S
Sixpence
Guest
Agreed, Buddhists are not required to believe in reincarnation.
Some religions are set up in a cafeteria style, and that’s what you’re actually supposed to do.
- Status
Some religions are set up in a cafeteria style, and that’s what you’re actually supposed to do.
E
Elizium23
Guest
Someone please explain, in detail, how to reconcile the core Buddhist beliefs with core Christian beliefs. It seems to me that if one desires to remain Christian, one needs to reject Buddhist doctrines such as dukkha: (Christianity: the human state is noble yet fallen. We sometimes must accept suffering here on Earth as the will of God. Our individual souls will either be purified from suffering in Purgatory and freed eternally in Heaven, or sent to everlasting torment in Hell.) karma: (God does as he wills, independent of the will of Man. The presence of evil in the world is worked by demons, fallen angels, who continually oppose God’s will and cause us to sin.)
Elements of the Eightfold Path are certainly present in Christianity, but it is an incomplete roadmap to eternal life. As Catholics, we must believe in God, be baptized in His Church, receive the sacraments in our life, and die in a state of grace to attain Heaven. This tears apart the Fourth Noble Truth and shows how woefully inadequate the Eightfold Path is.
I can see Catholics being able to take on a Buddhist “flavor” or outlook on life that fully adapts Buddhism to Christianity, without adopting un-Christian belief, but this would be syncretism, heresy, turning our back on the comprehensive theology of the Church and the Word of God. Foreign philosophies can be respected and viewed objectively, and kernels of truth can be found in them, but they cannot replace or supplement authentic Christian belief and practice.
I am not aware of critical commentary on Fr. Robert Kennedy, SJ, but I would be interested to hear how he lives the authentic Catholic faith while maintaining his position as Zen roshi; it can perhaps be contrasted with the path of Ruben Habito, who left the Jesuit order to pursue Zen full-time.
Elements of the Eightfold Path are certainly present in Christianity, but it is an incomplete roadmap to eternal life. As Catholics, we must believe in God, be baptized in His Church, receive the sacraments in our life, and die in a state of grace to attain Heaven. This tears apart the Fourth Noble Truth and shows how woefully inadequate the Eightfold Path is.
I can see Catholics being able to take on a Buddhist “flavor” or outlook on life that fully adapts Buddhism to Christianity, without adopting un-Christian belief, but this would be syncretism, heresy, turning our back on the comprehensive theology of the Church and the Word of God. Foreign philosophies can be respected and viewed objectively, and kernels of truth can be found in them, but they cannot replace or supplement authentic Christian belief and practice.
I am not aware of critical commentary on Fr. Robert Kennedy, SJ, but I would be interested to hear how he lives the authentic Catholic faith while maintaining his position as Zen roshi; it can perhaps be contrasted with the path of Ruben Habito, who left the Jesuit order to pursue Zen full-time.
S
stanczyk
Guest
I suppose it is reasonable to be skeptical of claims such as Fr Kennedy’s, but I would suggest that it is uncharitable to lob accusations of syncretism before one has a full understanding of what is actually going on.
There appears to be some misunderstanding as to the nature of Zen Buddhism, and conflation of Zen teaching with some other schools of Buddhism which are more doctrinaire and are certainly incompatible with Catholicism.
Simply put, Zen, which means meditation, is compatible with Catholic doctrine because it espouses no doctrine of its own. It is difficult to compare Eastern conceptions of religion with the Abrahamic tradition. Zen may fill the role of religion for some, philosophy for others. I cannot speak for Fr Kennedy but I assume he falls into the latter category. As a method of meditation without any affirmative tenets, there is nothing to conflict with Catholicism, any more than Kantianism or Pilates or any other philosophical or methodical approach to life would conflict. That Kennedy is a Roshi may be confusing; but a Roshi is really one who is qualified to teach Zen, not a position that conflicts with Catholicism.
There is certainly much of the True Faith reflected in Buddhism, and when you study Zen you can see that the objectionable aspects are simply not present.
There appears to be some misunderstanding as to the nature of Zen Buddhism, and conflation of Zen teaching with some other schools of Buddhism which are more doctrinaire and are certainly incompatible with Catholicism.
Simply put, Zen, which means meditation, is compatible with Catholic doctrine because it espouses no doctrine of its own. It is difficult to compare Eastern conceptions of religion with the Abrahamic tradition. Zen may fill the role of religion for some, philosophy for others. I cannot speak for Fr Kennedy but I assume he falls into the latter category. As a method of meditation without any affirmative tenets, there is nothing to conflict with Catholicism, any more than Kantianism or Pilates or any other philosophical or methodical approach to life would conflict. That Kennedy is a Roshi may be confusing; but a Roshi is really one who is qualified to teach Zen, not a position that conflicts with Catholicism.
