How would you respond to this?

[kvw]

There is a woman at my parish who has brought up, for the second time now, this second time at a Bible study where about five parishoners meet, that it doesn’t matter what religion you are in really, because we are all trying to end up in the same place. A couple of her three grown children have left the Catholic Church. One has become a minister in his church. She encouraged the other one to leave just prior to his marriage, so they could share the same faith and raise their future children in a unified household.

I don’t know why she keeps bringing this up, and rather adamantly, except maybe to convince herself that her kids are okay or that her participation in helping them leave church was okay. When she says it is easier for a married couple to share the same faith, I agree with her, to try to establish common ground. Otherwise, I just listen incredulously to the rest and don’t know what to say. A couple times a month we work together at a church activity or see each other at a meeting, so I can’t just avoid her if I come up with a response which angers her. Any ideas? Oh, I suppose she goes on my prayer list, for starters.

 

[ServusDomini]

Unfortunately, that is an opinion which is held my many people. We live in a culture where people are tolerant of everything except intolerance, but the reality is that if someone has true convictions they will not make a statement like that woman made.

However, it is possible that she is upset by the situation which her children have placed themselves and is trying to get people to tell her that it is okay because “it doesn’t matter what religion someone is”.

I would reach out to her and tell her that whatever is good and true about any religion is from God who subsists in the Catholic Church and through that God is working to bring them back to the Church. I would also tell her that I am praying for her children.

 

[kvw]

It just occurred to me that maybe she reiterated her feelings the second time because, after the first time, I had lent her a CD set by Dr. Scott Hahn called “Evangelizing the Baptized,” which I had not listened to in its entirety when I handed it to her.

Since she responded in the way she did, reiterating her position on her children being just fine with being out of the Church, I have to wonder if she either did not listen to the CDs, or she is unmoved by them and wanted me to know as much. I think they are excellent, however one denomination mentioned in them as tending toward being anti-Catholic, happens to be the same as her minister son’s.

It does seem to me, though, that planting a seed can be a good idea. It might not sprout right away. But with some prayer, who knows? Eventually the ideas in the CD and/or the Holy Spirit might begin to work on her.

I would reach out to her and tell her that whatever is good and true about any religion is from God who subsists in the Catholic Church and through that God is working to bring them back to the Church. I would also tell her that I am praying for her children.

Yes, I wondered if I could get brave enough to suggest that she might invite her son with the wife of the same faith to come on back and bring her too!

Thanks for your ideas.

 

[NPC]

I wonder, firstly, how she is so sure that we’re all going to the same place. Last time I checked Scripture or teaching of the Church there were no less than two “final desinations” - Heaven and Hell. I think we are greatly deceiving ourselves if we deny this.

I have a logical response to the question of one church being as good as another. I got the reply in the book “Catholic Replies” by James J. Drummey. In summary it says that “if you say that one church is as good or true as another, then you must agree that vice is as good as virtue, and falsehood is on a par with truth. For there are churches today that teach absolutely conradictory things - that Jesus is God, that Jesus is not God; that Hell exists, that Hell does not exist; that infant baptism is right, that infant baptism is wrong; that abortion is evil, that abortion is good; that homosexual behaviour is sinful, that homosexual behaviour is not sinful.”

Essentially the author is saying that a square cannot be a circle - Jesus is either God or He isn’t; Hell either exists or it doesn’t. The sincerity of a particular denomination’s is not in question - sincerity cannot change what is objectively false. God has revealed certain teachings to us, so He will hardly give His approval to those who say that it really doesn’t matter what one believes.

 

[Oreoracle]

I wonder, firstly, how she is so sure that we’re all going to the same place.

She said that we are all trying to get to the same place, just to clarify.

 

[NPC]

She said that we are all trying to get to the same place, just to clarify.

So she did - my sincerest apologies for misquoting the original post. All the same, this culture of religious indifferentism or exponents of “one church is as good as another” frequently justify their sentiments by this view - that we are all trying to get to heaven. But we know this - it’s the ultimate goal of all Christians. However, as I said in my earlier post, it’s not the sincerity of one particular religious group that’s in question. Mere sincerity in one’s views does not make those views correct. A group which teaches that Christ is not divine does not make that belief true because they hold and teach it with sincerity and because they are ultimately trying to get to heaven. God will judge them fairly on their sincerity, but also on their adherence to truths which have been revealed by God Himself.

