Dealing with misinformation and wild misconceptions

[Euphon]

What is the best way to counter people - well-meaning people - who have been exposed to crazy conspiracy theories about the Church?

So, I have a radio show on a community radio station (i.e. all volunteers) where I play a lot of 60s soul music. This past week, I was invited onto their Sunday morning gospel show, to make a guest appearance to play and talk about Motown and the gospel music tradition. We had a production meeting in the week running up to the show, I met the presenter (a born-again evangelist preacher) and his producer, and everything was going swimmingly well - we talked about his finding Jesus and the effect it has had on his life, and the great community work he has been inspired to do as a result… until I let slip I was hoping to become Catholic, at which point the atmosphere turned decidedly nasty. (I think I might have had a better reaction if I’d said I was converting to voodoo, or that I needed to sacrifice a chicken live on air to appease the spirits, or something.)

I was met with a barrage of what I can only describe as nonsense: did I know that the Catholics weren’t true Christians? Did I know that the Vatican owns the world’s largest telescope, which they’ve named L.U.C.I.F.E.R.? Did I know that the Vatican has done everything it can to suppress St Malachy’s Prophecy of the Popes, but that every Pope lines up with the predictions with uncanny accuracy? Did I know that the Vatican used to believe reading the Bible in English was a sin, and worked for hundreds of years to suppress the Holy Word from the people? Did I know that Catholicism makes no sense, because St Peter was never charged with a ministry to the Gentiles, and because Acts 10 explicitly states Peter was only meant to preach to the Jews? And so on, and so on, and so on.

Now, some of this insanity I could deal with there and then - I always have a Bible on hand, and was able to go through all of Acts 10 with him and ask him exactly how he’d come to that conclusion; I knew LUCIFER was nothing to do with the Vatican’s VATT telescope, but rather a piece of equipment on an entirely different internationally-operated telescope somewhere else on the same mountain; I knew the Prophecy of the Popes was considered a mediaeval forgery (and I could even quote the, um, “uncannily accurate” descriptions to bat them aside… Oh yes, he was saying that because Pope Francis had chosen his name in honour of St. Francis of Assisi whose father’s name was Pietro and because the Pope’s family originates from Italy this is 100% cast iron proof that Petrus Romanus is among us etc etc). And I was being as nice as I could, even though deep down I felt hugely insulted and that this guy’s behaviour was not terribly Christian. But I was thrown for a loop.

I did the show; I’d steeled myself for a lengthy apologetics session, I even bought a copy of the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church to give to him should he start spouting off about “what Catholics really believe”, but there was none of that, it all went fine, no comments were made, it was very pleasant. I didn’t give him the book. Maybe I should have.

Then, this morning, I get a text asking me to check out Tom Horn and Chris Putnam because they would “blow my mind” as they have had unprecedented access to the Vatican’s secret files and come up with all sorts of compelling arguments about… I don’t know, I stopped reading at this point.

So, anyway… what do you do when someone is talking like that…?

I don’t for a moment think he even meant to be insulting, just that he’s coming from a place where “Catholic” is a synonym for “misguided”, and “priest” means “venal, devil-worshipping pederast”. I could say “you are talking rubbish, and here is why”, but that feels like a pointless errand. And I’d no wish to provoke a quarrel; if we’d never got onto the subject, he was a fine example of a good Christian - he works with a lot of troubled young people in the community, does lots of charity work. But I found it hard smiling and saying “we’ll have to agree to disagree there” when someone indirectly accuses you of worshipping the devil. What to do…?

 

[pablope]

What is the best way to counter people - well-meaning people - who have been exposed to crazy conspiracy theories about the Church?

Then, this morning, I get a text asking me to check out Tom Horn and Chris Putnam because they would “blow my mind” as they have had unprecedented access to the Vatican’s secret files and come up with all sorts of compelling arguments about… I don’t know, I stopped reading at this point.

So, anyway… what do you do when someone is talking like that…?

