Existentialism

[romancatholic94]

Is it possible to be Catholic and an existentialist? I recently met a person at school who believed wholeheartedly in the Catholic Church’s teachings. He goes to mass almost everyday and seems like he has a very good prayer life, and is a very geniune person. He said to me that he believed his morals came from God and that He set a structure to everything. He told me when he prays, he is just communicating with the God we knows is there, he is not asking for anything, he is doing it for the sake of communion with the Lord. He also believes that God need not intervene on situations on Earth, thats its unnecessary because humans are capable of handling situations on their own through the intellect they have been given. He references the terms “called” to a ministry, saying that he believes it is up to us to decide what we should do. I’m intrigued and slightly confused at to what he said. What he said makes sense to me but at the same time it doesn’t. Has anybody ever met anybody else who had similar beliefs such as my friend?

 

[jimmy]

Is it possible to be Catholic and an existentialist? I recently met a person at school who believed wholeheartedly in the Catholic Church’s teachings. He goes to mass almost everyday and seems like he has a very good prayer life, and is a very geniune person. He said to me that he believed his morals came from God and that He set a structure to everything. He told me when he prays, he is just communicating with the God we knows is there, he is not asking for anything, he is doing it for the sake of communion with the Lord. He also believes that God need not intervene on situations on Earth, thats its unnecessary because humans are capable of handling situations on their own through the intellect they have been given. He references the terms “called” to a ministry, saying that he believes it is up to us to decide what we should do. I’m intrigued and slightly confused at to what he said. What he said makes sense to me but at the same time it doesn’t. Has anybody ever met anybody else who had similar beliefs such as my friend?

It is hard to tell from that short bit what your friend believes, but there are existentialists who are Catholics. I think P. John Paul II was heavily influenced by existentialism. Karl Rahner had a form of existential Thomism, so he was heavily influenced by it.

I like existentialism as well.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Is it possible to be Catholic and an existentialist? I recently met a person at school who believed wholeheartedly in the Catholic Church’s teachings. He goes to mass almost everyday and seems like he has a very good prayer life, and is a very geniune person. He said to me that he believed his morals came from God and that He set a structure to everything. He told me when he prays, he is just communicating with the God we knows is there, he is not asking for anything, he is doing it for the sake of communion with the Lord. He also believes that God need not intervene on situations on Earth, thats its unnecessary because humans are capable of handling situations on their own through the intellect they have been given. He references the terms “called” to a ministry, saying that he believes it is up to us to decide what we should do. I’m intrigued and slightly confused at to what he said. What he said makes sense to me but at the same time it doesn’t. Has anybody ever met anybody else who had similar beliefs such as my friend?

There has never been general agreement on the definition of Existentialism. The term is often seen as a historical convenience as it was first applied to many philosophers in hindsight, long after they had died. In fact, while Existentialism is generally considered to have originated with Kierkegaard, the first prominent existentialist philosopher to adopt the term as a self-description was Jean-Paul Sartre. According to philosopher Steven Crowell, defining Existentialism has been relatively difficult, and he argues that it is better understood as a general approach used to reject certain systematic philosophies rather than as a systematic philosophy itself.[8]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialism

Unfortunately, existentialist ideas lead to false conclusions, quite often, like* He also believes that God need not intervene on situations on Earth, thats its unnecessary because humans are capable of handling situations on their own through the intellect they have been given.* God “needs not intervene?” If God wasn’t intervening micro-second-to-micro-second, there wouldn’t be any here, here at all.

It leads to foolish homilies by priests that say Jesus didn’t multiply the loaves and fishes. Or people accepting fatalistically that nothing can be done because they do not see a solution by human agency.

The problem with his thinking is that is does not take into account fact: miracles are real, God intervenes constantly, without the Communion of Saints we are all doomed. This is the way the Universe works, through the constant interaction of the eternally alive, whether they are located in Time, as we are, or have passed on to the next state of being as those in Heaven have, or have always been in that state as God and the angels have.

This isn’t a fairy tale, it’s supernatural physics. And that reality must be accepted before any Truth can be fully realized or the truly awesome potential of the individual can be reached.

 

[GEddie]

In what sense (based on the written record) was JP2 an existentialist?

 

[jimmy]

In what sense (based on the written record) was JP2 an existentialist?