There is certainly much of the True Faith reflected in Buddhism, and when you study Zen you can see that the objectionable aspects are simply not present.
M
minion
Guest
Well, in my childhood, I went to a non-denominational Protestant school, but I also went to CCD and a Catholic Church. As a child the differences never occurred to me, so I just amalgammed them into one Christianity.
Only recently now that I’ve been attacked for being Catholic, which forced me to take the time to study my faith more in depth do I realize the major differences, which I used to think could be reconciled as one.
G
Gods_Peace
Guest
The mixing of two different religious practices is like the sin of adultery, fornication, and lust. It’s a disgusting creature that grows from it!!!
B
BrianGular
Guest
My experience with this kind of thing suggests that people are cherry-picking their beliefs. They like this part of one religion and that part of another, so they combine them. Of course, they also dismiss the parts that they don’t like so that they need not live a life of obvious contradictions.
If the Bible is really God’s word then we should not be surprised that there are some parts of it that make us uncomfortable. The gospel is “offensive” because it speaks to the basic needs of all men–needs we are more likely to deny than embrace.
B
benjammin
Guest
I agree it’s cherry picking. My mother is the same way (though at least she considers herself part of 2 christian churches). She takes what she wants from catholicism and her lutheran faith that she grew up in and of course it led to disaster since now she doesn’t attend church. I always feel that people who mix religions simply end up having no religion
S
Sixpence
Guest
Close friend of mine has an out-of-wedlock four year old daughter. Despite being the result of premarital fornication and lust, I can’t call her a disgusting creature. She’s actually quite adorable. Loves princesses and being read to.
Mixing of religious practices, though- qualified yes, mostly a yes for the monotheistic world religions, although Messianic Judaism makes some sense to me from the standpoint that Jesus and His disciples were Jews. And there are some religions outside the big 3 where syncretism can make sense or at least look harmless to me. Just as long as they don’t mix with one from the big 3. Daoism, Confucianism, Buddhism- if you want to mix those three with each other, I don’t see why not, or why it would be worse than picking just one of those three.
P
Publisher
Guest
Among Friends it isn’t uncommon to find those who are “Quaker/Buddhists” or as one Friend stated…“I am an Episcopalian Unitarian Quaker”…he finds value in all three traditions and incorporates “disiplines” from each of them into his life. He utilizes the “Book of Common Prayer”…along with Quaker worship and Unitarian openess and diversity. His religious affiliation on “paper” is among the Society of Friends…
C
CMatt25
Guest
Incorrect according to a Catholic bishop I once asked. I asked if even someone who is pro choice and does not believe in transubstantiation can rightly be called a Catholic, and this was the actual Catholic answer he gave in his reply. I have it in front of me so I’ll quote from it for you.
“A person becomes a member of the Catholic Church by the Sacrament of Baptism. However a further distinction would be whether one is a practicing or non practicing member. And of course being a practicing member does not exclude the possibility of sin in one’s life. That person would still be considered to be Catholic, although perhaps a non practicing one.”
I don’t hold you responsible though because as I see Catholics often alleging of others, perhaps you were improperly catechized or don’t understand Catholic teaching on this matter. I just see this type of statement made so often here though and am always amazed everytime I do, that so many Catholics either affirm it or let it slide by. But I think to state Catholic teaching correctly, you meant to say to be a fully faithful or perhaps practicing Catholic, you must believe in everything.
Hope this helps. God bless.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Thanks for your words before I saw that post because I’d have found it offensive. I still do but your words helped. Closer than a friend of mine has one too. Older than 4 but she’s not a disgusting creature either. God bless you.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Publisher, a blessing for them it must be along their journeys to find value and peace in these various traditions.
L
Lokabrenna
Guest
There are quite a few Pagans who mix paths, most of the time it’s because the two paths have meaning to them in some way, other times gods and goddesses from certain traditions happen to call to them, and it’s not something you can really refuse (well, you can, but it might not stop them from pestering you about it). One of my friends is primarily devoted to Irish deities (particularly Brighid) but also honours Vor and (until recently) Thor from the Norse pantheon, another person claims to be both a Heathen and a Taoist, and so on and so forth
There’s an endless debate among Pagans over whether it’s possible to be a Christo-Pagan. My experience has been that Christo-Pagans do their own thing and don’t really worry about disapproval from either camp.
There’s an endless debate among Pagans over whether it’s possible to be a Christo-Pagan. My experience has been that Christo-Pagans do their own thing and don’t really worry about disapproval from either camp.
