Why are the New Age movement and other exotic ideas so attractive?

[Denise1957]

well they are becoming popular in the Northwest where I live. I don’t know much about the water table issue. Here is a website about green burials.greenburials.org/FAQ.htm

The Catholic Church views the body as a holy temple. It is believed that all people were created in the image and likeness of God. Therefore, the burning of a body after death was once seen as a desecration of God’s work. The Church also believed that cremation represented a denial of the belief in resurrection. As the Church evolved, burials and entombment continued to be stressed but cremation was permitted.

Good explanation. I’m not sure if this is correct, but I think that the preferred burial of the body after death also has to do with the uniting of the body with the soul after Jesus’ return, at the end of the world. A priest explained it to me once, but I’m hazy on the details. I think, too, that it was due to the Fall in the Garden of Eden that our body was then to be separated from the soul after death, which isn’t natural, since God’s plan was to have our body and soul together after death, just as Jesus Himself ascended into Heaven with His body, and Our Lady, too.

The early Christians in Rome went to great trouble to bury their dead during the horrid persecutions by Roman Pagans. Hence the catacombs, which can still be visited in Rome.

Correction: Our Lady didn’t ascend into Heaven; she was ‘assumed’ into Heaven. Not sure what the difference is, exactly.

 

[Sufjon]

Well, thank you, friend!

Just wondering, though, in your religion what is a bad person, if not a person who does bad things?

Hi PRMerger: t would take a long time to explain. A person may go through a stage in their life where the sum of what they do is mostly bad for them and for others. They may go through another point in their lives where they are doing things that are mostly good for themselves and for others. These things that people do are not what they are. They are stages that they move through. The soul within them belongs to God. It is neither good nor is it bad. It simply is. If I caught you hiding in a dark corner doing something you shouldn’t do, does what I caught you doing define who you are? Most of us in the course of a lifetime can be found in that dark corner. We can also be found in the light. Is God’s love depending on whether your life terminated while you were being bad, being good, or is it cumulative? If it’s cumulative, then I suppose a Christian would see that as the output of a brief life and if you weren’t able to learn in that one shot, well then you’re toast. For me, it is a very vast time frame in which every being is afforded however long it takes to find it’s way back to it’s rightful place, which of course is with God, with whom all things belong. Nothing can be taken from God. I see it that we are here for the experience. The more good you do, the faster you get back and the more able you are to transcend all sorts of suffering and come out the other end whole. The less good you do, the more suffering you cause and the more suffering you endure. God loves us either way, and awaits our awakening. Any other sort of God sounds like something more like some sort of angry tribal volcano God.

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[PJM]

=Eric Hilbert;7858354]Return to the thread topic.

It’s EASY

It’s non-judemental [don’t judge me and I woun’t judge you]

You make YOUR OWN values and determanations of Right or wrong

You actually are a “god yourself”

It permits one to ignore thruth and make their own versions of it

It flexes and you flex

SIN is always MORE FUN and Instant Gratification has beome a “RIGHT” of the people

 

[PRmerger]

It’s EASY

It’s non-judemental [don’t judge me and I woun’t judge you]

You make YOUR OWN values and determanations of Right or wrong

You actually are a “god yourself”

It permits one to ignore thruth and make their own versions of it

It flexes and you flex

SIN is always MORE FUN and Instant Gratification has beome a “RIGHT” of the people

Exactly.

Except, there are a few inconsistencies–

1. you cannot disobey the values that they’ve set, such as environmentalism = the highest good. Other values are gray/up for debate.
2. thou shalt not judge, except that New Agers get to judge you for judging.

 

[Sufjon]

Exactly.

Except, there are a few inconsistencies–

1. you cannot disobey the values that they’ve set, such as environmentalism = the highest good. Other values are gray/up for debate.
2. thou shalt not judge, except that New Agers get to judge you for judging.

I am writing this in the hopes that it’s considered on topic, in that I’m trying to respond to someone who has postulated as to why New Age beliefs are attractive, which is the title of the thread. The point in particular is that New Age beliefs are attractive because they offer slack values and a free booting lifestyle. If I have misunderstood, then I apologize…

Now PR Merger, PJM et al, are you sure you guys want to suggest that others don’t have moral values because they don’t fall into the confines of what you’ve been told or chosen to believe? PRMerger, having been familiarized with the austerities of my faith, would you say that they are in some way more slack than yours? I say this because I think you have somehow equated New Age beliefs with anything non-christian. Either way, in your estimation, would God be more pleased if I were to love others and show kindness, or is it your view that would He prefer that I flog myself or wear a metal belt under my clothes? I am not sure I follow the line of thought, and indeed I am not entirely certain that some people don’t acquire a taste for such things, in which case self mortification and the like would then be abominations. Is that not right?

