Tao Te Ching

[suuran]

Here's a question for y'all: Do you think it would be wrong to read Aristotle and use his philosophy to help you in living a Catholic life?

If he's reading the Tao Te Ching for school and finds that it states a principle of natural law or morality particularly well, why shouldn't he let that inspire him?

I'd say "Christian and a Taoist" is going too far, and I'll admit I don't know much about Taosim in particular, but good things can be gleaned from pre-Christian philosophy. See Aristotle above. He had a great influence on St. Thomas Aquainas' thinking, just like Plato influence St. Augustine.

Caution is required, definitely, and he should be careful to always study Taoism in the light of the truth. But that doesn't mean everything in Taoism is false, or that it doesn't state some moral principles well.

[Theologian in Training]

This reminds me of the time a professor told me she believed it was possible to be a Catholic Buddhist, while I tried to explain to her the incompatibilities that clearly exist. It was only when I showed her writings from both John Paul II and the Dali Lama who agreed that though there are similarities, in the end, Catholicism and Buddhism cannot work side by side, there has to be a choice eventually as to which one you wish to practice. She told me Buddhists were unhappy with JPII for writing that.

While it is true that there is an element of truth in every religion, we, as Catholics believe that the fullness of truth exists within the Catholic Church. (I know some of you disagree with this, but, as we read in Lumen Gentium, the Church subsists in the Catholic Church).

I once had a spiritual director who taught all the major religions and showed the value and the greatness that each contained. However, he also showed how they fell short in one area or another, he then ended with teaching Catholicism to show how it made up where the others were lacking.

Don't get me wrong, I do believe that there is benefit in understanding and knowing other religions and faiths, but I think the inherent danger lies in trying to insert elements of those into the Catholic faith. A great example of this going way too far is former Dominican priest Matthew Fox who decided that the Mass had so much more potentia sol why not add elements of Wicca or Native American traditions, and while we are at it to spruce up the music with a little techno and then call it "Techno-Cosmic Mass."

See, the true danger is not in the studying, but it is in your original question: "Can someone be both a Christian and a Taoist?" because it seeks to make Catholicism a mix of everything rather than a religion on its own. I believe many New Agers used to do just that in order to draw from all backgrounds in order to find a Catholicism that worked for them.

So, I would echo everyone else in saying it is fine to read and study, but be careful in trying to adopt certain elements and trying to make them Catholic.

BTW, to those who admit that you don't know much about Taoism, I would recommend you learn more about it before endorsing it. It can be very hard to engage in discussion when all sides have not been understood.

Just my very long winded .02

God Bless

Fr. Brian

Edited November 21, 2006 by Theologian in Training

[heavenseeker]

ok, i feel like you all got the wrong impression on that i meant being taoist in the sense as a religion but its not what i meant. Yeah i know that in some parts of the world thats how it is treated but its not the only way of doing it. I agree that not all parts of the Tao are true but that is a very small part from how i understand it. The way i read it about 90-95% of the Tao Te Ching ties in wit hour Catholic teachings.

I believe that it is possable to use non-christian teachings like that of the Tao to sorta help one understand their christian faith and help relate it to others(i know that makes no sense to you guys but it does to me). Like if you were talking to someone that avoides talking about the christian faith because they dont believe what we do then to be like "ok then try to look at it this way" and then point out how it has the same or very simular teaching to that of christianity. In a way like St. Augustine, and St. Thomas Aquainas were influenced.

Anyways I didn't think this would turn into a debate or have somany people think i meant being taoist in the way that it was interpritated.

Edited November 22, 2006 by heavenseeker

[son_of_angels]

I have read and studied the Tao Te Ching, and there are definitely some attractive points to it...

1. It acknowledges that there is a level of purely potential being which supports the existence of everything, which connects all things together.
It seems to me that this accords with Christianity and Platonism.

2. It focuses on the need for meditation and ascetism, for a withdrawal from the world, and for a contentment with simply being, something also present in Christian monasticism.

As for the whole evil/good thing....In a way, this can be reconciled with Catholic teaching. All moral acts are contingent upon a single moral principle, which, while it must be acknowledged in order to have logical continuity between moral norms, nonetheless cannot be deduced without an acknowledgment that God created man "and saw that it was good." Or, as Kant put it, "treat other people always as an end and never simply a means." So, what I'm saying is that there all moral principles are contingent upon one, decreed moral principle that has no origin other than the Will of God, and therefore all actions can be moral in one sense, and immoral in another. It would require the perfect union with the will of God to make an action absolutely moral, and even an evil action could be seen as moral, removed enough in effect from the action itself. Hence the relevance of evil is not to others, but primarily to oneself, where God lives and dwells and desires our wholeness and purity. For Christians, the grace of God takes even those actions which are not perfectly and moral and, united with "purity in spirit" makes us fit to "see God" through the merits of Christ.

So, can one be Catholic and Taoist? Well...no. Nor can one be Christian and Platonist or Aristotelian, if by that you also mean adopting all the practices and teachings of those teachers without modifying and discerning in them the Christian mindset, or you mean making the practice of Tao some sort of secondary religion. But one could learn to formulate the faith within a Taoist construct, just as within a Dionysian construct, and freely acknowledge the image of truth that's there. Lao-Tzu, after all, was primarily a philosopher, and not a religious figure.

[uruviel]

[quote name='heavenseeker' post='1125575' date='Nov 21 2006, 09:49 PM']
ok, i feel like you all got the wrong impression on that i meant being taoist in the sense as a religion but its not what i meant. Yeah i know that in some parts of the world thats how it is treated but its not the only way of doing it. I agree that not all parts of the Tao are true but that is a very small part from how i understand it. The way i read it about 90-95% of the Tao Te Ching ties in wit hour Catholic teachings.

