21st Century Apologetics?

[grannymh]

Ten years into this century should give us a pretty good idea of

1. What is happening with Catholic Apologetics?
2. What is happening to Catholic Apologetics?
3. What should happen to Catholic Apologetics?

If possible, please answer questions from your own experience or from the experience of someone else.
Please note that question 3 is wide open to all suggestions for the next 5 years.

Please respect the current ban on evolution/atheism discussions.
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/misc_khaki/sticky.gif Sticky: Temporary Ban on Evolution/Atheism Threads

Thank you.

Blessings
granny

The human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.

 

[Theophorus]

I think the picture is different here in Europe but I think the focus here is on Natural Law, the misrepresentation of sex abuse allegations/scandals/cover-ups and the all male priesthood.

The shift I’m noticing is in who we are talking to. Historically it has been actual proper protestants (that is a compliment btw I prefer a proper protestant to a cafeteria Catholic) that we have focused on and talked with. Now we are talking to, more and more, un-churched individuals, relativist non-denominational types, militant secularists and non-Christians like Muslims and Jehovah’s Witnesses’. Rather than debating grace, faith, works and bible verses we are explaining who we are, and the Christian philosophy, our world view and even the Scriptures themselves need to be explained and defended.

I think this will only increase in the next few years, esp. on the net and other new media

God bless

 

[Prophesy]

Ten years into this century should give us a pretty good idea of

1. What is happening with Catholic Apologetics?
2. What is happening to Catholic Apologetics?
3. What should happen to Catholic Apologetics?

If possible, please answer questions from your own experience or from the experience of someone else.
Please note that question 3 is wide open to all suggestions for the next 5 years.

Please respect the current ban on evolution/atheism discussions.
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/misc_khaki/sticky.gif Sticky: Temporary Ban on Evolution/Atheism Threads

Thank you.

Blessings
granny

The human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.

I’m not sure we can say that for sure yet. It’d be like asking a person in 1910 what the biggest things is for the 20th in apologetics. They might say occultism for example. I really think decades is a better time frame.

-Prophecy

 

[grannymh]

I’m not sure we can say that for sure yet. It’d be like asking a person in 1910 what the biggest things is for the 20th in apologetics. They might say occultism for example. I really think decades is a better time frame.

-Prophecy

Go right ahead and use decades. Personally, I see some immediate things. But question 3 is wide open…

 

[grannymh]

I think the picture is different here in Europe but I think the focus here is on Natural Law, the misrepresentation of sex abuse allegations/scandals/cover-ups and the all male priesthood.

The shift I’m noticing is in who we are talking to. Historically it has been actual proper protestants (that is a compliment btw I prefer a proper protestant to a cafeteria Catholic) that we have focused on and talked with. Now we are talking to, more and more, un-churched individuals, relativist non-denominational types, militant secularists and non-Christians like Muslims and Jehovah’s Witnesses’. Rather than debating grace, faith, works and bible verses we are explaining who we are, and the Christian philosophy, our world view and even the Scriptures themselves need to be explained and defended.

I think this will only increase in the next few years, esp. on the net and other new media

God bless

 

[grannymh]

I think the picture is different here in Europe but I think the focus here is on Natural Law, the misrepresentation of sex abuse allegations/scandals/cover-ups and the all male priesthood.

The shift I’m noticing is in who we are talking to. Historically it has been actual proper protestants (that is a compliment btw I prefer a proper protestant to a cafeteria Catholic) that we have focused on and talked with. Now we are talking to, more and more, un-churched individuals, relativist non-denominational types, militant secularists and non-Christians like Muslims and Jehovah’s Witnesses’. Rather than debating grace, faith, works and bible verses we are explaining who we are, and the Christian philosophy, our world view and even the Scriptures themselves need to be explained and defended.

I think this will only increase in the next few years, esp. on the net and other new media

God bless

I found your reference to relativist non-denominational types quite interesting. When I first landed on CAF, there was a well read young person who was defending Utilitarianism. What amazed me was the confusion between subjective and objective reasoning which made for difficult discussions of anything to do with relativism. This confusion was not confined to any particular faith or no faith but, at that time, was across the board.

