perennialism???

[schulze43]

What is the Church’s stance on perennialism (that all religions are getting at the same reality just in different ways)? Obviously we hold that there is one full truth, but I have heard that each religion could have bits of the Truth so is perennialism right or partially right?

any help is appreciated

 

[Trishie]

Why be satisfied with partial truth if it is possible to live in the fullness of truth!
Preferable to belong to the Church that Jesus Himself began rather than any of the numerous Churches begun by men who unlike Jesus, were not God.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a9p3.htm

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth"273 are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements."274 Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him,275 and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."276

 

[Trishie]

scborromeo.org/ccc/p123a9p3.htm

Who may be saved
“Catechism of the Catholic Church” Imprimi Potest. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict)

“Those who through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience–those too may achieve eternal salvation”

Dogmatic Constitution of the Catholic, LUMEN GENTIUM, solemnly promulgated by his holiness Pope Paul v1 on November 21,
1964

1. The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter. (14*) For there are many who honor Sacred Scripture, taking it as a norm of belief and a pattern of life, and who show a sincere zeal. They lovingly believe in God the Father Almighty and in Christ, the Son of God and Saviour. (15*) They are consecrated by baptism, in which they are united with Christ. They also recognize and accept other sacraments within their own Churches or ecclesiastical communities. Many of them rejoice in the episcopate, celebrate the Holy Eucharist and cultivate devotion toward the Virgin Mother of God.(16*) They also share with us in prayer and other spiritual benefits.

Likewise we can say that in some real way they are joined with us in the Holy Spirit, for to them too He gives His gifts and graces whereby He is operative among them with His sanctifying power. Some indeed He has strengthened to the extent of the shedding of their blood. In all of Christ’s disciples the Spirit arouses the desire to be peacefully united, in the manner determined by Christ, as one flock under one shepherd, and He prompts them to pursue this end. (17*) Mother Church never ceases to pray, hope and work that this may come about. She exhorts her children to purification and renewal so that the sign of Christ may shine more brightly over the face of the earth."

 

[schulze43]

thanks for the helpful info Trishie

 

[Trishie]

Note that the CCC teaches, with the authority given by the Holy Spirit upon Jesus’ command (scriptural) that “Those who through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience–those too may achieve eternal salvation.”

If a person knows that the Catholic Church has the fullness of truth but chooses to reject that and go elsewhere, his salvation is in jeopardy.

 

[Trishie]

legionofmarytidewater.com/faith/pope/ecum.htm

Perhaps this encyclical on ecumenism by Pope John Paul 2 would also interest you?

God bless you, Trishie

 

[schulze43]

legionofmarytidewater.com/faith/pope/ecum.htm

Perhaps this encyclical on ecumenism by Pope John Paul 2 would also interest you?

God bless you, Trishie

thanks I will def check it out God bless you too

 

[Yggdrasil]

What is the Church’s stance on perennialism (that all religions are getting at the same reality just in different ways)? Obviously we hold that there is one full truth, but I have heard that each religion could have bits of the Truth so is perennialism right or partially right?

any help is appreciated

Perennialism could never be “partially right,” because it isn’t about “parts.”

The selections from the Catechism are somewhat out of line with Perennialism, because they insist on the Roman Catholic faith as “the fullness of Truth.” This is at variance with the Perennial Philsophy, which holds that there is an Ultimate Reality of which religion (like all things and all concepts) can only at best be a human commentary. It is ineffable and beyond words. It defies any specific “belief.” It might not even be safe to say that IT IS, because it transcends both being and non-being.

If there is a commonality among the various religions, it is the trend of monistic mysticism: the realization of a One without a second, transcending all space, time, and concepts: birthless, deathless, endless, and unchanging. A.N. Whitehead’s definition of religion fits the bill:

Religion is the vision of something which stands beyond, behind and within the passing flux of immediate things; something which is real, and yet waiting to be realized; something which is a remote possibility, and yet the greatest of present facts; something that gives meaning to all that passes, and yet eludes apprehension; something whose possession is the final good, and yet is beyond all reach; something which is the ultimate ideal, and the hopeless quest.

The Catechism is a compendium of dogmatic theology. Christianity contains the Perennial Philosophy, of course, but it is best hinted at in the mystical theology of such Christians as Dionysius the Areopagite, Meister Eckhart, Thomas Traherne, and others—as well as in the liturgy.

Plotinus, who was not a Christian, is often considered the Perennialist nonpariel in the West. His philosophy is much in line with the Tat Tvam Asi of the Upanishads:

When you know that you have become this perfect work, when you are self-gathered in the purity of your being, nothing now remaining that can shatter that inner unity, nothing from without clinging to the authentic man, when you find yourself wholly true to your essential nature, wholly that only veritable Light which is not measured by space, not narrowed to any circumscribed form nor again diffused as a thing void of term, but ever unmeasurable as something greater than all measure and more than all quantity—when you perceive that you have grown to this, you are now become very vision: now call up all your confidence, strike forward yet a step—you need a guide no longer—strain, and see.

 

[schulze43]

Perennialism could never be “partially right,” because it isn’t about “parts.”

The selections from the Catechism are somewhat out of line with Perennialism, because they insist on the Roman Catholic faith as “the fullness of Truth.” This is at variance with the Perennial Philsophy, which holds that there is an Ultimate Reality of which religion (like all things and all concepts) can only at best be a human commentary. It is ineffable and beyond words. It defies any specific “belief.” It might not even be safe to say that IT IS, because it transcends both being and non-being.