Are we afraid that others are escaping their due level of self-sacrifice or something? Is someone escaping the pangs of life that you suffer, or are we all doing our best to find God in whichever way we have reasoned to be most fit? You have reasoned that to be a 2,000 year old faith. I have reasoned it to be a 6 thousand year old faith. Someone else sees God in a faith that started a week ago. Is one less genuine in it’s longing for God? Or does God reserve His grace only for those whose brains happen to be wired in such a way as to see things this way or that? Did He give me the ability to reason not knowing what I might see?

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[PRmerger]

The point in particular is that New Age beliefs are attractive because they offer slack values and a free booting lifestyle. If I have misunderstood, then I apologize…

I don’t know what’s been proferred in earlier portions of the thread, but I believe that the New Age ethos is attractive because it offers the Almighty Self as the source and summit of the faith.

As GK Chesterson said, “That Jones shall worship the god within ultimately means that Jones shall worship Jones.”

 

[PRmerger]

Now PR Merger, PJM et al, are you sure you guys want to suggest that others don’t have moral values because they don’t fall into the confines of what you’ve been told or chosen to believe?

I don’t believe any Catholic here has suggested that non-Christians don’t have moral values…

On the contrary. We’ve been suggesting that they do indeed have moral values, but for some reason when Catholics proclaim a moral value it’s criticized as being judgmental. This is especially egregious in light of the mantra that there’s no right or wrong, only what one’s heart discerns it to be.

Why do New Agers get to proclaim “polluting the earth is bad!” but Catholics cannot proclaim, “Living as a homosexual is sinful!”?

PRMerger, having been familiarized with the austerities of my faith, would you say that they are in some way more slack than yours?

Actually, Sufjon, I am not quite sure what your faith is. Are you Hindu?

I say this because I think you have somehow equated New Age beliefs with anything non-christian.

Not at all. I would never confuse Islam with New Age beliefs. Nor Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Iglesia ni Cristo…

Either way, in your estimation, would God be more pleased if I were to love others and show kindness, or is it your view that would He prefer that I flog myself or wear a metal belt under my clothes?

Objectively, I would say that God would be more pleased if you were to love others and show kindness, all while being conformed to Truth.

I am not sure I follow the line of thought, and indeed I am not entirely certain that some people don’t acquire a taste for such things, in which case self mortification and the like would then be abominations. Is that not right?

This is correct.

Are we afraid that others are escaping their due level of self-sacrifice or something?

No, Sufjon. I have no fears about others’ lack of self-sacrifice. Rather, I regret their loss of truth.

Truth trumps everything.

Is someone escaping the pangs of life that you suffer, or are we all doing our best to find God in whichever way we have reasoned to be most fit?

I really couldn’t say if you are “all doing [your] best to find God”. Seek, and you will find, Sufjon. Of that I can be certain.

However, sincerity is not all that’s required.

You have reasoned that to be a 2,000 year old faith. I have reasoned it to be a 6 thousand year old faith.

Again, what faith is this?

Someone else sees God in a faith that started a week ago. Is one less genuine in it’s longing for God?

Again, sincerity isn’t all that’s required to save you. If sincerity isn’t enough to pay your mortgage (the bank really won’t care how sincerely you wanted to pay your note ) why should it be enough in matters of Truth and Eternity?

Now, to be clear, sincerity is necessary, but isn’t sufficient.

Or does God reserve His grace only for those whose brains happen to be wired in such a way as to see things this way or that?

This is a peculiar comment. Are you proposing that Catholics’ brains are wired to see things as Catholic and your brain is wired to see things as non-Catholic?

Did He give me the ability to reason not knowing what I might see?

Yes, God gave you the ability to reason.

 

[Sufjon]

I don’t know what’s been proferred in earlier portions of the thread, but I believe that the New Age ethos is attractive because it offers the Almighty Self as the source and summit of the faith.

As GK Chesterson said, “That Jones shall worship the god within ultimately means that Jones shall worship Jones.”

PRMerger: I guess the point about the slack lifestyles of non-Christians somehow fell off the radar unless you had something more to say on it. Anyway, it seems we have now shifted to another point. Before we do that, did you have something to add on the subject of slackness?

Okay, the next stone to throw at non-Christians is the “I am God” thing and the almighty self. That is a profound over-simplification. It is also disingenuous in same way if I were to take the words of Jesus to say that you and I are God when Jesus addressed the Jews who had accused Him of calling Himself God:

"“Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?”. -Jesus, right? Yes, Jesus. And He was also quoting scripture when He said it.