It seemed to me that if a Catholic apologist were to engage a relativist, he or she better have a firm grasp of subjective and objective reasoning and then go forward to finding out how the relativist distinguishes between the two reasoning methods.

Blessings,
granny

The search for truth is worthy of the adventures of the journey.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Ten years into this century should give us a pretty good idea of

1. What is happening with Catholic Apologetics?
2. What is happening to Catholic Apologetics?
3. What should happen to Catholic Apologetics?

If possible, please answer questions from your own experience or from the experience of someone else.
Please note that question 3 is wide open to all suggestions for the next 5 years.

Please respect the current ban on evolution/atheism discussions.
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/misc_khaki/sticky.gif Sticky: Temporary Ban on Evolution/Atheism Threads

Thank you.

Blessings
granny

The human person is worthy of profound respect from the moment of conception.

I’ll address the questions this way: Catholic apologetics has moved beyond the realm of the professional apologist and has become much more mainstream. Lead by organizations like Catholic Answers, ordinary lay Catholics are much more knowledgeable about their faith and much better equipped to address the questions and defend against the attacks of non-Catholics. IOW, instead of a handful of professionals, we now have jillions of amateurs who are able to spread the truth of the Catholic faith more widely than ever before.

It’s all good and the Catholic tide is coming in!

 

[grannymh]

I’ll address the questions this way: Catholic apologetics has moved beyond the realm of the professional apologist and has become much more mainstream. Lead by organizations like Catholic Answers, ordinary lay Catholics are much more knowledgeable about their faith and much better equipped to address the questions and defend against the attacks of non-Catholics. IOW, instead of a handful of professionals, we now have jillions of amateurs who are able to spread the truth of the Catholic faith more widely than ever before.

It’s all good and the Catholic tide is coming in!

I agree with you about lay Catholics being able to answer questions, etc. I see it all the time on CAF. It is truly great.

Do you see anything new down the road regarding attacks against Catholic teachings?

Blessings,
granny

John 3:16-17

 

[Randy_Carson]

I agree with you about lay Catholics being able to answer questions, etc. I see it all the time on CAF. It is truly great.

Do you see anything new down the road regarding attacks against Catholic teachings?

Blessings,
granny

John 3:16-17

Something new after 2,000 years of assaults on the Church?

Seriously, I think any “new” stuff will be either related to moral failings of the clergy or some bombshell announcement about a high-ranking Vatican official that will cause great scandal.

But this isn’t REALLY new, is it?

 

[Axion]

Attacks on Catholicism are now more vicious and from a wider range of assailants than in the recent past. Among the most vicious assaults come from Atheist/Rationalist/liberals, who have gained strong influence in the popular mass media such as films, the press and television. attacks now come on three levels:

1. “Traditional” Protestant/Evangelical attacks. Basically that the Catholic Church is in contradiction of what they hold to be “biblical”. Such attacks try to undermine teaching on the priesthood, transubstantiation, Purgatory, prayer for the dead, the Communion of Saints, Confession, Salvation, Absolution and the Status of Mary.

2. Attacks on the essence of Catholic Christianity and the Church. Led by radical secularists and their supporters in the media, these attacks are meant to undermine the credibility of the Church, and to bring on its hoped-for destruction. These attacks are on a broad front, but all to the same end of compromising people’s belief in the Church, its ministry, its history and teaching. Fronts for this attack include:

a) Deconstructing basic teachings: attempts to rubbish New and Old Testament accounts as historical. Jesus either didn’t exist or his life was falsified by lying churchmen. His teachings are not trustworthy.

b) Falsifying history: Church history is re-written and twisted into a catalogue of evil. The intention being to explode the Church’s moral authority by presenting it as an utterly evil and cynical institution. Every wrong-doing by a churchman is exaggerated and twisted. The overwhelming positive effect of the Church on history is ignored or lied about. The Church is falsely accused of every evil from oppressing women, suppressing learning, encouraging pogroms and slavery, along with endemic corruption. So far very little effort has been put into countering this broad spectrum of slander.

