A question for those who were raised Catholic

[Davidsui]

I think that this is a stupid question. The term “Brainwashing” is so ambigious that it can be applied to anything.

 

[Joan_of_Bark]

Yes, those games were good; and the lessons were moral. Good guys. Bad guys. Compare the media of the 1950’s and 1960’s to what children are bombarded with today.

But the bad guys were always Indians. Before that it was Jews, or “negroes”, or whoever else our society decided to demonize. You think that’s a good thing? You think it’s a good thing that we were taught that issues were black and white, with no grey?

As for the Middle Ages, perhaps you have been brainwashed about that. Try this book.

The knowledge I have about Medieval Europe I gained as an adult. My OP referred to childhood upbringing. And I’ve read dozens of books about the middle ages. I majored in history for two years in college, and my special interest was the Medieval Europe. I know there are lots of myths about that time; I often find myself debunking them with friends and colleagues. But the fact of the matter is it was NOT a time of love and brotherhood, as numerous wars showed, despite the fact that everyone believed in God.

And again, we’re getting off topic.

In any case, I’d say the brainwashing today is done primarily by the secularist media, not by parents.

Are you saying the media have more influence over children than their parents? And are you implying that somehow people are objectively worse today than in the past? If that’s the case, then you are probably suffering from the disease my parent’s generation – and probably every generation in history – has been afflicted with: the ‘back in the good old days’ syndrome. It’s a weird condition, considering they saw the horrors of WWII.

 

[Joan_of_Bark]

Brainwashed! Absolutely Not! In my senior year of high school, way back in 1963 the priest that taught our religion class sent us all out to check out other faiths.
We attended many services of different faiths throughout the nine months. Methodist, Baptists of different types, Episcopaleans, LDs, Jewish services, and so on.
Then the priest would have the ministers etc. come to class so we could discuss their faiths.B

Best year of High School I ever had, and it did solidify my faith as a Catholic.
God Bless that priest.

You had a wise priest.

 

[Joan_of_Bark]

Speaking for myself, I was raised Catholic but carefully considered other religions and world views before I “reverted” to Catholicism. I even considered atheism but found that its existential and philosophical consequences were absurd. In any case, why believe anything? Because it’s true. Catholicism (i.e., Christianity) is true.

How would you respond to a Muslim or Hindu who says the same thing?

 

[Joan_of_Bark]

There is a large anti-Catholic sentiment in America (despite our large numbers)

I want to address this point, because I’ve seen it mentioned, in various forms, several times on this forum.

Many groups see themselves as martyrs, but the idea that Catholics fit this category is simply not backed up by the numbers. I have seen two modern surveys that show that among religious and other groups in America, Catholics face less prejudice than Jews, Mormons, gays, blacks and Muslims … and far less than atheists!

And because Catholics have such large numbers, such prejudice is easier to counter. There’s definite strength in numbers.

I’ll find the links to the surveys, but it might take awhile (and here I am again, letting us get off topic).

 

[DallasCatholic]

I’ve actually studied Catholicism quite a bit, as I majored for two years in history and I focused on Medieval studies (my favourite prof was an expert on that time period). I’m reading the catechism now, and as I’ve already said, I’ve read the Bible many times. I find it vague, ambiguous and contradictory – more so every time I read it. But that’s also off-topic.

If you have studied Catholicism than you must know about Confirmation. This is the time in every Catholic’s life where they are supposed to make an informed decision about whether to continue in the Catholic faith. Now, I grant you, some Confirmation programs are better than others…but I know that the one I went through required us to read and discuss all of the major religons. Also, one of the tenets of the Catholic faith (which causes probably the most dissension) is that a Catholic should follow their properly formed conscience. Some people will jump on this but it is a fact AND I include the full term “properly formed conscience”. What that term means is an education unto itself.

