I didn’t say salvation is by faith alone but by Grace.(And the conduit from which that gift (Grace) flows is from God manifested in the flesh as Jesus Christ, born of a virgin.) Faith nor Works are possible without Grace and through the sacraments we are feed and strengthen enabling us to to grow in faith and do His works.
No, the thread is about Zen, not Pure Land Buddhism.
It’s not that simple. It’s a matter of different emphases. Buddhists have devoted a lot of thought to issues of how we reach inner peace and contentment, how we deal with the anxiety arising from the insatiability of human desire and the inescapable flow of time, etc. It’s worth paying attention to their ideas and practices, but of course everything should be checked against the Christian Faith and not accepted uncritically.
Do you understand what that is? I don’t understand it very well.
But as I said, that is not the subject of this thread. That is a red herring that you have introduced. We are not talking about worship.
Catholics need to understand though about comtemplative prayer that it is a gift from God that cannot be forced nor learned.
I have been a Christian all of my life, but it wasn’t until I relapsed back into my alcoholism after nine years of sober living, spiritually hit bottom before I submiitted to Chirst’s will in my life, then everything I was running away from started to make perfect sense. I don’t go around recommending to people that they need to become a drunk to know Christ. Maybe the fact is the Holy Spirit showed you that you didn’t need Buddha or Buddhism to understand Christ’s message?
But you needed Christ himself.
I wouldn’t go that far. In fact, I would say the exact opposite: Zen is one of the least philosophical schools, which accounts for part of its attraction to Christians, especially.
sloppy think is annoying, your 19th century approach to our faith
And that is why he said ‘I came not to abolish the law, but fulfill it’, AND reiterated the necessity of keeping God’s commandments to the rich man, AND paid his Temple taxes AND worshipped in most all respects as a devout Jew???
No, it’s not easy, but Buddha is far from being the best guide. He seems to have known nothing of taking up the cross but rather seems to have desired to eliminate suffering entirely (a very un-Christian attitude - the true Christian welcomes and uses suffering to come closer to Christ)
IMHO Thomas Merton’s judgment on the subject is where a lot of the confussion about Christianity and Buddhism begins. For he seemed to be in conflict as to if he was a Catholic or a Buddhist at the end of his life. The more he focused on Buddhism he seemed more comfortable toward Buddhism then toward Christianity. Apparently that confussion continues, for all the Buddhist I have meet on this thread appear to be fallen away Christians or Culture Christains that rejected thier parent’s Christianity- that should indicate one of two things. One that it doesn’t matter where you put your trust and faith? or two, Buddhism may be a danger to undermining Christian spirituality?
who exactly made you the arbiter of who is a suitable guide for someone else’s salvation?
Most Buddhist I know who left Christianity, did not leave Christianity for Buddhism. They just left. It was usually much later that they found Buddhism. In my case it was 20 years later. Buddhism is not a threat to Christianity.Apparently that confussion continues, for all the Buddhist I have meet on this thread appear to be fallen away Christians or Culture Christains that rejected thier parent’s Christianity- that should indicate one of two things. One that it doesn’t matter where you put your trust and faith? or two, Buddhism may be a danger to undermining Christian spirituality?
.
how we feel about our church is an individual matter.
You speak some truth here, Christians are threat to themselves and carry the burden of guilt of allowing thier children to fall away from the teachings of the Church. But there is a grave misunderstanding by the world about what Christianity is and what a Christian is. Christians are not perfect, nor can they become Holy on thier own, it is a long process, a process made perfect by God not by the believer. If Christians were perfect then there would be no need of Christ, for mankind could save themselves. As to denominations and thier different opinions that is the part of disconnect of men trying to follow thier own paths instead of submitting to the will of God and humbling themselves to tradition, authority and the will of God. Vainity and pride is not something isolated here or there, but a universal problem of all mankind, and since Christians are part of that humanity why would one put them to a higher standard then thier brother and sisters of the world? Who is being Judge? and where does the beam protrude from? Because a Christian or other Christians have failed in ones own life, does that mean Christ message must be false? God gave man a freewill, and awaits for all of mankind to freely choose His Love and Grace -Christianity is a threat to itself. The way Christian denominations talk about one another is shameful. Just read some of the posts in this forum about other forms of Christianity. Just read some of the links that have been posted. There does not appear to be much respect for differing points of view or even compassion for those who think and believe differently.
What is that quote? “And why behold thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but consider not the beam that is in thine own eye?”
Metta
notself
I think what you mean by “philosophical” is what I would mean by “metaphysical.” And I agree that that’s why it’s more compatible with other religious traditions than, say, Theravada (or Nagarjuna’s Mahayana philosophy). I suppose Zen is “philosophical” more in the sense of Hellenistic philosophy, or what people in the Renaissance meant when they spoke casually of acting like a philosopher. I.e., it’s a certain way of life based on rational beliefs about the nature of human existence.
If by “philosophical”, you mean “paradoxical and cryptic”, then I would agree – at least in terms of Zen as practiced by the Rinzai school, which uses koans like “What is the sound of one hand clapping” (or, as the Zen Rabbi asked, What is the sound of one God clapping?
)Again, in the Hellenistic/Renaissance (or popular medieval) sense this could easily be seen as “philosophy.” In the Renaissance, one of the main popular senses of “philosophy” was living a simple life and being content with what you had, rather than pursuing wealth and power. We still use the word “philosophical” occasionally to denote a calm acceptance of misfortune.If by “philosophical”, you mean “paradoxical and cryptic”, then I would agree – at least in terms of Zen as practiced by the Rinzai school, which uses koans like “What is the sound of one hand clapping” (or, as the Zen Rabbi asked, What is the sound of one God clapping?
But the Soto school is known for its real earthiness and nonpretentiousness: enlightenment is chopping wood, carrying water.
Nope. I went to a Protestant liberal arts college and my formal education has never gone further than my bachelors degree. The closest I came was almost going to law school. I am an average Joe. I was messing with you because you obviously had me confused with someone else.
if you would like an example of christian thought which is very similiar try luke, question of the unjust judge, the question of the dishonest steward spring to mind immediatelyIf by “philosophical”, you mean “paradoxical and cryptic”, then I would agree – at least in terms of Zen as practiced by the Rinzai school, which uses koans like “What is the sound of one hand clapping” (or, as the Zen Rabbi asked, What is the sound of one God clapping?
But the Soto school is known for its real earthiness and nonpretentiousness: enlightenment is chopping wood, carrying water.