Now, far be it from me to take Jesus at His word without some help from Paul, Irenaeus or any of the other guys who felt that Jesus’ words needed help or their elaboration before it was fit for the rest of us to understand, but what do you suppose that meant? Take out the self appointed arbitrators and what do you see there? If you are One Bread and One Body, where then is the demarcation? Are you not in some way one, and in some way not? What then would the Eucharist attempt to achieve? A realization of this, or what? Sounds like someone is telling you that you and God are one, and then they are telling you that you are not, and in the ensuing confusion, you have asked me why I think what I think. I have told you before that I say God and His creations are like the sun and a billion bowls of water out in the noonday sun. You see a billion and one suns, but yet there is only one. Yet there are a billion and one. The billion do not exist without the one and are therefore reflections of it. Where does the One end and the billion begin? With the one of course, but you can’t separate them.

Do you understand this, or do you need to see in your minds’ eye a bearded old man reaching across the Sistine Chapel ceiling with countless unworthy subjects below, looking up in awe? Perhaps it is infinitely better than that. Maybe we’re actually part of the whole thing. If not, then we are in hell already by virtue of this arrangement.

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[PRmerger]

PRMerger: I guess the point about the slack lifestyles of non-Christians somehow fell off the radar unless you had something more to say on it. Anyway, it seems we have now shifted to another point. Before we do that, did you have something to add on the subject of slackness?

Okay, the next stone to throw at non-Christians is the “I am God” thing and the almighty self. That is a profound over-simplification. It is also disingenuous in same way if I were to take the words of Jesus to say that you and I are God when Jesus addressed the Jews who had accused Him of calling Himself God:

"“Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?”. -Jesus, right? Yes, Jesus. And He was also quoting scripture when He said it.

Now, far be it from me to take Jesus at His word without some help from Paul, Irenaeus or any of the other guys who felt that Jesus’ words needed help or their elaboration before it was fit for the rest of us to understand, but what do you suppose that meant? Take out the self appointed arbitrators and what do you see there? If you are One Bread and One Body, where then is the demarcation? Are you not in some way one, and in some way not? What then would the Eucharist attempt to achieve? A realization of this, or what? Sounds like someone is telling you that you and God are one, and then they are telling you that you are not, and in the ensuing confusion, you have asked me why I think what I think. I have told you before that I say God and His creations are like the sun and a billion bowls of water out in the noonday sun. You see a billion and one suns, but yet there is only one. Yet there are a billion and one. The billion do not exist without the one and are therefore reflections of it. Where does the One end and the billion begin? With the one of course, but you can’t separate them.

Do you understand this, or do you need to see in your minds’ eye a bearded old man reaching across the Sistine Chapel ceiling with countless unworthy subjects below, looking up in awe? Perhaps it is infinitely better than that. Maybe we’re actually part of the whole thing. If not, then we are in hell already by virtue of this arrangement.

Your friend
Sufjon

Firstly, friend, am I correct in understanding that you are Hindu?

 

[Sufjon]

Firstly, friend, am I correct in understanding that you are Hindu?

Yes, PRMerger, I thought everyone knew that. My apologies.

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[PRmerger]

Yes, PRMerger, I thought everyone knew that. My apologies.

Your friend
Sufjon

No, I did not know for certain.

 

[PRmerger]

Okay, the next stone to throw at non-Christians is the “I am God” thing and the almighty self. That is a profound over-simplification.

Fair enough. How does it err?

It is also disingenuous** in same way **if I were to take the words of Jesus to say that you and I are God when Jesus addressed the Jews who had accused Him of calling Himself God:

This is absolutely incorrect, Sufjon. The example you are giving is not an example of “over simplification”, but of misinterpretation of Jesus’ words.

He never said that you and I are God. As if!

"“Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?”. -Jesus, right? Yes, Jesus. And He was also quoting scripture when He said it.

John 10:34 is a reference to the judges of Israel who,since they exercised the divine prerogative to judge (Deut 1:17), were called “gods”; cf Exodus 21:6, besides Psalm 82:6 from which the quotation comes.

Now, far be it from me to take Jesus at His word without some help from Paul, Irenaeus or any of the other guys who felt that Jesus’ words needed help or their elaboration before it was fit for the rest of us to understand,

Well, yes, that is why Catholics have Sacred Tradition, in addition to the Sacred Scriptures.

but what do you suppose that meant?

See above regarding the judges of Israel.

 

[PRmerger]

If you are One Bread and One Body, where then is the demarcation?

I think St. Paul addressed this 2000 years ago:

But as it is, there are many parts, yet one body.