c) Magnifying, creating and exaggerating scandal. We’ve all seen this. Child abuse, (where Catholics actually have a LOWER incidence than other groups); AIDS and condoms, (where condoms actually INCREASE AIDS rates); alleged support for the Nazis, (where Catholics were among the only groups to confront them). No opportunity is lost to twist such stories back to front to demonise the Church

3. Attacks on Catholic Practice and Moral teaching. This is another front of the attack, and one that could lead to new forms of persecution. Catholic opposition to Abortion, Euthanasia, Gay marriage, Gay adoption, sexually promiscuous lifestyles is used to accuse the Church of unhealthy rigour and discrimination. Catholics are then gradually barred from certain positions in civil society. At the moment such roles as judges, adoption workers, European Commissioners, gynaecologists are starting to be withheld from Catholics who follow church teaching. This could easily spread to other professions such as Social Workers (Do you support abortion, contraception for under 16s?) or Teachers, (Do you believe a gay lifestyle is valid and admirable?) Even jobs in areas like the Law, Hospitality and Reporting could become subject to these new “Test Acts.”

Apologerics in the future is going to need to counter attacks in all these sectors.

 

[Theophorus]

It seemed to me that if a Catholic apologist were to engage a relativist, he or she better have a firm grasp of subjective and objective reasoning and then go forward to finding out how the relativist distinguishes between the two reasoning methods.

Blessings,
granny

The search for truth is worthy of the adventures of the journey.

I agree a firm grasp of both subjective and objective reasoning is necessary. I would also say the dictatorship of relativism, as Pope Benedict calls it, is one of, if not the most, pressing issue facing today. By us I mean not only as Catholics but anyone who claims that there is such thing as objective Truth

 

[grannymh]

I wonder how 21st Century Catholic Apologetics is dealing with the -isms. Materialism? Relativism? and Scientism?

Blessings,
granny

Our first parent Adam was the apple of God’s eye.
(example of reality and figurative language)

 

[inocente]

I wonder how 21st Century Catholic Apologetics is dealing with the -isms. Materialism? Relativism? and Scientism?

As a non-Catholic in overwhelmingly Catholic Spain, there’s something interesting going on.

Holy Week is a big event in all towns and villages. In some more people take part in the solemn processions than there are spectators. In the local town of Lorca there are also chariot races, etc. on Good Friday. Tourists come to watch, but that’s not its purpose. It’s for Christ, and for tradition. (See 1st video for Good Friday - note the embroidery. See 2nd and 3rd videos for amateur footage of one of the bigger solemn processions - note the local army unit taking part. - semanasantalorca)

Yet church attendances keep falling, there are displays of condoms in supermarkets, five years ago two thirds of the people were happy when homosexual marriage was legalized, and so on. No doubt there is increasing materialism and also some associate the Church with the Franco era they want to forget. But many people seem to hang on to Christ in one way or another, the Church not so much. Can the Church find a way to be more upbeat and relaxed, or is it happy with how things are going here?

 

[reggieM]

I see Dinesh D’Souza as an example of a newer trend in apologetics. His two most recent books defend Christianity and then Theism in general terms. He is a Catholic but he is arguing for belief in God and the afterlife, and therefore gets support from all believers in the same (Jewish, Protestant, Muslim, etc).

Probably the so-called “new atheists” have created the need for that kind of apologetics (at least here in the U.S. where atheism was much less openly proclaimed than it is now). Patrick Madrid has a new book on atheism – and Scott Hahn did one recently.

In the past, apologetics meant almost entirely an argument against Protestantism. Karl Keating’s “Catholicism and Fundamentalism” was the book that launched the new, Catholic apologetics movement (and launched Catholic Answers itself).

Since then there has been a flood (a good flood) of books arguing the Catholic case against Protestantism (and many converts to follow from that).

So, that’s been a very strong point in the U.S.
Weak points (or underdeveloped thus far) are apologetics regarding some of the more esoteric (for our culture) religions:

Islam
Hinduism
Buddhism
Paganism
… and the many varieties of non-religious, secular, atheistic philosophies that people have adopted recently.

There is a strong anti-Catholicism (hatred?) emerging from a secular, left-wing position. Sometimes this can be a semi-Christian or secularized-Christian attitude.

