I am a Catholic convert – with nearly twenty years intensive engagement in the New Age subculture prior to my conversion. And within that culture, it seems to me, there is a typical pattern, which involves that of the “spiritual teacher.” Now, our secular world is filled with individuals who have become “stars” – often due to real talent, even brilliance on their part. And something similar is at work in the New Age movement. There too, certain individuals achieve “star” status …
Let me explain the pattern further. Typically, an individual possessed of a certain charisma, ability to communicate and quite possibly a noble and moral nature as well, claims the attention and following of many New Agers. Typically, the individual will have spurned tradition and have evolved a spiritual teaching outside religious institutions. Much of the source of the teaching may then be his own interior, spiritual reflection or experience. (Though in my judgment, it will also usually draw on other New Age teachings and ideology). But if the individual is highly ethical, there can be no doubt that the teaching will have some good points to it. The teacher may also have a kind of mystical experience, which may be rare or extraordinary. Herein will lie much attraction. In my own experience, many a New Ager reading the literature, attending the lectures, sessions, workshops and so forth, will also be a person of real sensitivity and ethical awareness. Recognising what may be genuinely noble in the New Age teacher, the New Age follower well may say to oneself: “That sounds good – I’ll buy it!”
Certainly, when I look to my own twenty years with the New Age, this is how I was – I heard and read numerous “spiritual teachers” and my reaction, not even fully conscious, went something like: “That sounds good – I’ll buy it!” Alas! For I now believe that what is called for is deep critical reflection, before “buying” any “spiritual path”. For the dangers are significant ….
It is with such thoughts in mind – and heart – that I want to turn briefly to the thinking of Eckhart Tolle – who has become a superstar in the New Age world. “Briefly” – I wish to stress that this is but a short piece in broad strokes. It cannot hope to do full justice to a spiritual philosophy with significant nuance and complexity. But even if it cannot do such justice, I hope this undertaking can still serve to stimulate in the reader, the very kind of critical reflection I ultimately found so sorely lacking in New Age circles.
We will quickly then look at a New Age text that has become very popular: Tolle´s The Power of Now. It is not only popular in the New Age, but has achieved considerable mainstream success as well. Since its first publication in 1997, it has been translated into thirty languages, reached millions of people and made the Number One spot on the New York Times Bestseller List.
All of this constitutes a phenomenon which – incidentally but significantly I think – would seem unimaginable thirty years ago. On the back of one edition of this book, there is a recommendation by Oprah Winfrey, which exclaims “The Power of Now can transform your thinking … The result? More joy – right now! ” The back cover blurb then goes onto inform us that:
“To make the journey into the Power of Now, we will need to leave our analytical mind and ego behind … We can find our way out of psychological pain. Authentic human power is to be found by surrender to the Now … the present moment where problems do not exist. … It is here that we discover that we are already complete and perfect.”
Now I believe this is a book with a depth of profound and authentic experience of a certain kind. For I do not think the author is a fraud. And summing up a profound book by its blurb is admittedly fraught with pitfalls. On the other hand, Tolle presumably agreed to have his thinking presented to the world with such a blurb. And within the limits of a short space, I feel this blurb does suffice to give an accurate reflection of the book´s content – at least to a degree.
Yes with honesty, I believe Tolle gives an account of how his life was transformed by the discovery of a realm of experience, wherein he found a “way out of psychological pain”, beyond “the analytical mind and ego” to the experience of a state “where problems do not exist” or at least seem to …
However, the question remains: are there sufficient grounds in the experience presented here for all of us to take up our beds and follow him? It seems to me that Tolle is making some sort of claim to this effect. For example, after speaking of that which transformed his life, Tolle confidently asserts:
“It wasn´t until several years later, after I had read spiritual texts and spent time with spiritual teachers, that I realized that what EVERYBODY WAS LOOKING FOR had already happened to me (Emphasis mine, pg 5).”