First of all, read carefully. I said he was influenced by existentialism. His emphasis on freedom is one example.
42. Patterned on God’s freedom, man’s freedom is not negated by his obedience to the divine law; indeed, only through this obedience does it abide in the truth and conform to human dignity. This is clearly stated by the Council: “Human dignity requires man to act through conscious and free choice, as motivated and prompted personally from within, and not through blind internal impulse or merely external pressure. Man achieves such dignity when he frees himself from all subservience to his feelings, and in a free choice of the good, pursues his own end by effectively and assiduously marshalling the appropriate means”. [Veritatis Splendor, 42]

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Is it possible to be Catholic and an existentialist? I recently met a person at school who believed wholeheartedly in the Catholic Church’s teachings. He goes to mass almost everyday and seems like he has a very good prayer life, and is a very geniune person. He said to me that he believed his morals came from God and that He set a structure to everything. He told me when he prays, he is just communicating with the God we knows is there, he is not asking for anything, he is doing it for the sake of communion with the Lord. He also believes that God need not intervene on situations on Earth, thats its unnecessary because humans are capable of handling situations on their own through the intellect they have been given. He references the terms “called” to a ministry, saying that he believes it is up to us to decide what we should do. I’m intrigued and slightly confused at to what he said. What he said makes sense to me but at the same time it doesn’t. Has anybody ever met anybody else who had similar beliefs such as my friend?

Sounds like a rock solid individual to me. Where’s the problem? What has that got to do with existentialism? Clarify your thoughts before you post.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Sounds like a rock solid individual to me. Where’s the problem? What has that got to do with existentialism? Clarify your thoughts before you post.

Seemed perfectly clear to me, especially when OP said he was confused. If your problem is that you are confused, it’s a bit difficult to “clarify your thoughts.” If that were possible, he would not be confused and wouldn’t need to post at all.

How did you, as a Catholic, come to the conclusion the person was “rock solid?” In what way did you think he was solid? As a Catholic who does not believe in the action of God on earth?

 

[sirach2v4]

About God possibly not intervening in the matters of the world (which I don’t believe),
consider this verse of scripture, which I just was reading today.

Exodus 4: 11 And the LORD said unto [Moses] , Who hath made man’s mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?

Remember the admonition of Psalm 1, verse 1

1Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.

The “scornful” are all the atheists, agnostics, and such who do not believe in God. The “man” under discussion in this thread seems “scornful” to me.

[both of these verses from the first online bible I could find, in this case, the King James.]

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Seemed perfectly clear to me, especially when OP said he was confused. If your problem is that you are confused, it’s a bit difficult to “clarify your thoughts.” If that were possible, he would not be confused and wouldn’t need to post at all.

How did you, as a Catholic, come to the conclusion the person was “rock solid?” In what way did you think he was solid? As a Catholic who does not believe in the action of God on earth?

I liked your post #3. However, I’m not sure your analysis applies to the O.P.s friend for two reasons. First, he didn’t define what he meant by " existentialist " and wheather or not his friend identified himself as an adherent to that particular " philosophy, " and if so, what particular form of that philosophy, and if so, to what extent ? I have found that people can be extremely confused on these points because most people simply see or hear or read a snippit from a system and immediately say, " oh yes, that’s me, I’m a materialist, " or " I’m an existentialist, " when they really don’t know anything about the complete system, excet a paragraph or two.

This is generally true of those who attack St. Thomas and his " existentialist ( so says Etienne Gilson and Charles A. Hart, both devout Thomists ).

Secondly, his friend obviously has a " rock solid " spiritual life, so he obviously does not mean that God doesn’t act or communicate with His creation. The O.P. has not explained exactly how his friend defines this. Clearly there is confusion and the O.P. has created it by not being specific enough.

 

[Pugsly]

First of all, read carefully. I said he was influenced by existentialism. His emphasis on freedom is one example.
42. Patterned on God’s freedom, man’s freedom is not negated by his obedience to the divine law; indeed, only through this obedience does it abide in the truth and conform to human dignity. This is clearly stated by the Council: “Human dignity requires man to act through conscious and free choice, as motivated and prompted personally from within, and not through blind internal impulse or merely external pressure. Man achieves such dignity when he frees himself from all subservience to his feelings, and in a free choice of the good, pursues his own end by effectively and assiduously marshalling the appropriate means”. [Veritatis Splendor, 42]

