The Wisdom of Deepak

Tuesday, August 16, AD 2011

Evidently Deepak Chopra has gone from writing insipid self-help schlock to becoming a political pundit.  He isn’t much better in his second career, but he is good for a laugh.

Chopra’s argument is that the President is doing the right thing by being a mature adult, rising above the partisan fray, refusing to engage in verbal warfare with the right.  No, seriously, he really believes this.

Continue reading...

48 Responses to The Wisdom of Deepak

  • What Deepak wrote is exactly the kind of treatment anyone on the right will get when trying to engage in “dailogue” with the left. It almost seems as though there are two intractable, irreconciliable sides in America today, and I suspect there really are.


  • Deepak “that standing rebuke to all that is sentient” Chopra’s political philosophy was well summed up by Orwell in Animal Farm: “Four legs good! Two legs bad!”

  • Truth is lie. Lie is truth.

    A. B. Hinkle: “So far, none of those who call peaceful Tea Party activists terrorists have flung the same accusation at British rioters who have inflicted genuine terror.”
    Or, for that matter US Obama flash rioters.

    If Obama were a leader, he would have responded to Tea Party hecklers, “You are not ‘terrorists’.” Instead, your low-life-street-hustler-in-charge said, “I didn’t say they you is terrorists.”

    Anyhow, Dipchit is just another OWN: Obama Worshiping Nitwit.

  • Deepak Chopra was always off his rocker. But he went from spirituality to politics; he can continue his damage on a more practical level. The most central issue as I see it is that of sin. If sin is not recognized, people will seek out government for answers. If sin is recognized, they will fear government. The answers government gives assume that people are victims, not sinners. And victims are helplessly caught up in something they didn’t contribute to. Yet as sinners we are all a part of it. We must all take ownership for the mess we find ourselves in. We must accept that we are sinners and that God, not government, is the answer. Government is simply a structure made up of more people who are sinners just like us. And if their faith is in themselves and our faith as a people is in them, we will falter.

  • Really, Paul, was it necessary to consume valuable bandwidth for new-age kooks like Deepfried Chopra? Oh vey!

  • Ah, Deepak Chopra: the one Coast-to-Coast guest that is too strange for me to listen to….

  • Really, Paul, was it necessary to consume valuable bandwidth for new-age kooks like Deepfried Chopra? Oh vey!

    Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

  • (Digressing: the first time I heard of the fellow, the radio guy said it as “De-pack Oprah.” Had a mental association between the fellow and the TV host since….)

  • Well, a false prophet gives his stamp of approval to a political leviathan. What else is new? And he caused all to bow down to the image, great and small……sounds familiar. I think this has happened before.

  • It’s impossible for me to take someone seriously whose name sounds like a Thai restaurant dish.

  • thought it was deepfried okra–the vegetable

  • Ever since gthe Beatles, or Swami Vivikenanda at the World’s Fair in 1898, this business of Indian gurus advising us has been viewed as some kind of a rare treat.

  • Larry, lol. Then again, Barack Hussein Obama sounds like a Taliban leader.

  • We have a love affair with Indian visionaries. They appear unwashed and crazy, and we fall down at their feet and seek their wisdom.

  • pat, who can forget the Maharishi Yoga, who used to ride around in a Rolls Royce and became the symbol of the 60s counterculture by inveighing against materialism? Again, oh vey!

  • I meant Yogi, of course….I didn’t want to confuse him with Yogi Berra, who also was a great philosopher.

  • Yeah, these Indian guys have become a real celebrity. But they’ve gone from wild eyes and long matted hair to the corporate look.

  • Joe, don’t even confuse him with Yogi Bear, who’s smarter than the average yogi! LOL!

  • There was a time when I seriously investigated Eastern religions and actually read portions of the Baghadavita. But when I learned some Indian prime ministers were drinking their own urine, that kind of put a crimp into things, so to speak.

  • I’ve been told Ghandi did that. He drank his own urine. Just like that.

  • But Chopra’s gone corporate. He’s clean-cut, wears a suit, gets hair cuts, etc. He doesn’t look the part of the earlier guru. He was wild-eyed, with matted wavy hair, and usually let himself go all around. Chopra has a further reach, I think, because he’s Americanized in his appearance.

  • pat, apparently ignored signs that stated: “Void where prohibited” : )

  • Joe, if he had the audacity to do such a thing, he must have been just a little removed from reality. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that you don’t drink urine. It just doens’t take that much mental capability. Yet people look back on Ghandi as someone who had a lot of sense in his head. Lol.