QUOTE]

thanks for the help, but could you explain this a little more to me, sorry I dont quite understand

 

[EnchantedEve]

What is the Church’s stance on perennialism (that all religions are getting at the same reality just in different ways)? Obviously we hold that there is one full truth, but I have heard that each religion could have bits of the Truth so is perennialism right or partially right?

any help is appreciated

This is not entirely the accurate definition of perennialism. Perennialism is the belief there is one Truth, and all religions are attempts to find it, to greater and lesser degrees. I happen to believe that this one Truth happens to subsist in the Catholic Church, but is not synonymous with it. But this would be a better definition of perennialism.

 

[EnchantedEve]

Yggdrasil;6471884:

Perennialism could never be “partially right,” because it isn’t about “parts.”

The selections from the Catechism are somewhat out of line with Perennialism, because they insist on the Roman Catholic faith as “the fullness of Truth.” This is at variance with the Perennial Philsophy, which holds that there is an Ultimate Reality of which religion (like all things and all concepts) can only at best be a human commentary. It is ineffable and beyond words. It defies any specific “belief.” It might not even be safe to say that IT IS, because it transcends both being and non-being.

QUOTE]

thanks for the help, but could you explain this a little more to me, sorry I dont quite understand

Again, there is no necessary contradiction. The Catholic Church is the fullness of Truth as we know it. There a great many more facets of Truth which are essentially unknown, unknowable to our mind, or beyond our comprehension.

 

[Yggdrasil]

thanks for the help, but could you explain this a little more to me, sorry I dont quite understand

One way to look at it is to compare two religions that are very different from each other: Christianity and Buddhism. If Perennialism is “right,” so to speak, then Christianity and Buddhism would have to lead to the same goal. “Salvation” and “liberation” would have to be similar ideas.

If you believe that the Christian notion of salvation and the Buddhist notion of liberation are two of mortal man’s noble ways of musing about eternity and the Ultimate Reality, then you will admit the likelihood of perennial religion.

If you believe that Christianity and Christianity alone contains the fullness of Truth, and that all other religions (however well-intentioned, from Islam to Siberian Shamanism to Buddhism) are only glimpsing the Truth by varying degrees, then you must reject the idea of perennial religion.

 

[schulze43]

One way to look at it is to compare two religions that are very different from each other: Christianity and Buddhism. If Perennialism is “right,” so to speak, then Christianity and Buddhism would have to lead to the same goal. “Salvation” and “liberation” would have to be similar ideas.

If you believe that the Christian notion of salvation and the Buddhist notion of liberation are two of mortal man’s noble ways of musing about eternity and the Ultimate Reality, then you will admit the likelihood of perennial religion.

If you believe that Christianity and Christianity alone contains the fullness of Truth, and that all other religions (however well-intentioned, from Islam to Siberian Shamanism to Buddhism) are only glimpsing the Truth by varying degrees, then you must reject the idea of perennial religion.

got ya thanks for the help!

 

[EnchantedEve]

One way to look at it is to compare two religions that are very different from each other: Christianity and Buddhism. If Perennialism is “right,” so to speak, then Christianity and Buddhism would have to lead to the same goal. “Salvation” and “liberation” would have to be similar ideas.

If you believe that the Christian notion of salvation and the Buddhist notion of liberation are two of mortal man’s noble ways of musing about eternity and the Ultimate Reality, then you will admit the likelihood of perennial religion.

If you believe that Christianity and Christianity alone contains the fullness of Truth, and that all other religions (however well-intentioned, from Islam to Siberian Shamanism to Buddhism) are only glimpsing the Truth by varying degrees, then you must reject the idea of perennial religion.

Not necessarily. Many prominant perennialists, including Julius Evola and Rene Guenon, believed in view similar to your latter one, except in Guenon’s case it was Islam.

The main area perennialists and Catholicism would probably disagree is regarding salvation. Most perennialists believe that since all religion is a glimpse at the Truth, than no one religion can be the full and therefore necessary way to Truth. The Church would obviously beg to differ.

 

[Yggdrasil]

Not necessarily. Many prominant perennialists, including Julius Evola and Rene Guenon, believed in view similar to your latter one, except in Guenon’s case it was Islam.

Yes. I think this is where those authors perhaps finally part company with Ananda Coomaraswamy, whose perspective as a Vedantist was able to accomodate all paths.

Which religion did Julius Evola consider as having the fullness of Truth? Christianity?

The main area perennialists and Catholicism would probably disagree is regarding salvation. Most perennialists believe that since all religion is a glimpse at the Truth, than no one religion can be the full and therefore necessary way to Truth. The Church would obviously beg to differ.

True, but this is an example of where pre-conciliar Church teaching was actually much less hubristic than the current one: the doctrine was always uncompromisingly “Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus,” and yet despite the forcefulness of the stance, and the apparent harshness of Cantate Domino, no souls were ever definitively said to be in hell (with the possible of exception of Judas, although this idea was never de fide). Even Origen’s theory of apocatastasis was condemned, but only insofar as it could be held as an actual belief. One could privately hold it as a hope without deviating one iota from the dogmatic soteriology. Hence why Origen was anathematized and Eckhart was only censured.

What’s truly weird about the Vatican II documents Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate is that the authors seem to assert that non-Christian religions are glimpsing the truth by varying degrees according to how closely they resemble the Abrahamic paradigm. How totally bizarre. The Church had formerly lumped them all entirely together with no distinctions and left them utterly at the infinite mercy of God—an attitude much more in line with a perennial view which adheres wholly to the Christian religion and admits the futility in knowing precisely the judgements of God.