I don’t for a moment think he even meant to be insulting, just that he’s coming from a place where “Catholic” is a synonym for “misguided”, and “priest” means “venal, devil-worshipping pederast”. I could say “you are talking rubbish, and here is why”, but that feels like a pointless errand. And I’d no wish to provoke a quarrel; if we’d never got onto the subject, he was a fine example of a good Christian - he works with a lot of troubled young people in the community, does lots of charity work. But I found it hard smiling and saying “we’ll have to agree to disagree there” when someone indirectly accuses you of worshipping the devil. What to do…?

My first suggestion is to post this in the Apolgetics section, you may get more responses there on those who have encountered such.

I have encountered such a group. My first request to them was for the source of their material. And then I started attacking the source material as most always, it was cobbled up material from conspiracy theorists…and what not.

Some of it maybe from Chick Tracts or Alberto Rivera.

catholic.com/documents/the-nightmare-world-of-jack-t-chick

freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1690526/posts

Anyway, one person posted a story of a massacre committed by Jesuits. I noticed the date of the massacre, it was even before the Jesuits were founded. So what I did was ask them to provide me the date of founding of the Jesuits. When they provided it, I asked them how could the Jesuits commit such a massacre when they were founded 7 years after the massacre? Of course, no one could answer…but I kept on hounding them about the accurary of their source…it there is one such mistake, then there could be other mistakes.

 

[Bonnie]

Holy cow!

And I thought the stories in “Far from Rome, Near to God” were bad.

The only advice I can give is try to make them stick to one accusation at a time. The scattergun approach is hard to counter.

You might find Karl Keating’s first book, "Catholicism and Fundamentalism: The Attack on “Romanism” by “Bible Christians” to be helpful.

 

[bitznbitez]

So, anyway… what do you do when someone is talking like that…?

You be nice.
You pray.

You won’t be able to talk them out of it. If they are open to it, you might ask who told them this and why they think it, and if they are open explain it a bit to them. Baby steps. But when they shut down, just smile and be nice.

I used to believe a lot of that stuff too…

 

[bsroufek]

To all that, you could counter with simple faith and say simply, “I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church”.

But, what did Jesus say? “Blessed are you whenever they revile you and persecute you and they say every evil word against you for my sake, in falsehood.”

 

[Joe_5859]

If someone is that convicted of their misconceptions, sometimes pointing out the errors only entrenches them even further into their mindset.

It sounds like you handled things fairly well. Really in those situations, it has to be the Holy Spirit at work through whatever words you are able to offer. Usually, the barrage of anti-Catholic misconceptions they rattle off are not the underlying issues. They are simply the “stumpers” they have had passed onto them which they latched onto because they already unquestioningly accepted the premise that Catholics aren’t really Christians. To get at the underlying issues takes time and a fair bit of perception on your part. That’s not always easy to do in these sorts of situations.

I think the best responses are those that turn the questions around and encourage them to do their homework. You’re not likely to change their mind with a sound-bite-sized answer. But if you can prompt the gears in their head to start turning, that could make a difference.

Encourage them to review what the Catholic Church actually teaches. You might even try to appeal to their sense of being right by telling them that knowing how Catholics articulate things will only make them more effective at countering what the Catholic Church teaches. After all, if you’re just going by second or third hand sources that tell you what Catholics believe, it is not likely going to convince any Catholic who knows their faith even a little bit.

I always remember Karl Keating’s story of how the one thing he said in an entire debate that stuck with someone was the question (I’m paraphrasing): “Who do you think is more likely to have a better idea of what Jesus really taught and what the Bible really means – those who lived closer to Him in time, or those who live further away?” This question really got the guy thinking and sent him on a study of the writings of the Early Church Fathers which, naturally, led him into the Catholic Church.

 

[Euphon]

Fascinating responses, thank you all!

My first suggestion is to post this in the Apolgetics section, you may get more responses there on those who have encountered such.

A good suggestion, and I did worry I was putting this in the wrong place - but I wasn’t really hoping to counter his specific “arguments” as such (they were too many, and - frankly - too loopy), but rather what to do in general in that situation.

I mean, I knew everything he told me was crazy, but even after I explained he was wrong about L.U.C.I.F.E.R. and showed him the ownership details for that telescope which are freely available online and, surprise, don’t include the Vatican and he just moved on to the next crazy thing in the pipeline, I realised I was dealing with an entrenched position.

