How do you even begin debunking reincarnation?

[Roman_Army]

It doesn’t really add up when you think about all the different kinds of species and greater number of creatures on Earth today than in any other time in the Earth’s history as well as the significant difference in life spans between the creatures. Then we have to break this cycle through enlightenment by doing what Buddha did? The creatures are not intelligent enough to know what enlightenment is and 99% of human beings don’t even want to or are not strong enough to undertake such rigorous acts of asceticism required for it. What is the purpose then of an endless cycle of reincarnations and what or who began it? Why do we not remember anything of our past lives? I have never once remembered anything, unless the feeling of de ja vu is anything, which it isn’t since I experience it as a human being in which a false memory is produced or an actual memory deep in the recesses of my brain. Then also Catholicism has an answer to those who claim with accuracy that they remember things of a past human individual’s life. Demons are constantly lurking all around us observing and even influencing human history. They are very powerful and cunning and are able to read and influence our minds. It is no real stretch to see such phenomenon as a demonic influence of some kind, it is the power that necromancers, witches, astrologers, sooth sayers, etc. tap into to allegedly speak to the dead and foretell the future, know of our pasts, etc. and etc. The reason why we are not permitted to do these things that witches do is precisely because they are not from God, they are from demonic forces in order to lead us away from complete trust in God through prayer.

 

[Ahimsa]

The CCC does talk about rejecting reincarnation, but it cites no council or papal statement, which – if I understand correctly – are the sources of infallible teaching. CCC 1013 says “There is no “reincarnation” after death” but no source is given for that statement.

Scripture says lots of things, but a scriptural statement in and of itself is not a direct statement of infallible dogma.

There’s a book about reincarnation, written by a retired Catholic priest:
The author is a retired Catholic priest who learned that his lifelong friend, Michael Newton Ph.D., was practicing past-life regression hypnotheraapy and was writing a book on his findings concerning a soul’s activity between death and reincarnation, Journey of Souls. At first disbelieving because of the Catholic Church position that there is no such thing as reincarnation, Father Fahey began to research Sacred Scripture and the dogmatic pronouncements of the Church to determine if the belief that life is divided into many segments spanning thousands of years had ever been formally condemned. He found that only non-essential elements often associated with the theory had been anathematized, not reincarnation itself. Having concluded that one could believe in reincarnation without being unfaithful, he then searched for anecdotal evidence of phenomena that pointed to its existence. This bookpresents his findings.

 

[GEddie]

Given that the Catholic Church numbers more than 1,000,000,000 people, you can find Catholics who believe anything. It is no surprise at all to me that one Catholic priest has published a book defending reincarnation.

It also is no big deal. The first thing a Catholic learns growing up is not everything every priest says is truth. And reincarnation plays no part, nor ever played a part, in Church teaching.

God Bless and ICXC NIKA.

 

[Ahimsa]

Given that the Catholic Church numbers more than 1,000,000,000 people, you can find Catholics who believe anything.

Very true, which is why I’m still waiting for someone to produce an infallible conciliar or papal statement that rejects “reincarnation” – and not simply an infallible statement that rejects only certain forms of reincarnation, but that rejections all forms of reincarnation.

 

[passer_by]

The CCC does talk about rejecting reincarnation, but it cites no council or papal statement, which – if I understand correctly – are the sources of infallible teaching. CCC 1013 says “There is no “reincarnation” after death” but no source is given for that statement.

Scripture says lots of things, but a scriptural statement in and of itself is not a direct statement of infallible dogma.

There’s a book about reincarnation, written by a retired Catholic priest:
The author is a retired Catholic priest who learned that his lifelong friend, Michael Newton Ph.D., was practicing past-life regression hypnotheraapy and was writing a book on his findings concerning a soul’s activity between death and reincarnation, Journey of Souls. At first disbelieving because of the Catholic Church position that there is no such thing as reincarnation, Father Fahey began to research Sacred Scripture and the dogmatic pronouncements of the Church to determine if the belief that life is divided into many segments spanning thousands of years had ever been formally condemned. He found that only non-essential elements often associated with the theory had been anathematized, not reincarnation itself. Having concluded that one could believe in reincarnation without being unfaithful, he then searched for anecdotal evidence of phenomena that pointed to its existence. This bookpresents his findings.

