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

[PRmerger]

That’s great PR that you understand now. Because here you were saying you were having difficulty and did not get it.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=7869720&postcount=324

I can see why you would be confused. On the one hand, I do not understand your POV, as it lacks consistency and logic, but OTOH, I do understand and get it.

It’s similar to this: picture yourself in a conversation with a Fred Phelps-esque type of guy:

Fred: God hates homosexuals.
You: Do you read the Bible? Doesn’t God say He is a God of love?
Fred: Yes, I do read the Bible.
You: Well, then,** I don’t understand how you get your paradigm.
Fred: I get it from
You: ** I do understand that you feel this way.** I have been around many types of people who feel this way and have heard all the arguments before. But you are wrong because

Oh, wait. You wouldn’t ever have that conversation with him because you’ve got that little old excuse that lets you get out of social justice. You love to use the excuse of “I’ve got my own specks to deal with”

Firstly, you propose that you wouldn’t even be able to point out his error due to your “own specks”, and secondly, even if you did, he’s come right back at you and say, rightly, “Well, I’m just using the same paradigm you use to determine what’s right and wrong: my faith.”

So homophobia and hatred are allowed to prevail in your paradigm.

 

[PRmerger]

T
There is no more inconsistency in my faith PR than in another’s. Each of our faiths is based on our understanding of our consciences. Devout Catholics such as yourself and Gary, Tom, others, place your faith in the Catholic Church’s interpretation of Herself, in Her interpretation of the Church, in Her interpretation of ECF writings. You follow your conscience and you believe it must conform entirely to the Catholic Church or else your conscience is in err. You believe this because the Catholic Church tells you this and you believe She is the same Church Christ founded and has always remained so.

I keep faith based on my conscience too. And yes before you bring up Fred again, he has his beliefs. I know you don’t understand how I could say Fred is wrong for following his conscience. But I can disagree with him, PR, and do, if only based on what you have told me about Fred.

Just as your conscience tells you I am wrong. And from what I can gather from our many previous discussions, you would get into Fred’s face and tell him he is wrong too and I’m not exactly certain what else you would do with him.

I get what you’re saying.

It simply prompts the question, then, that if the Church is wrong on some things, and right on some things, then how is it you know? How do you know the Church got it wrong when she says divorce and re-marriage is immoral? Is it because it’s a “mean” teaching? Is it because you want to be able to divorce and re-marry? Is it because it makes you feel bad because you wouldn’t be able to celebrate with your sister and her new “husband”?

But that doesn’t mean any of us can prove faith.

Ok. This is true perhaps, but a non-sequitor.

It means we can not prove with absolute certainty what the one truth is. We walk by faith.

Indeed. And all of life is really about faith, is it not? You don’t have any “absolute certainty” that the pilot flying your plane is actually licensed, right?

So what’s the point in bringing up that we don’t have “absolute certainty” with faith?

And it’s not as if I haven’t tried to believe as you.

Of this I have no doubt. I just question your default, which is “If I can’t understand it, then it’s the Church that’s wrong and not me.”

 

[PRmerger]

As Sujon says, “You just play out who you are, and you unfold as you are meant to.”

Heh. I wonder how those who have suffered at Fred Phelps’ hands would respond to this. “God wants Fred Phelps to picket at the funerals of my deceased loved ones and proclaim that their death is a result of the wrath of God. It’s how God wants it to be.”

 

[CMatt25]

I can see why you would be confused. On the one hand, I do not understand your POV, as it lacks consistency and logic, but OTOH, I do understand and get it.

It’s similar to this: picture yourself in a conversation with a Fred Phelps-esque type of guy:

Fred: God hates homosexuals.
You: Do you read the Bible? Doesn’t God say He is a God of love?
Fred: Yes, I do read the Bible.
You: Well, then,** I don’t understand how you get your paradigm.
Fred: I get it from
You: ** I do understand that you feel this way.** I have been around many types of people who feel this way and have heard all the arguments before. But you are wrong because

Oh, wait. You wouldn’t ever have that conversation with him because you’ve got that little old excuse that lets you get out of social justice. You love to use the excuse of “I’ve got my own specks to deal with”

Firstly, you propose that you wouldn’t even be able to point out his error due to your “own specks”, and secondly, even if you did, he’s come right back at you and say, rightly, “Well, I’m just using the same paradigm you use to determine what’s right and wrong: my faith.”