Dissenting or secular-liberalized-heretical Catholicism remains a major challenge that hasn’t really been addressed very well at all in terms of apologetics, in my opinion.

 

[grannymh]

This quote from post 6 keeps haunting me. “Catholic apologetics has moved beyond the realm of the professional apologist and has become much more mainstream.”

Does mainstream refer to CAF posters? If it does, then what should CAF posters be doing off line?

Blessings,
granny

The quest for spiritual truth needs Catholicism.

 

[grannymh]

In my humble opinion, Catholic Apologetics should address websites such as biologos.org/ which sound great, but which actually deny Catholic doctrine regarding Adam and Eve as the the two sole parents of the human species.

“Although BioLogos takes a firm stand on the fact that Adam and Eve could not have been the sole biological progenitors of all humans…”

biologos.org/search/results/?query_extra=-originurlextension%3Apdf&keywords=Adam&app_id=_6VBd63IkY2Z0T5rHdYwHgH5dhkOXMpIpRw0_k_m&term_el=keywords&sites=biologos.org&x=11&y=12

Blessings,
granny

“The shepherds sing; and shall I silent be?”
from the poem “Christmas” by George Herbert

 

[reggieM]

Excellent point, Granny.

I’m afraid that many Catholic apologists support Biologos’ position – and thus undermine their good efforts to defend the Faith at the same time.

God has given us the Faith. It’s not ours to create or reshape as we might want.
So, we should embrace and defend it with our best abilities.

When someone denies the teaching of the Catechism (as even many Catholics do, sadly) on this point … then that is where there is a serious need for good apologetics.

Personally, I think you’ve discovered a big gap which has not been addressed adequately.

 

[grannymh]

Excellent point, Granny.

I’m afraid that many Catholic apologists support Biologos’ position – and thus undermine their good efforts to defend the Faith at the same time.

God has given us the Faith. It’s not ours to create or reshape as we might want.
So, we should embrace and defend it with our best abilities.

When someone denies the teaching of the Catechism (as even many Catholics do, sadly) on this point … then that is where there is a serious need for good apologetics.

Personally, I think you’ve discovered a big gap which has not been addressed adequately.

Reply to posts 15 & 16. Regarding the following:

“Although BioLogos takes a firm stand on the fact that Adam and Eve could not have been the sole biological progenitors of all humans…”
biologos.org/search/results/?..org&x=11&y=12

Apparently, Catholics have to face the fact that our normal belief in Adam and Eve, Original Sin, and our own human nature is under stealth attack from both outside and inside our Church.

Catholics should put aside the children’s books on the lovely Garden of Eden and memorize the term monogenism so that they can recognize the glib, superficial faith and science writing which actually denies Catholic doctrine. What looks like mountains of evidence against our beloved, two sole parents of humanity (monogenism) can be broken down to anthills of assumptions. The best kept secret is that natural science cannot rule out the possibility of Adam and Eve.

Catholicism can be compatible with the truths learned through natural science provided we do scientific research consistently and rigorously. This means that the nitty-gritty of methods and materials used in research projects must be looked at very carefully. How does one actually know what happened all over the earth millions of years going backwards?

The quest for truth is worthy of the adventures of the journey. As a beginning, I am gathering information for an article or possible booklet on the subject title, Darwinism and Catholicism, Conflict Over Adam and Eve. If there is someone who would enjoy contributing to the issues connected to the real, or not so real, Adam and Eve, please PM me. I am very interested in communicating with university researchers and Catholic apologists; thus, I am looking for names. My first inquiry letter went out today.

Blessings,
granny

John 3: 16 & 17

 

[geoformeo]

“Although BioLogos takes a firm stand on the fact that Adam and Eve could not have been the sole biological progenitors of all humans…”
biologos.org/search/results/?..org&x=11&y=12

Apparently, Catholics have to face the fact that our normal belief in Adam and Eve, Original Sin, and our own human nature is under stealth attack from both outside and inside our Church.

Granny,

There is a semantics problem here that you need to understand. The term Biologos is used in one of two manners: 1) as a synonym for the general theistic evolution position (which is the manner in which Francis Collins originally coined the term in his book “The Language of God”); and 2) as an organization that promotes a specific form of theistic evolution.