Obviously one would like to be charitable in their response to this lady - and it seems very difficult to approach the subject in a subtle way. There are numerous stories of conversion out there - Dr Scott Hahn was mentioned earlier. Encouraging her to read such books is probably a good and positive step - the Venerable John Henry Cardinal Newman’s observation that “a Protestant who immerses himself in history ceases to be Protestant” is really jumping out at me now. Perhaps some books explaining Catholic teaching (and their history) could be useful. You could also try directing the lady to these forums - that would be an excellent move!

 

[PJM]

There is a woman at my parish who has brought up, for the second time now, this second time at a Bible study where about five parishoners meet, that it doesn’t matter what religion you are in really, because we are all trying to end up in the same place.

I don’t know why she keeps bringing this up, and rather adamantly, except maybe to convince herself that her kids are okay or that her participation in helping them leave church was okay.

Here is something to share with her

Matthew 16:19 "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven . . ."
**
The “power of the keys” has to do with ecclesiastical discipline and administrative authority with regard to the requirements of the faith, as in Isaiah 22:22 (cf. Is 9:6; Job 12:14; Rev 3:7). From this power flows the use of censures, excommunication, absolution, baptismal discipline, the imposition of penances, and legislative powers. In the Old Testament a steward, or prime minister is a man who is “over a house”**

1. Mt: 16:19 " whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

"Binding" and “loosing” were technical rabbinical terms, which meant to “forbid” and “permit” with reference to the interpretation of the law, and secondarily to “condemn” or “place under the ban” or “acquit.” Thus, St. Peter and the popes are given the authority to determine the rules for doctrine and life, by virtue of revelation and the Spirit’s leading (Jn 16:13), and to demand obedience from the Church. “Binding and loosing” represent the legislative and judicial powers of the papacy and the bishops (Mt 18:17-18; Jn 20:23). St. Peter, however, is the only apostle who receives these powers by name and in the singular, making him preeminent.

1. Peter’s name occurs first in all lists of apostles (Mt 10:2; Mk 3:16; Lk 6:14; Acts 1:13). Matthew even calls him the “first” (10:2). Judas Iscariot is invariably mentioned last.
2. Peter alone among the apostles receives a new name, “Rock,” solemnly conferred (Jn 1:42: Mt 16:18).
3. Peter is regarded by Jesus as the Chief Shepherd after Himself (Jn 21:15-17), singularly by name, and over the universal Church, even though others have a similar but subordinate role (Acts 20:28; 1 Pet 5:2).
4. Peter alone among the apostles is mentioned by name as having been prayed for by Jesus Christ in order that his “faith may not fail” (Lk 22:32)
   .
5. Peter alone among the apostles is exhorted by Jesus to “strengthen your brethren” (Lk 22:32).
6. Peter first confesses Christ’s divinity (Mt 16:16).
7. Peter is regarded by the Jews (Acts 4:1-13) as the leader and spokesman of Christianity.
8. Peter is specified by an angel as the leader and representative of the apostles (Mk 16:7).
9. Peter leads the apostles in fishing (Jn 21:2-3,11). The “bark” (boat) of Peter has been regarded by Catholics as a figure of the Church, with Peter at the helm.
10. Peter’s words are the first recorded and most important in the upper room before Pentecost (Acts 1:15-22).
11. Peter takes the lead in calling for a replacement for Judas (Acts 1:22).
12. Peter is the first person to speak (and only one recorded) after Pentecost, so he was the first Christian to “preach the gospel” in the Church era (Acts 2:14-36).
13. Peter works the first miracle of the Church Age, healing a lame man (Acts 3:6-12).
14. Peter utters the first anathema (Ananias and Sapphira) emphatically affirmed by God (Acts 5:2-11)!
15. Peter is the first person after Christ to raise the dead (Acts 9:40).
16. Cornelius is told by an angel to seek Peter for instruction in Christianity (Acts 10:1-6).
17. Peter is the first to receive the Gentiles, after a revelation from God (Acts 10:9-48).
18. Peter instructs the other apostles on the catholicity (universality) of the Church (Acts 11:5-17).
19. Peter is the object of the first divine interposition on behalf of an individual in the Church Age (an angel delivers him from prison - Acts 12:1-17).
20. Peter presides over and opens the first Council of Christianity, and lays down principles afterwards accepted by it (Acts 15:7-11).
21. Peter is the first to recognize and refute heresy, in Simon Magus (Acts 8:14-24).
22. Peter’s proclamation at Pentecost (Acts 2:14-41) contains a fully authoritative interpretation of Scripture, a doctrinal decision and a disciplinary decree concerning members of the “House of Israel” (2:36) - an example of “binding and loosing.”
23. Peter commanded the first Gentile Christians to be baptized (Acts 10:44-48).
24. Paul went to Jerusalem specifically to see Peter for fifteen days in the beginning of his ministry (Gal 1:18), and was commissioned by Peter, James and John (Gal 2:9) to preach to the Gentiles.