In a final answer from this “cradle Catholic”…yes, I did consider that my Catholic faith was not truly “mine” but a remnant from my parents. I wandered from the '70s to early 2001. I was, at various times, an agnostic, bhuddist, stoic, and an atheist. I have studied several of the various protestant denominations (Joan of Bark, you wrongly stated that protestants don’t believe in exorcism…I can assure you that several hundred denominations do…even some Baptists). I have studied Islam, Hinduism, and Bhuddism among others.I have spent my life questioning and being skeptical. After all of my intellectual pursuits and my life experience I returned to the Catholic Church. I understand your question and where it comes from because I was in a similar place myself. No one on earth can reassure your heart or your mind…and I know how inadequate that answer is to you right now. The only thing I can offer is to encourage you to never end your journey. If you ever stop questioning yourself and your beliefs than you can no longer call yourself “objective” or even a skeptic. I, myself, continue my questioning…will I still be a Catholic 5 or 10 years from now? I can only answer that, right now, I believe so but only time will tell…as my journey is not yet complete.

regards,
DC

 

[JimG]

But the bad guys were always Indians. Before that it was Jews, or “negroes”, or whoever else our society decided to demonize. You think that’s a good thing? You think it’s a good thing that we were taught that issues were black and white, with no grey?

When my brothers and I played war games, we didn’t always specify who were the good guys and who were the bad guys. It was the one you were playing against who was the bad guy. And I don’t recall any of us having the idea that the Indians were always the bad guys.

Are you saying the media have more influence over children than their parents? And are you implying that somehow people are objectively worse today than in the past? If that’s the case, then you are probably suffering from the disease my parent’s generation – and probably every generation in history – has been afflicted with: the ‘back in the good old days’ syndrome. It’s a weird condition, considering they saw the horrors of WWII.

Yes, sometimes, (often?) the media do have more influence than the parents, because it spends more time with the kids.

Every age has its portion of good and evil. There were the horrors of WW-II, and there were the horrors of Stalinist purges and deliberate starvation of peoples, and now we have the horrors of an abortion culture. It’s hard to choose among evils. At least the middle ages did not deliberately kill nearly so many of its people as did the 20th century.

 

[WatchfulPilgrim]

Have you ever considered that you may have been brainwashed? Consider the fact that children raised in Saudi Arabia become … Muslims. Those raised in most of India become Hindus. Children raised by practicing Jews in Israel tend to become practicing Jews. And kids raised by evangelical Protestants usually turn out to be Protestants. Why do you suppose this is? Do you believe that upon becoming free-willed adults they carefully consider all religious creeds and come to the conclusion that (fill in the blank) is really the best and truest religion? Of course not. We can see that they’ve merely been indoctrinated into their religious creed without the benefit of a balanced exposure to other religions. So are you really any different?Now you may have been raised in the west, where a more pluralistic society prevails. Certainly while growing up you would have encountered other religious sects. But is a child who goes to a Catholic school five days a week, and to mass every week, and has Catholic parents and relatives, really any different than a Saudi Muslim – except in the degree of the indoctrination?
Look at it another way. If you had children, would you take them to a Jewish synagogue, a Muslim mosque, a Protestant church, and a Hindu temple – as well as a Catholic church – and say to them: “Okay, my child, it’s now up to you to decide which of these religions – if any – is the true one”?If you answer ‘no’ to this question, perhaps you can begin to see where the question at the top of this post comes from.

Hi “Joan”

I haven’t read any of the other responses, but just to give you my own 2cents:

I think you are too caught up in religious titles. I was raised Catholic, got caught up in the occult, returned to Catholicism, dabbled in Buddhism, left the Catholic Church and nearly joined the Amish, then became Atheist, then returned to Catholicism…

Forget about religious titles for a moment.

Who will follow the way of Christ?

“Joan” of “none” religion,
Don’t let religious titles fool you (Catholic, Muslim, etc… ). WE ARE ALL IN THE SAME BOAT

He who knows God is he who follows after the way of Christ - whether He knows His name or not. No one can claim they do not know what to follow.

“By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another”.

The professing, religious person, regardless of creed and church affiliation is not in much better a position than you are. Who lives the way of God? Who lives the way of Love? Some of us will be more accountable than others based on our knowledge and experience, and the graces given him (which, I happen to believe, are more abundant in the Catholic faith, but regardless…), but ultimately we are all going to be judged by the measure of our love and mercy.

You are no less accountable b/c you haven’t found (what you consider) sufficient proof for Gods existence. I’ve been right where you are, and you are NOT excused. You are just as accountable b/c you have been given sufficient light to accept the way of Light - and perhaps you do accept it, and live it, yet do not call it God… I do know that many Atheists have also been given that sufficient amount of light and still reject it b/c they prefer to live in darkness. Likewise , there are professing religious (Christian and non-Christian) who do not practice what they preach, or do not take advantage of the graces that are given them (“To whom much is given much is expected”) who will be held accountable.

