What do I do with a statue of Buddha?

[Ghoti]

You are Catholic. Don’t you light candles in front of the images of saints?

Buddhist veneration of Buddha is actually pretty close to Catholic veneration of saints. This is certainly true for Theravada Buddhists (in fact, since they don’t believe Buddha can hear prayers, they’re arguably farther from worshiping him than Catholics are from worshiping saints). Mahayana Buddhists are more complicated. You could argue that they do worship Buddha, though it becomes a question of semantics.

Edwin

Doesn’t it always? Isn’t the separation between the Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian Churches over a mistranslation of one word? (more or less)

 

[RosaryCrusader]

It would be hard - albeit entertaining - to try to burn a presumably ceramic statue.

Personally, I would dispose of with 12ga 00 buck and sweep fragments into the trash while reciting a prayer of reparation for those who do not worship the Blessed Trinity.

Amen to ‘Other Eric’ as well:

I cannot recommend doing anything to this statue but to destroy it. Burn it and scatter the ashes, melt it down or smash it into a million pieces with a hammer. That it is “artistic” is irrelevant. That it is likely of some monetary value is also irrelevant. That the friend who gave this item to you might feel slighted is, frankly, the risk that person took when he or she decided to treat your Christian faith in such a careless manner.

 

[Contarini]

It would be hard - albeit entertaining - to try to burn a presumably ceramic statue.

Personally, I would dispose of with 12ga 00 buck and sweep fragments into the trash while reciting a prayer of reparation for those who do not worship the Blessed Trinity.

I’ll say a prayer of reparation for Christians who bring disgrace to the name of Christ by their rude and vicious language (and behavior) toward non-Christians.

You are no different than I was when I was eight years old and sprayed a statue of the Virgin Mary with a water hose. I grew out of it. You apparently haven’t.

Edwin

 

[RosaryCrusader]

I’ll say a prayer of reparation for Christians who bring disgrace to the name of Christ by their rude and vicious language (and behavior) toward non-Christians.

You are no different than I was when I was eight years old and sprayed a statue of the Virgin Mary with a water hose. I grew out of it. You apparently haven’t.

Edwin

You ever hear of St. Boniface? St. Benedict or St. Patrick? They destroyed pagan statues - those biggoted mean spirited men! I guess they never grew out of it either.

 

[adstrinity]

adstrinity: sorry for misjudging your intentions.

I still have possession of the statue–have it in my car trunk.

Plain and simple, the statue just freaks me out. Moreover I dont need a representation of another religion adorning my household.

I still have no idea what to do with it. If anyone lives in the LA area and wants to pick it up, just get in contact with me…

No problem. No worries.

Why does it freak you out? How big is it?

 

[Other_Eric]

Other Eric,
I hope you’re not planning a trip to Japan anytime in the near future.

It’s doubtful that the friend knew of the OP’s strong convictions against having a buddha in his house and it was meant as a great kindness and token of personal affection and respect. It was a simple mistake.

I have no pressing need to travel to Japan.

If the friend did not know of the OP’s strong convictions, then this friend will find out when the object is destroyed. The OP therefore acts in charity by minimizing the likelihood that this friend will repeat the mistake.

Further, that the friend’s intentions were good is an insufficient basis on which to form a response. One ought to be reminded that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

 

[adstrinity]

I’ll say a prayer of reparation for Christians who bring disgrace to the name of Christ by their rude and vicious language (and behavior) toward non-Christians.

You are no different than I was when I was eight years old and sprayed a statue of the Virgin Mary with a water hose. I grew out of it. You apparently haven’t.

Edwin

You ever hear of St. Boniface? St. Benedict or St. Patrick? They destroyed pagan statues - those biggoted mean spirited men! I guess they never grew out of it either.

The Virgin Mary isn’t pagan.

 

[Corki]

adstrinity: sorry for misjudging your intentions.

I still have possession of the statue–have it in my car trunk.

Plain and simple, the statue just freaks me out. Moreover I dont need a representation of another religion adorning my household.

I still have no idea what to do with it. If anyone lives in the LA area and wants to pick it up, just get in contact with me…

If it makes you uncomfortable, you are certainly under no obligation to keep it. My brother once gave me an angel statue that just was weird looking. I have nothing against angels, obviously, but eventurally put it in a garage sale. Also, if you think it would detract from the household impression of yours being a Catholic home, by all means give it away. You can always donate it to a non-Catholic charity who might get some money from it and put it to good use.

You ever hear of St. Boniface? St. Benedict or St. Patrick? They destroyed pagan statues - those biggoted mean spirited men! I guess they never grew out of it either.

They destroyed statues of pagan gods that were obstacles to their conversion efforts in the lands where they were sent to save souls. They destroyed them publically to make a point that the gods those statues represented were powerless.

