History questions- HELP!

[kristanl]

My boyfriend is protestant, and it causes many heated debates about religion between us. I do not know that much about history, so I need someone to help me.
He constantly discusses the persecutions of Protestants in Ireland, how Catholics killed woman and children in Spain and tried to get them to convert, and a lot of times around the Protestant reformation as well. He also believes Catholics helped out Hitler during WWII (which I found evidence against), but he claims his “sources”, which he never will tell me are reliable.

He also tells me that Catholics were not the first Christians (he claims there were many different types), and that he does not believe Peter was the first pope.

I believe some of this history stuff happened, but it is not always so one sided as it may sound. I just wanted to know if someone knows a lot of history, can give me reasons why/ or against it etc.
I just hate how the history he has read or heard about is preventing him to see what I see and feel how I feel about the Church.

For example, when I read about WWII, and how the Pope did not really do anything at first. What could the Pope really do to speak out against Hitler. He is just a Pope, he was trying to protect Catholics as well- because if he tried to get people to kill Hitler, he would have gotten the Nazi’s to kill many Catholics. The CC ended up hiding many Jews in the Vatican which I thought was a good thing. But of course, looking back anyone would have wished that the CC would have done more then they could.

Please help me!
Thanks!

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I’m not sure even if you bring up the historical documents to support your point–and believe me, there are many, that it will help. After all, your boyfriend won’t even give his sources (probably they are simply what he has been told, or shown on some lurid website). And as you quite correctly note, the ‘bare facts’ don’t tell the whole truth–and often, in fact, tell outright lies.

As far as ‘protestant persecution in Ireland’, it does exist. Of course it is dwarfed in comparison to the hideous atrocities and massacres which were done to Catholics BY Protestants for centuries. Does that excuse a given Catholic ‘attack’ on a given Protestant? By no means. However, to imply as your boyfriend does that it is a completely one-sided attack ‘out of the blue’ on the innocent protestants is disingenuous and false. If he expects sorrow for ‘persecution of the protestants’ he had better reciprocate with much greater and lengthier sorrow on behalf of the protestant sins against Catholics. I doubt that he wants to do that. . .

As for the Inquisitions, there were several, for varying reasons, and actually it goes on today (goodness); The Society for the Propagation and Defense of the Faith is the contemporary ‘branch’ of this department. I’m sure you remember the head of that department for the later years of the 20th century. . .then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. . . Were people killed? Yes. Were they tried fairly? Actually, the Inquisition courts (which were, while ‘administered’ by clerics, set up by the MONARCHS of the countries involved) were considered (as were ‘clergy’ trials in general) MORE FAIR than the ‘civil’ courts of the times.

You know who burnt witches at the stake? Not Catholics. You know the only example of executions of witches in the U.S. took place in Massachusetts --under the extremely protestant Puritans. A lot of protestant propaganda is based on trying to blame the Catholics for actions that the protestants were guilty of, or ‘more’ guilty of, on the principle that attacking somebody loudly enough, long enough, and with enough ‘ammunition’ would keep people from noticing the blatant errors and sins on the part of the attacker.

You often hear of “Bloody Mary”,Mary Tudor, the Catholic queen of England. Coming to the throne on the death of her brother, Edward, son of Henry VIII, at a time when the majority of England was still Catholic, she married the Catholic prince of Spain and, on the advice of her ministers, in order to make the country safe for him, did interrogate many Protestants. While she herself often could be moved to mercy if approached on her own, her ministers argued that in order to make life secure in England for EVERYONE, those who absolutely refused to abjure should be executed. Mind you, this went the other way round too. When Protestant rulers were in power, Catholics got executed too. It’s just that Protestants were a little more. . um. . .creative. Mary, working to bring her country which had been Catholic for centuries and in which the majority of the people WISHED Catholicism to return, knew that those who opposed Catholicism were against not just Catholics in general, but Catholic rule. Mary’s (and her husband Philip’s) lives were in danger, but Mary thought of the eternal life, and to her, and to the PROTESTANTS TOO of the time, one’s faith was more important than even physical life.