P
Publisher
Guest
Friends who worship in unprogrammed meetings find spiritual insight and value in many different faith traditions…each of those traditions is a response to the Light as understood by the adherants…I never could really understand why as I often see here…“Can I read a Protestant book…Muslim book…Mormon book?” My question alwasy is…“You mean…you don’t know if it’s ok to read other faith traditions experience with God?”
If I were to approach the Clerk of the Meeting and ask…“Is it ok if I read “Course in Miracles”?” I’d get a dumbfounded look…they would question if they had understood my question correctly…their response would most likely be…“Why not? Why would it be wrong?”
For most of us who find value in other faith traditions…it’s not an “all or nothing” propisition.
E
Elizium23
Guest
To be a Catholic in good standing, one must believe everything the Church teaches. You must obey the precepts of the Church and confess your mortal sins regularly in Confession. To knowingly, obstinately reject a teaching of the Catholic Church is a mortal sin, that if unrepented will send you to Hell. So your bishop is correct that membership in the Church is for all the baptized, but participation in Christ’s sacrifice and the sacramental life of the Church is not optional for those who hope for eternal life.
In the case of this thread, we are saying that you cannot adhere to the tenets of another religion if you expect to be a Catholic in good standing. The shorthand phrase is “You cannot be a Catholic and a member of another religion” - it’s just a common way of saying “Catholic [in good standing]”
Sure there is value in other religious traditions. As Catholics we recognize and respect that. However, it is unwise to immerse oneself in acquaintances or materials that will damage the faith, that will lead us astray from the True Faith. Because Catholicism is the One Faith revealed by Jesus Christ for our salvation, we don’t know the many other paths that may lead to God. Jesus has said “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life.” And we take Him at His word, because He is God. We reject other faiths because they have not been revealed to us as the Way.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Yes I know the common way of CAF so I know what is meant. But to someone who doesn’t know the common way of CAF or is not yet familiar with it, you might mislead or confuse them by saying someone is not a Catholic when they are. Good standing or not. And I just didn’t think Catholics in good standing would want anyone confused about any aspect of your Church teaching. That was my reason for the correction. In any case God bless you along your faith walk and peace to you.
C
CMatt25
Guest
I don’t understand it either. Besides being capable of deciding for myself my religious reading materiaI, I simply just don’t see what there is to fear. The worst thing that could happen is they might receive some knowledge or a better understanding of another faith tradition’s beliefs. No one would be forced to take on an adherence to beliefs they’d be reading about. They can use their own God given free will and reasoning to decide if they receive any valuable insight or not. But I think maybe that’s just how God wired my DNA. Maybe though he wired yours in a similar way, Publisher.
Peace my friend as you journey.
S
SteveVH
Guest
There is something called “objective truth”. One cannot hold two contradictory beliefs at the same time and call it truth. Either they are both in error or only one is correct. But two beliefs that are in contradiction cannot both be true. One cannnot, for instance, believe in the resurrection and reincarnation simultaneously. If they do, their religion consists of nothing more than confusion.
E
Elizium23
Guest
It is simply an issue of avoidance of sin and assurance of salvation. I do not watch sexually explicit films because they cause me to sin. I do not listen to the same music I used to, because the lyrics offend me morally, and allowing them to seep in even subconsciously is to invite sin. You would not give a thief the key to your bank vault and you would not allow a molester to be alone with your children. The same goes for entertaining foreign religions. While it may be acceptable to read the scriptures of another faith, or study it objectively for purposes of comparison and education, it is not acceptable to audit foreign religions with the intent of absorbing their ideas and melding them with Christianity, or with the intent of finding a better path to God than what has been revealed to us. This is a betrayal, a rejection of God’s own revelation to us, a denial that Christ’s sacrifice was sufficient for all men of all time. The Ten Commandments are not narrowly construed by us: the First Commandment reminds us that the Lord is a jealous God, that we shall have no Gods before him. This includes false paths and alien philosophies: to accept ideas that subvert or contradict God’s Word is idolatry, the worship of something that is not God.
Please observe these wise words on the doctrine of Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus:
Please observe these wise words on the doctrine of Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus:
P
Publisher
Guest
However one can hold to a belief that “resurrection” and “reincarnation” are two sides of the same coin…BOTH are an attempt…a very human attempt…to seek to understand how our lives NOW effect our place in the “afterlife”. Both are religious explanations that seek to understand the justice and mercy of God.
BOTH cannot be “true”…but BOTH ideas and beliefs CAN be used as vehicles to seek Truth.
- Status