That’s very different than destroying a gift. While there is no obligation to keep the gift, I think it is wrong to turn it into the object of anger or violence.

 

[RosaryCrusader]

They destroyed statues of pagan gods that were obstacles to their conversion efforts in the lands where they were sent to save souls. They destroyed them publically to make a point that the gods those statues represented were powerless.

That’s very different than destroying a gift. While there is no obligation to keep the gift, I think it is wrong to turn it into the object of anger or violence.

It’s not different at all - although you would like it to be. The simple truth is if a relative sent you a statue of the devil you would probably have no issue with destroying it. Nor should there be any issue in destroying anything so blatantly contrary to the Faith should it come into your posession.

Idols, statues of false gods etc. bring with it the very real possibility of demonic influence. I would not want anything like that in my home.

Here’s a little anecdotal episode from the life of St. Jane Frances de Chantal as found in Fr. Michael Mueller’s The Blessed Eucharist. I think you’ll find it entertaining as do I every time I come across it.

*When God speaks, what He commands is done in an instant. As He made the sun, the moon and the stars merely by saying: “Let light be made,” so also at the Last Supper, by His word alone, He instantaneously changed bread into His Body and wine into His Blood. To those who doubt this, we may apply the reproof which St. Jane Frances de Chantal once gave to a Calvinist nobleman who was disputing with her father about the Real Presence. She was at that time only five years of age, but hearing the dispute, she advanced to the heretic and said: “What, Sir! You do not believe that Jesus Christ is really present in the Holy Eucharist, and yet He has told us that He is present. You then make Him a liar. If you dared attack the honor of the king, my father would defend it at the risk of his life, and even at the cost of yours; what have you then to expect from God for calling His Son a liar?” The Calvinist was greatly surprised at the child’s zeal, and endeavored to appease his young adversary with presents; but, full of love for her holy faith, she took his gifts and threw them into the fire, saying: "Thus shall all those burn in Hell who do not believe the words of Jesus Christ."
*

 

[Ghoti]

It’s not different at all - although you would like it to be. The simple truth is if a relative sent you a statue of the devil you would probably have no issue with destroying it. Nor should there be any issue in destroying anything so blatantly contrary to the Faith should it come into your posession.

Idols, statues of false gods etc. bring with it the very real possibility of demonic influence. I would not want anything like that in my home.

Here’s a little anecdotal episode from the life of St. Jane Frances de Chantal as found in Fr. Michael Mueller’s The Blessed Eucharist. I think you’ll find it entertaining as do I every time I come across it.

When God speaks, what He commands is done in an instant. As He made the sun, the moon and the stars merely by saying: “Let light be made,” so also at the Last Supper, by His word alone, He instantaneously changed bread into His Body and wine into His Blood. To those who doubt this, we may apply the reproof which St. Jane Frances de Chantal once gave to a Calvinist nobleman who was disputing with her father about the Real Presence. She was at that time only five years of age, but hearing the dispute, she advanced to the heretic and said: “What, Sir! You do not believe that Jesus Christ is really present in the Holy Eucharist, and yet He has told us that He is present. You then make Him a liar. If you dared attack the honor of the king, my father would defend it at the risk of his life, and even at the cost of yours; what have you then to expect from God for calling His Son a liar?” The Calvinist was greatly surprised at the child’s zeal, and endeavored to appease his young adversary with presents; but, full of love for her holy faith, she took his gifts and threw them into the fire, saying: "Thus shall all those burn in Hell who do not believe the words of Jesus Christ."

So someone should take a hammer to all the pagan sculptures in the Vatican? Like Ceres, Bacchus, Neptune, all the usual suspects? The Venus Felix? The Apollo Belvedere?

 

[adstrinity]

So someone should take a hammer to all the pagan sculptures in the Vatican? Like Ceres, Bacchus, Neptune, all the usual suspects? The Venus Felix? The Apollo Belvedere?

NOT BACCHUS!!! I don’t care about art, beauty, the sea, music, whatever, but, NOT BACCHUS!!!

 

[RosaryCrusader]

So someone should take a hammer to all the pagan sculptures in the Vatican? Like Ceres, Bacchus, Neptune, all the usual suspects? The Venus Felix? The Apollo Belvedere?

We’re not talking about museums.

Homes. Private individuals.

 

[blaskoman]

Is your lack of respect for Buddhism based on knowledge or just prejudice?

Edwin

Not really the purpose of this thread…but Buddhism as a religion has multiple shortcomings, if not erroneous doctrines. The idea of Karma is flat out irrational and wholly without merit. Buddhism does not adhere to the idea of a Supreme being or God, but is primarily based on individual merits…I believe that I read something by then Cardinal Ratzinger where he negatively portrayed Buddhism.