Dear Reader, as a Catholic, this is clearly troubling indeed. May I personally declare here that I, at least, am not at all looking for what has happened to Eckhart Tolle? And I believe the same has been and will continue to be true of countless others, including the great Christian mystics and saints …
Here is also an example of something all too common in New Age circles – that spiritual experience of a certain kind gets muddled up with New Age ideology. For at least implicit here is a classic example of New Age ideology, repeated so, so, so many times, that it has become axiomatic, and therefore unquestioned and unchallenged. The implicit ideology here then, is the claim that there is ONE spiritual goal that we are ALL seeking. However Tolle makes the same claim explicit as well. For he writes:
“In essence, there is and always has been only one spiritual teaching, although it comes in many forms … When I quote from the ancient religions or other teachings, it is to reveal their deeper meaning and thereby restore their transformative power, particularly for those readers who are followers of these religions or teachings. I say there is no need to go elsewhere for the truth. Let me show you how to go more deeply into what you already have … (pg 10-11)”
At this point, it may be necessary for the traditional Catholic reader to catch his breath! Such a reader may be forgiven for thinking I am being far too gentle with New Age teachers such as Tolle, speaking of their nobility and authenticity! If you are such a reader, remarking perhaps the sheer inflation on offer here, please know I understand and sympathise. But I think there is reason to be gentle. What is evident to you, dear Catholic Reader, is by no means so, to many sincere people in the New Age movement.
For throughout my long New Age years, the assumption Tolle is making about one single path that he is qualified to offer, might have washed over me, completely unnoticed. Unnoticed, because I had never paid serious attention – as I suspect Tolle has also never paid serious attention – to the idea that just because one has had a certain perhaps very profound form of mystical experience, does not mean ipso facto that this is the ONLY valid form of mystical experience.
Let us suppose we take Tolle at face value – that he truly is participating in extraordinary and in one sense, liberating way of being. Does that qualify him to speak about this experience? Undoubtedly, yes. Does that qualify him to say that this is the only form of valid spiritual experience that there is, which ´everybody is looking for’? Does he KNOW that his is the only way? And that for example, his way is the same way as offered by the Church with her Sacraments – which Catholics could just as easily forget and come to him for, instead? That the Christian Sacraments offer nothing different and can thus be exchanged? Speaking personally, dear Reader, I see no justification at all for this New Age ideology in Tolle’s writing, and for myself, I am convinced that the Holy Church and Her Sacraments offer something very, very different to Tolle …
(One could also question why Tolle makes the implicit claim that religion has lost its “power” which he can “restore”. And I suspect I know the answer – that like many a New Age teacher, he has never deeply experienced a religious practice, but has nonetheless bought another tenet of New Age ideology: religion has lost its “deeper meaning and … power”.)
Yes, I am writing as an erstwhile New Ager who once bought such ideology myself – I who had never practiced a religion in my life! Now having practised New Age-ism and having practiced Catholicism, I can only report my personal conviction: the Power of Now and Catholicism lead to very different results in the soul …
In the short scope of this piece, no extensive comparison of Tolle and Christianity is possible. Suffice it to say, that Christianity seeks not the transcendence of suffering, but the EMBRACE of suffering. And that as such, Christianity is not about seeking “More joy, right now!”. Rather it concerns a compassionate identification with world suffering. At the very core of the Christian Faith, is the God who is not seeking “more joy, right now” but to become one with humanity, to the point of complete embrace of the entire agony of the human condition. Christians seeking a way of Imitatio Christi are therefore not in search of overcoming suffering, but of something else, which frequently will not relieve oneself of suffering, though it will lead to tremendous depth, strength, meaning and riches, within that suffering …
For Christianity, suffering is not without a point. For Tolle it would seem clear that ultimately there is no point. I say “ultimately”, for I am aware that Tolle does teach a certain willingness to meet the experience of suffering. But again and again, the message is there, explicitly and implicitly, that the only point to this is to move beyond suffering. For example in the Power of Now, he advises:
“When there is no way out, there is always a way through. So don’t turn away from the pain. Face it. Feel it fully. Feel it – don’t think about it. … Keep putting your attention on the pain, keep feeling the grief, the fear, the dread, the loneliness, whatever it is (pg 222)”
But one may notice the context the advice is couched in: “When there is no way out, there is always a way through. “ With Tolle, as the back cover of the book says, it is always about getting to the place “where problems don’t exist”. And shortly after Tolle has advised us to “keep feeling the grief, the fear” etcetera, he elaborates:
“Give your complete attention to what you feel … By giving full attention you use the power of your presence … Presence removes time. Without time, no suffering, no negativity can survive.”
