Philosophical Daoism

  • Thread starter Thread starter MattJohn57
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MattJohn57

Guest
What is the general Catholic view of philosophical Daoism (as opposed to Chinese Folk Religion/religious Daoism)? I am an ex Christian (Protestant/Baptist) and currently a Daoist but I enjoy comparative religion and discussion. I think comparing and contrasting one’s faith with another faith/faiths helps to bring your own views into perspective.
 
Catholics tend to value the natural law implications of Daoism. C.S. Lewis (Anglo-Catholic of sorts) in fact wrote on this very subject in the Abolition of Man, if you want more than CAF.

For another example, François Quesnay, who was a devout Catholic, coined the term “laissez-faire,” which is (as you probably know) a French translation of Lao Tzu’s “wu wei.” He valued the idea that laissez faire economics could provide for rule by natural law, which he saw in Lao Tzu.
 
Last edited:
I don’t know enough about it to answer anything, but generally for most eastern religions, the Church teaches they hold some truth, but not the fullness of it.
 
The great Chinese jurist J.C.H. Wu, a convert to Catholicism, wrote an analysis of Therese Lisieux and Loazi which you may find interesting. I had to dig it up, but here it is linked, and here is a sample:

The Science of Love by John C.H. Wu
To my mind, Thérèse is so significant to the spiritual life of our age, precisely because she is a saint fully aware of her mental states. She is charmingly subtle and subtly charming. She is ingenuously ingenious, and she is holy. She is as complicated as she is simple. She is delicately audacious, and audaciously delicate. She has the head of a witch, and the heart of an angel. She is as flexible as water, and as passionate as fire. She is a genius who knows how to hide her genius gracefully. She knows the masculine, but keeps to the feminine. She is as sharp as a two-edged sword, but she always keeps her sword in its scabbard. She was a precocious child; but she pasteurized her precocity by always remaining like a hidden sprout and not rushing to early ripening. Even now, after she has become a veritable prodigy of miracles, she is still a hidden sprout at heart; and, in spiritual things, as we know, a sincere disposition of heart is all that matters. I think that now more than ever she has realized the truth of what she said before she had shed her mortal coils, “It is Jesus who does all, and I…I do nothing.”

I suppose that Lao Tzu would have said, “It is the Tao (the Word) that does all, and I…I do nothing.” But the Tao is such an impersonal entity that it appears to me to be of the ice, icy: whereas Jesus is such a living flame of love that He enkindles every fiber of my heart.

To me as a Chinese, the great thing about Christianity is that it combines the profound mysticism of Lao Tzu with the intense humanism of Confucius. It differs from Taoism in that the Tao, or the Word, has taken on flesh and has a warm pulsating heart. It differs from Confucianism in that it is the Word, and nothing short of the Word, that has done so.

Confucius said, “One who has given offense to God prays in vain.” Lao Tzu said, “Why did the ancients prize the Tao? Is it not because, through It, whoever seeks finds, and whoever is guilty is relieved of punishment?”

The Confucian idea of God is personal but narrow, while the Taoistic idea is broad but impersonal. In my humble opinion, God is more than a Person, and for that very reason He is capable of assuming a Personality. Those who think otherwise seem to place themselves above God. They presume that they alone can possess personalities, but not God.

Only Christianity can satisfy my mind completely, because its idea of God is at once broad and personal. And it is Thérèse who has confirmed my faith in my Religion, for her mind is as subtle and detached as that of Lao Tzu, while her heart is as affectionate and cordial as that of Confucius.

https://www.ewtn.com/library/SPIRIT/SCI-LOVE.TXT
 
I don’t know enough about it to answer anything, but generally for most eastern religions, the Church teaches they hold some truth, but not the fullness of it.

It sometimes seems as if Eastern religions hold that same view about Catholicism and Western religions
 
Last edited:
Catholics tend to value the natural law implications of Daoism. C.S. Lewis (Anglo-Catholic of sorts) in fact wrote on this very subject in the Abolition of Man, if you want more than CAF.

I have heard if that, sounds very interesting
 
Last edited:
“It is Jesus who does all, and I…I do nothing.”