I think you are too focused on the differences between religions. I think you are missing the point of Christ. WE ARE ALL IN THE SAME POSITION BEFORE GOD. No one is lacking in what is needed to understand the truth. God is not short-changing anyone! NO ONE IS EXCUSED!

Who will love as Christ has? He who does is following the way of Christ - I don’t care what they call themselves…

The bottom line is: What is in YOUR HEART, “Joan”? THAT is the essence of Christianity, and the foundation of most EVERY religion - - even some of Atheism (although much of Atheism leads to very problematic reasoning… But I consider the likes of Buddhism and Pantheism for example… Non-deistic but having a very godly “flavor”…)

Of course, if you are looking for an excuse, you can argue all you want. Ask yourself what would be enough proof? I’ll wager that no “proof” would be “sufficient”. Most Atheists have already made up their minds. It’s not a matter of not having enough proof. It’s a decision. And the reason this is so (their rejection of God) is b/c they reject the light they have been given. It is skepticism gone past reason.

EVERYONE IS GIVEN ENOUGH LIGHT TO REVEAL WHAT IS IN THE HEART. And most people will not take a look at what is there, in the heart. They will clutter their minds and stifle their spirit with the things of the world; the hustle and clamor of life… But nothing is hidden from God. It is possible that those who reject God may have hidden something in their hearts and WILL NOT SILENCE THEMSELVES LONG ENOUGH to reveal what is hidden there from their intellect - thus, remaining blind.

So, when you say:

“Okay, my child, it’s now up to you to decide which of these religions – if any – is the true one”?

you are doing nothing less than God does to each one of us. We are all free (freewill). But who will follow the proof? Who will follow the essence of religion? Who will follow Love?

A better question to ask is: “Okay, my child, it is now up to you to decide how you will live out the essence of the truth that has been revealed to you throughout life - not just from your religion, but from your life experience”.

One day, titles will not matter. Not even those who say “Lord, Lord” will be held less accountable.

~Pax~

 

[Joan_of_Bark]

I want to address this point, because I’ve seen it mentioned, in various forms, several times on this forum.

Many groups see themselves as martyrs, but the idea that Catholics fit this category is simply not backed up by the numbers. I have seen two modern surveys that show that among religious and other groups in America, Catholics face less prejudice than Jews, Mormons, gays, blacks and Muslims … and far less than atheists!

And because Catholics have such large numbers, such prejudice is easier to counter. There’s definite strength in numbers.

I’ll find the links to the surveys, but it might take awhile (and here I am again, letting us get off topic).

Okay, I’ve found the links:

Some Americans Reluctant to Vote for Mormon, 72-year-old Presidential Candidates

Gallup Polls and Other Surveys on American Attitudes Toward Atheists

 

[Joan_of_Bark]

The OP is overlooking some facts,

In Jurnor High students tends to question everything and debate religion among other things.

People do change religions based on their personal research into other traditions.

If people were brainwashed, there would not be those freedom of choices.

There are no absolutes when it comes to human interaction, experience and responses. I never claimed otherwise.

 

[Joan_of_Bark]

Conditioning is not limited exclusively to early childhood. Teenagers and even adults are susceptible to the blowing winds of shifts in cultural thoughts. Not that I’m accusing you or anything, just pointing out that it’s possible.

So the only way for someone who is raised Catholic to be objective is to switch religions? I disagree. I actually find that a tad insulting. One can seek to understand others viewpoints and even do so successfully without having to buy into them. All you need is a bit of intellectual honesty.

sigh I really wish people would stop turning my generalizations into absolutes. I did not say that the only way to be objective is to switch religions. As I wrote earlier, there are* levels* of objectivity.

 

[Joan_of_Bark]

All things considered, I believe I remain fairly objective and I was raised Catholic. I wonder if you find it difficult to accept that someone would be objectively drawn to the Catholic faith since you now reject Christianity.

Of course that’s possible. Just as some people are objectively drawn to Buddhism, Islam or or one of the many protestant sects.

 

[Joan_of_Bark]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crash001

Plain and simple…this is just a ‘silly question’.

You don’t need religion – or to be more precise Catholicism – to teach children to love their neighbor.