Thus again, the goal is about getting beyond suffering, which is implicitly equated with “negativity” …
Dear Reader, all this and much more I find disturbing in Tolle’s philosophy. But it is his philosophy and it is his right to expound it. And one must be free to buy it – or not. Obviously, I prefer not to buy it. For in freedom, I have chosen Catholicism …
Now Catholicism is clear about the fact that freedom and choice exists between different spiritual paths. What I find severely problematic with Tolle is that such freedom and choice are being subtly denied. Again and again, implicitly or explicitly in his writing, I find the repeated suggestion that there is no other valid choice. That his philosophy represents the single path. IF this were true, all well and good. But if it is not true, then those who uncritically accept his claim have their freedom to choose reduced.
I want to turn to one last example of this tendency – one that seems to me to evidence no comprehension at all as to what Christianity is, and to subtly annihilate Christianity in the process. Thus directly after the material just quoted, Tolle, employing the literary device of an inquirer, presents us with the following exchange:
“Their are many accounts of people who say they have found God through their deep suffering, and there is the Christian expression ´the way of the cross´ which I suppose points to the same thing.”
To which Tolle responds: “We are concerned with nothing else here.”
We are concerned with nothing else here …!! From the context, it is manifestly clear that Tolle believes that the Way of the Cross is nothing other than his own spiritual philosophy. He seems in fact to have reinterpreted a path of voluntary carrying of suffering with a way in which one gets so fed up with suffering that one transcends it! For he writes:
“Enlightenment through suffering – the way of the cross – means to be forced into the kingdom of heaven, kicking and screaming. You finally surrender because you can’t stand the pain anymore (pg 225)”
This is indeed a profound reinterpretation of the Way of the Cross! One wonders whether it has never even occurred to Tolle that the Way of the Cross might be about something altogether different than his own path. Yes, a different “spiritual path” entirely which is not focussed on getting through the suffering. Yes, Our Lord went through the Crucifixion. Our Lord was resurrected. Yet he did not leave behind the world agony. But continues to suffer with us, his Sacred Heart pierced …
I cannot say for sure, but I will venture here an imagination. I imagine that such thinking about the pierced heart of Our Lord which goes on suffering … I imagine such a concept would be difficult for Tolle to take seriously. I cannot say with any certainty – but reading Tolle, it is very easy for me to imagine him seeing it as “medieval clap-trap” glorifying pain, little realising that countless Christian mystics, medieval and modern, walk such a way with Christ, letting their hearts be pierced with His …
Whatever the truth of my imagination, this is, as I say, a short piece. A more complete response could and would go into further issues. I well know for example, that many a New Ager – convinced by the “one basic path” New Age dogma – will demand if it is not that there is just semantics in my assertion that Tolle and Christianity are talking about radically different mystical paths. Many other questions and nuances could be addressed. But if my short piece has served to stimulate critical enquiry, it will have served its goal.
Dear Reader, in summing up, may I simply say that these are my personal convictions after years of reflection? That the kind of New Age-ism that takes its cue from Tolle IS about something radically different from Catholic Christianity. And we have a choice. And we deserve to know, that we have a choice – and that different spiritual paths DO exist, leading to different results in the soul. If you are a traditional Catholic such as myself, such a conviction will be the now proverbial “no-brainer”. What may be surprising to you, is that there are untold numbers of New Age folk – and a very great many of them are highly sincere and moral people – who have no inkling whatsoever that there could be an entirely different kind of “spiritual path” to the one offered by Eckhart Tolle. Or that there is a Mystery of Christ being completely buried by the kinds of assumptions and ideology that many New Age teachers are holding forth – often I suspect being barely conscious at all as to why they hold these views.