So homophobia and hatred are allowed to prevail in your paradigm.

It may lack consistency and logic PR according to the parameters of your understanding. Not of mine.

Actually no I have not been around any Fred types to the degree in which you present Fred to be.

Do you have all the specks forever out of your eye so you can deal with the specks of another?

What do you propose to do about Fred, PR, after you have spoken to him vehemently protesting to him about his injustice yet he continues? Are you going to punch his eye out or what during your discourse with him? You talk about him a great deal but I’ve never quite understood what your next move is with Fred?

Sometimes I have difficulty understanding you too I guess.

Peace.

 

[CMatt25]

if the Church is wrong on some things, and right on some things, then how is it you know? How do you know the Church got it wrong when she says divorce and re-marriage is immoral? Is it because it’s a “mean” teaching? Is it because you want to be able to divorce and re-marry? Is it because it makes you feel bad because you wouldn’t be able to celebrate with your sister and her new “husband”?

what’s the point in bringing up that we don’t have “absolute certainty” with faith?

Of this I have no doubt. I just question your default, which is “If I can’t understand it, then it’s the Church that’s wrong and not me.”

That’s what you don’t understand PR. I don’t KNOW IF the Catholic Church is wrong on some things. I don’t KNOW it’s not. What I BELIEVE though is based on my conscience after much thought and reasoning, prayer, well you know the drill I use. But who told you I don’t understand why you believe as you do?

Uh no PR. It would be difficult for me to divorce and my sister doesn’t have a new “husband”. I’m not certain what the quotation marks are about but if my sister did have a new husband, I’d celebrate. I don’t know if Fred or you celebrate. But then I’m not Fred or PR. I’m me, CMatt25.

Ahh and now to the point about faith. Catholics say they know with certainty theirs is the true one. I actually just heard that said on EWTN tonight.

But you might be getting closer to truly understanding me, PR, with your words “true perhaps” and “indeed” when I said none of this we talk about means any of us can actually truly prove faith and that we can not prove with absolute certainty what the one truth is. That we walk by faith.

And there very simply lies the point PR.

 

[PRmerger]

What do you propose to do about Fred, PR, after you have spoken to him vehemently protesting to him about his injustice yet he continues? Are you going to punch his eye out or what during your discourse with him? You talk about him a great deal but I’ve never quite understood what your next move is with Fred?

'Tis a fair question, Matt. And it’s true that, in the end, your paradigm and the Catholic paradigm leave Fred up to the judgement of God.

However, in a rational discussion with Fred I could propose the absolute truth as proclaimed by Scripture and the Church. He then could not state, “Well, I’m using the same paradigm that you’re using. I pray to the Holy Spirit and meditate and this is what my conscience tells me to do.”

Think of it this way: We’re both 5th grade teachers. Your paradigm is: read, study, and then whatever way you feel in your heart is the correct answer, that’s the correct answer.

So your 5th grade student tells you: 8 x 8 is 56!

You have to say, “Ok, I guess. You did what I told you.”
And now this 5th grade students goes on to study engineering and makes a bridge with wrong foundations and he is responsible for the deaths of hundreds when the bridge collapses because of his wrong calculations.

I, on the other hand, can tell him: no, 8 x 8 is 64. You are wrong. Study some more.
And this student goes on to win multiple Engineering awards because his calculations were based on truth. :yeah_me:

 

[PRmerger]

But who told you I don’t understand why you believe as you do?

Huh?

Uh no PR. It would be difficult for me to divorce and my sister doesn’t have a new “husband”.

Please don’t take me literally here, Matt. Try to see the bigger picture.

It’s like my telling my child, “If everyone goes and jumps off a bridge, would you do that, too?” And my child responds, “No, because there isn’t a bridge nearby for me to jump off.”
Um, dear sweet child o’mine, please see the bigger picture. I wasn’t really talking about bridges, was I?

 

[GEddie]

'tis a fair question, matt. And it’s true that, in the end, your paradigm and the catholic paradigm leave fred up to the judgement of god.