As for the answers I was expecting, some people provided them: they pointed out their experiences, the fact that they considered other religions, and ultimately decided on Catholicism. Ultimately, I think it’s a good idea to reconsider all the things we were taught as children. If this were a Muslim board, or a Judaism board, I would ask the same thing.

After all, what’s the point of having free will if we don’t exercise it?

 

[OraLabora]

As a child I learned the catechism by rote but never with any explanation of what I was memorizing, actually meant. I must say that it did make me feel “brainwashed”, and I did leave the Church for a very long time (22 years to be exact) at least in part because of it. I didn’t then, and don’t now, like being played for a fool. It’s one reason I can still get in heated arguments on some Church teachings when, while asking for explanations, I am told “because the Church says so”. She must have a reason for “saying so”, and I am intelligent enough to be able to understand or reject those reasons; one thing I do when properly forming my conscience though, is not limit myself to Church or Biblical sources.

I have been educated and trained as a scientist and have been a scientist for many years. So I will also look at scientific sources in addition to Church teaching, and I am very often skeptical of when the Church attempts to meddle in areas outside of its expertise. For instance, in setting social policy the Church (or her pastors) often very clearly lobbies for economic policies that make it clear that economics is not her forte. I think her efforts should be limited to stating the morally objective truths such as needing to care for the poor, avoiding greed and excessive attachment to wealth, etc. But when it comes to how to achieve those, she is out of her depth, but I have had pastors make homilies saying that the gov’t should do such-and-such (usually left-wing) thing. Similarly in science, she has the duty to speak up and ensure that we remain moral in our use of science (such as in stem-cell research), but clearly should stay clear of trying to assimilate scientific data! Fortunately, she doesn’t do that anymore, but certainly for social policy she still often feels the need to meddle in areas outside of her expertise (or at least if she doesn’t, many of her pastors including bishops do feel it’s their role to meddle).

So basically blind, rote learning was a huge turnoff for me, and I suspect for many others. I have no idea how we teach the catechism now, I hope we do a better job! I came back to the Church on my own steam and after my own critical analysis of belief vs skepticism and non-belief, Christianity vs everything else, and of Catholicism vs. other forms of Christianity.

 

[Joan_of_Bark]

Like I have said, if you actually had come to church, you will know that Christians are not obliged to perform Jewish laws anymore, if you read the book of Romans, your eyes will actually be opened. And why just stop at the Sabath, Seven day adventist seem to love the idea of drag out a particular thing they like the the Old Testament and try to apply it. Why don’t we also follow the Jewish dietary or the Jewish custom of circumcision? Why just stop at the Sabath day?

I raise the issue of that commandment because I find that some Christians love to wield The Ten Commandments like a blunt instrument when it suits them. I suspect this is more an issue with protestants, but surely you’ve heard of the many attempts in America to plaster the Commandments on public buildings?

 

[kenofken]

I would concur with the initial statement that much of Catholic identity, and that of many other religions, is based on indoctrination/family/cultural inertia rather than informed choice. By virtue of mere baptism alone, the Catholic church claims people as members for life, whether or not they ever believe or practice the faith. Confirmation, at least when I went through it in the early 80s, was even more farcical. We were all of 13 years old or so and not thought competent to enter a contract for a magazine subscription, yet mature enough to decide something with eternal rammifications.

Most of us barely knew other people who weren’t Catholic, let alone the wide variety of belief systems out there. We went along because it was expected by friends and family and you got a small party and gifts etc. The idea is to rope em in young before they can think for themselves. The downside is, of course, what you would expect: a nation full of nominal and lapsed Catholics who feel no real sense of buy-in or personal comittment to the faith.

Fortunately, conditioning can be broken. Adulthood is a wonderful opportunity to rewrite your own code, to start over from square one on your own personal spiritual quest and make your own decisions about where you really belong. It’s not that I think nobody would objectively choose the Catholic faith in a fair and open market of ideas, but it sure seems that the church is a bit insecure about that.

 

[Joan_of_Bark]

I think that this is a stupid question. The term “Brainwashing” is so ambigious that it can be applied to anything.

Funny, I might say the same about “faith”.

 

[colmcille1]

Funny, I might say the same about “faith”.