The only advice I can give is try to make them stick to one accusation at a time. The scattergun approach is hard to counter.

You’re absolutely right. There were soooo many of them, it was physically wearying after a while. The problem is that when I tried to pin him down on one specific charge, he said I was deliberately changing the subject. Irony of ironies.

You might find Karl Keating’s first book, "Catholicism and Fundamentalism: The Attack on “Romanism” by “Bible Christians” to be helpful.

That sounds promising, thank you

You be nice.
You pray.

You won’t be able to talk them out of it. If they are open to it, you might ask who told them this and why they think it, and if they are open explain it a bit to them. Baby steps. But when they shut down, just smile and be nice.

I used to believe a lot of that stuff too…

That was my gut reaction - I doubted whether it was a productive use of time (for either of us!) for me to patiently debunk each and every mad thing that came up.

May I ask, if you don’t object, what was it that ended up changing your mind?

To all that, you could counter with simple faith and say simply, “I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church”.

I did do this! And got a look of pity and, I kid you not, a response that the church was not founded by Jesus or St Peter at all, but rather had evolved as the result of a 4th Century power grab when Emperor Constantine became the first Pope. It’s like an onion of ignorance, you peel off one layer and there’s another, even stranger layer waiting underneath to make your eyes hurt.

 

[Euphon]

If someone is that convicted of their misconceptions, sometimes pointing out the errors only entrenches them even further into their mindset.

It sounds like you handled things fairly well. Really in those situations, it has to be the Holy Spirit at work through whatever words you are able to offer. Usually, the barrage of anti-Catholic misconceptions they rattle off are not the underlying issues. They are simply the “stumpers” they have had passed onto them which they latched onto because they already unquestioningly accepted the premise that Catholics aren’t really Christians. To get at the underlying issues takes time and a fair bit of perception on your part. That’s not always easy to do in these sorts of situations.

Thank you - I’m very new to all of this and it was an odd experience being thrust into the role of defending a faith I’m not officially part of yet! And yes, that’s exactly how it went down and the impression I got; erroneous starting assumption (Catholic != Christian) followed by each and every nonsensical “stumper” being trotted out with scant attention to detail.

I think the best responses are those that turn the questions around and encourage them to do their homework. You’re not likely to change their mind with a sound-bite-sized answer. But if you can prompt the gears in their head to start turning, that could make a difference.

This is very welcome advice. Be subtle, try and gently plant the seed of doubt, let them come to their own conclusions… this is exactly what I had in mind, I just wasn’t sure it was right! (Or whether I was under an obligation to correct these things.)

Encourage them to review what the Catholic Church actually teaches. You might even try to appeal to their sense of being right by telling them that knowing how Catholics articulate things will only make them more effective at countering what the Catholic Church teaches. After all, if you’re just going by second or third hand sources that tell you what Catholics believe, it is not likely going to convince any Catholic who knows their faith even a little bit.

That was my exact motivation (and strategy!) for buying him a copy of the Compendium (I had previously directed him to the online version of the full Catechism, and he said he’d look at it, but I could tell immediately he wouldn’t!), I was going to hand it to him if it came up in our second meeting, but he was actually nice as pie. Maybe he knew he’d overstepped the mark the first time? I don’t know.

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

I did do this! And got a look of pity and, I kid you not, a response that the church was not founded by Jesus or St Peter at all, but rather had evolved as the result of a 4th Century power grab when Emperor Constantine became the first Pope. It’s like an onion of ignorance, you peel off one layer and there’s another, even stranger layer waiting underneath to make your eyes hurt.

Funny.

I also suggest that you turn the discussion and ask the person questions, rather than answer theirs. Who founded their church? When? Why? Where is their authority found? That kind of thing.

There is one question you should really be concerned wth when dealing with a Protestant. You ask them about the number of existing protestant denominations in the world. Then you point out to their* sola scriptura *principle that they all follow. And then THE question: why should you trust that this person’s church community has the correct interpretation of Christianity, since they all claim the same principle but differ drastically over a number of issues. And then hold on to this like a terrier and see how your friend answers the question. They will try and give some kind of a justification, but don’t expect too much. The point is that they start thinking about what they believe.