However, in a rational discussion with fred i could propose the absolute truth as proclaimed by scripture and the church. He then could not state, “well, i’m using the same paradigm that you’re using. I pray to the holy spirit and meditate and this is what my conscience tells me to do.”

think of it this way: We’re both 5th grade teachers. Your paradigm is: Read, study, and then whatever way you feel in your heart is the correct answer, that’s the correct answer.

So your 5th grade student tells you: 8 x 8 is 56!

You have to say, “ok, i guess. You did what i told you.”
and now this 5th grade students goes on to study engineering and makes a bridge with wrong foundations and he is responsible for the deaths of hundreds when the bridge collapses because of his wrong calculations.

I, on the other hand, can tell him: No, 8 x 8 is 64. You are wrong. Study some more.
And this student goes on to win multiple engineering awards because his calculations were based on truth. :yeah_me:

bravo

 

[tqualey]

Hi, PRmerger,

Now, hold on a minute … do I detect ‘industrial strength’ hyperbole being spilled onto the post… will there be a HazMat emergency called…? CMatt seems to have taken this as far as he can - ultimately, Faith is a gift and we all will be judged according to the Graces we have cooperated with. If Faith were as reduceable as a math question like “8 x 8=?” then … it just wouldn’t be Faith… would it?

In the ‘chapter’ on extreme cases - Fred Philips has his own section! Personally, what he is doing is so very painful to those who have lost family members - and, I really have tried to reconcile his stated purpose with the means he is using … and, I have come up short. But one of the problems with extreme cases is that it really does so little to explain the majority of human experiences. Personally, after reading these many posts, I am no more enlightened about Fred or how the Canon of Sacred Scripture was developed and used - and then altered in the 16th Century.

I really think CMatt is moving in the best direction he can… for the moment… Admittedly, it is not the direction that you and I have chosen (and, will be judged on) and I think we just have to acknowledge that and move on. The very concept of New Age is so very destructive to both the human spirit and the immortl soul that it is difficult to adequately identify all of the toxins. Who knows, given a bit more time … CMatt may mellow a bit more as he continues to thnk and pray about where it is we are all going and how it is we are getting there.

CMatt I hope you ralize that a lot of folks are praying for you. Your job is to pray for us!

God bless

'Tis a fair question, Matt. And it’s true that, in the end, your paradigm and the Catholic paradigm leave Fred up to the judgement of God.

However, in a rational discussion with Fred I could propose the absolute truth as proclaimed by Scripture and the Church. He then could not state, “Well, I’m using the same paradigm that you’re using. I pray to the Holy Spirit and meditate and this is what my conscience tells me to do.”

Think of it this way: We’re both 5th grade teachers. Your paradigm is: read, study, and then whatever way you feel in your heart is the correct answer, that’s the correct answer.

So your 5th grade student tells you: 8 x 8 is 56!

You have to say, “Ok, I guess. You did what I told you.”
And now this 5th grade students goes on to study engineering and makes a bridge with wrong foundations and he is responsible for the deaths of hundreds when the bridge collapses because of his wrong calculations.

I, on the other hand, can tell him: no, 8 x 8 is 64. You are wrong. Study some more.
And this student goes on to win multiple Engineering awards because his calculations were based on truth. :yeah_me:

 

[CMatt25]

Hi, PRmerger,

Now, hold on a minute … do I detect ‘industrial strength’ hyperbole being spilled onto the post… will there be a HazMat emergency called…? CMatt seems to have taken this as far as he can - ultimately, Faith is a gift and we all will be judged according to the Graces we have cooperated with. If Faith were as reduceable as a math question like “8 x 8=?” then … it just wouldn’t be Faith… would it?

In the ‘chapter’ on extreme cases - Fred Philips has his own section! Personally, what he is doing is so very painful to those who have lost family members - and, I really have tried to reconcile his stated purpose with the means he is using … and, I have come up short. But one of the problems with extreme cases is that it really does so little to explain the majority of human experiences. Personally, after reading these many posts, I am no more enlightened about Fred or how the Canon of Sacred Scripture was developed and used - and then altered in the 16th Century.