Very poetic. Very Pauline as well of course
 
Last edited:
But the Tao is such an impersonal entity that it appears to me to be of the ice, icy: whereas Jesus is such a living flame of love that He enkindles every fiber of my heart.

I hear you. I’m a bit of a Zen inclined cold fish so I find the Tao suits me better. Some Hindus think that God has both a personal and an impersonal aspect (Brahma and Brahman) and I think maybe that could be true and different people are drawn to the different aspects.
 
There are logical/philosophical reasons why I think a personal God is more likely, but Wu talks about God being bigger than human personality, and yet, accurately described as personal, in the text linked. Which sounds like the kind of thinking you are alluding to - even if you and he wind up different places.

I don’t remember if that is in the sample I put up here, but it is in the source which I linked. I just picked a succinct sample. I really recommend reading the whole thing if you have the leisure.
 
Last edited:
There are logical/philosophical reasons why I t hink a personal God is more likely.

Could be the case, I don’t really think so myself but that’s largely a matter of subjective feeling. In folk Daoism there is the Jade Emperor, the Creator, who emerged from the Great Void/Dao. Kind of reminds me of the Gospel of Thomas “If they say to you ‘where did you come from?’ tell them you came from the Light which created itself spontaneously” (paraphrased, I can’t find Thomas in my pile)
 
Another person would probably describe my level of certitude as subjective, but I do think my reasons are rational. I only mentioned my personal views to say that, this is one route you can take, but that our cited author might be more in the vein that you are investigating.

However, if the question of whether God is personal (and what that even means) is of interest to you, I could recommend some authors.
 
Last edited:
It looks like you know more about Catholicism than many Catholics do!
 
As a non Christian I can’t say I really care all that much whether God is personal or not. If God is personal I assume he will forgive my wrong doings provided that I am repentant in mind and action, and if God is impersonal then I might have the consequences of rebirth/reincarnation to deal with, meaning that I have a good reason to repent in mind and action for karmic reasons.
 
So, I am not going to try to convince you that God loves you, against your will, over a chatroom, after 8, on a Tuesday - but He does , I promise. 😜

All I will say is (as I am sure you know) there’s a great deal more to religion than whether you will be punished for your evil - so, one’s interest in whether or not God is personal should not be dismissed if one determines that this is irrelevant to one’s punishment.

Secondly, not saying if you are right or wrong about the personal God who possibly exists, but what manner of personal God exists is an open question for you - and therefore all sorts of possibilities that could affect you become open questions. There is more confidence in what God is like than I would have in your situation.

It’s worth looking into is all I’m saying.

Anyway, I think this was a surprisingly good conversation
 
Last edited:
This?

Yeshua says: If they say to you: From whence have you come?, say to them: We have come from the Light, the place where the Light has come into being from Him alone; He himself [stood] and appeared in their imagery. If they say to you: Who are you?, say: We are his Sons and we are the chosen of the Living Father. If they ask you: What is the sign of your Father in you?, say to them: It is movement with repose.
 
Yeshua says: If they say to you: From whence have you come?, say to them: We have come from the Light, the place where the Light has come into being from Him alone; He himself [stood] and appeared in their imagery. If they say to you: Who are you?, say: We are his Sons and we are the chosen of the Living Father. If they ask you: What is the sign of your Father in you?, say to them: It is movement with repose

Yes, I must have another translation
 
So, I am not going to try to convince you that God loves you, against your will, over a chatroom, after 8, on a Tuesday - but He does , I promise.

If this is true then assume it’s also true regardless of whether or not my “God view” is correct and therefore I feel no urgency in altering my view (which is admittedly far from an experts view, but is nonetheless a product of about 15 years of reading, listening to hours of podcasts, arguing with various kinds of believers and inner contemplation) *point to clarify, I used to be more worried about the impersonal vs personal nature of God than I am now
 
I am not saying that God won’t love you if you do not believe XYZ! Please don’t misunderstand me; I hope I did not leave that impression.

I am just saying, that it is wonderful to know a God Who loves us.

And it is definitely an area worth exploring, and not because we are worried about what will happen if we do not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top