You’re going a great job. Well done

 

[PJM]

=Euphon;10825251]What is the best way to counter people - well-meaning people - who have been exposed to crazy conspiracy theories about the Church?

So, I have a radio show on a community radio station (i.e. all volunteers) where I play a lot of 60s soul music. This past week, I was invited onto their Sunday morning gospel show, to make a guest appearance to play and talk about Motown and the gospel music tradition. We had a production meeting in the week running up to the show, I met the presenter (a born-again evangelist preacher) and his producer, and everything was going swimmingly well - we talked about his finding Jesus and the effect it has had on his life, and the great community work he has been inspired to do as a result… until I let slip I was hoping to become Catholic, at which point the atmosphere turned decidedly nasty. (I think I might have had a better reaction if I’d said I was converting to voodoo, or that I needed to sacrifice a chicken live on air to appease the spirits, or something.)

I was met with a barrage of what I can only describe as nonsense: did I know that the Catholics weren’t true Christians? Did I know that the Vatican owns the world’s largest telescope, which they’ve named L.U.C.I.F.E.R.? Did I know that the Vatican has done everything it can to suppress St Malachy’s Prophecy of the Popes, but that every Pope lines up with the predictions with uncanny accuracy? Did I know that the Vatican used to believe reading the Bible in English was a sin, and worked for hundreds of years to suppress the Holy Word from the people? Did I know that Catholicism makes no sense, because St Peter was never charged with a ministry to the Gentiles, and because Acts 10 explicitly states Peter was only meant to preach to the Jews? And so on, and so on, and so on.

Now, some of this insanity I could deal with there and then - I always have a Bible on hand, and was able to go through all of Acts 10 with him and ask him exactly how he’d come to that conclusion; I knew LUCIFER was nothing to do with the Vatican’s VATT telescope, but rather a piece of equipment on an entirely different internationally-operated telescope somewhere else on the same mountain; I knew the Prophecy of the Popes was considered a mediaeval forgery (and I could even quote the, um, “uncannily accurate” descriptions to bat them aside… Oh yes, he was saying that because Pope Francis had chosen his name in honour of St. Francis of Assisi whose father’s name was Pietro and because the Pope’s family originates from Italy this is 100% cast iron proof that Petrus Romanus is among us etc etc). And I was being as nice as I could, even though deep down I felt hugely insulted and that this guy’s behaviour was not terribly Christian. But I was thrown for a loop.

I did the show; I’d steeled myself for a lengthy apologetics session, I even bought a copy of the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church to give to him should he start spouting off about “what Catholics really believe”, but there was none of that, it all went fine, no comments were made, it was very pleasant. I didn’t give him the book. Maybe I should have.

Then, this morning, I get a text asking me to check out Tom Horn and Chris Putnam because they would “blow my mind” as they have had unprecedented access to the Vatican’s secret files and come up with all sorts of compelling arguments about… I don’t know, I stopped reading at this point.

So, anyway… what do you do when someone is talking like that…?

I don’t for a moment think he even meant to be insulting, just that he’s coming from a place where “Catholic” is a synonym for “misguided”, and “priest” means “venal, devil-worshipping pederast”. I could say “you are talking rubbish, and here is why”, but that feels like a pointless errand. And I’d no wish to provoke a quarrel; if we’d never got onto the subject, he was a fine example of a good Christian - he works with a lot of troubled young people in the community, does lots of charity work. But I found it hard smiling and saying “we’ll have to agree to disagree there” when someone indirectly accuses you of worshipping the devil. What to do…?

KISS

keeping it simple for them is the best way IMO.

Challange them to PROVIDE evidence of their understanding.

Then offer another challange.

YOU show Me PROOF or your faith beliefs AND I’ll show you proof of mine. Let’s take the issues one at a time.

a SMILE and a God Bless you!

 

[greenpatrick125]

If you want to answer them then tell them, “I don’t have an answer to that, but I will find the answer and give it to you.” If you use this tactic you will be able to thoroughly dissect the claim and give them an answer. Don’t try to answer all their questions. Just give them one good answer to one question. There’s no need to go into apologetics overload and become discouraged by trying to find the answer to every single claim.

Posted from Catholic.com App for Android