  • I’ve read accounts of severely dehydrated POWs drinking sea water in desperation and even urine but both can be lethal.

  • This thread has gone in a very interesting direction.

  • Yes, but Ghandi wasn’t out of water. He should have known: urine was drunk; you don’t drink it.

  • Stream of consciousness, Paul?

  • Well, getting back to the subject, Chopra is a Maharishi gone corporate. People look East these days for advice. Either that or they turn on Dr. Phil. Christianity, on the other hand, requires an about face turn. Fortunately, with God all things are possible, which is why I believe that conversion is initiated by God.

  • For a nit wit new age pagan guru (is there any other kind?), Deepak Chopra certainly has garnered a lot of comments in the space of mere hours.

    So Ghandi drank his own urine? Mehercule!

  • Well yes, after Christianity, anything new is really old (in a new guise). Chopra’s philosophy is very old and stale. But people love him because such philsophy doens’t ask much. It doesn’t require much faith or effort or sacrifice. It’s rather comfortable like the Rolls Royce that Maharishi drove.

  • Reminds me of yet another Deepak Chopra political essay, which I addressed in this blog post: (the title refers to his little missive coming out the same time that Fr. Corapi made his bizarre switch to being a sort of low-rent Glenn Beck). I did a lot of digging before I wrote that because it sounded more like a hoax than a real essay, but apparently he has written plenty just like it.

  • There is a Christian apologist named Ravi Zacharias. He’s argued against Eastern philosophies and points to their inconsistencies and failures. He does so in a convincing and throrough manner. I’d seriously recommend his site to anyone interested in why Christianity makes sense and how Eastern thought is in reality an absurd dead-end.

  • Intersetingly, Zacharias is an Indian by birth, and formerly an Eastern thinker. He knows its bankruptcy. I’d like to see Zacharias go head to head with Chopra.

  • Ravi Zacharias is a Protestant Evangelical. Obviously God is raising up sons to Abraham from the stones themselves. And I mean that sincerely and with all respect to Rev. Zacharias.

  • For the wind is in the palm-trees, and the temple-bells they say:
    “Come you back, you British soldier; come you back to Mandalay!”
    Where the flyin’-fishes play,
    An’ the dawn comes up like thunder outer China ‘crost the Bay!

    Depak and Obama make as much sense the temple-bells . . . in a typhoon.

  • I would like to thank all involved in this thread. Bringing up the drinking of urine allows me to enter this thread into the TAC record book as one of the top ten most bizarre discussion threads. Huzzah! Release the dove of Triumph!

  • Urine indeed! A bizarre topic for discussion. Yes, Zacharias is an Evangelical Protestant. But I hope you won’t hold that against him. He realizes that a marriage of East and West (eastern religion and western technology) is not the answer to our spiritual disease.

  • T SHaw, I’d rather expect you to quote Rudyard Kipling: east and west, never the twain shall meet.

  • “But I hope you won’t hold that against him.”

    Nope, Pat, I don’t. In fact, the Protestant Pentecostals and Evangelicals are doing precisely what we Catholics have failed to do. In spite of all their theological errors, they KNOW that it’s the Gospel of repentance and conversion, not this insipid worthless horse manure that passes for social justice, the common good and peace at any price that has been preached from Catholic pulpits all across this nation for the past 40 years. For decades we have accomodated this worthless, mindless culture of “it’s not her fault she’s pregnant” and “he can’t help it he’s gay”. I am sick and tired of this yellow bellied, cowardly, gutless, spineless, craven, effeminate idiocy that pretends to be open mindedness and tolerance. It’s time to get intolerant and point out what sin really is and what its consequences are. Deepak Chopra and his godless liberal idiocy are but symptoms of the deeper problem – SIN. It’s time to tell Satan where he can go. And it’s time to start preaching the truth so people can be rescued from his demonic grip.

  • Pat,

    Actually, I thought of E-W but “Mandalay” made less rational sense and thus is more appropriate for this discussion.

    The left is unadulterated emotion and lies. Those people hate facts and truth which are not susceptible to their whining.

    Hey! Ho!

    Occult hydration habits are another issue . . . I will not touch it.

  • Yes, when they were wild-eyed and unwashed they seemed demonic. Now they look so well put together with their suits and haircuts. But the Devil can disguise himself as an angel of light. He’s alive and working as always.

    The Occult has a long history of misusing human waste ritualistically. They did it during the Mau Mau uprising. It was a real treat for people stationed there at the time, of course. Lol.