As I am an advocate of the theistic evolution position, I consider myself an advocate of BioLogos (using the term as a synonym and it just flat-out sounds better than “theistic evolution”. However, as you mentioned the BioLogos organization holds a particular version of theistic evolution which is incompatible with Catholic doctrine. Therefore, I am not an advocate of the BioLogos organization in that regard. I know it can be confusing, but that is an important distinction.

Catholicism can be compatible with the truths learned through natural science provided we do scientific research consistently and rigorously. This means that the nitty-gritty of methods and materials used in research projects must be looked at very carefully. How does one actually know what happened all over the earth millions of years going backwards?

We also have to do science accurately and logically. There is nothing wrong with being critical and analyzing the details of scientific research and discovery. As a matter of fact, it is part of the scientific ethic. However, we also must be careful not to bring in pseudoscientific nonsense if the results do not appear to conform with our theology.

We geologists use the principle of uniformitarianism to understand what happened on the Earth millions of years ago. In essence, “the present is the key to the past”. We look at what processes are going on currently on Earth’s surface (volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, mountain building and uplift, erosion, sea level rise and fall, wave activity, etc.) and see what the effects of these processes are. We then look at the rock record for similar effects, and conclude based upon what we see (with the help of fossils) what the environment was like when the rock (sediment) was originally deposited.

A simple example: sandstone. Sandstone is lithified (turned into rock) sand. Where do we find sand on Earth today? 1) Beaches and the shallow ocean floor; 2) Deserts; and 3) River banks. Right away we have been able to eliminate practically all other possibilities for the environment in which that sediment was deposited. Then we look at other factors (fossils, sand chemistry, layering, uniformity, etc.) to whittle the answer down to a single possibility. The rocks don’t lie, and using this and similar methodologies (much of which was first produced by saint Nicolaus Steno), we can, with a large degree of certainty, determine what happened on Earth long ago.

The quest for truth is worthy of the adventures of the journey. As a beginning, I am gathering information for an article or possible booklet on the subject title, Darwinism and Catholicism, Conflict Over Adam and Eve. If there is someone who would enjoy contributing to the issues connected to the real, or not so real, Adam and Eve, please PM me. I am very interested in communicating with university researchers and Catholic apologists; thus, I am looking for names. My first inquiry letter went out today.

Sounds like a great book idea. God bless you on your quest!

 

[reggieM]

Reply to posts 15 & 16. Regarding the following:

“Although BioLogos takes a firm stand on the fact that Adam and Eve could not have been the sole biological progenitors of all humans…”
biologos.org/search/results/?..org&x=11&y=12

Apparently, Catholics have to face the fact that our normal belief in Adam and Eve, Original Sin, and our own human nature is under stealth attack from both outside and inside our Church.

True. There is both a stealth attack and an open attack. And these come from both outside and inside our Church.

Catholics should … recognize the glib, superficial faith and science writing which actually denies Catholic doctrine. What looks like mountains of evidence against our beloved, two sole parents of humanity (monogenism) can be broken down to anthills of assumptions. The best kept secret is that natural science cannot rule out the possibility of Adam and Eve.

That’s a great insight and a very important consideration for us all. I like your analogy about the supposed “mountains of evidence” – when seriously investigated, they do crumble down to anthills, and of assumptions and speculations at that.

Catholicism can be compatible with the truths learned through natural science provided we do scientific research consistently and rigorously. This means that the nitty-gritty of methods and materials used in research projects must be looked at very carefully. How does one actually know what happened all over the earth millions of years going backwards?

Exactly. Claims should be offered with care. There shouldn’t be exaggerations and speculations offered as if they are certainties.

The quest for truth is worthy of the adventures of the journey. As a beginning, I am gathering information for an article or possible booklet on the subject title, Darwinism and Catholicism, Conflict Over Adam and Eve. If there is someone who would enjoy contributing to the issues connected to the real, or not so real, Adam and Eve, please PM me. I am very interested in communicating with university researchers and Catholic apologists; thus, I am looking for names. My first inquiry letter went out today.

That does sound like a great project.
I can suggest Dr. Vincent Torley as a possible contributer.