After Mary died and her sister Elizabeth, a protestant, took the throne, Elizabeth knew that she likewise was in personal danger. However, even here, the danger was less to her life than to her throne. By strict standards, Elizabeth was illegitimate and illegitimate children were not in the line of succession. By the ‘device’ of Edward, Elizabeth’s cousin Catherine Grey (daughter of Henry’s younger sister) was heir. By strict primogeniture, Mary Queen of Scots (at the time the Dauphine of France, though her husband,soon to be King Francis, died a year later), granddaughter of Henry’s OLDER sister, was the legitimate heir to the throne of England. No Catholic wanted Elizabeth killed, but many did feel she was a usurper. However, when Elizabeth (illegally) imprisoned Mary some 9 years later (likewise illegally executing MARY in a fine piece of judicial lese majeste), the majority of Catholics, with no reputable claimants by that time (Catherine having been proven to be a fool and Mary in prison) would have accepted Elizabeth, even with the papal bull that announced that she was illegitimate and NEED NOT be obeyed as sovereign, but by this time Elizabeth’s advisors were afraid of losing their Protestant ‘riches’ and so they engineered several so-called "Catholic plots’ in order to pretend that Catholics were dangerous. And, when Catholics were imprisoned, it was not ‘for being catholic’. Oh no. it was for being TRAITORS TO THE QUEEN.

So you have decades of CATHOLIC MARTYRS, but the protestants will protest, 'oh no, they were killed for treason. Nothing ‘religious’ about it at all."

As far as WW2 and the pope, the WHOLE thing started with a bad play from 1962 in which the pope was accused of helping out Hitler. The facts are that Pius not only helped to save thousands of Jewish people–and the leading Rabbi of Rome at the time actually converted to Catholicism as a gesture of respect, but that he did so while he himself was in personal danger. The Vatican is in Italy, and Italy until 1943 was under the control of Mussolini and the Fascists and allied with Hitler. Again, millions of Catholics in Italy and Germany (as well as the Jews) were in danger had the Pope done ‘more’, and as it was, he condemned Hitler in round terms, and there are reprints of his encyclicals etc on the subject in the New York times during the 1930s and 1940s to prove it.

The story that he either ‘did nothing’ or even CORROBORATED with Hitler is typical anti-Catholic propaganda. The fact that we can show these are lies, and even show who started the lie, when, and why, means nothing. All it takes is for yet another loud-mouth to bray, “Everybody knows” and the syncophants and evil-minded and intellectually lazy and the bigoted and foolish will swallow the lies again and again.

 

[kristanl]

Wow, I wish I knew as much as you do, maybe I would blow his socks off then! LOL! I knew about the Bloody Mary stories from taking World History Class in high school. I have an Irish background, so I actually had heard of the Ireland situation the way you said it, but I didnt want to say it like that and be wrong!
That is amazing about the Rabbi converting, I didn’t know that.
Do you know anything about supposed other Christians at the beginning? Etc. Basically my boyfriend thinks the Catholic church has power to “make up” documents and hide things from the rest of the world in the Vatican (I know, I know). It drives me nuts that he says these things, and I really just want to know a lot of things before I can really tell him things. It just makes me sad/mad that he thinks the Catholic Church is so terrible (for historical reasons).
Do you know anything about the beginnings of Friday the 13th, supposedly that is another things Catholics have “faults” for.

p.s. Do you have any sites I could look at with this information. Since I do not know that much about history I have trouble knowing whether or not it is purposely anti-catholic or not.

Thank you for all of your help.
YOU ARE AMAZING!!!
God bless you!

 

[Ignatius007]

Was a former staunch evangelical/protestant and underwent a miraculous conversion to the Catholic faith. I am now seeking to undergo the RCIA program through the diocese in my area. I can understand where anti-catholics come from. They have alot of obstacles to overcome with the grace of God. But all things are possible with God!

Please checkout some resources:

scotthahn.com/dr-hahns-favorites.html (great resources suggested by Catholic apologist who was a former Presbyterian minister)

ewtn.com/tv/prime_sunday.asp (checkout the TV program Journey Home on EWTN which frequently features former Protestants that accepted the Catholic faith).