Are you not in some way one, and in some way not?

Again, this was prophetically addressed by Paul:

Now the body is not a single part, but many.

What then would the Eucharist attempt to achieve? A realization of this, or what?

The Eucharist “attempts to achieve” that which the marital embrace “attempts to achieve”: the One Flesh Union. Spiritual as well as physical.

Sounds like someone is telling you that you and God are one, and then they are telling you that you are not,

What Christianity does is to proclaim, (again paraphrasing Chesterton) that humanity has not only to look inwards, **but to look outwards, **to behold with astonishment and enthusiasm a divine company and a divine captain. The only fun of being a Christian was that a man was not left alone with the Inner Light, but definitely recognized an outer light, fair as the sun, clear as the moon, terrible as an army with banners." ibid

and in the ensuing confusion, you have asked me why I think what I think. I have told you before that I say God and His creations are like the sun and a billion bowls of water out in the noonday sun. You see a billion and one suns, but yet there is only one. Yet there are a billion and one. The billion do not exist without the one and are therefore reflections of it. Where does the One end and the billion begin? With the one of course, but you can’t separate them.

This is partially true, Sufjon. In that, as quoted above, it acknowledges the Inner Light.

But Christianity is a both/and proposition. One must also recognize the Outer Light–that which is transcendent and Holy*** Other***.

Do you understand this, or do you need to see in your minds’ eye a bearded old man reaching across the Sistine Chapel ceiling with countless unworthy subjects below, looking up in awe?

No, I do not see a bearded old man as God. God is not a grandfather. God is Father. God is a thunderbolt. God is Holy Other.

Maybe we’re actually part of the whole thing.

Of course. This is quite consonant with Catholicism. And it was the atoning death of Christ who achieved this for us, making us "part of the whole thing.

If not, then we are in hell already by virtue of this arrangement.

Yes, were it not for Christ, this is what our destiny would have been.

 

[Sufjon]

I don’t believe any Catholic here has suggested that non-Christians don’t have moral values…

On the contrary. We’ve been suggesting that they do indeed have moral values, but for some reason when Catholics proclaim a moral value it’s criticized as being judgmental. This is especially egregious in light of the mantra that there’s no right or wrong, only what one’s heart discerns it to be.

I took it that you and PJM were discussing how others make up moral codes to suit their ow needs or wants.

Why do New Agers get to proclaim “polluting the earth is bad!” but Catholics cannot proclaim, “Living as a homosexual is sinful!”?

I think that some people see polluting the earth is bad and that homosexuality isn’t. I think they are telling you what they think and you are telling them what you think. You disagree.

Actually, Sufjon, I am not quite sure what your faith is. Are you Hindu?

Yes, but there are many variations on what that means.

Not at all. I would never confuse Islam with New Age beliefs. Nor Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Iglesia ni Cristo…

I meant Eastern religions.

Objectively, I would say that God would be more pleased if you were to love others and show kindness, all while being conformed to Truth.

I agree.

No, Sufjon. I have no fears about others’ lack of self-sacrifice. Rather, I regret their loss of truth.

Truth trumps everything.

How do you know what is true and what is not?

I really couldn’t say if you are “all doing [your] best to find God”. Seek, and you will find, Sufjon. Of that I can be certain.

We are seeking the same thing. We have different vantage points.

Again, what faith is this?

Faith in the same God as yours.

Again, sincerity isn’t all that’s required to save you. If sincerity isn’t enough to pay your mortgage (the bank really won’t care how sincerely you wanted to pay your note ) why should it be enough in matters of Truth and Eternity?

Everyone pays.

This is a peculiar comment. Are you proposing that Catholics’ brains are wired to see things as Catholic and your brain is wired to see things as non-Catholic?

God made both of us, yet you cannot see what I see. Should He hold you at fault for that? Conversely, many can’t see what you see. Will they be held at fault for that? We are given different capacities for understanding and the ability to follow reason as we see it. How we are able to reason is governed by many factors, and many of these factors are completely out of our control. You were probably raised in a Christian society where you have been taught certain doctrines, and these may have been reinforced by scriptures you read, priests and other Christians you come in contact with, discussions, and a lifetime of acceptance of these things. If you are wrong is that your fault? If you only saw a small part of the picture is that your fault? What if you have a low IQ or are deranged? What is the threshold at which a lack of understanding is acceptable or not? How about a smart person who just sees it differently? Is that their fault?

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Christine77.

While there is a place for crystals and aromatherapy and psychology - that place is not to try and replace God. It sounds like your friend is in a serious race to outrun God to get away from Him. Such a race is really futile - the “Hound of Heaven” will continue to follow and remind her and everyone else that the empty place in our hearts is reserved for Him and Him alone.