I really think CMatt is moving in the best direction he can… for the moment… Admittedly, it is not the direction that you and I have chosen (and, will be judged on) and I think we just have to acknowledge that and move on. The very concept of New Age is so very destructive to both the human spirit and the immortl soul that it is difficult to adequately identify all of the toxins. Who knows, given a bit more time … CMatt may mellow a bit more as he continues to thnk and pray about where it is we are all going and how it is we are getting there.

CMatt I hope you ralize that a lot of folks are praying for you. Your job is to pray for us!

God bless

Tom, thank you. Your kindness for the most part in your discussions has not gone unnoticed. What PR was proposing was questionable to me to be sure. And I’m not enlightened by Fred either. But I do hope you were not placing me in some new age movement today. Mellow me is more mainline than the little I know or understand about new age today.

Thank you and all the folks praying for me. And of course I shall pray for all of you!

I am heading out for the weekend. You and PR and all have a safe and good one. Let us remember all who have gone before us. God bless you too. Peace.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, CMatt25,

Enjoy your weeend.

I was just making a general comment about New Age in general - and nothing specific to you. As you know, there are some folks who are apparently sold on New Age and have gone out of their way to sing its praises.

You know … this New Age stuff sounds remarkably like Old Age Paganism … but, I guess we will all find out what is what as we each approach our own fullness of time.

God bless

Tom, thank you. Your kindness for the most part in your discussions has not gone unnoticed. What PR was proposing was questionable to me to be sure. And I’m not enlightened by Fred either. But I do hope you were not placing me in some new age movement today. Mellow me is more mainline than the little I know or understand about new age today.

Thank you and all the folks praying for me. And of course I shall pray for all of you!

I am heading out for the weekend. You and PR and all have a safe and good one. Let us remember all who have gone before us. God bless you too. Peace.

 

[PRmerger]

bravo

shaw:

Just curious, Eddie…why did your post above, which included my comments, change all the capitalizations?

 

[PRmerger]

I don’t think God made the rest of us simply to serve as a dull backdrop against the effulgence of some chosen people. You may believe that if you like, and I would never try to change that, but I certainly can’t with any honesty say that I agree or even see the logic in it, especially knowing God as the more loving and inclusive God that I already know.

Your friend
Jesus

Hi, Jesus. You seem to be misrepresenting your Church in the above post, because I’m pretty sure that your church never proposed that “the rest of” you serve only as dull backdrops against the effulgence of some chosen people.

You sound like an imposter to me!

Or at least someone posting as you, but someone who has clearly never met you nor dined with you.

 

[Sufjon]

Hi, Jesus. You seem to be misrepresenting your Church in the above post, because I’m pretty sure that your church never proposed that “the rest of” you serve only as dull backdrops against the effulgence of some chosen people.

You sound like an imposter to me!

Or at least someone posting as you, but someone who has clearly never met you nor dined with you.

Hmm - could have sworn I wrote Sufjon. Not intentional. Now aside from that, did you have a point PRMerger?

Your friend,
Sufjon

 

[PRmerger]

Hmm - could have sworn I wrote Sufjon. Not intentional. Now aside from that, did you have a point PRMerger?

Your friend,
Sufjon

Hi, Sufjon.

This is my point: the CC does not teach that “the rest of” you serve only as dull backdrops against the effulgence of some chosen people.

 

[Sufjon]

Hi, Sufjon.

This is my point: the CC does not teach that “the rest of” you serve only as dull backdrops against the effulgence of some chosen people.

Hi PRMerger: Good!

Yiour friend,
Sufjon

 

[GEddie]

shaw:

Just curious, Eddie…why did your post above, which included my comments, change all the capitalizations?

Wish I knew. I certainly didn’t command the changes. But I’ve seen it happen before.

ICXC NIKA

 

[afthomercy]

From your posts (Sufjon), it would appear that you have truly embraced Moral Relativism and that our activities at promoting Moral Absolutes are not only misdirected but nonsense. You know, there is no future in Relativism - there are some out there with a real agenda and tormenting your soul for all eternity is their target. Those who wave Relativism’s flag are ultimately constrained to actually pick a side, deny evil exists and simply eat, drink and be merry…

Well put! This is the real chasm separating Christianity and the eastern religions, and the chasm is so wide and deep, that I don’t see any scope for covergence. At a fundamental level, our God is distinct and separate from his creation, whereas theirs is not. For them, everyone and everything is God (or his manifestation). These two philosophies are poles apart, and it is not possible for anyone to embrace the one without rejecting the other in totality, which is good, because it prevents any scope for syncretism. Trying to see similarities between the teachings of Christ and Krishna merely glosses over this fundamental difference.