A Mystery of Christ being buried … ! Again dear Reader, if you are a traditional Catholic, you may feel I have been far too gentle in this piece. That I could have and should have used different and stronger language right from the outset. Perhaps you are right, but I will leave it to your imagination, as to what kind of language I might have used. I understand this New Age mindset very well, having participated in it for two decades. And I believe that as Christians, we need to be gentle. While at the same time, we need to be as alert as we possibly can to all that which serves to bury the Sacrifice on Calvary and all that which claims that the Catholic Mystery can be exchanged for the Power of Now – without cost to the soul.
Roger Buck
10 Comments
I tried to read Eckhart Tolle, but I couldn’t get past the simplistic platitudes and “New Age speak”. I didn’t read more than the first chapter. I like to read “Meditations on the Tarot” as a morning contemplative exercise. But does that mean that I find Tolle offensive or deluded? No, I to believe that Tolle has had some sort of genuine experience and is trying to express it the best he can. He obviously had some sort of profound, life-changing experience and wants to share it with the world. He feels compelled to spread his message. Tomberg (and others) would probably argue that years of contemplation, reading and counsel from older souls would have been profitable before establishing himself as a Teacher. But as a cradle Catholic who has dabbled with New Age philosophies (because of a profound, life-changing experience in my late middle age) I can understand why someone would want to share his or her experiences.
One of the direct consequences of my “awakening” is that I clearly remember past lives. Many of these lives were in the East: China, Tibet, India etc. I remember being a monk, warrior, mystic without any direct knowledge of Christ. Yet those lives were of direct spiritual benefit to my present incarnation. I no longer look at Eastern spiritual traditions as a bunch of “hooey”; I know that those lives were important to my spiritual development. As I read Tomberg, it is impossible to understand him without coming to terms with his belief in reincarnation. Even though he stated that belief in reincarnation is optional, if you read him closely it quickly becomes obvious that reincarnation is essential to his cosmology. Oddly enough, the Roman Catholic church is one of the few religions that has come out strongly AGAINST reincarnation. Tomberg was doubtless aware of this. It is not surprising that he instructed that his masterpiece be published posthumously. He must have been only too strongly aware of the reactionary forces at work in the Church. These forces are not just human, but spiritual.
After dabbling with Buddhism, Taoism, Steinerism and consulting psychics (a sad group; consulting spirits can be a damaging occupation) I have re-embraced Catholicism. Not that I ever left the fold or lost my faith in Christ. I was looking for answers to my experiences, and these philosophies (and not the Church) offered answers to my questions concerning reincarnation. Until I started reading Tomberg–then all my questions were fully met and more.
Although Tomberg mentions him many times, I don’t think he gives Teilhard enough emphasis. I believe that Teilhard de Chardin’s vision presents the ultimate alchemical process, the transformation of the Universe to Christ. How this was to be brought about, Teilard did not say (I don’t think he knew, really). But there is no doubt that there is an East Asian influence on both Tomberg and Teilhard. And it is necessary. It is a part of the evolution of consciousness that the Church must come to terms. To think that the East has nothing to offer is deny the complete consecration of the world. And though Tolle has a very incomplete vision, in some small way it has its part to play.
I am not defending Tolle, and I hope you don’t construe this as an attack, but I would hope that we can define ourselves by what we are, and not by what we are against.
Kevin, I thank you for this complex response, for which I have some real concern. You write:
“Oddly enough, the Roman Catholic church is one of the few religions that has come out strongly AGAINST reincarnation. Tomberg was doubtless aware of this. … He must have been only too strongly aware of the reactionary forces at work in the Church. These forces are not just human, but spiritual.”
The suggestion you appear to be making here is that the Church’s “odd” stance against reincarnation is “reactionary” – and that this “reactionary” quality is rooted in something beyond the human.
I wonder if you are even suggesting here, demonic?
I do not know – but certainly Valentin Tomberg was gravely aware of demonic forces at work. And it seems to me that he is saying that the Church’s own profound awareness of the dimension of non-physical evil led it to reject reincarnation!
