself.

I also think that, as Christians, we need to be careful when we bring the truth to others. We have the truth and we know it, but do we really have to treat other people like **** because of it? If we act like a bunch of jerks by just ranting and raving about how we’re right and everyone else is wrong, how the heck are we going to reach others? They’re going to tune us out. They may even go so far as to say, “Well, if she/he’s a Christian and she/he acts like that, then I don’t want to be a Christian.” Or “Maybe they’re *all *like that.”

I must admit that a few of the comments I saw here frustrated me.

Personally, I do not see *learning *about other religions as heretical experimentation. I think it can lead to it, though. The responsibility rests with you. If you find yourself wandering and wanting to “get into” non-Christian practices, then there’s something else going on here. I do not think your desire came about simply because that non-Christian religion just magically “sucked” you in and turned you into a heretic. No. Take responsibility for your actions. You made the decision to do/think/feel whatever it is. Buddhism, or any other non-Christian religion for that matter, is not going to twist your arm and force you to disobey God just because you decided to learn about it. (Like, read a book about it, for example).

I do not think there is much balance in this area. It seems to me that many individuals either let *everything *in, or try to keep *everything *out.

Sigh.

 

[lareinatortura]

Darn it. I forgot I am not allowed to say the “C” word here. Sorry guys. It looks like I said something else in my post. . Sorry!

 

[Mystic_Warrior]

None of these things are the self. I’d imagine there are those who equate the mind with the soul, but I can’t really answer for them. hehe…

Inside of all these not self parts, deep down there, there is a true self, a soul. This gets into why we won’t be bored after a thousand years in heaven… the soul doesn’t answer to all of these ‘not self’ tendencies and notions that the body and even the mind feed to the soul.

The core essence of the soul doesn’t change. It’s always soul and never ‘not soul’. Of course it can come closer to God or further away depending on what it’s exposed to.

As far as I know (which isn’t very far, lol), the soul is not composed of smaller parts. The spark, the breath of life God gave us, surely has some base level of purity within it.

To a degree, the soul is under our control. We can never cause the soul to become ‘not soul’, so it is beyond our control in that respect. However, all souls choose either to embrace or to reject God, thus having a great level of control over the soul in the long run.

… if that makes sense. We’re talking about something neither of us can point to, and I’m honestly pretty confused

I believe that if you think about this, you will see that there is no permanent state of being for humans, animals or the environment. That’s why the teaching is that there is “no self”. All of these conditions coming together is what makes us who we are. All of these together made us human. Whether these things came together through a divine being, the big bang or nature itself, the result is the same.

Without one or more of the things - we would be an animal, a plant or a tree. These things come together and we live as a human being. One day, one hour, one minute and down to the second, those consolidated conditions will cease to exist interdependently. When that happens, we call it death.

No matter how you slice it, we cannot escape this thing we call “death”. It is beyond our control. We are merely cogs in the wheel of life that is forever changing, expanding and contracting. When our senses experience this thing we call death, we simply move on to something else - another life, another set of experiences and another death.

This is my understanding - flawed as it may be.

Peace…

MW

 

[usemelord]

I’ll try to make this brief. About five or six years ago This Rock magazine had an interesting feature article entitled “Jesus vs. Buddha,” or something to that effect. After a fascinating five page side-by-side comparison the author concluded by stating the inescapable fact that “Jesus is God; Buddha is not.” In my opinion a serious academic and intellectual interest in Buddhism is totally incompatible with practicing one’s Catholic faith. But, then again, that’s merely one man’s opinion.

 

[Polycarp1]

As Catholics while we support freedom of religion, in that people’s freewill should not be subjugated in order to get them to follow a faith, we do believe that Roman Catholism is the one and only faith created, founded and commissioned by God that holds the fulness of Truth as revealled by Him so far. We believe that anyone who honestly and diligently seeks the Truth will ultimately be lead into the Catholic Church by the Holy Spirit.

While other Christian religions hold sufficient Truth they also hold some false doctrine. Many faiths contain elements to lead seekers away from the Truth, but often it is packaged in very appealling ways that seem lovely on the surface but ended up leading to spiritual disaster. This is no accident, but a deliberate effort to lead people away from the Truth.

Christ stated that " “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” There is little room left for us to accept, or support other doctrines and it is dangerous to pretend that it is safe or okay for us to dabble in them.

 

[notself]

As Catholics while we support freedom of religion, in that people’s freewill should not be subjugated in order to get them to follow a faith, we do believe that Roman Catholism is the one and only faith created, founded and commissioned by God that holds the fulness of Truth as revealled by Him so far. We believe that anyone who honestly and diligently seeks the Truth will ultimately be lead into the Catholic Church by the Holy Spirit.

While other Christian religions hold sufficient Truth they also hold some false doctrine. Many faiths contain elements to lead seekers away from the Truth, but often it is packaged in very appealling ways that seem lovely on the surface but ended up leading to spiritual disaster. This is no accident, but a deliberate effort to lead people away from the Truth.

Christ stated that " “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” There is little room left for us to accept, or support other doctrines and it is dangerous to pretend that it is safe or okay for us to dabble in them.

Since Buddhism predates Christianity by 500 years, perhaps Christianity is leading people astray leading to spiritual disaster through deliberate effort.

Having been a Catholic and having left Catholicism and Christianity, I can tell you that no book or other religion lead me away. Actually that isn’t quite true. I stopped believing in any all powerful creator after reading the bible. If you haven’t read every word of the bible then please don’t. It could destroy you faith.

I think that people find the religion or philosophy that suits them and helps them lead a good life. Some are born to it. Others have to search for it.

 

[lareinatortura]

It does matter. You can’t be both, and you can’t respect both.

I beg to differ Spiritus,

but I guess it comes down you define “respect.” I would like to think that I can respect Buddhism and Buddhists, while still being a Christian. For example, I don’t go around telling Buddists–and everyone else, for that matter–that they’re “wrong,” and that they “need to become Christians.” I don’t tell people that what they do or what they believe in is worthless or meaningless. At the same time, I don’t say that it is “good,” or “all right,” either. I just say nothing.

If the subject of religion comes up, I explain that I am a Christian. While I do talk to others about God, I don’t shove Christian beliefs in their faces and tell them what they should and should not do. I do not want to be a bad witness. It is not my place to judge them. I am human and thus am not perfect–I do judge others–but, I try to be respectful of other peoples’ religious beliefs because, well, their salvation is between them and God. Not them and I.

I guess, if I could put it short and sweet, I “respect” other religions by allowing their ‘practitioners’ to believe what they want to believe in peace. It doesn’t mean I am for what they believe in, it doesn’t mean that I don’t stand up for what I believe in. I just see it as avoiding unnecessary conflict and attempting to be a good witness by showing that I can coexist with others, even though I believe differently than they do.

I want to offer God to others, not force Him on them.

 

[Polycarp1]

Our various ancestors worshipped God to the best of their abilities using whatever was available to them based on their intrinsic sense that there was something greater than themselves out there. This brought some order into their lives and I have no doubt that God smiled on their efforts and was mercifully to those who strove to be good men. They basicaly prayed that God would reveal what their purpose and destiny was and what His will was for their lives. God responded to the prayers of these “Natural Religions” by sending his Son into the world to show His will and fulfill their religions by revealling Truth.

As an American Indian people often as me if I follow Native Spirituality and I reply of course, I’m Roman Catholic. Christ came into the world as an answer to the prayers of my ancestors and Roman Catholism is the fulfillment and perfection of their efforts.

No man made religion predates the Truth that is and always has been and always will be.