I am not sure if you are in denial but Reincarnation is certainly not an acceptable position for a Catholic. Did you take some time to read the previous post I made to you?

As far as infallible teaching goes, you are looking at it the wrong way.

There are infallible teachings declaring what happens to a person after death and that there is only ONE LIFE to get it right. After death, you are either going to heaven (might have to hit purgatory on the way) or hell. Also, the teachings on the soul necessitate that a human being is both body and soul together. One body for one man/woman. The soul does not simply animate a body.

So these things are infallibly defined which leaves no room for re-incarnation.

 

[Ahimsa]

I am not sure if you are in denial but Reincarnation is certainly not an acceptable position for a Catholic. Did you take some time to read the previous post I made to you?

As far as infallible teaching goes, you are looking at it the wrong way.

There are infallible teachings declaring what happens to a person after death and that there is only ONE LIFE to get it right. After death, you are either going to heaven (might have to hit purgatory on the way) or hell. Also, the teachings on the soul necessitate that a human being is both body and soul together. One body for one man/woman. The soul does not simply animate a body.

So these things are infallibly defined which leaves no room for re-incarnation.

All this is well and good, but I’m looking for a “de fide”, or infallibly stated, rejection of reincarnation. To say that one has “one life” to live is perfectly compatible with forms of reincarnation in which “one life” stretches over multiple births and deaths.

 

[Benadam]

I believe people can experience memories of the past lives of others. I believe it is a part of our true nature to be in contact with those who’s earthly lives have ended.

I can understand the impulse to own the memories but there really is no reason to believe the past life is our own. Besides it feeling like it, what makes us so sure that the past experienced is an experience of our own soul?

 

[passer_by]

All this is well and good, but I’m looking for a “de fide”, or infallibly stated, rejection of reincarnation. To say that one has “one life” to live is perfectly compatible with forms of reincarnation in which “one life” stretches over multiple births and deaths.

So you see, here it seems that you are asking for something unreasonable.

When the church has infallibly declared teachings, it is clear as day from it that reincarnation is not compatible. If you read the quotes from various saints in the article I gave you, it is very clear that there had been no doubts over this matter.

There really has to be no pronouncement infallibly on re-incarnation. It is clear from existing teaching about LIFE after DEATH that it is unacceptable.

One life stretching over multiple deaths is also not possible since the human being is not something that is solely spiritual. The church teaches a bodily resurrection. Now if you want to go further and argue that somehow the person gets the same body in the next life that leads to other issues. If it were such and there were multiple deaths, then Jesus’s death and resurrection would be nothing special because everyone seems to do that on a regular basis according to your theory of re-incarnation. Every reincarnation would just be a resurrection.

So no, the nature of a human being as defined according to Christian teaching is very much incompatible with re-incarnation.

 

[Gracicados]

Reincarnation is a concept for those who fear that should they falter they will be given a second chance without the aid of our almighty Father, and another example of human stubbornness to admit that we are weak, we are frail, and that without God we can achieve nothing. As to convincing another of their mistake, you could ask why a soul would leave this world for judgement only to return into another vessel? What would be the point? Why would it happen? A friend once put to me the argument that our Lord Christ reincarnated, so if that should come up I would say what I did to him- he did not reincarnate, but he resurrected and triumphed over death.

 

[Ahimsa]

So you see, here it seems that you are asking for something unreasonable.

When the church has infallibly declared teachings, it is clear as day from it that reincarnation is not compatible. If you read the quotes from various saints in the article I gave you, it is very clear that there had been no doubts over this matter.

There really has to be no pronouncement infallibly on re-incarnation. It is clear from existing teaching about LIFE after DEATH that it is unacceptable.

It may be clear to you, but it is obviously not clear to everyone, not even every Catholic. Saints are saintly, but they are not necessarily infallible.

The church teaches a bodily resurrection. Now if you want to go further and argue that somehow the person gets the same body in the next life that leads to other issues. If it were such and there were multiple deaths, then Jesus’s death and resurrection would be nothing special because everyone seems to do that on a regular basis according to your theory of re-incarnation. Every reincarnation would just be a resurrection.

