Is it acceptable for a Catholic to have a Buddha shrine?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jredden92
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tis_Bearself said:
I suppose if one thinks of the Buddha as reasonably being in Heaven, which doesn’t seem out of the question, then one could privately venerate him as a saint.

I still would not make a “shrine” to him, as that seems a little uncomfortably close to practicing Buddhism.
Click to expand...
I was thinking more in terms of a peaceful compassion. Statues of the Buddha always look so tranquil, like a call to tranquility. Not veneration. And a call to detachment and that is the bridge to Christ who taught a dying to self. and compassion for the least of us.
 
rossum said:
Not quite. Things do not exist the way we think they exist. The problem is not the existence, but the way we think about that existence. We think there is water in a mirage. A mirage exists – it is not nothing – but the way we think about a mirage is incorrect.
Click to expand...
I apologize - I’ll need to do more studying. At any rate, suffice it to say that the Buddhist doctrine of the anatman - that there is no unchanging, permanent self, soul or essence in phenomena - would be incompatible with Christian theology.
 
I’m fine with a statue of a Buddha because it’s a reminder to stay calm, or pleasant to look at, or to pray for the Buddha’s soul and privately ask his intercession. I even kind of like the pictures of Jesus and Buddha hanging out together that crop up from time to time.

It’s the fact that the OP called it a “shrine” and is apparently in RCIA that raised my concern.

If you, or Thomas Merton, said you had a Buddha statue in your house or garden, I’d probably expect that and not be concerned. Yes, I know some people become alarmed at mention of Merton. I am not one of them.
 
Last edited:
I like the idea of “Shrines” and grottos as in places set aside for reflection and prayer.
 
Shrine has a religious veneration meaning to me. So I wouldn’t want a shrine to anyone who wasn’t God or an established saint of the Church.

Grotto, “meditation garden”, “prayer garden” etc not so much. I’d be fine with a meditation garden named for Buddha or Kwan Yin or my favorite Protestants.
 
Last edited:
I don’t think the Buddha would ant to be venerated. But people do what they do.

When I hear “shrine” I think Shriners.
 
I found couple things in English. One is news from Catholic News Agency that they will be removed in next edition of Martyrology.
I also found catholic calender for year 2005. with Catholic and Orthodox saints, St. Josaphat and Barlaam are venerated only in Orthodox Church (19. December for Russian and Serbian) but nothing in Catholic. It is not in English.
Josaphat and Barlaam were venerated only one period of time. I also guess that was influenced by fact that they were recognised as part of christianised Buddha story - recognition wasn’t possible until Buddhism arrived on West with translation of it’s work - according to some authors. According to other, as book down says, it was story by st. John Damascus.

Then I found book (2015.) which says that they are deleted from Roman Martyrology.


(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

This book also says they will be removed
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Tis_Bearself said:
it would be fine to reasonably think Buddha, having lived a good life in invincible ignorance, might be in Heaven
Click to expand...
That is possible but personally I don’t find him to be first on my list to ask for intercession and don’t agree that suggestion would be helpful to OP.
Buddha definitely could be in Heaven but not venerated as catholic saint.

I have nothing against saints who are known only through legends. I was named after a saint who is very unfamous, lived in 3./4.century A. D. and very little known, only mentioned in writing of st. Jerome. So yeah I am fine with those saints.
 
Last edited:
ReaderT said:
At any rate, suffice it to say that the Buddhist doctrine of the anatman - that there is no unchanging, permanent self, soul or essence in phenomena - would be incompatible with Christian theology.
Click to expand...
Yes. Anatman is something which distinguishes Buddhism from most (or all?) other religions. What you think is your soul isn’t. It is another example of the difference between what we think something is and what it actually is.
 
rossum said:
40.png
Inbonum:
Saints Barlaam and Josaphat ARE NOT saints we venerate in Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
They were once. They even had a feast day. They were relegated in the ‘Bonfire of the Saints’ in 1969. IIRC the Russian Orthodox Church still venerates them.
Click to expand...
They’re no longer in the Roman Calendar, but they’re still listed in the official Roman Martyrology (Martyrologium Romanum) on November 27. So they’re still very much considered Roman Catholic saints.
27 Novembris Quinto Kalendas Decembris. Luna …

xxviij. A

Antiochiae sanctorum Martyrum Basilei Episcopi, Auxilii et Saturnini.

