Is Tai Chi sorcery?

[JimR-OCDS]

your issue is with the vatican, its their document, obviously you didn’t read it or you wouldn’t be quoting time lines. and it quotes yoga. link the document you ref
thats just a silly statement as the vatican doc is from 2003 and your ref 1989

I have read it and it’s about the New Age Movement. but that’s not what we’re talking about in this thread.

Also, I provided a quote from the Vatican to the Bishops on Aspects of Meditation from non-Christian religions.

Jim

 

[saveusfromhell]

I have read it and it’s about the New Age Movement. but that’s not what we’re talking about in this thread.

Also, I provided a quote from the Vatican to the Bishops on Aspects of Meditation from non-Christian religions.

Jim

actualy you didn’t understand it then because it’s exactly what its talking about. jesus the water bearer of life document is 2003 while the document you failed to link is from 1989.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

actualy you didn’t understand it then because it’s exactly what its talking about. jesus the water bearer of life document is 2003 while the document you failed to link is from 1989.

Well being the document is about the New Age Movement, where the one I linked has to do with aspects of meditation coming from the East, I think the one who is lacking understanding is yourself.

Also, as stated in the forward to the document, it is “provisional.” in other words, it in the context of the time it’s written and can change as new information warrants.

Jim

 

[saveusfromhell]

Well being the document is about the New Age Movement, where the one I linked has to do with aspects of meditation coming from the East, I think the one who is lacking understanding is yourself.

Also, as stated in the forward to the document, it is “provisional.” in other words, it in the context of the time it’s written and can change as new information warrants.

Jim

2003 so show me where the vatican has decided new info waranted since. i quoted the 2003 document where it specifies Zen Buddhism, Yoga and goes on to detail what it means by new age in depth.

if you can’t accept the church document from 2003 thats okay,

 

[JimR-OCDS]

2003 so show me where the vatican has decided new info waranted. i quoted the 2003 document where it specifies Zen Buddhism, Yoga and goes on to detail what it means by new age in depth.

if you can’t accept the church document from 2003 thats okay

It specifies Yoga and Zen Buddhism with respect to New Age groups and those using them as a means toward spiritual enlightenment that is outside of Christianity. It was provisional because many Catholics were bringing in New Age practices into Catholicism, including crystals and astrology.

In other words, they’re not Christ centered, but centered on a mystical experiences in themselves.

Something totally different than what we’re talking about here.

The Letter I pointed to has to do with the fact that the Vatican recognizes the truths in the great religions of the world and does not reject them, but just the opposite. We can use these truths so long as they do not distort the truths of our faith.

Jim

 

[saveusfromhell]

This is not true. Taoism, Hinduism and Buddhism are not the occult, and the Church never defines them as such.

The Church teaches that other religions have germs of truth in them and they should not be rejected just because they are not Catholic.

Jim

it does if they are not Christ based

The Letter I pointed to has to do with the fact that the Vatican recognizes the truths in the great religions of the world and does not reject them, but just the opposite. We can use these** truths so long as they do not distort the truths of our faith**.

but it does of course reject them if they are not christ based as 2003 doc
which is of course where we started off, unless you think the church accepts reincarnation etc as having gems of truth.

 

[CrimsonThorn]

This is not true. Taoism, Hinduism and Buddhism are not the occult, and the Church never defines them as such.

The Church teaches that other religions have germs of truth in them and they should not be rejected just because they are not Catholic.

Also, God reveals himself to those who seek him in a limited way, even when they are not able to know Jesus Christ or his Church.

Jim

Fr. Amorth disagrees and even calls Yoga satanic. Not only does he state, but the Hindu priests as well, say that seperating the spirituality of yoga from the exercise portion of it is impossible. To do one is to do it entirely. Look it up.

 

[thistle]

Tai Chi trains a person to use their internal energy to heal themselves and to develop a mystical awareness of the world. I just found this in the Catechism.