  • Mr. Primavera, I’ll let you in on a little secret. The more traditional Evangelicals are far apart from Pentecostalism. The gap is not perhaps as wide as that between Catholics and Protestants generally, but one nevertheless exists. Zacharias, to my knowledge, is a more traditional Evangelical, and would probably be as wary of Pentecostals as of drinking urine.

  • Pat,

    My immediate family (mother and siblings) are all devout Assemblies of God Pentecostals. My boss and his family are all Baptists. Other than the charismatic nature of AG adherents, and the Calvinist tendencies of some Baptists, the differences aren’t as great as you figure. I agree that Zacharias is perhaps a more “traditional” Evangelical. I don’t know where he stands on the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues. BTW, there is a charismatic, tongue speaking segment in the Catholic Church:

  • One other thing, Pat.

    Bishop Burbidge of the Diocese of Raleigh and Dr. Cecil Robeck had a seven day meeting at the vatican on Pentecostal / Catholic International Dialogue. More here:

    I don’t know how I could have forgotten that since Bishop Burbidge had been my bishop.

    So the next time you want to be condenscending and let me on a little secret, please ensure you do a little research first. I have been with Baptists and Pentecostals my whole life. Baptists don’t like Pentecostals because of tongue speaking. Pentecostals don’t like Baptists because they don’t speak in tongues, and because most Baptists believe in the doctrine of eternal salvation. There are other differences, of course, but those are the main ones. That being said, the Pentecostals are every bit as Evangelical as the Baptists other Evenaglical denomination. I hold less hope for the Presbyterians, Methodists and Lutherans who claim to be evangelical because they have been infiltrated with modernism and liberalism. I make the exception of the vice president at my place of work who is a devout Evangelical Presbyterian. We have had several interesting Bible discussions, focusing on Genesis 1 and 2 (evolution and creation are an interest of his – he shared with me some fascinating things about changes in light speed over time that he says supports the diea of a short Earth history – but that’s a conversation for a different time).

    Oh, I forgot – the four main Pentecostal denominations are AG, Church of God, Aime Sempleton’s Church of the Four Square Gospel (now hers is a real story that would make anyone blush!) and Pentecostal Holiness. I have variously attended the first three as well as Baptist and other Evangelicals. Never had the chance to attend the fourth. And my vice president invited me to attend his Presbyterian Church at some time; just haven’t had the chance yet. Not much difference in the preaching, that’s for sure. But unlike most Catholic priests, they can and do preach repentance and conversion. Sad. We are supposed to be the example.

  • Paul P: I live near a VERY “evangelical” Presbyterian church. You never can tell with Presbyterians. Shortly after I moved here they split over abortion — the folks who said abortion was okay left, but the rest of them split again, some of them forming their own non-Presbyterian church. The two churches work together on projects and charities now, and I don’t really know what the difference between them is. I have asked but the answers I get are (to me) vague, although I’m sure they are clear as day to those familiar with all the people and the differences in what they profess. It is endlessly interesting to work and deal with Protestant churches. It seems to me that a lot of them seize on to one great part of Christianity that properly belongs to the Church, and run with it — but make up the rest. They are often very, very, VERY good examples of the one part they seize on. The Presbyterian folks I know are good and faithful people, very zealous. They do a lot of work with the poor, a lot of outreach, a lot of evangelizing. They LOVE God. But they remain pretty much all one demographic, education level, and size. There is nothing universal about them.

  • Yes, Gail, I agree with your observations. I did a little more digging on Ravi Zacharias and discovered he was ordained by the Christian and Missionary Alliance. Its statement of faith at ( ) isn’t all that different that what I remember from my youth in the AG (the main difference being the AG emphasis on speaking in tongues as evidence of the infilling of the Holy Spirit). But I am sure there are differences that each denomination considers significant enough to keep intact the division that divides them.

    I also found it interesting that Zacharias had once spoken at a Mormon Temple:

    You can view the entire video at the web link above. My impression is that Zacharias does go out of his way to reach out without compromising the Gospel of Conversion and Repentance. Of course, the “nuances” of his Protestant theology are a different matter, but I find I have more in common with what little I know about him than I have with any liberal democrat pseudo-Catholic “Christian” espousing that social justice nonsense which murders unborn babies and sanctifies homosexual filth.

  • I thought Deepak Chopra was some mediocre rap “singer.” Am I confusing him with someone else? Maybe if he put his ramblings to rap music he would get a bigger audience.