A really great book is “The Early Papacy” by Adrian Fortescue. It supports that from the earliest of times, right after the apostles, the most renown Church Fathers (recognized by Protestants and Catholics) confess the primacy and pastoral authority of the Bishop of Rome. This was very helpful for me.

And always remember the words of Christ the Lord that the Church shall always remain and never fall away into apostacy.

Matt 16:18-20
18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Matt 28:17-20
18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
(from New International Version - for those Evangelicals out there!)

History is on the side of the Catholic claim of continuity with the Church Jesus estabilished. All others are man-made Churches and/or have split from the chief pastor the Pope.

Another key question to help him have an open mind is to consider and learn about how Christians recieved the Holy Bible - specifically the Canon of the New Testament. Protestants would have to thank the Catholic Church for that one!

 

[kage_ar]

Good for you learning your faith.

Question, your husband is supposed to be helping you get to Heaven, how can a man who mocks your faith be a good husband?

 

[kristanl]

Good for you learning your faith.

Question, your husband is supposed to be helping you get to Heaven, how can a man who mocks your faith be a good husband?

He is just my boyfriend, but thats why we have these talks. I’m not really sure I could/can marry someone who is not Catholic. Especially when we get in arguments about things. He does support my faith, and we pray together. Its just general, nothing very Catholic. I want something more and he knows that-thats why I’m trying to help him see the Truth I see.

 

[kristanl]

Was a former staunch evangelical/protestant and underwent a miraculous conversion to the Catholic faith. I am now seeking to undergo the RCIA program through the diocese in my area. I can understand where anti-catholics come from. They have alot of obstacles to overcome with the grace of God. But all things are possible with God!

Please checkout some resources:

scotthahn.com/dr-hahns-favorites.html (great resources suggested by Catholic apologist who was a former Presbyterian minister)

ewtn.com/tv/prime_sunday.asp (checkout the TV program Journey Home on EWTN which frequently features former Protestants that accepted the Catholic faith).

A really great book is “The Early Papacy” by Adrian Fortescue. It supports that from the earliest of times, right after the apostles, the most renown Church Fathers (recognized by Protestants and Catholics) confess the primacy and pastoral authority of the Bishop of Rome. This was very helpful for me.

And always remember the words of Christ the Lord that the Church shall always remain and never fall away into apostacy.

Matt 16:18-20
18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Matt 28:17-20
18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
(from New International Version - for those Evangelicals out there!)

History is on the side of the Catholic claim of continuity with the Church Jesus estabilished. All others are man-made Churches and/or have split from the chief pastor the Pope.

Another key question to help him have an open mind is to consider and learn about how Christians recieved the Holy Bible - specifically the Canon of the New Testament. Protestants would have to thank the Catholic Church for that one!

Thank you for the sites!

 

[Tantum_ergo]

You might enjoy this book: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Western Civilization. The author, Anthony Esolen, is the senior editor of Touchstone magazine (a great publication) and is a professor of English at Providence College. He gives a lot of excellent information about why a lot of what people are learning about everything from the Greeks to Christianity itself, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and modern history is. . .wrong! Very readable footnotes too so that you can see what the writers actually said and not what the moderns ‘interpret’ it to mean. . .

Another good, but long and very ‘dense’ kind of book is G. K. Chesterton’s “The Everlasting Man.” Still another is “The Great Heresies” by Hilaire Belloc.

Also, “How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization” by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

 

[Rolltide]

Do you know anything about supposed other Christians at the beginning? Etc. Basically my boyfriend thinks the Catholic church has power to “make up” documents and hide things from the rest of the world in the Vatican (I know, I know). It drives me nuts that he says these things, and I really just want to know a lot of things before I can really tell him things. It just makes me sad/mad that he thinks the Catholic Church is so terrible (for historical reasons).

Well, ask him how the Bible was compiled. If he’s suspicious about the Catholic Church, then the very Bible he uses is unreliable. Early Christian sects and the compilation of the Bible go hand-in-hand. First, a few things for starters:

1. There WERE many documents that didn’t make it into the Bible. What’s even more shocking is that most of them still exist! Here’s a website that contains ALL of the existing books and fragments in translation, if he’d like to look at them:

earlychristianwritings.com

Any time you hear on tv about a “new book” of the Bible being discovered (like the recently discovered “Gospel of Judas”), keep in mind that most of these books were never really lost, most don’t actually date to the Apostles, many are historically proven forgeries, and even when they WERE lost, we know what types of information they contained from second hand writers.