 

[Sufjon]

Hi, Sufjon,

Glad to hear you read the article.

Sorry about being a bit late in responding to this post … I am easily distracted …

OK… let’s see what we have here … h-m-m-m-m… “nothing to lose”, eh? I really must disagree with you on that one. Let me explain…

I would interpret your respose is a really big YES concerning Relativism. The problem with this, Sufjon, is that is it treats all things as equal… and we know that is not true. For example, grass is food for cows but not food for humans because we cannot disgest cellulose. To treat all foods equally would put both humans and cows in danger - cows can not digest meat.

None of us can consciously chose evil for evil’s sake. It just can not be done. We make choices based on what we think at the time is best for us - and some of our choices have been remarkably short-sighted, self-defeating and harmful. The alcoholic makes a decision that either he wants to stop hurting or he wants to feel better - either way - he chooses to drink more alcohol. This is a destructive choice - it is even more destructive if he gets in a car because he thinks he can drive and runs into you!

Not only are there wise and foolish choices - there are moral absolutes!

The flag you have been waving for Moral Relativism reduces everything to “Why can’t we all just get along?” in the famous words of Rodney King. Christ died for redemption of every one of us - and that means that each of us has a real value. Satan is damned to hell for all eternity - and, his only aim is foolish revenge by trying to deprive the Creator of some of His human creations, So, we have value for the Devil, too. There can be no argument that we have intrinsic value… but there is a difference. God wants to share His Kingdom with us for all eternity. The Devil wants to torment us - truly inferior creatures to the angels - even the fallen ones - for all eternity. Now, please do not think of eternity as a really long period of time. It is the total absence of time. And for a truly finite mind such as I have - that just scares the hell out of me!

Think in terms of defending and protecting the soul that Christ redeemed with His Life, Death and Resurrection. We are not mere spectators in this activity - we are here to do His Will… and for this He has promised us life eternal.

From your posts, it would appear that you have truly embraced Moral Relativism and that our activities at promoting Moral Absolutes are not only misdirected but nonsense. Believe me, you were not the first to think this - nor, will you be the last. St. Paul encountered such opposition when he wrote the beginnng of his first letter to the Corinthians. Paul identified that for some, “…the message of the cross is foolishness…”. Here is link where you can read this first chapter to get the sense of what Paul was addressing:usccb.org/nab/bible/1corinthians/1corinthians1.htm

You know… there is no future in Relativism - there are some out there with a real agenda and tormenting your soul for all eternity is their target. Those who wave Relativism’s falg are ultimately constrained to actually pick a side, deny evil exists and simply eat, drink and be merry…

God bless

Hi tquale: I don’t perceive that my soul as being tormented. Is there something out there trying to torment yours? What is tormenting you?

Secondly, you mention this eat drink and be merry thing when it comes to describing other faiths. I see a lot of that attitude about other religions on this forum. What austerities are you practicing that you would like to tell me about?

As for worrying about the devil or voices coming out of the vents, what in your estimation is the problem with being good simply because you love God and love your neighbor? Is it better to be good because you are afraid of the devil?

Your friend,
Sufjon

 

[Sufjon]

Well put! This is the real chasm separating Christianity and the eastern religions, and the chasm is so wide and deep, that I don’t see any scope for covergence. At a fundamental level, our God is distinct and separate from his creation, whereas theirs is not. For them, everyone and everything is God (or his manifestation). These two philosophies are poles apart, and it is not possible for anyone to embrace the one without rejecting the other in totality, which is good, because it prevents any scope for syncretism. Trying to see similarities between the teachings of Christ and Krishna merely glosses over this fundamental difference.

What would you say are the primary differences? For the sake of keeping focused, maybe we could list one difference and talk about that.

Your friend
Sufjon