  • I apologize if I sounded condescending before. Pentecostalism isn’t Protestant or Evangelical according to their own classification. It is not a denomination either, from what I’ve been told by one. It’s an organization.

    Zacharias is a great apologist, I think. He knows that Christianity resonates with one’s totality. It reaches our hearts and minds and goes to the very center of our being.

The Coming Open Rebellion Against God Part II

Sunday, February 6, AD 2011

In my first article The Coming Open Rebellion Against God, I spoke of a time where God would reveal his omnipotence and some would simply leave their faith behind.  Why? Because just as in John 6, some would say it simply doesn’t make sense and walk away. Some have prayed that if only God would show His omnipotence; many would fall on their knees and believe. I truly believe the time is coming when some of our intelligentsia, including clergy will see the hand of God and say; “No thanks, this doesn’t mesh with my worldview.”

Father Dwight Longenecker recently wrote a review of the movie The Rite Starring Sir Anthony Hopkins, a movie somewhat inspired by a real life Italian exorcist. The movie was given praise by many Catholic writers including Father Longenecker for actually showing the Church in a positive light. Perhaps this was due to the film’s producers using a California based exorcist Father Gary Thomas who actually was present at the filming of the movie. In a key passage Father Longenecker pondered the fact that far too many in this modern rationalistic world see the idea of the devil and demonic possession as beyond them, even though if they truly followed their rationalistic approach, they would come to see that there simply was no medical or scientific explanation for some cases. Sadly, for too many the sin of pride all too often is their downfall.

Recently Father Gary Thomas was interviewed by Leticia Velazquez of Catholic Exchange; some of his remarks about the way in which the teachings of the Church with regard to evil were defiantly rebuked by some within the Church including bishops were more than a little disconcerting. This movie review of The Rite by Father Raymond Schroth SJ associate Editor of America Magazine is one such example. As you can see, the devil is so passé to Father Schroth SJ. It hardly jibes with the high mindedness of those to which he and his urbane friends associate. Check out the comments section in the article, some of the comments left are as elitist and depressing as his treatise on who God is and who He should be.

George Weigel has noted the sad state of some quasi dissident bishops that Pope John Paul II and now Pope Benedict XVI have had to confront. They came from a mindset that preferred the adulation of the dissident intelligentsia of the Ivy League rather than the working class Catholic roots from which many came.

With regard to Jesus and the devil, Jesus spent a good deal of his time fighting the devil and his minions, but alas those who don’t believe in such things seem to indicate that Jesus and the Gospel writers got it wrong, Jesus was not fighting demonic powers but those who were dealing with bouts of depression and epilepsy. According to these liberal dissident elites, Jesus was the precursor to Dr Phil and Deepak Chopra helping those poor seemingly possessed people get their groove back and find their Zen destiny. Never mind what the Church teaches on the subject or the fact that both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have specifically spoken of evil and the needs for more exorcists in the Church, these elites know better. Talk about hutzpah, Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI have been labeled as intellectually brilliant, even by their detractors, but no matter to those who don’t believe in such archaic things as the devil. Perhaps we should ask those in the Church, especially in the Church Hierarchy, if you don’t believe what Jesus said about the devil and the manifestation of evil, what else don’t you believe?

Continue reading...

5 Responses to The Coming Open Rebellion Against God Part II

  • Thank you for referring to my interview of Fr Gary Thomas. When I read the book, I was impressed at how deeply their experience of the devil moved both Fr Gary and the book’s author Matt Baglio. I was therefore thrilled to hear that the US bishops had a special meeting about exorcism before their general meeting last November.
    As you assert in your book, the tide is turning. Let us pray that it is in time to save our fellow Catholics, many of whom are hostage to the enemy, thanks to poor catechesis and their own selfishness.


  • Slight spoiler

    The Rite was very well done. Respectful of the Church and enough spookiness to keep you on edge without overplaying ala The Exorcist. Maybe overplayed the “doubting young priest out to prove science over belief” a bit, and showed the Church to be a little too “faith over reason,” in particular I am recalling a scene where our hero challenges his exorcism instructor with scientifically based rationals for the various instances of possession, and the intsructor’s comeback was rather weak – sort of a “you gotta have faith” and left it at that.

    I also think the movie left you with the impression that the Church believes possession occurs far more often than the Church actually believes it does. But then, they gotta sell tickets, don’t they.

  • and by faith over reason, I mean portraying the Church as pitting faith against reason, as opposed to recognizing them as complementing each other.