 

[Contarini]

You ever hear of St. Boniface? St. Benedict or St. Patrick? They destroyed pagan statues - those biggoted mean spirited men! I guess they never grew out of it either.

1. If I were making your argument for you, I’d focus on St. Martin of Tours, since we have accounts of him actually struggling with demons in the ruins of pagan temples. These stories may or may not be true, and they may or may not have meant what he and others of his time thought they meant (that the pagan gods were demons). But these ancient saints were the ones “on the ground.” If they claimed to have experiential reason to believe that the gods of the Greeks, Romans, Germans, and Celts were demons, then I’m not going to dismiss their witness lightly (nor am I going to accept it uncritically). Unless you have direct experience of demonic activity in connection with a statue of Buddha, comparing yourself to them is simply laughable. (Even if you did, I wouldn’t necessarily take your word as seriously as theirs. But until you do, your invocation of them as examples is sheer impertinence.)
2. You assume without any argument or evidence that Buddha is in the same category as the gods of the ancient pagan religions. (Indeed, in a further burst of irrational bigotry, you include Satanism as if it were something of the same kind as either the ancient religions or Buddhism!) Everything we know about Buddha indicates that he was a wise and virtuous man. When Buddhists venerate his statue, they are primarily meditating on his virtues in order to imitate them. Buddha himself did not worship or teach his followers to worship the ancient Indian “devas” (the equivalents of the European gods whom the ancient saints regarded as demons). True, he didn’t take a hostile stance against them for the most part. Indeed, there are stories claiming that they venerated *him. *You may see that as evidence that he was himself evil, but that makes no sense in terms of what we know about his character. Perhaps the Indian gods were of somewhat better moral character than their European cousins. Or perhaps we should take all these stories in a non-literal way. But at any rate, you show your ignorance when you lump Buddha together with the pagan gods.
3. To sum up: the ancient Christians believed that they had good reason to regard the ancient gods as demons. If you read early Christian polemic, you will see that this was largely based on the apparent moral character of these beings, and the effect worship of them allegedly had on ancient pagans. Early Christians saw their pagan contemporaries worshiping beings of at best ambiguous moral character, usually in order to gain some worldly benefit, and often in order to pursue immoral ends (to gain sexual favors, for instance, or to conquer a foreign country and enslave its people). None of this applies to Buddha. Your argument therefore is utterly without merit.

I do not rule out the possibility that the Church, as it develops in its understanding of the Faith it professes, has rightly “matured” to a more nuanced approach even to ancient paganism. But I am not going to make that argument here. I don’t need to.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Not really the purpose of this thread…but Buddhism as a religion has multiple shortcomings,

Well, so does Christianity, if you take it as a historical reality rather than extracting what you regard as “true” Christianity and ignoring the rest.

if not erroneous doctrines.

You’re right: that isn’t relevant.

The idea of Karma is flat out irrational

I don’t see this.

and wholly without merit. Buddhism does not adhere to the idea of a Supreme being or God, but is primarily based on individual merits…I believe that I read something by then Cardinal Ratzinger where he negatively portrayed Buddhism.

And everything by Cardinal Ratzinger is retrospectively infallible because he later became Pope? I’m pretty sure that your Church does not teach this. . . . (and mine obviously doesn’t think that the Pope is infallible at all).

Cardinal Ratzinger/Pope Benedict is distinguished in many ways, but knowledge of non-Christian religions is unfortunately not one of them. His statements about them almost always lack nuance or deep understanding.

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

The Virgin Mary isn’t pagan.

How are you defining “pagan”? If “pagan” means “anything other than Christian or Jewish,” then you aren’t really saying anything, are you? You might as well have simply said “the Virgin Mary is a Jewish woman venerated by Christians.” If “pagan” has more specific content, then could you please tell me what that content is so that we can determine whether the word applies to Buddha?

The Buddhist veneration of Buddha [at least among Theravadas] looks a lot like Catholic veneration of the Virgin Mary to me. If one is idolatrous, I am not sure how the other can escape being so.

