New Agism?

What exactly is New Age (ism)? Is there a source of information regarding exactly what “New Age” means? What is the churches teaching on it and why or how is it bad? How do I know if something is connected to New Age?

I have a business seminar that on the surface looks pretty good that I would like to attend. Then I was alerted that there may be some connection to this New Age thing and I wanted to learn more about it?

If you do a google search “catholic church and new age” it will give you a bunch of links. The first three are great, one is an interview with Father Mitch Pacwa and another is the Church’s document on it. Father Pacwa has written books about it, so he is a great source.

Here is the google link
google.com/search?hl=en&q=catholic+church+and+new+age&aq=1&oq=catholic+church+and+new+a

What the New Age is exactly is a little hard to explain, because it can be well hidden. Anything that teaches that some sort of power comes from us, that numbers and names (other than the Name of God or of Christ) have meaning, that Christianity can be merged with other religions (especially Buddhism), or that crystals have power are all new age concepts. They can borrow from philosophy and astrology. It can teach re-incarnation or any other anti-Christian ideas.

Some business seminars teach self improvement or self empowering techniques that are new age. I cannot comment on if the one you are looking at is problematic or not.

Pontifical Council for Culture, “A Christian reflection on New Age”:

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/interelg/documents/rc_pc_interelg_doc_20030203_new-age_en.html

Technically, an “Age” is the period during which the sun is located in one sign of the zodiac at the spring equinox. And it is conveniently named after that sign. That sign changes, i.e. moves forward, roughly each 2200years, nowadays from Pisces to Aquarius, hence the hippie song.

Technically, the astrological explanation is right. It needs some fleshing out to make any sense (actually it will never make sense). The spiritualists and other people experimenting with occult science, Neo-Paganism and such curiosities in the 18th and 19th Centuries produced works which caught the attention of late-1970’s religious seekers. These people read and tried such practices and those of 20th-Century channelers (people who allow themselves willingly to be possessed by spirits without always knowing anything about them first in a search for knowledge and wisdom: Bad idea BTW).
The planet proceeds through the “signs” – or twelfths of the sky in any hemisphere – backward to the direction of the zodiac used in divination and personality classification. Thus the Age of Taurus was the time people worshipped bulls, the Age of Aries was when sheep were important in ANE Civilization and the Age of Pisces was the Christian Era (supposedly; in reality it was never anywhere near that simple and astrology is an attempt to use astronomic-electromagnetic scientific concepts for divination, forbidden by God because it doesn’t work and tends to take people’s worship away from God.) Following Pisces is Aquarius, one of the few human symbols in the Babylonian-Hellenic system, making humanity the new god, and Aquarius is an air sign (intellectual) but a bearer of water (emotion), so that fusion of thought and feeling and self-worship are supposedly part of the new role of every person. New Agers believe each age is accompanied by “earth changes”, or disastrous movements of earth and water, with plagues and other problems as part of the changes. They think only those in harmony with the coming age are capable of surviving these changes. Thus the Age of Pisces came with disasters that only Christians survived (I don’t know of any reason to beleive this; most of the world remained pagan back then). They think the Age of Aries came in with disasters only sheep-worshippers survived (what sheep-worshippers?) and the Age of Aquarius came in with changes only New Agers will survive. Therefore they feel they must convert people. However, because they equate air with a hands-off style, they don’t think this proselytism should happen out loud and with force – rather, with meditaiton, sending out energy – airy ways of persuasion, such as semantic games and cooperative-looking ways of making their way into power in schools and offices – they don’t consider this sneaky but gentle and necessary. They see themselves, not as a conspiracy to destroy other religions, but as a movement that will inevitably become universal as it becomes the only way through the earth changes. They feel sorry for “Old-Agers”, whom they see as fearful, limited and dull, lacking love and light.
As you might have guessed I used to be one. That’s how I can use so many gross generalizations. I merely mean to explain what I mostly saw and picked up in the movement.
The New Age Movement is hard to fight using normal means of argument because it disregards mere logic or fairness as rules needed in an old, fading world, irrelevant to the intuitive wonders they feel prepared to rely on, and they just respond to everything with semi-agreement and semi-pity, never seeing a need to make a point and defend it clearly. It’s experience, however subjective, they generally consider meaningful, since they consider themselves the standard of reality.

Aha. I never understood that.
That’s why this is the dawning of the age of Aquarius.

One of the hallmarks of the worst of the new age self-help movement is the idea that you control what goes on around you. You create good things or bad things yourself. *You *run the universe.

For instance, if I need Saturday to be sunny because I want to go swimming, I can make that happen.

They never say what happens if farmers happens to need rain on Saturday for their crops… who wins?

I was in one such program. One guy who was legally blind was going to stomp on his glasses and “make” his vision perfect. It was amazing how fast the instructors moved to keep him from doing that. They grabbed the glasses up off the floor in a heartbeat.That’s when I began to get a bit disenchanted…

Plus they never told me how I “created” my friend in high school getting killed in an accident, or how I “created” my first boyfriend’s suicide.

I spent a lot of money on that garbage before I realized what bilge it was.

And of course it’s completely contrary to the whole Judeo-Christian world view. Me, I’m glad I can leave it up to the Lord! :thumbsup:

Ruthie

:eek: This sounds like that “self help” **** on PBS with that new guy saying how we control the energies around us.

Once upon a time, New Ageism was called “Theosophy.”

Same stuff, different packaging.

the one that I love is the “you must visualise it, and mentally own it, and it is yours” or whatever that stuff is. It is so bogus and I have proof

From the age of 13 until my twenties, I visualized and mentally owned several famous, beautiful women. I can tell you, I knew them quite well. And not once did I end up with one.

Postive thinking my behind.:wink:

Actually, we are no longer dawning into the Age of Aquarius, we have already passed into it. I believe this happened a couple of months ago.

And I don’t see the love yet that it was supposed to usher in either, do you? Thank the Lord, even though we all have our theological differences, we still can show our love for one another through Christ. :thumbsup:

I don’t really know what New Age is but an email I got from CAF sure made it sound pretty evil… rofl.

"new age’ is a lot more watered down and ‘user-friendly’ than theosophy. It is ALL bunk, though.

I wasted over 20 years studying and learning and teaching something that can never be understand because it is the most illogical stuff on the planet.

This time, there is no doubt about it.

So you believe that part about Oprah being the high priestess?

No. She is a big advocate of it, but not priestess. That is too much of a pay cut for her

Thanks for all the replies. I learned a lot about this New Age deal from the sources listed here.

As I mentioned in another thread the seminar I am considering has Dan Millman author of Way of the Peaceful Warrior as a speaker. I knew nothing about this man or his books.

What caught my eye and raised my suspicions were some of the tag lines, “transcending fear and self doubt”, “how to truly live in the moment and simplify your life”, “spiritual law and the theater of the selves”, and “awakening the warrior within” amongst others.

Doesn’t sound bad on the surface, but I suppose that is the danger? Is all this stuff bad or anti-christian? What is the danger when it is just a business seminar? (I am not in disagreement but am merely wanting to learn more and to know how to answer these questions myself).

I have heard he is connected to the “Human Potential Movement” which sounds like more of the same??? Can anyone comment on that?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.