You know, ‘New Age’ sounds a lot like just old age paganism with a colorful wrapper. Once the covering is removed we can see it for what it is … and, it should be very disappointing to anyone really interested in the kind of self fulfillment that lasts for eternity.

God bless

I have a very good friend who is into all things New Age. She tries crystals, aromatherapy, Jungian pyschology, channelling etc, to no avail. She still feels anxious and depressed.

I gently try to tell her that God is the source of all peace, and keeps us free from anxiety, but so far she is not ready to turn to Christianity. One day, I am hoping she will, and quit this endless search for happiness and self-knowledge through all these unfruitful New Age teachings and methodologies.

 

[Sufjon]

This is absolutely incorrect, Sufjon. The example you are giving is not an example of “over simplification”, but of misinterpretation of Jesus’ words.

He never said that you and I are God. As if!

Yes, it seems that many words are always needed to back out of what Jesus said. Why not take Him at His word? Did He appoint these people who interpreted these things for you or did they appoint themselves? I wonder about that. I always see apologists and theologians using 3,000 words to bend a ten word sentence by Jesus to mean something else. I wonder about that. What are they up to?

 

[PRmerger]

I took it that you and PJM were discussing how others make up moral codes to suit their ow needs or wants.

It seems that some do.

But what is inconsistent with some who profess the New Age ethos is that they are allowed their moral view (although it seems they wouldn’t call it that), but won’t allow Catholics the same.

I think that some people see polluting the earth is bad and that homosexuality isn’t. I think they are telling you what they think and you are telling them what you think. You disagree.

Well, not really. Polluting the earth *is *bad.

I was simply promoting an ethos that clearly some New Agers would find objectionable, in an effort to illustrate the inconsistency in their paradigm. On the one hand they say, “all is gray” but on the other hand they will get on their high horse about someone throwing a plastic bottle in the ocean.

I meant Eastern religions.

Well, truly, there is nothing new under the sun. New Age is really just a re-formulation of old heresies.

How do you know what is true and what is not?

Do you not believe that it’s true that Canada is north of the US? How do you know?

If one can know what’s true regarding geography, why would other areas–such as morality, spirituality, theology be any different?

We are seeking the same thing. We have different vantage points.

Vantage points are irrelevant. Truth is truth.

Canada is not north of the US for me, but south of the US for you.

Faith in the same God as yours.

My God proclaimed that He died to save our sins. Does your God say that?

Everyone pays.

True. And because of Christ, our payments are meritorious and efficacious.

 

[PRmerger]

God made both of us, yet you cannot see what I see. Should He hold you at fault for that? Conversely, many can’t see what you see. Will they be held at fault for that?

The CC has a term for this, Sufjon: “invincible ignorance”. We are not held accountable for our invincible ignorance. Yet, clearly, we are responsible for seeking the truth.

We are given different capacities for understanding and the ability to follow reason as we see it. How we are able to reason is governed by many factors, and many of these factors are completely out of our control. You were probably raised in a Christian society where you have been taught certain doctrines, and these may have been reinforced by scriptures you read, priests and other Christians you come in contact with, discussions, and a lifetime of acceptance of these things. If you are wrong is that your fault?

If you only saw a small part of the picture is that your fault? What if you have a low IQ or are deranged? What is the threshold at which a lack of understanding is acceptable or not? How about a smart person who just sees it differently? Is that their fault?

Your friend
Sufjon

The inspired writer, John, spoke to this here:

If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin; but as it is they have no excuse for their sin.

 

[PRmerger]

Yes, it seems that many words are always needed to back out of what Jesus said. Why not take Him at His word?

Sufjon, have you ever thought about how it is you know what Jesus’ words were?

I will tell you how you know: it is through these :“people who interpreted these things” (i.e the apostles and their successors).

IOW: you would not know that Jesus spoke these words: “Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?”

except for some men who interpreted them to be theopneustos.

Did you know that there are over 400 ancient Christian texts, most of which were rejected by these “men who interpreted them” and discerned them to not be the words of Jesus.

There’s even a story about Jesus, as a little boy, making animals out of mud, and at his word these animals sprung to life.

It was the CC–men who interpreted–who discerned that this was not inspired words, but that the words, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” were.

So, you see, that each and every time you talk about what Jesus said you are giving tacit authority to these men.

 

[sallyliao]

I still read up on mysticism and demonology from time to time but only form Christian authors and I never dwell on them.

Microsoft Office Home And Student 2010Microsoft Access 2010