“All practices of magic or sorcery, by which one attempts to tame occult powers, so as to place them at one’s service and have a supernatural power over others – even if this were for the sake of restoring their health – are gravely contrary to the virtue of religion. These practices are even more to be condemned when accompanied by the intention of harming someone, or when they have recourse to the intervention of demons. Wearing charms is also reprehensible. Spiritismoften implies divination or magical practices; the Church for her part warns the faithful against it. Recourse to so-called traditional cures does not justify either the invocation of evil powers or the exploitation of another’s credulity (CCC 2117).”

This seems to condemn Tai Chi, Yoga, and all other alternative health care and holistic practices not including herbology. Am I right?

Tai Chi is NOT sorcery and is NOT forbidden to Catholics. It is a form of exercise and I have an old priest friend who practices Tai Chi daily.

 

[ValPal]

Fr. Amorth disagrees and even calls Yoga satanic. Not only does he state, but the Hindu priests as well, say that seperating the spirituality of yoga from the exercise portion of it is impossible. To do one is to do it entirely. Look it up.

You can look it up at your local Yoga center. What most people practice in the west that they call Yoga doesn’t even resemble the real Yoga practiced in India.

As far as the rest of this thread goes, there is a tremendous amount of confusion. Everything is thrown in the pot and treated the same way, hence the reason discussions on this subject don’t lead anywhere.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Fr. Amorth disagrees and even calls Yoga satanic. Not only does he state, but the Hindu priests as well, say that seperating the spirituality of yoga from the exercise portion of it is impossible. To do one is to do it entirely. Look it up.

And they’re talking about different things.

Fr Amorth, has problems of his own BTW and has been discredited with some of his claims,

As far as Hindu Priest, their speaking about Yoga in Hinduism, not Yoga exercises that Americans do, which they wouldn’t consider Yoga.

Jim

 

[BluesPicker]

Many people seek the Kingdom of Heaven but few find it according to Jesus Christ. Some people think they are in Heaven but really they are in Hell. To enter the Kingdom of God you have to give up all that is not of God. Whether this be in this life, or in Purgatory you have to give up that which is not of God.

Obedience to your superiors in the Church according to  St. John of the Cross  is paramount.  St. Padre Pio  equated the will of his Bishop with the Will of God  and obeyed even while being persecuted unjustly.  Same is true of  St. Faustina.

 If you want to enter Heaven then obey the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

And many don’t enter the Kingdom of Heaven, because they do not see God in others, but see them as deficient outcasts to be shunned.

I believe that those who see themselves as good Catholics, will not recognize Jesus at his 2nd coming. They’ll be as the Scribes and Pharisees, looking for a Jesus in their own vision of glory, rather than a Jesus of God’s glory which is love and compassion.

If you can’t see God in others and in his creation, you’ll not know Jesus when he comes.

Jim

 

[SeekingHisMercy]

Several points need clarification here:

Taijiquan is a very formidable self-defense system. The techniques in taijiquan cause much greater damage than other martial arts when properly applied. For people looking for a quick method of self-defense, taiji doesn’t really suffice since, like any martial art, it takes time to develop skill (the idea of “gong fu” is that it is a skill acquired through much time, hard work, and patience) techniques. I’d also add that taijiquan isn’t primarily a form of exercise. The exercise/health benefits found in taijiquan are by-products of a highly sophisticated fighting system.

Taijiquan does not predate Christianity. The Zhang San Feng legend dates back to the 12th century. Chen Wangting’s era dates between 1580-1660. The presence of Christianity in China predates both, since the earliest archeological findings related to Christianity relate to a stele located in Xi’an dated 781.

Taijiquan is based on a philosophy related to the taiji, a state between the wuji and yin/yang. Mantak Chia’s book “The Inner Structure of Tai Chi” talks about taijiquan as it relates to the Universal Force, the Cosmic Force, and the Earth Force and gets very deep into Taoist philosophy even in the first chapter. Chia isn’t “the authority” on taijiquan, but his book does point out basic taiji philosophy. Chen Xiaowang’s book on the Five Levels of Taijiquan talks about achieving, at the highest level of practice, completeness of person. Taiji philosophy does deal with chakras–3 of them in its case, called in Chinese “dantien”. To deny that these things exist within taiji philosophy is to be ignorant of the core principles which undergird taijiquan practice.