1. There WERE other early sects of Christianity, and what’s even more surprising, we know all about them! However, these sects were usually based on misinformation, since they used some of the clearly false texts above. Further, most of these sects are so RADICALLY different than anything we would recognize as Christianity today, that even most Protestants would dismiss them out-of-hand.

So, what were some of these early sects? Here are the most important ones… the ones from the first 300 years or so of Christianity.

The Gnostics:
Gnostic Christians believed that a “secret code” containing “hidden wisdom” was contained in the Holy Scriptures, and that anyone who could break that code would be guaranteed admittance into heaven. In this sect, morality meant nothing. It didn’t matter if you were Mother Teresa or Adolf Hitler… if you cracked the code, you made it to heaven. This group believed that heaven was reserved for a VERY small scholarly elite that would study for years secretly, and in private, slowly uncovering the secrets of the afterlife. They also believed that the material world was evil, and that only by cracking the Scripture Code could you escape it. (This flies in the face of a salvation that is open to everyone, and accepts the idea that God created a flawed, evil, wicked world as a mistake.) The Gnostics also wrote their own scriptures, called the Gnostic Gospels. Some of the more famous books include the Gospels of Thomas, Philip, and Mary Magdelene. Most of these books were written more than 100 years later than any book included in the Bible today, and appear to have been forged to support their doctrines. The fact that their scriptures were written so late kills most of their credibility. The only modern religious group today that bears any sort of resemblance to the Gnostics are the Scientologists, although the two groups are not actually related in any way.

The Docetists:
Docetists were a spin-off from Gnosticism. They asserted that Jesus only appeared to be human. They considered the material world, including the human body, so evil and corrupt that God, who is all good, COULDN’T have assumed a real human body and human nature. He must have pretended. The Docetists denied that Jesus was EVER a man, although they had no problem with his divinity. The problem with this sect is that it means that the whole crucifixion was just a show, a parlor trick. Jesus only “appeared” to suffer, but in fact, nothing happened to Him at all. If the Passion was only an illusion, then so was our salvation. Essentially, we are all too evil to be saved, since we’re all created out of matter. The best we could hope for was to try and escape it by living in the spiritual world of the mind. So… here we have a form of Christianity where we have very little hope, so what’s the point? There is NO modern version of this type of Christianity that survives. Docetists also often used Gnostic Gospels, and I believe that some of them lacked access to some of the New Testament books that we use today.

continued…

 

[Rolltide]

Arianism:
This was the most dangerous and widespread of the early Christian sects. In many ways, it’s the exact OPPOSITE of Docetism. The Arians denied the existence of the Trinity. They believed that Jesus was ONLY a man, but was not divine in any way at all. God decided to adopt Him after His birth as a sort of step-son, but He was still fully human. Any powers He used or miracles He performed were not really done by Him, but done at His request by God (no different than Moses asking God to part the Red Sea… Moses didn’t perform the miracle, God did). So… Docetists believed that Jesus was all God, no man, and Arians believed that Jesus was all man, and no God. Many people bought into this in the fourth century because it was easy to understand, but once again, it denies the saving power of Jesus’s Passion. If Jesus was just an ordinary man, then His death on the cross meant no more than the death of Abraham or Moses. Humankind was not redeemed. The issue was decided at a council called by the Emperor Constantine of Rome in 325 AD. ALL of the Christian bishops came and agreed to abide theologically by the decision of the council. Arius was soundly proven wrong by a bishop named St. Athanasius, and most of the bishops returned to mainline “Catholic” Christianity. The result of this conference, by the way, was the creation of the “Nicene Creed”, a list that ALL Christians agreed upon as the MINIMUM requirements that one must agree to in order to call themselves Christian. Every word was carefully crafted to ensure that all doctrinal issues were addressed. There are VERY few groups today that hold beliefs similar to the Arians, although the Jehovah’s Witnesses would be pretty close, since they deny the Trinity, instead claiming that Jesus was actually St. Michael the Archangel in human form…