Hi there Joan,
I’ve been reading over this thread and find it very interesting.
Forgive me for zoning in on one aspect but here goes.
I found it very telling that you replied in one post that you were delighted to see how many people related personal histories, how they “tried” other faiths and then came back to Catholicism. I was reminded of a discussion I had recently with a woman here in Irelan about her atheism. I asked her where she got her ideas about eternal damnation. She then listed off a string of biblical references. I then asked her why, if she is a non-believer, she gets her notions from the Bible? She did not reply and I did not pursue it. But I was left with trying to formulate an answer for her myself. My answers are irrelevant to the current debate and would of course be grossly presumptious. Yet, can I be brazen and ask if you are seeking a way to the Catholic faith? I hope you are not slighted by this question and it is asked with due respect.
I remain your seeking friend,
Colmcille1.

 

[Kay_Cee]

You mean in the same way that atheists are asked to prove that God doesn’t exist?

Nice try at changing the subject. I’ve never asked an atheist to prove a negative. I readily admit the burden of proof is on the theist.

Anyway, I didn’t ask you to ‘prove’ you haven’t been indoctrinated. I only asked if you ever suspected you might have been, based on the fact that people of all faiths (not just Christians) were usually raised with that faith. Another way for me to ask would be: do you believe that Muslims, Hindus, JW’s, practicing Jews, etc. have come to their faith through logic, or simply because of the way they were raised?

You threw out the implication. Implications color people’s attitudes. Weren’t you arguing against attitudes being colored?

I question the way I was raised all the time, and I often wonder if I really believe based on my experiences and logic, or if I was simply indoctrinated. It’s an ongoing process.

You question it “all the time”? Do you question your current beliefs all the time too?

You’ll notice I made the same suggestion about Muslims, Hindus, JW’s, practicing Jews, etc. And I would make the same suggestion about Republicans, Democrats, communists, anarchists, Buddhists, etc. Any strongly held belief system that is passed on from generation to generation should be questioned in this way.

I haven’t spent my life living on a mountaintop in Tibet. I’ve spent most of my life living in overwhelmingly Christian countries (England and Canada). I have heard the arguments. I don’t find them convincing.

But have you read the book I suggested? If not, how do you know you’ve heard all the arguments? Sounds to me like you’re dismissing this book (which is based on logic, not people’s opinions) without giving it a chance. I thought you were arguing for being objective, which would mean looking at all arguments from a logical point of view.

Honestly, for someone who says we should question things, you don’t seem willing to question your current beliefs. If you were, you would embrace the opportunity to be shown all logical arguments. Instead, you dismiss them without even bothering to look at them. Why are you insisting we question our beliefs without checking out all the arguments that question yours?

 

[OraLabora]

Most of us barely knew other people who weren’t Catholic, let alone the wide variety of belief systems out there.

I was lucky where I lived: on my street in Montreal were several Jewish families, and my back yard butted up against a synagogue. On the corner, was a Jewish school. So at least I did get a lot of exposure to Judaism. One of my best friends was Jewish and I was exposed to their faith and their holidays (though I never went to the synagogue). My parents were very open-minded about faith (my father was, incidentally, Anglican but I was raised Catholic and my mother was Catholic), and didn’t mind me mingling with Jewish kids, and my father was friends with the Jewish cantor at the synagogue. There was also a Protestant school around the block. I had to walk several blocks to my Catholic school.

Eventually the Jewish families moved out to more prosperous neighborhoods as their prosperity increased, and they were replaced by Italians who also moved up from their near-slums to our lower-middle class neighborhood. However, they were Catholic. And much less nominally so than the rest of us, but that’s another story.

Fortunately, conditioning can be broken. Adulthood is a wonderful opportunity to rewrite your own code, to start over from square one on your own personal spiritual quest and make your own decisions about where you really belong. It’s not that I think nobody would objectively choose the Catholic faith in a fair and open market of ideas, but it sure seems that the church is a bit insecure about that.

For me, it was a roundabout journey from nominal Catholicism (I can’t say that even as a kid I truly “believed”, especially after I discovered that Santa Claus was really Dad), through agnosticism, through evangelical atheism, then back to Catholicism. But I’ve always had a fascination with Judaism, I guess because of my experiences as a kid. The way the catechism was taught to me left a very negative impression of Catholicism that took me many years to overcome. Rote learning works for your times tables, but isn’t so good where critical thinking is required.

Even now though, I have my periods of doubt but I stick with it.