Although I can appreciate that other religions may offer gems of truth, as Catholics, we have Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition which give us all we need to know for salvation. Being a complete person comes through a relationship with Jesus Christ, particularly through reception of the Sacraments, not through practicing taijiquan. Catholics don’t need to be wasting time with chakra development. If we did, I’m guessing it would be part of the deposit of Faith.

I’ll end this reply with this comment: I searched for many years, asking, studying, and praying about participation. Time and again, I was led out to the conclusion that taiji practice was incompatible with the Catholic Faith. I argued the other side many times, with a lot of the arguments I see here, and in the end, all of those arguments came up short. I wanted to hang on to it and became upset many times when I felt that my practice of it was being challenged in terms of my walk with the Lord Jesus. That alone was problematic and because of my wanting to hang on to practicing taijiquan so badly, I fought for a long time to keep it.

 

[thistle]

Several points need clarification here:

Taijiquan is a very formidable self-defense system. The techniques in taijiquan cause much greater damage than other martial arts when properly applied. For people looking for a quick method of self-defense, taiji doesn’t really suffice since, like any martial art, it takes time to develop skill (the idea of “gong fu” is that it is a skill acquired through much time, hard work, and patience) techniques. I’d also add that taijiquan isn’t primarily a form of exercise. The exercise/health benefits found in taijiquan are by-products of a highly sophisticated fighting system.

Taijiquan does not predate Christianity. The Zhang San Feng legend dates back to the 12th century. Chen Wangting’s era dates between 1580-1660. The presence of Christianity in China predates both, since the earliest archeological findings related to Christianity relate to a stele located in Xi’an dated 781.

Taijiquan is based on a philosophy related to the taiji, a state between the wuji and yin/yang. Mantak Chia’s book “The Inner Structure of Tai Chi” talks about taijiquan as it relates to the Universal Force, the Cosmic Force, and the Earth Force and gets very deep into Taoist philosophy even in the first chapter. Chia isn’t “the authority” on taijiquan, but his book does point out basic taiji philosophy. Chen Xiaowang’s book on the Five Levels of Taijiquan talks about achieving, at the highest level of practice, completeness of person. Taiji philosophy does deal with chakras–3 of them in its case, called in Chinese “dantien”. To deny that these things exist within taiji philosophy is to be ignorant of the core principles which undergird taijiquan practice.

Although I can appreciate that other religions may offer gems of truth, as Catholics, we have Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition which give us all we need to know for salvation. Being a complete person comes through a relationship with Jesus Christ, particularly through reception of the Sacraments, not through practicing taijiquan. Catholics don’t need to be wasting time with chakra development. If we did, I’m guessing it would be part of the deposit of Faith.

I’ll end this reply with this comment: I searched for many years, asking, studying, and praying about participation. Time and again, I was led out to the conclusion that taiji practice was incompatible with the Catholic Faith. I argued the other side many times, with a lot of the arguments I see here, and in the end, all of those arguments came up short. I wanted to hang on to it and became upset many times when I felt that my practice of it was being challenged in terms of my walk with the Lord Jesus. That alone was problematic and because of my wanting to hang on to practicing taijiquan so badly, I fought for a long time to keep it.

Tai Chi when practiced simply as an exercise is NOT incompatible with Catholicism and is NOT forbidden by the Church. I have a 75 year old Chinese Singaporean priest friend who had been doing Tai Chi more or less daily since he was a young kid. He told me its ridiculous for anyone to say this is not compatible with Catholicism.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Taijiquan is based on a philosophy related to the taiji, a state between the wuji and yin/yang. Mantak Chia’s book “The Inner Structure of Tai Chi” talks about taijiquan as it relates to the Universal Force, the Cosmic Force, and the Earth Force and gets very deep into Taoist philosophy even in the first chapter. Chia isn’t “the authority” on taijiquan, but his book does point out basic taiji philosophy. Chen Xiaowang’s book on the Five Levels of Taijiquan talks about achieving, at the highest level of practice, completeness of person. Taiji philosophy does deal with chakras–3 of them in its case, called in Chinese “dantien”. To deny that these things exist within taiji philosophy is to be ignorant of the core principles which undergird taijiquan practice.