Two other heresies didn’t appear until the fifth century and later… Nestorianism, and Monophystism, but I’ll skip those, since it suffices to say that their beliefs arose more than 500 years after the Apostles…

So… we have the paper trail, and we know what other sects were around. If Catholic Christianity was NOT the true branch, which of these others sounds like the correct one? How many of the New Testament letters warn about “false teachings” and “false prophets”? Many believe that the figure Simon the Magician was one of the earliest Gnostic leaders, and that these letters may in fact be rebuking that group.

The next thing we need to look at is the compilation of the Bible itself, although it’s late and I’ll have to save that topic for tomorrow.

Do you know anything about the beginnings of Friday the 13th, supposedly that is another things Catholics have “faults” for.

According to Wikipedia, Friday the 13th isn’t a very old superstition. The earliest recorded mention of a Friday the 13th bringing bad luck only dates back to 1869. No one is quite sure how the superstition got started, although in Christianity, Jesus was crucified on a Friday, and the betrayal of Judas required the selection of a new, 13th apostle. Both of those things were considered to be unlucky, and so this is one of the more likely explanations on how the myth got started.

 

[Joe_5859]

He also believes Catholics helped out Hitler during WWII (which I found evidence against), but he claims his “sources”, which he never will tell me are reliable.

Red flag!!! If you boyfriend wants to prove that he respects you as a human person, he should be willing to share with you his “sources” for such claims. That he does not share them with you is a sign of disrespect.

How can you possibly have an open and honest conversation about important issues if he only wants to badger you with his point of view that you must accept solely because he says so?

There is a lot of misinformation out there about the history of the Catholic Church. Challenge your boyfriend to be intellectually honest and research these claims. He should be willing to read opposing points of view as well.

 

[PJM]

=kristanl;5722288]My boyfriend is protestant, and it causes many heated debates about religion between us. I do not know that much about history, so I need someone to help me.
He constantly discusses the persecutions of Protestants in Ireland, how Catholics killed woman and children in Spain and tried to get them to convert, and a lot of times around the Protestant reformation as well. He also believes Catholics helped out Hitler during WWII (which I found evidence against), but he claims his “sources”, which he never will tell me are reliable.

He also tells me that Catholics were not the first Christians (he claims there were many different types), and that he does not believe Peter was the first pope.

I believe some of this history stuff happened, but it is not always so one sided as it may sound. I just wanted to know if someone knows a lot of history, can give me reasons why/ or against it etc.
I just hate how the history he has read or heard about is preventing him to see what I see and feel how I feel about the Church.

For example, when I read about WWII, and how the Pope did not really do anything at first. What could the Pope really do to speak out against Hitler. He is just a Pope, he was trying to protect Catholics as well- because if he tried to get people to kill Hitler, he would have gotten the Nazi’s to kill many Catholics. The CC ended up hiding many Jews in the Vatican which I thought was a good thing. But of course, looking back anyone would have wished that the CC would have done more then they could.

Please help me!
Thanks!

Friend here is my “Grandpa Catholic” advice.

1. If he is unwilling to share his sources, refuse to discuss that issue.
2. I’m not a historian but not one of the items you mentions rings true. Get the evidence, or suggest he hush up
3. If memory serves Pious X th. was Pope in WW II. Keep in mind Italy was a Nazi occupied country. The Pope did much in clindestine ways to assist the Jews. You should be able to Google this Popes name and come up with some defensive material.
4. Challange him to share the real reason he hates Catholics. Now you have a common ground on which to carry on a friendly debate:thumbsup:
   

Don’t let him push you around. Jesus founded only One Church, [His Catholic Church…Mt. 16:15-19] and for nearly 1,500 years it was the ONLY Christian Church in the entire World.