Certainly, my own close reading of Tomberg reveals a profound affirmation of the Church’s reason for teaching against reincarnation. Because of the anonymous nature of some of his writing, I am in a moral conundrum as to how to give public reference to this. But I will write you privately.
Tomberg makes very clear indeed that the most profound danger attends the teaching of reincarnation. This is very far indeed from seeing the Church as “reactionary” in terms of its stand against reincarnation.
Profound danger … when you write Kevin “I am not defending Tolle, and I hope you don’t construe this as an attack, but I would hope that we can define ourselves by what we are, and not by what we are against.”
I do not at all construe it as an attack and your warning about such definition contains wisdom I feel. A pure “anti-ness” serves no-one.
I tried to meditate deeply on what I wrote about Tolle. I did not write it so much because I found him personally “offensive” as you put it – but I do believe his profound misrepresentation of Christianity is not without significance on the global stage.
That is a deliberate understatement.
Untold numbers are being blinded to Jesus Christ and His Church. As I was once blinded. These are very grave matters indeed.
You raise other serious matters, Kevin. About what you call an “East Asian influence” on Tomberg for example. My own journey through his writings suggests that he was endeavouring to make us very clear indeed in the choice we made between Eastern approaches and Christianity.
Thus in numerous ways, Tomberg returns to the idea that Eastern –(and Western pagan, Platonic, etc) approaches before Christ were to be a thief and a robber in respect of personalisation. “All who came before me are thieves and robbers (John x, 8)” …
Kevin your response is complex as I say. And I have studied it. I will write you privately as I say. I have concern as I say, but let me finish for now in saying I am also glad to hear that you have not “left the fold or lost your faith in Christ.” …
Thank you again. I cannot easily do more justice to your response for the moment. I will just say that I have two long articles in preparation, which concern Valentin Tomberg and the Church. One of them I hope will go up very soon.
Roger: I read the following differently from you
“… there is no need to go elsewhere for the truth. Let me show you how to go more deeply into what you already have … (pg 10-11)”
I would/took this to mean for me that ET is saying everything I could ever want is in my Catholic faith, and he wants to show me how to go more deeply into it…
And from what I can see, many who are searching for The Truth do eventually find their way to the Catholic Church even if it is sometimes a very windy path and totally unexpected by them!
Unfortunately, whether we like it or not many have been damaged by those within the Catholic Church who were / have not grasped what Bishop Slattery was talking about in his recent homily as quoted below (see my ‘Listen and listen again’ blog post of today for more):
“in sharing Christ’s obedience to the Father, we are made obedient to a new order of reality, in which love is supreme and life reigns eternal, in which suffering and death have been defeated by becoming for us the means by which Christ’s final victory, his future coming, is made manifest and real today.
Suffering then, yours, mine, the Pontiffs, is at the heart of personal holiness, because it is our sharing in the obedience of Jesus which reveals his glory. It is the means by which we are made witnesses of his suffering and sharers in the glory to come.
Do not be dismayed that there many in the Church have not yet grasped this point, and fewer still in the world will even dare to consider it, but you know this to be true and it is enough, for ten men who whisper the truth speak louder than a hundred million who lie.”
There has been a lot more damage to people’s souls within the church than any physical or sexual damage imho, and sometimes it’s through seeing things through the eyes of someone like ET that actually brings us back to the true core of what the Catholic Church is, as so beautifully described by BishopSlattery!
Epsilon, different responses here. To both what you have posted here and the related and beautiful things at your site.
First I hear your interpretation of Tolle and it is possible that he could mean something like that in certain places in his writings.
However I do think there is a great deal of other material there to bear out my interpretation.
Whether we were to come to agreement on that or not, one thing I could agree with is expressed in that old yet profound chestnut: God works in mysterious ways.
I would not deny that Tolle might on occasion serve people to find the Faith. Now, if I recall correctly, Edwin was counselling me recently to recall the stages of St Augustine’s pre-Christian journey in a similar light. Important stages on his way.