From a reincarnational perspective, what would make Jesus distinctive would be the idea that Jesus resurrected in a “glorified” body, which is not the same as our mortal body, nor is it the same as our subtle/astral body. The average person possesses a mortal body and a subtle/astral body, but Jesus possessed a glorified body, which is ‘physical’ like the mortal body, but ‘non-physical’ like the subtle/astral body, thus accounting for Jesus’ ability to appear/disappear as well as eat food. The Church teaching of bodily resurrection would still be true, because the body that is resurrected, as Paul says in 1st Corinthians 15, is the glorified, uncorruptible, body. (Paul also hints in that chapter of the different bodies that the average human possesses.)

So, every reincarnation would not be a resurrection, because the normal reincarnation process would be a process that led to a mortal physical body, and even the subtle/astral body is impermanent and thus ‘mortal’, ultimately. Jesus’ resurrected body would be immortal, uncorruptible, and not subject to death or the reincarnation process.

 

[passer_by]

It may be clear to you, but it is obviously not clear to everyone, not even every Catholic. Saints are saintly, but they are not necessarily infallible.

Once something is taught repeatedly in Tradition, it is infallible.

On a side note, if it is not clear to you, should you listen to your private interpretation or those that were taught by saints?

From a reincarnational perspective, what would make Jesus distinctive would be the idea that Jesus resurrected in a “glorified” body, which is not the same as our mortal body, nor is it the same as our subtle/astral body. The average person possesses a mortal body and a subtle/astral body, but Jesus possessed a glorified body, which is ‘physical’ like the mortal body, but ‘non-physical’ like the subtle/astral body, thus accounting for Jesus’ ability to appear/disappear as well as eat food. The Church teaching of bodily resurrection would still be true, because the body that is resurrected, as Paul says in 1st Corinthians 15, is the glorified, uncorruptible, body. (Paul also hints in that chapter of the different bodies that the average human possesses.)

So, every reincarnation would not be a resurrection, because the normal reincarnation process would be a process that led to a mortal physical body, and even the subtle/astral body is impermanent and thus ‘mortal’, ultimately. Jesus’ resurrected body would be immortal, uncorruptible, and not subject to death or the reincarnation process.

I think you are missing the important point here.

If re-incarnation was true, then there is no need to seek immortality for it already is here. You might “die” but death is temporary for you are born again.

Now if you say that the reincarnated person DOES NOT share the same body as prior, then you are again in a condemned position by the Catholic church. Why? Because the body and spirit together make a human being.

So the it is as follows:-

1. If reincarnation is true, and the person is reborn again, then death is NOT FINAL, and the person is immortal in the physical AND spiritual sense. – condemned as error

To get away from that error, you can say something like

1. The reincarnated body is not the same as the last body and memories shared so in this sense the person is not immortal – condemned as error because such a thing is not compatible with the Christian teaching of the human being

In short, re-incarnation is clearly not an acceptable position. Now I can understand your confusion. Many Catholics do have this confusion.

But when in confusion, what you should do is turn to the saints. They have taught it very clearly.

 

[GEddie]

Our LORD’s Resurrection was in NO sense a reincarnation, as HIS original soma became, or was subsumed into, HIS resurrectional Body. He even kept the scars in HIS limbs (associated with His death)!

He stayed Himself; He did not become someone else.

It is HIS experience, and not past-life regression, that the Church teaches infallibly will be the pattern for our own post-death.

God Bless and ICXC NIKA

 

[Ahimsa]

Once something is taught repeatedly in Tradition, it is infallible.

Geocentrism was taught repeatedly in Tradition, as was the condemnation of usury (interest). Neither are considered infallible today.

If re-incarnation was true, then there is no need to seek immortality for it already is here. You might “die” but death is temporary for you are born again.

If reincarnation obviated the need to seek for immortality, then the Hindus and the Buddhists would not love Lord Krishna, or take Refuge in the Buddha.

Now if you say that the reincarnated person DOES NOT share the same body as prior, then you are again in a condemned position by the Catholic church. Why? Because the body and spirit together make a human being.