And here’s a question you can ask him." Is the Bible TRUE?" [Second Timothy, chapter three, verse sixteen 2 Tim. 3:16] "***16 ’ QUOTE: "All scripture is inspired by God *and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. **

So if the bible is true, and is inspired by God. Knowing that the bible came into being through the Catholic Church, and that the entire New Testamant was written by men, we know today to have been the First Catholics, and given the fact that the Bible was completely written by the end of the First Century, and compiled into One Volume, in One language [The latin Vulgate Bible] in about 400 AD, and was the ***Only Bible ***until about 1600, on what Authority did Protestants change not only the number of books in the bible, but also a great deal of text to support there new found faith?

Did God wait 1,600 years for Luther to have the mistakes [He God made] in the now 1,200 year old Bible corrected.

Obviously not! So on what authority did Protestants have to seperate from God’s Only Chrsitian Church:shrug:

Love and prayers,

 

[Joe_5859]

1. If he is unwilling to share his sources, refuse to discuss that issue.

This is advice you must follow. It is a waste of everyone’s time if we start discussing issues without looking at the underlying sources. It is impossible to respond to an assertion (particularly an off-the-wall assertion) if you don’t know where it originated.

Requesting evidence isn’t about being snarky or pretentious. It is about avoiding needless uncharitable exchanges rooted in false information by starting the discussion from the same page.

 

[kage_ar]

This is advice you must follow. It is a waste of everyone’s time if we start discussing issues without looking at the underlying sources. It is impossible to respond to an assertion (particularly an off-the-wall assertion) if you don’t know where it originated.

Requesting evidence isn’t about being snarky or pretentious. It is about avoiding needless uncharitable exchanges rooted in false information by starting the discussion from the same page.

YES!

Missionary dating is not a good idea, and this man is trying to tear down your faith - find a good Catholic man.

 

[PJM]

=Joe 5859;5729585]This is advice you must follow. It is a waste of everyone’s time if we start discussing issues without looking at the underlying sources. It is impossible to respond to an assertion (particularly an off-the-wall assertion) if you don’t know where it originated.

Requesting evidence isn’t about being snarky or pretentious. It is about avoiding needless uncharitable exchanges rooted in false information by starting the discussion from the same page.

Hi Joe,

I thought I did. But if I missed something you’d care to bring to attention, I’ll do what I can to correct the shortcomming.

Love and prayers friend,

 

[LARSCOUT0311]

He also believes Catholics helped out Hitler during WWII (which I found evidence against), but he claims his “sources”, which he never will tell me are reliable.

This may be where he is a bit mixed up and mingling some of the “ammunition”. Some of The Republic of Ireland, which was/is mostly Catholic, supported the Nazi’s politically as they were anti-British. Thats saying the Irish, as Irishmen, supported the Nazi’s. Even though you had supporters from The Republic, the country as a majority remained outwardly neutral and were even denied entrance in the United Nations for a period of time due to their choice of neutrality…even near the end of the war.

 

[Joe_5859]

Hi Joe,

I thought I did. But if I missed something you’d care to bring to attention, I’ll do what I can to correct the shortcomming.

Love and prayers friend,

Sorry. My comment was directed towards the OP. I meant that the OP should follow the advice that you gave. I did not mean to imply that you were failing to heed your own advice.

 

[Ceil-1]

I know a nice, young Catholic man I’d like you to meet.

But, first, bone up on your history.

amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_0_16?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=christ+the+king+lord+of+history&sprefix=Christ+the+King+

 

[kristanl]

Thank you everyone for your advice I know its somewhat a lost cause sometimes. He always tells me lets start with what we have in common… hes prayed the rosary with me before, and he thinks its repetitive and boring which is so different then how I feel obviously.

Thank you for all the books and websites.

Its really hard for me to find guys that are Catholic in Georgia, most people down here are protestant. I know that eventually God will bring me a nice Catholic man (hopefully one that believes and trusts in all I do )
But if you know people! Feel free to hook me up haha.

 

[MarkInOregon]

There is a book I believe it is called “How the Catholic Church Built Civilization” by Tom or Thomas Wood who is a college professor.
It is easy to read and a very good primer and will provide you with much good information and many sources for follow-up if you wish.
It will help set the facts straight for a lot of the misinformation you hear out there.

There is also a tv series on EWTN based on the book. I havent seen it on lately but I’d watch for it.

Mark