Internet communication is fraught with peril, but it seems that there MIGHT be a plea in both of you and Edwin here, that I become more open and tolerant to the idea that New Age thought may yet serve to lead people to Christian and Catholic faith.
IF so, I understand I think such a plea for openness and tolerance. Such I think is quite a natural disposition for me.
But in a certain sense, I am working to overcome it. Through a LOT of intense processes in prayer, in thinking and in life, I have become painfully convinced that although under the heading of the mysterious ways of God, this kind of New Age thinking might be occasionally helpful, the truth is far, far more often the reverse.
People’s way to the Church is being blocked and confused with countless obscurations of Christianity.
I find your Bishop Slattery piece at your site very beautiful and as you indicate in your next piece there, I do believe Eckhart Tolle is serving to obscure precisely what Bishop Slattery is saying. Tolle is actually suggesting that his approach to transcending pain and Christian embrace of pain are one and the same thing. They are not.
I will repeat the painful nature of this process for me. I have among other things alienated dear old friends. But I have had to go where an examination of decades of my own New Age experience took me – this stuff is in countless ways blocking people from the Church.
And I must dare to sound intolerant and narrow-minded …
As regarding you saying “whether we like it or not many have been damaged by those within the Catholic Church”. And you speak about the damage to people’s souls within the Church being greater than even the physical and sexual abuse.
Epsilon. I am not without resonance here and my reading of your writings suggests to me as I have said before here, a truly heartfelt, compassionate nature.
Though again internet communication is fraught with peril, for what it is worth your writing gives me the impression of someone who would with humility, keenly FEEL the limitations of the Church.
Such feeling is very very important. And if I read you rightly, keenness of feeling would lead you to shy away from a kind of “triumphalist Catholicism of we the Church are all white and they’re black …” Which frankly characterised certain pre-Vatican II expressions of Catholicism.
In modern parlance, this is called “demonisation”, of course. And the modern Church has shied away from the from the far more confrontational stance it took before Vatican II.
I do see these things and struggle with them. As I struggle, I find very mixed things in me. On the one hand unlike certain Traditionalists, I certainly believe in what Ven John Paul did … asking forgiveness for the sins the members of the Church have collectively committed.
On the other hand, the older I get, the more “De Maistrean” I get in this sense, seeing we are all radically, radically broken.
Seeing ever more the darkness of our hearts, inevitably a VAST collective of people over time and space such as Catholics have been, would do terrible things to people’s souls and bodies in the name of the Church. Like every other vast collective.
For me then, it becomes ever more miraculous how much good the Church has done. Which I think is sometimes being forgotten by those who feel so keenly the limitations …
And that feeling this limitation, many post Vatican II Catholics have to one extent or another given up belief in the sheer Miracle of the Power of the Church.
And I thus I also want want to fully join with certain Traditionalists who have a powerful faith in and defense of the Church, even if at times they might lack that keen, heartfelt sense I feel in your writings.
I actually feel we need to recover much of that pre-Vatican II confrontational stance that is now so regretted … (This feeling is behind recent Tridentine rumblings at this site ).
This is a LONG response Epsilon. And forgive me if I have hopelessly misconstrued you and it is thus irrelevant. Concluding points
1) I recognise and really appreciate the real heart I see in your writings.
2) You may end up finding me an intolerant narrow-minded Catholic – but I am hoping that you will not find me a KNEEJERK intolerant narrow-minded Catholic.
For it has taken very hard work for me to become this intolerant and narrow minded …
I would put a smile there, but there is too much suffering. Christianity is being buried …
I responded to this last night but it got lost in transit
Perfect response, Roger!