Actually, the reincarnated person (who consists of physical mortal body, subtle/astral body, and causal body – the last two commonly referred to as “spirit”, since they are not physical bodies but bodies made of subtle and even-more-subtle substances) has a physical body that shares some similarities, as well as differences, to the physical body of his/her previous incarnation, but for the most part, the two physical bodies will be very different. On the other hand, the causal body will be the same from incarnation to incarnation – so, we can say that the reincarnated person does share the same causal body.

So the it is as follows:-

1. If reincarnation is true, and the person is reborn again, then death is NOT FINAL, and the person is immortal in the physical AND spiritual sense. – condemned as error

The idea that death is not final is also part of Christian theology: every one will be resurrected, some to eternal life, and some to eternal suffering. In addition, the resurrected persons will be a union of body-and-spirit. So, to criticize the reincarnation idea for not making death final, when Christianity does the same thing, is a bit disingenuous.

To get away from that error, you can say something like

1. The reincarnated body is not the same as the last body and memories shared so in this sense the person is not immortal – condemned as error because such a thing is not compatible with the Christian teaching of the human being

Again, the innermost body, the causal body, would be the same from incarnation to incarnation.

 

[passer_by]

Geocentrism was taught repeatedly in Tradition, as was the condemnation of usury (interest). Neither are considered infallible today.

Geocentrism was NOT an article of faith In case you did not know, the church can err on scientific ideas.

If reincarnation obviated the need to seek for immortality, then the Hindus and the Buddhists would not love Lord Krishna, or take Refuge in the Buddha.

I am not sure if you are really a Buddhist. But the reason for people to seek refuge in Buddha is not for immortality. It is in-fact to end the cycle of birth. For some, it is a matter of reaching rahath.

The state of being in heaven is actually temporary in Buddhism.

Actually, the reincarnated person (who consists of physical mortal body, subtle/astral body, and causal body – the last two commonly referred to as “spirit”, since they are not physical bodies but bodies made of subtle and even-more-subtle substances) has a physical body that shares some similarities, as well as differences, to the physical body of his/her previous incarnation, but for the most part, the two physical bodies will be very different. On the other hand, the causal body will be the same from incarnation to incarnation – so, we can say that the reincarnated person does share the same causal body.

EXACTLY! And hence the condemnation by the Catholic Church.

If you get the same body after re-incarnation, it means that you don’t need a bodily resurrection.

The idea that death is not final is also part of Christian theology: every one will be resurrected, some to eternal life, and some to eternal suffering. In addition, the resurrected persons will be a union of body-and-spirit. So, to criticize the reincarnation idea for not making death final, when Christianity does the same thing, is a bit disingenuous.

Death is final in Christianity in that after death, one cannot merit towards heaven or earth.

Again, the innermost body, the causal body, would be the same from incarnation to incarnation.

Which is why it is condemned in the Church.

My honest advice to you, it seems like you do not understand Church teaching very well. So it might be better for you to listen to the saints and Tradition, accept their teaching for now.

Not everyone is suppossed to get everything. Sometimes we have to accept what the church teaches and move on. In this case, Reincarnation is incompatible with Christianity no matter how much you might like the idea. It has been clearly condemned by saints before you as well. So I can only suggest that you listen to them.

 

[paul_c]

Ahisma,
I find it very strange that you are telling Catholics that our faith allows room for reincarnation. In fact, it does not. You’ve already seen that the Catechism precludes it and the Catechism has the authority of Pope John Paul II. Furthermore, you are wrong that it doesn’t have references from infallable sources . it referencs both Lumen Gentium 48 and Hebrews 9:27.

1013 Death is the end of man’s earthly pilgrimage, of the time of grace and mercy which God offers him so as to work out his earthly life in keeping with the divine plan, and to decide his ultimate destiny. When “the single course of our earthly life” is completed,586 we shall not return to other earthly lives: "It is appointed for men to die once."587 There is no “reincarnation” after death.

586 LG 48 § 3.
587 Heb 9:27.

 

[Ahimsa]

Ahisma,
I find it very strange that you are telling Catholics that our faith allows room for reincarnation.

