Anthony De Mello’s Awareness undermines the notion that morality is intrinsically objective by relocating the foundation of ethical life from duties and universally binding norms to an inner, non-evaluative state of detachment. Because he treats suffering, guilt, duty, and even love as the products of psychological conditioning rather than responses to real moral obligations, he dissolves the idea that certain actions are objectively right or wrong independent of how the agent feels about them. His repeated claim that all behaviour—even helping others—amounts to forms of “selfishness,” and that suffering, guilt, and moral struggle arise from illusions rather than from genuine demands of conscience, turns moral categories into subjective projections rather than features of moral reality. By instructing readers not to renounce wrongdoing but simply to “see through” it as an illusion that cannot deliver happiness, he replaces the idea of moral truth with psychological insight, making ethical norms functionally derivative of personal awareness rather than binding in themselves. This re-framing effectively empties morality of its objective content: obligations become unnecessary, guilt becomes a mistake, altruism becomes self-interest in disguise, and even grief or compassion lose their normative force, leaving awareness—not moral truth—as the final court of appeal.
Here’s a concise list of potential dangers or criticisms associated with Anthony De Mello’s approach and Awareness:
1. Over-Simplification of Emotional Healing
De Mello suggests that changing one’s attitude and giving up selfishness is enough for happiness.
This may underestimate the complexity of mental health issues such as depression, trauma, or grief.
2. Minimization of Grief or Pain
Claims that a change in attitude can make suffering manageable might invalidate genuine emotional pain or the time needed to process loss.
3. Misrepresentation of Spiritual Traditions
His interpretation of Buddhism and other traditions can be simplified or distorted, which may mislead readers about these religions.
4. Psychological Risks
Readers might attempt to self-correct deep-seated issues without professional guidance, potentially ignoring therapy or medical treatment.
5. Ambiguity Regarding God and Religion
While framed as spiritual, the system often equates spirituality with psychology, which could confuse or alienate religious practitioners.
6. Unrealistic Expectations
Suggesting that happiness or bliss is attainable through attitude change alone could create guilt or failure feelings if readers do not achieve it.
7. Lack of Structured Method
Unlike meditation-based systems, De Mello’s approach is largely conceptual and reflective, without a clear step-by-step practice, which may limit effectiveness for some readers.
CHURCH CONDEMNATION
What the Church Condemned About De Mello’s Teachings
Relativism / Religious Indifferentism
The Vatican said his work relativizes faith, presenting all religions (e.g., Christianity, Buddhism, Islam) as equally valid paths.
natcath.org
EWTN Global Catholic Television Network
He is said to treat Jesus merely as one teacher among others rather than the unique Son of God.
Wikipedia
Problematic View of God
He is accused of using a radical apophatic theology: portraying God as so transcendent or unknowable that “nothing can be said” about Him.
Wikipedia
This leads to an impersonal or “cosmic” concept of God rather than a personal, Christian God.
lifepositive.com
Scripture and Revelation
He allegedly treats the Bible (and Christian doctrine) in a way that undermines its authority: Scriptures are not presented as containing valid, unambiguous statements about God.
Wikipedia
The Church claims that, in his teaching, religion itself (including Christianity) becomes a barrier to “truth.”
EWTN Global Catholic Television Network
Moral Objectivity Denied
De Mello is said to argue that good and evil are “simply mental evaluations” rather than objective moral realities.
SpiritualDirection.com
This undermines the traditional Christian moral teaching that some acts are intrinsically right or wrong.
ephesians511blog.com
Eschatology / Final Destiny
Concern about his treatment of the “final destiny of man”: he allegedly downplays or rejects traditional Christian beliefs about life after death.
Wikipedia
According to the Church, he places too much emphasis on the present life and not enough on eternal salvation.
lifepositive.com
Critique of the Church’s Authority
He criticizes the institutional Church: for example, he suggests that formal professions of faith (creeds) and religious institutions prevent a personal access to truth.
EWTN Global Catholic Television Network
The Vatican ordered that some of his books be withdrawn and not reprinted, indicating serious concern with their doctrinal impact.
evangelist.org
Grave Spiritual Harm
The CDF concluded that his positions are “incompatible with the Catholic faith” and “can cause grave harm” to the faithful.
EWTN Global Catholic Television Network
His blending of Eastern spirituality and Christian mysticism was seen as potentially misleading or spiritually risky.
natcath.org
Misrepresentation of Divine Sonship
The Church said De Mello dilutes the divine sonship of Christ, treating Jesus not as uniquely the Son of God, but as one example among many “sons of God.”
EWTN Global Catholic Television Network