Call me an ignorant utilitarian but I see no connection between the philosophy of a physical move and the move itself. If a book on Tai Chi or any martial art teaches me how to position my body and a certain control of my breathing, then that’s all I ever need to know. What little martial arts experienced I’ve had has taught me that much.

Although I can appreciate that other religions may offer gems of truth, as Catholics, we have Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition which give us all we need to know for salvation. Being a complete person comes through a relationship with Jesus Christ, particularly through reception of the Sacraments, not through practicing taijiquan. Catholics don’t need to be wasting time with chakra development. If we did, I’m guessing it would be part of the deposit of Faith.

Despite how much you seem to know a lot but you seem to have also missed the point like all the other religious critics. I don’t see anyone advocating Tai Chi for the purpose that you’re describing.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The philosophy of Tai Chi, yin/yang, most likely comes from Taoism and the elements of Tai Chi are found in the Tao Te Ching.

chebucto.ns.ca/Philosophy/Taichi/tao-chi.html

The person attributed with founding Tai Chi, Chang San-feng, in the mid 13th Century, was a master in Taoism hence the connection.
egreenway.com/taichichuan/chang1.htm

Taoism predates Christianity by 500 years.

As a marital art, it’s useless for self-defense.

I practiced Martial Arts years ago, and learned Tai Chi. I also went to demonstrations with Tai Chi and Kung Fu masters, and there is nothing in Tai Chi that is effective as a method of self-defense.

Those advocate it, tell you that it takes many years to master. Well, even if that were the case, it would make it even more useless, being it wouldn’t serve you until you were in your old age.

Anyway, the exercise is very good, and there was never anything spiritual about it, when I studied it, unless you wanted to get into Taoist forms of meditation, which I never explored.

When engineers from China came to my office, I spoke with them about Tai Chi and was amazed how little they knew about it, but told me that their grandparents practiced Tai Chi every morning out in the park or gym near their homes.

Jim

 

[CrimsonThorn]

You can look it up at your local Yoga center. What most people practice in the west that they call Yoga doesn’t even resemble the real Yoga practiced in India.

As far as the rest of this thread goes, there is a tremendous amount of confusion. Everything is thrown in the pot and treated the same way, hence the reason discussions on this subject don’t lead anywhere.

I’m not sure you’re understanding. The conclusion they’ve all come to, is that even if its not the “same” yoga they do in India, its the exact same Yoga, because it is impossible to do yoga without the spirituality of it being present.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I’m not sure you’re understanding. The conclusion they’ve all come to, is that even if its not the “same” yoga they do in India, its the exact same Yoga, because it is impossible to do yoga without the spirituality of it being present.

Then this is false. for it’s possible to do yoga without the spirituality.

I’ve been doing it for years, and there is no spirituality in what I’m doing, other than the fact that I’m a spiritual being as well as a mortal one.

But then, perhaps it shouldn’t be called Yoga in this forum, so as not to confused the uninformed.

Jim

 

[CrimsonThorn]

And they’re talking about different things.

Fr Amorth, has problems of his own BTW and has been discredited with some of his claims,

As far as Hindu Priest, their speaking about Yoga in Hinduism, not Yoga exercises that Americans do, which they wouldn’t consider Yoga.

Jim

Actually the Hindu priests were talking about Yoga overall, even the kind Americans do that’s “just for exercise.” Their claim and conclusion along with Fr Amorths was that its the same, as it is impossible to seperate the spirituality from the positions, and I think they would know better than us.

Who has discredited Fr Amorth?

 

[CrimsonThorn]

Then this is false. for it’s possible to do yoga without the spirituality.

I’ve been doing it for years, and there is no spirituality in what I’m doing, whatsoever.

But then, perhaps it shouldn’t be called Yoga in this forum, so as not to confused the uninformed.

Jim

Even if you’re not doing the spirituality portion on purpose or knowlingly, you still are. I think that was the point.

But yea, if you’re just stretching or whatever, then you’re not doing “yoga” If you’re taking a.yoga class though, you’re doing yoga, and yoga in full, even if they don’t meditate.