Sometimes, I’ll pick up a Catholic book and I’ll see stuff like “spirit energy” “spirit self”, sending bad energy to others. It sounds like an anime story. Am I alone in thinking it’s a bit suspect? I can’t follow that new talk. The old talk you read in something TAN publishes is easier to follow, I think. It seems much more straight-forward, despite flowery formal prose.
I don’t have that concern about St. John of the Cross, because he was an honest to goodness mystic. He lived a life of which would give one the impression it’s solid and the imprimaturs and nihil obstats and such gives you the guarantee that it is, because those bishops seemed to be pretty straight in their thinking. They, Catholic authors and clergy who approve their writings, weren’t playing around with Protestant, Buddhist, what we’d call new-agey thoughts etc. concepts in those days either.
One of these “spirit energy” people sent me a personality test I could do and the book list had names like Meiuster Eckhart and Enneagrams. Should I assume the others are influenced by new-agey writing as well? One of them had God talking to the reader. I can trust He’d say what “Imitation of Christ” would say but, in these times, unless written by a traditionalist or at least an EWTN personality, I don’t feel comfortable reading it. Pop-theology has gotten too fuzzy in many quarters to trust just any writer’s quality, especially without a bishop’s declaration of the work having no errors in doctrine. Even then, that can be worked around consciously or influenced by erroneous doctrine.
What do you think?