Sebaste, in Armenia, sanctorum Martyrum Hirenarchi, Acacii Presbyteri, ac septem mulierum. Harum porro constantia Hirenarchus commotus, ad Christum conversus, sub Diocletiano Imperatore et Maximo Praeside, una cum Acacio, securi percutitur.

Apud Caeam fluvium, in Gallaecia, sanctorum Facundi et Primitivi, qui sub Attico Praeside passi sunt.

In Perside sancti Jacobi intercisi, Martyris conspicui, qui, tempore Theodosii junioris, cum in Isdegerdis Regis gratiam Christum negasset, et propterea mater ejus et uxor ab ipsius se consuetudine subtraxissent, hinc, in se reversus, intrepide coram Vararane, Isdegerdis filio ac successore, se Christianum esse confessus est; ideoque ab irato Rege, lata in eum mortis sententia, membratim jussus est concidi et capite obtruncari. Quo etiam tempore innumeri alii Martyres ibidem passi sunt.

Aquilejae sancti Valeriani Episcopi.

Apud Regium, in Gallia, sancti Maximi, Episcopi et Confessoris; qui, usque a primaevae astatis annis omni virtutum gratia praeditus, primum Lirinensis coenobii Pater, deinde Regiensis Ecclesiae Episcopus, signis et prodigiis inclytus exstitit.

Salisburgi, in Norico, sancti Virgilii, Episcopi et Carinthiorum Apostoli, qui a Gregorio Nono, Pontifice Maximo, in Sanctorum numerum adscriptus est.

Apud Indos, Persis finitimos, sanctorum Barlaam et Josaphat, quorum actus mirandos sanctus Joannes Damascenus conscripsit.

Lutetiae Parisiorum depositio sancti Severini, Monachi et Solitarii.

Et alibi aliorum plurimorum sanctorum Martyrum et Confessorum, atque sanctarum Virginum. R. Deo gratias.
Click to expand...
http://www.liturgialatina.org/martyrologium/21.htm
 
PeterT said:
They’re no longer in the Roman Calendar, but they’re still listed in the official Roman Martyrology (Martyrologium Romanum) on November 27. So they’re still very much considered Roman Catholic saints.
Click to expand...
This Martyrology is from 1749. so it isn’t newest one. Many saints are added and some removed since then. It changes.
I posted source from 2015. which claims that they are deleted from Roman Martyrology.
 
Iit is amazing they still value compassion with no ultimate person to experience it.
 
Inbonum said:
Saints Barlaam and Josaphat ARE NOT saints we venerate in Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
“But they weren’t actually de-sainted, just downgraded” said Christopher Bellito, a history professor at Kean University.
Click to expand...
We can’t remove sainthood from a person once he/she is Canonized.
 
Last edited:
They were never officialy canonised so nobody removed official sainthood from them.
They were removed from the list of saints and martyrs to which they had been added in one part of history.

I don’t see why is that so hard to accept as fact.
 
Last edited:
Inbonum said:
I posted source from 2015. which claims that they are deleted from Roman Martyrology.
Click to expand...
No, your source gives an opinion that they are likely (in the author’s opinion) to be deleted from the next revision of the martyrology.

Still haven’t seen anything definitive that they WERE deleted.
 
It says “deleted” next to their names. Next to some names is “add” and to others is “deleted”.
The book is list of all saints from newest Roman Martyrology, reliable source, not opinion.

It is strongest of all sources I have found in English.
Those two saints aren’t in Roman Martyrology anymore.

Btw, Vatican published newest edition in 2004.
There is no English translate online but there are translations in other languages. They aren’t on the list anymore.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top