I totally understand / agree with you on this:
“I actually feel we need to recover much of that pre-Vatican II confrontational stance that is now so regretted … ”
At a Julian Meeting last Thursday I got great pleasure in reading extracts from a letter of St Catherine of Siena and a prayer of hers where the dreaded word “sin” is used. The meeting is made up of Anglicans mostly and a couple of other protestants plus a catholic priest (who is more new age than catholic). When I was invited to “lead” I thought – find out who is the saint of the day – and as luck would have it St Catherine of Siena popped up. Now I have to admit to knowing very little about St C before this (what would we do without the internet!) but she said everything I wanted to say!! and she was born in the same decade as Julian of Norwich…
My boatrocking is a little ironic given that one of St C’s symbols is – the boat (The Church) – which she wanted to steady – but then again they’re two different boats…
I am reminded of a teaching I heard from a Hasidic Rabbi. It goes something like this: You see to people on a ladder one is higher and one is lower than each other…so the Rabbi asks cryptically: “Who is higher up the one who is “higher” or the one who is “lower?” The natural response is the obvious one: The one who is higher is higher. But the Rabbi says in response to this: “It depends if they are moving up or down.”
Similarly, alternative or New Age or the religions or spiritual cultures may be signposts often secretly pointing us to Christ and His Church or they may be pointing away. This is part of the Mystery of Grace and that is why there is not a clear black and white response to the question of the relation of non-Christian faiths or practices to Christianity. One can certainly see both perspectives.
Epsilon and Edwin, thank you both again.
It is indeed easy to see a vast multiplicity of perspectives in the modern age. And more widespread subtlety of thinking rather than “black and white” fundamentalism might be also seen as a certain gift of modernity.
However, there is an enormous trap for many here, which speaking for myself, I suffered many years from. The perspectives on offer led me into a paralysing indifference. In fact the Eckhart Tolle article above grew out of a life-turning event for me. This involved a dream of a man I believe to be an uncanonised Catholic saint. Through the dream, I realised I was being paralysed by indifferentism. And interior work was needed.
And I have worked hard to overcome this- and the article above and the whole site bear witness to this work. Although I still don’t think I’ve entirely managed it.
Additionally, I think the post-confrontational, post-Vatican II Church is caught on the horns of this paralysing indifferentism as well – and very, very often crippled as a result.
I don’t know the mission of Saint Catherine of Siena very well either, Epsilon. Though strangely for the last months, have been feeling I need to. Thank you for your postings and links here.
One thing I am sure of, the dynamic St Catherine did not suffer from paralysing indifferentism …
Well, there certainly is more than one alternative to “paralysing indifferentism.” The refusal to be indifferent may open us to asking what the meaning of these faiths/ideas are and exploring this question in depth. Most of all, let us avoid an attitude of hostility. Conversation at the level of depth versus contraversy seems to be in order.
Edwin, your comment makes me wonder if I sound hostile?
And given the darkness of my heart, it is very possible that some hostility is seeping out from it here.
However , it honestly seems to me that the interior movement I have been indicating in this comments section is – by the Grace of God – a movement to greater and deeper charity.
What my core intention in this thread is certainly charity and I could not agree with you more about the need to offer up our hostility and pray that it become consumed by LOVE …
However this does not preclude certain very sharp distinctions being made, For example, the Holy Father as Cardinal Ratzinger spoke about other religions being “gravely deficient” in comparison with Christianity in Dominus Jesus – a document that took enormous courage and became instantly notorious in certain circles, when it was issued in the year 2000.
Valentin Tomberg, whom I know you honour deeply too, occasionally (and certainly not always!) makes even sharper distinctions than any recent Pope. For example, when he speaks of the “Lutheran heresy”.
Now I do not think such very sharp statements spring from a lack of enquiry into the “meaning of these faiths/ideas”as you put it.
And in both cases, I think Joseph Ratzinger and Valentin Tomberg were speaking with not hostility, but burning charity for the world.
But I am not the Holy Father or Valentin Tomberg! It may well be that my own sharp distinctions DO indicate lack of charity or enquiry into meaning – and that you are somehow picking this up. The more I look into my heart, the more darkness there is to see …
I repeat my movement does seem to be one in the direction of greater charity in these matters. BUT I welcome your feedback – and any prayers you may have for me.
Finally, although it is on a somewhat different topic, I am readying a post from Kim which speaks beautifully I think to the issue you raise of not succumbing to hostility. It will be ready soon. (Because Kim has an eye problem, I must upload all her writings).