A
Archus
Guest
If I may, I’d like to contribute 
Let us start with what we know of our faith:
We hold that Catholicism has the “fullness of faith”. This is because that God has revealed Himself to us.
All other religions do not hold that “fullness” but still conform to a common truth in one aspect or another, they have the “substance” or “seed” of truth within them. In this way the Catechism teaches us that they are a “preparation for the Gospel”. From the time of the Fathers (not the Apostles, but the Patristics) of the Church have tried to reasonably reconcile the truth of the Christian faith through devices of reason such as philosophy and its systems. They also utilised what they knew from other traditions such as Paganism to explain Christian concepts. In all of these things, it has always been a matter of explaining the truth in the way that is needed; it is a matter of language in whatever from be it vernacular, art, imagery, philosophy, science etc.
Franciscan traditions hold to the idea of there being a Book of Creation - that we can find God in the world, that nature, this world and ourselves are Good, because they, being creatures of God, hold something of God within them. It is a matter of looking (or more accurately, listening) for it. We express God in art, music, language and they all are True, because they are conformed to Christian teachings and Sacred Tradition.
So while we, being Western have used Western Philosophy to describe the Truth of God and everything else, there is no reason that the principles of Eastern Philosophy cannot do the same thing; Aristotle, Plato etc, have aspects of their philosophy that Christianity disagrees with, but still recognises its merit in principle and their way of thinking, so there is no reason we cannot take the ideas in Tao Te Ching, Kung Fu and others to describe Christ as we understand Him in the Catholic Tradition. It is like in English we say “God”. In French, it is “Mon Dieu”. Now, of course God literally is not mon Dieu - the spelling is different! BUT both mean God.
In Chinese bibles, “Tao” is used for “Word”. In more common translations and uses, “Tao” is also rendered as “Way” in English. Now, we know that Christ is “The Way, the Truth and the Life”. This would also mean that Christ is Tao - He is our Way, or “Method” to enlightenment, which is union with God. I have not read much of Tao Te Ching, but it seems to me that in this work, and also Taoism, is that they recognise that fulfilment is in the infinite; being united body and soul - knowing yourself. Yet, where this infinite or enlightenment (or Tao) is essentially, while known, is somewhat abstract, Christianity goes a step further and professes this infinite is not abstract but deeply personal. Indeed, “it” is “He” - it is not abstract but He is a Person - One in Three, Three in One and this, as we have said is only known to us because God revealed it. If we tried on our own merits and efforts to come to enlightenment, we get Taoism and Buddhism etc. - we are part way. Yet, God also calls us, in fact, He called us first, and we respond to His call. This communion, this fulfilment of ourselves, our enlightenment lies in God, recognising that we are body and soul, and both come from Him. When we know ourselves, we come to know God. The Tao Te Ching is rendered as “The Canon/Classic of the Way/Path and the Power/Virtue”. Let us pick one and call it “The Classic of the Way and the Virtue”. Our Way is not the world’s Way. God’s Tao is not Tao Te Ching’s Tao. Our Way is Christ, our Virtue is Holy and Cardinal. It is a matter of language that we can start to pick out the truth that we see in such works, and instead of imposing truth or whatever upon it, thereby risking distorting it and giving way to falsehood, we must instead recognise what is already there - we must recognise Christ where we can see Him. We have Scripture and Sacred Tradition, and we can also use systems of Philosophy, both Western and Eastern, to help us to come closer to God. Start with what you know, and let’s take it from there.
Let us start with what we know of our faith:
We hold that Catholicism has the “fullness of faith”. This is because that God has revealed Himself to us.
All other religions do not hold that “fullness” but still conform to a common truth in one aspect or another, they have the “substance” or “seed” of truth within them. In this way the Catechism teaches us that they are a “preparation for the Gospel”. From the time of the Fathers (not the Apostles, but the Patristics) of the Church have tried to reasonably reconcile the truth of the Christian faith through devices of reason such as philosophy and its systems. They also utilised what they knew from other traditions such as Paganism to explain Christian concepts. In all of these things, it has always been a matter of explaining the truth in the way that is needed; it is a matter of language in whatever from be it vernacular, art, imagery, philosophy, science etc.
Franciscan traditions hold to the idea of there being a Book of Creation - that we can find God in the world, that nature, this world and ourselves are Good, because they, being creatures of God, hold something of God within them. It is a matter of looking (or more accurately, listening) for it. We express God in art, music, language and they all are True, because they are conformed to Christian teachings and Sacred Tradition.
So while we, being Western have used Western Philosophy to describe the Truth of God and everything else, there is no reason that the principles of Eastern Philosophy cannot do the same thing; Aristotle, Plato etc, have aspects of their philosophy that Christianity disagrees with, but still recognises its merit in principle and their way of thinking, so there is no reason we cannot take the ideas in Tao Te Ching, Kung Fu and others to describe Christ as we understand Him in the Catholic Tradition. It is like in English we say “God”. In French, it is “Mon Dieu”. Now, of course God literally is not mon Dieu - the spelling is different! BUT both mean God.
In Chinese bibles, “Tao” is used for “Word”. In more common translations and uses, “Tao” is also rendered as “Way” in English. Now, we know that Christ is “The Way, the Truth and the Life”. This would also mean that Christ is Tao - He is our Way, or “Method” to enlightenment, which is union with God. I have not read much of Tao Te Ching, but it seems to me that in this work, and also Taoism, is that they recognise that fulfilment is in the infinite; being united body and soul - knowing yourself. Yet, where this infinite or enlightenment (or Tao) is essentially, while known, is somewhat abstract, Christianity goes a step further and professes this infinite is not abstract but deeply personal. Indeed, “it” is “He” - it is not abstract but He is a Person - One in Three, Three in One and this, as we have said is only known to us because God revealed it. If we tried on our own merits and efforts to come to enlightenment, we get Taoism and Buddhism etc. - we are part way. Yet, God also calls us, in fact, He called us first, and we respond to His call. This communion, this fulfilment of ourselves, our enlightenment lies in God, recognising that we are body and soul, and both come from Him. When we know ourselves, we come to know God. The Tao Te Ching is rendered as “The Canon/Classic of the Way/Path and the Power/Virtue”. Let us pick one and call it “The Classic of the Way and the Virtue”. Our Way is not the world’s Way. God’s Tao is not Tao Te Ching’s Tao. Our Way is Christ, our Virtue is Holy and Cardinal. It is a matter of language that we can start to pick out the truth that we see in such works, and instead of imposing truth or whatever upon it, thereby risking distorting it and giving way to falsehood, we must instead recognise what is already there - we must recognise Christ where we can see Him. We have Scripture and Sacred Tradition, and we can also use systems of Philosophy, both Western and Eastern, to help us to come closer to God. Start with what you know, and let’s take it from there.