I've finished reading Fr. Mitch Pacwa's Catholics and the New Age, a book equally informative and testimonial. He isn't simply writing a book pointing out the incompatibility of Catholicism and the New Age movement; he experienced and experimented with New Age practices in the 1970s. I've found his narrative very valuable because of that experience.
I came across some material that reminded me of a confusing conversation a few years ago. When I worked at Easter's Catholic Books & Gifts in Sacramento, one customer mentioned "ego suffering" in a conversation. I don't remember what led up to that point. This customer told myself and one of the owners that Jesus didn't actually suffer on the cross. It was actually ego suffering. Neither of us had heard that term before and didn't know what it meant. She had learned about this on the Cursillo retreat (of which she was very proud)... and I assume it was a fluke, since I have heard otherwise great things about the Cursillo retreats.
As far as I can tell, this "ego suffering" probably comes from the enneagram, a New Age circle thing that has nine points/personality types. The opposites of the personality types were different ego characteristics. "Each ego characteristics was described as a poisonous way of being and relating. No ego could be retained; removal was the sole cure." (Pacwa, Catholics and the New Age pg. 101) Maybe that customer meant that Jesus was suffering in order to get to His essence? Get rid of that ego? Who knows... when I read that part of Fr. Mitch's book, it sounded like it fit.
It really sounded gnostic. Gnosticism was a heresy that the Church encountered in the 2nd Century; it had many different manifestations because of the number of crackpots involved. One of the common features was that the gnostic leaders offered secret knowledge (gnosis is Greek for knowledge) that led to salvation. St. Irenaeus wrote against this particular heresy... up until the last century, the actual contents of the gnostic writings weren't known; all scholars had was St. Irenaeus' response salvo. Scholars actually criticized him, saying that he was going over the top in his criticisms just to make his point. When the gnostic documents at Nag Hammadi were dug up, scholars saw that St. Irenaeus wasn't going over the top after all. The gnostic writings were just that weird!
The Gnostics missed the boat, however; there isn't any secrecy when it comes to the teachings of Jesus. Jesus first had a public ministry of teaching and then established His Church to make sure that His message would go out to all the world. The Bible describes the Apostles teaching in public squares; St. Paul sailed around the eastern Mediterranean, going everywhere he could. There was nothing secret about that!
The customer's assertion of Jesus not really suffering is flat wrong. Maybe some New Agers think that, maybe some misguided Catholics or Christians believe that. St. Paul himself says in 1 Corinthians: "we preach Christ crucified" (1:23). There wasn't some deeper, secret meaning, only this: for the sake of every human soul, Jesus suffered and died on the cross.
No comments:
Post a Comment