Brother, John Paul II “emphasis on freedom” was an overarching theme of his papacy…because he battled Communism most of his life. Yes, Communism…an existentialist dream of brutally enforced equality and hyper-manipulation to save the people from the horrors of inequality and manipulation

 

[Sair]

First of all, read carefully. I said he was influenced by existentialism. His emphasis on freedom is one example.
42. Patterned on God’s freedom, man’s freedom is not negated by his obedience to the divine law; indeed, only through this obedience does it abide in the truth and conform to human dignity. This is clearly stated by the Council: “Human dignity requires man to act through conscious and free choice, as motivated and prompted personally from within, and not through blind internal impulse or merely external pressure. Man achieves such dignity when he frees himself from all subservience to his feelings, and in a free choice of the good, pursues his own end by effectively and assiduously marshalling the appropriate means”. [Veritatis Splendor, 42]

But what could anyone think God is, in order for this to be the case? A manifestation of human moral consciousness? Hardly. How about someone that steps in when we think we have the right of it and negates our human judgement, saying, “No, you must do as I have said”? By the reckoning laid out above, all our natural human inclinations are disordered if they don’t exactly conform to Church teachings, no matter how insane the latter might be. Of all the people who have acted through conscious, free choice, motivated personally from within (as opposed to “blind” internal impulse?) or by external pressure (often exerted by the Church), how many of them have been persecuted by the dogmatically-inclined hierarchy of the Church with its worldly concern for maintaining temporal power?

 

[jimmy]

Brother, John Paul II “emphasis on freedom” was an overarching theme of his papacy…because he battled Communism most of his life. Yes, Communism…an existentialist dream of brutally enforced equality and hyper-manipulation to save the people from the horrors of inequality and manipulation

What are you talking about? Existentialism and communism have nothing to do with each other. Lenin wasn’t an existentialist. And what the pope says here has nothing to do with communis or politics.

JPII wrote his dissertation on Sheller, an existentialist.

 

[Pugsly]

What are you talking about? Existentialism and communism have nothing to do with each other. Lenin wasn’t an existentialist. And what the pope says here has nothing to do with communis or politics.

JPII wrote his dissertation on Sheller, an existentialist.

I’m sorry Jimmy…I thought that since philosophies birth political systems that I could mention the connection.

 

[jimmy]

I’m sorry Jimmy…I thought that since philosophies birth political systems that I could mention the connection.

Existentialism didn’t give birth to communism. There might be existentialists who have been communists but it isn’t because they were existentialists.

 

[Pugsly]

Existentialism didn’t give birth to communism. There might be existentialists who have been communists but it isn’t because they were existentialists.

We disagree

 

[Julia_Mae]

I liked your post #3. However, I’m not sure your analysis applies to the O.P.s friend for two reasons. First, he didn’t define what he meant by " existentialist " and wheather or not his friend identified himself as an adherent to that particular " philosophy, " and if so, what particular form of that philosophy, and if so, to what extent ? I have found that people can be extremely confused on these points because most people simply see or hear or read a snippit from a system and immediately say, " oh yes, that’s me, I’m a materialist, " or " I’m an existentialist, " when they really don’t know anything about the complete system, excet a paragraph or two.

Oh, I agree. It’s especially true with existentialism which has no concrete definition.

Secondly, his friend obviously has a " rock solid " spiritual life, so he obviously does not mean that God doesn’t act or communicate with His creation. The O.P. has not explained exactly how his friend defines this. Clearly there is confusion and the O.P. has created it by not being specific enough.

Hmmm. Perhaps it would help to ask very specific questions like: What does your friend mean by God not acting on Earth? Does he not believe in miracles? Does he believe in the Eucharist? Then we can help with that clarification process.

 

[jimmy]

We disagree

To prove your assertion that Communism was birthed by existentialism, you would have to show that Vladamir Lennon was an existentialist or that he was heavily influenced by Kierkegaard and Nietzche. The term existentialism wasn’t even coined until the 1940’s by Gabriel Marcel to refer to Sartre’s philosophy. People apply back to Kierkegaard and Nietzche because they were the first ones to express the ideas of existentialism.

Existentialism doesn’t prescribe any political system; there have been existentialists who held every political view. What it gives is a way of approaching life. It focuses on subjective knowledge over objective knowledge. It also focus on being before essence, so freedom is important for the development of the person. You make your own decisions and those, rather than an essence, determine who you are.