Edwin

 

[RosaryCrusader]

1. If I were making your argument for you, I’d focus on St. Martin of Tours, since we have accounts of him actually struggling with demons in the ruins of pagan temples. These stories may or may not be true, and they may or may not have meant what he and others of his time thought they meant (that the pagan gods were demons). But these ancient saints were the ones “on the ground.” If they claimed to have experiential reason to believe that the gods of the Greeks, Romans, Germans, and Celts were demons, then I’m not going to dismiss their witness lightly (nor am I going to accept it uncritically). Unless you have direct experience of demonic activity in connection with a statue of Buddha, comparing yourself to them is simply laughable. (Even if you did, I wouldn’t necessarily take your word as seriously as theirs. But until you do, your invocation of them as examples is sheer impertinence.)
2. You assume without any argument or evidence that Buddha is in the same category as the gods of the ancient pagan religions. (Indeed, in a further burst of irrational bigotry, you include Satanism as if it were something of the same kind as either the ancient religions or Buddhism!) Everything we know about Buddha indicates that he was a wise and virtuous man. When Buddhists venerate his statue, they are primarily meditating on his virtues in order to imitate them. Buddha himself did not worship or teach his followers to worship the ancient Indian “devas” (the equivalents of the European gods whom the ancient saints regarded as demons). True, he didn’t take a hostile stance against them for the most part. Indeed, there are stories claiming that they venerated *him. *You may see that as evidence that he was himself evil, but that makes no sense in terms of what we know about his character. Perhaps the Indian gods were of somewhat better moral character than their European cousins. Or perhaps we should take all these stories in a non-literal way. But at any rate, you show your ignorance when you lump Buddha together with the pagan gods.
3. To sum up: the ancient Christians believed that they had good reason to regard the ancient gods as demons. If you read early Christian polemic, you will see that this was largely based on the apparent moral character of these beings, and the effect worship of them allegedly had on ancient pagans. Early Christians saw their pagan contemporaries worshiping beings of at best ambiguous moral character, usually in order to gain some worldly benefit, and often in order to pursue immoral ends (to gain sexual favors, for instance, or to conquer a foreign country and enslave its people). None of this applies to Buddha. Your argument therefore is utterly without merit.

I do not rule out the possibility that the Church, as it develops in its understanding of the Faith it professes, has rightly “matured” to a more nuanced approach even to ancient paganism. But I am not going to make that argument here. I don’t need to.

Edwin

Edwin,

First, because someone draws attention to the fact that buddhism is a false religion does not make one a bigot.

Second, do you think the buddhist religion is pleasing and acceptable to God?

 

[AnAtheist]

You ever hear of St. Boniface? St. Benedict or St. Patrick? They destroyed pagan statues - those biggoted mean spirited men! I guess they never grew out of it either.

And what is so great about actively destroying things holy to other people? Bonifatius is a perfect example of a despiteful scoundrel. (And a coward too, as he was accompanied by a heavily armed Frankish squadron when he cut the Chattens’ Donar Tree.) If someone came into your church and hacked the cross there into pieces you wouldn’t be amused either, would you?

 

[Contarini]

Edwin,

First, because someone draws attention to the fact that buddhism is a false religion

I think your use of the word “fact” is problematic.

And you need to define what “false religion” means.

does not make one a bigot.

I didn’t say it did.

Second, do you think the buddhist religion is pleasing and acceptable to God?

Every one who does righteousness and seeks the truth is pleasing and acceptable to God, and all beliefs and institutions that promote this must also be. Buddhism, like all human religions (including Christianity insofar as Christianity is not just divine revelation but also the human reception of that revelation), is a mixed bag containing both good and bad elements. The good elements are acceptable to God, the bad ones aren’t. Since I don’t claim to have a profound knowledge of Buddhism, I think it is rash to go too far beyond this admittedly trite and vague statement. You have not so far said anything to convince me that I should accept you as a greater expert on Buddhism than I am (and of course even experts can be wrong).

Edwin

 

[RosaryCrusader]

I think your use of the word “fact” is problematic.

And you need to define what “false religion” means.

Come on Edwin - get with it here.

false (fôls)
adj. fals·er, fals·est

1. Contrary to fact or truth:

False religion would naturally mean… a religion contrary to the true one.

Do you dispute the fact that buddhism is a false religion?

I didn’t say it did.

You called me a bigot by saying the following words addressed to me “Indeed, in a further burst of irrational bigotry…”

Every one who does righteousness and seeks the truth is pleasing and acceptable to God, and all beliefs and institutions that promote this must also be. Buddhism, like all human religions (including Christianity insofar as Christianity is not just divine revelation but also the human reception of that revelation), is a mixed bag containing both good and bad elements. The good elements are acceptable to God, the bad ones aren’t. Since I don’t claim to have a profound knowledge of Buddhism, I think it is rash to go too far beyond this admittedly trite and vague statement. You have not so far said anything to convince me that I should accept you as a greater expert on Buddhism than I am (and of course even experts can be wrong).

Nay.

You take an instance of an invidividual doing good and seeking truth and try to extrapolate that to somehow apply to his religion. This is a false assumption based upon false reasoning. If this particular person’s persuit of truth is pleasing to God it is in spite of his religion not because of it. Truth can never be pleased with error since error is directly opposed to It.