I’m not telling Catholics that reincarnation is allowable for them; I am asking is there a dogmatic, infallible statement (and a sentence from the CCC does not count as a dogmatic, infallible statement) rejecting any sort of reincarnation. So far, I haven’t seen it – and scriptural texts, again, do not qualify, even though they may be very interesting.

Now, if you want to say that reincarnation is not part of the historical teaching of the Church, I’m not arguing against that. I’m asking specifically about dogmatic, infallible statements (from council or Pope) that rejecting reincarnation.

 

[Ahimsa]

Geocentrism was NOT an article of faith In case you did not know, the church can err on scientific ideas.

I never said geocentrism was a dogma, but it certainly was part of the teachings of the Church Fathers and scriptural interpretation, in part because geocentrism was consistent with a real dogma: the special, unique place that humans have in Creation. Geocentrism helped support that idea; geocentrism was thus a supporting doctrine, but not a dogma.

Likewise, I’m haven’t yet seen anyone claim (with evidence) that the rejection of reincarnation is a dogma, either; yet, it’s clear that the rejection of reincarnation historically has helped support real dogmatic statements (resurrection of the body, e.g.). So, if geocentrism – because it wasn’t dogma – need not be true, then one might ask whether an absolute rejection of reincarnation – because it may not be dogma – might not be true, either.

But the reason for people to seek refuge in Buddha is not for immortality. It is in-fact to end the cycle of birth.

People seek Refuge in the Triple Gem for many reasons. Ultimately, it’s because Nirvana is the “highest Happiness/Joy”, and “Deathless”.

If you get the same body after re-incarnation, it means that you don’t need a bodily resurrection.

You don’t get the same physical body after reincarnation.

Death is final in Christianity in that after death, one cannot merit towards heaven or earth.

There are similar ideas in Buddhism. There are certain Buddhist hellish realms, in which one cannot get out by one’s own efforts.

In this case, Reincarnation is incompatible with Christianity no matter how much you might like the idea. It has been clearly condemned by saints before you as well. So I can only suggest that you listen to them.

OK, so you’re saying that condemnation by the Saints, make something a dogmatic teaching?

 

[Benadam]

This is from the catechism.

1013 Death is the end of man’s earthly pilgrimage, of the time of grace and mercy which God offers him so as to work out his earthly life in keeping with the divine plan, and to decide his ultimate destiny. When “the single course of our earthly life” is completed,586 we shall not return to other earthly lives: "It is appointed for men to die once."587 There is no “reincarnation” after death.

APOSTOLIC LETTER
***TERTIO MILLENNIO ADVENIENTE
***OF HIS HOLINESS
POPE JOHN PAUL II
TO THE BISHOPS, CLERGY
AND LAY FAITHFUL
ON PREPARATION
FOR THE JUBILEE OF THE YEAR 2000

Christian revelation excludes reincarnation, and speaks of a fulfilment which man is called to achieve in the course of a single earthly existence.

there are many many statements like this in documents at the vatican website.

That’s very difinitive

 

[paul_c]

I’m not telling Catholics that reincarnation is allowable for them; I am asking is there a dogmatic, infallible statement (and a sentence from the CCC does not count as a dogmatic, infallible statement) rejecting any sort of reincarnation. So far, I haven’t seen it – and scriptural texts, again, do not qualify, even though they may be very interesting.

Now, if you want to say that reincarnation is not part of the historical teaching of the Church, I’m not arguing against that. I’m asking specifically about dogmatic, infallible statements (from council or Pope) that rejecting reincarnation.

Ahimsa,
I find it equally strange that you, as a non-Catholic, are deciding what is and is not a dogmatic, infallible statement. The fact is, to knowledgeable Catholics it is clear that re-incarnation is counter to the faith. It is in scripture. it is in papal documents (Lumen Gentium for one), its in the writings of the Church Fathers and its explicitly stated in the Catechism in paragraph 1013. There is no need for a specific ex-cathedra statement explicitly denouncing reincarnation because there is no question among the faithful that would require clarification. Those kind of statements are made only to address specific needs.

 

[Ahimsa]

there are many many statements like this in documents at the vatican website.

That’s very difinitive

Apostolic Letters are not ex cathedra infallible dogmatic definitions.