I believe that it is possable to use non-christian teachings like that of the Tao to sorta help one understand their christian faith and help relate it to others(i know that makes no sense to you guys but it does to me). Like if you were talking to someone that avoides talking about the christian faith because they dont believe what we do then to be like "ok then try to look at it this way" and then point out how it has the same or very simular teaching to that of christianity. In a way like St. Augustine, and St. Thomas Aquainas were influenced.

Anyways I didn't think this would turn into a debate or have somany people think i meant being taoist in the way that it was interpritated.
[/quote]


I get your point, and perhaps it could help you in explaining the faith more thoroughly to someone, but I still think that it's dangerous to do that. I mean, if you have a clear understanding of the faith, then you will be able to explain it and present it, hopefully the way God wants you to. You just have to pray about that one and trust God that He's speaking through you in a way. But still, living the Catholic faith should be enough for you, in every aspect. You shouldn't have to bring in another religion in the picture to help you out, God gave us all the means to convert and live this faith, with His help.
I just think it could be dangerous to use other religions. Satan can make another religion look tempting because it sounds like the Christian faith. When the Catholic faith is the only true church and we shouldn't be bringing other religions in.
I know you say your not using it as a real religion, but thats what it is. It's a religion and in my view you can't use it as 'guidelines' esp. with the Catholic faith.
Make any sense... at all?

[Myles Domini]

[quote name='son_of_angels' post='1125640' date='Nov 22 2006, 04:37 AM']
I have read and studied the Tao Te Ching, and there are definitely some attractive points to it...

1. It acknowledges that there is a level of purely potential being which supports the existence of everything, which connects all things together.
It seems to me that this accords with Christianity and Platonism.

2. It focuses on the need for meditation and ascetism, for a withdrawal from the world, and for a contentment with simply being, something also present in Christian monasticism.

As for the whole evil/good thing....In a way, this can be reconciled with Catholic teaching. All moral acts are contingent upon a single moral principle, which, while it must be acknowledged in order to have logical continuity between moral norms, nonetheless cannot be deduced without an acknowledgment that God created man "and saw that it was good." Or, as Kant put it, "treat other people always as an end and never simply a means." So, what I'm saying is that there all moral principles are contingent upon one, decreed moral principle that has no origin other than the Will of God, and therefore all actions can be moral in one sense, and immoral in another. It would require the perfect union with the will of God to make an action absolutely moral, and even an evil action could be seen as moral, removed enough in effect from the action itself. Hence the relevance of evil is not to others, but primarily to oneself, where God lives and dwells and desires our wholeness and purity. For Christians, the grace of God takes even those actions which are not perfectly and moral and, united with "purity in spirit" makes us fit to "see God" through the merits of Christ.

So, can one be Catholic and Taoist? Well...no. Nor can one be Christian and Platonist or Aristotelian, if by that you also mean adopting all the practices and teachings of those teachers without modifying and discerning in them the Christian mindset, or you mean making the practice of Tao some sort of secondary religion. But one could learn to formulate the faith within a Taoist construct, just as within a Dionysian construct, and freely acknowledge the image of truth that's there. Lao-Tzu, after all, was primarily a philosopher, and not a religious figure.
[/quote]

From what I glean from your post. I'm troubled by the word 'potential' in connection to the principle upon which all created being exists. I wont take issue with the stuff about contemplation and asceticism since you have no elaborated on the doctrine that follows the Taoist understanding of why one practices it.

Confused...what do you mean when you say an evil action can be seen as moral?

[suuran]

I guess I'm still wondering about the question I posed: Do all y'all who think it's wrong to draw wisdom from Taoist philosophy also think it was wrong for St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine to be heavily influenced in their thinking by the pagan philosophers Plato and Aristotle?

In one of Archbishop Fulton Sheen's books--[i]The World's First Love[/i], a book about Mary--he quotes passages from the Quran in relation to Mary which he thinks are particularly beautiful and capture truths about Mary well. They're not inspired Scripture, but he thought it useful to present what was good in the Muslim understanding of Mary. He also connected reverance for Mary to the Islamic veneration of Fatima, Mohammed's...daughter, I think?

Archbishop Sheen also pointed out that Mary is apparently aware of this connection, given the name of the town where she appeared to three Portugese children .

He isn't saying the Islam is completely congruent with Catholicism on Mary, but he thought it was fruitful to recognize what Islam gets right and appreciate those passages in the Quran which express Marian truths well. He actually believed that the way Muslims could possibly be converted is through Marian devotion, because they already have such a deep respect for Mary and the ideal of the perfect woman.

Heck, the Archbishop even quotes the nihilist philosopher Nietsczhe (sp?) in [i]Three to Get Married[/i] (an awesome, awesome book on marriage and sexuality)--the quote is something like "You should never marry a woman you wouldn't want to talk to every day for the rest of your life." Nietsczhe's philosophy is deeply depraved--he was one of Hitler's inspirations--and Archbishop Sheen knows that perfectly well, and criticizes him often, but, in that particular case, he phrased an idea very well, and the Archbishop gave credit where credit was due and drew that fragment of wisdom from a philosophy who is usually dead wrong. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, after all.

I just don't see how it's wrong to acknowledge good where good exists. One should be firmly grounded in one's faith, of course, and know how to seperate the good from the bad--no one's denying that.