29: 1 Then said Jesus to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; 3 so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice. (Mt. Chapter 23)
Note: While the bible does not speak specifically of the “ Chair of Peter,” this term gets it’s origin from “the Chair of Moses,” which EVERYONE KNEW WAS THE “SEAT OF RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY.”

1. Peter corrects those who misuse Paul’s writings (2 Pet 3:15-16). ‘In conclusion, it strains credulity to think that God would present St. Peter with such prominence in the Bible, without some meaning and import for later Christian history; in particular, Church government.

The papacy is the most plausible (we believe actual) fulfillment of this directive to ‘Feed my sheep.‘ ”

 

[kvw]

Thank you, everyone, for all the helpful replies.

 

[distracted]

There is a woman at my parish who has brought up, for the second time now, this second time at a Bible study where about five parishoners meet, that it doesn’t matter what religion you are in really, because we are all trying to end up in the same place. A couple of her three grown children have left the Catholic Church. One has become a minister in his church. She encouraged the other one to leave just prior to his marriage, so they could share the same faith and raise their future children in a unified household.

I don’t know why she keeps bringing this up, and rather adamantly, except maybe to convince herself that her kids are okay or that her participation in helping them leave church was okay. When she says it is easier for a married couple to share the same faith, I agree with her, to try to establish common ground. Otherwise, I just listen incredulously to the rest and don’t know what to say. A couple times a month we work together at a church activity or see each other at a meeting, so I can’t just avoid her if I come up with a response which angers her. Any ideas? Oh, I suppose she goes on my prayer list, for starters.

i would just go on and on about how wondeful Catholicism is… the Mass, confession, the Real Presence, the purity and power of Mary…

can’t get that anywhere else… Soemtimes we have to be “fanatical” (what the world calls fanatical) about the Church… As some saint said, “The Church IS Christ”…

As you may know, Jesus said that he will deny us before the Father if we deny Him before men… so sometimes we just have to … be “out there” about things… and let the chips fall where they may.

So waht if she gets angry or irritated? If you plant a seed… it will be worth it…

 

[Leopard]

There is a woman at my parish who has brought up, for the second time now, this second time at a Bible study where about five parishoners meet, that it doesn’t matter what religion you are in really, because we are all trying to end up in the same place…

I’d say it’s like going to the airport and saying it doesn’t matter what airplane you get on because we’re all trying to end up in the same place.

 

[kvw]

I’d say it’s like going to the airport and saying it doesn’t matter what airplane you get on because we’re all trying to end up in the same place.

Yes!

 

[Slave2Christ]

A couple of her three grown children have left the Catholic Church. One has become a minister in his church. She encouraged the other one to leave just prior to his marriage, so they could share the same faith and raise their future children in a unified household.

I don’t know why she keeps bringing this up, and rather adamantly, except maybe to convince herself that her kids are okay or that her participation in helping them leave church was okay…

Anyone who is Catholic and then leaves the Faith is a heretic and in a state of mortal sin. This situation is very serious and could become dangerous. Unity is not a legit cause for which to abandon the Church of God. She needs to be more passionate about defending the Truth and not compromise it for peace’s sake alone. Being unified doesn’t matter when you are unified in the wrong. She needs to learn that if she really loves her kids, she will witness to them about this. Above all, it can never be right for a Catholic to advise someone to leave the Church, no matter how good the intent is.

It sounds like you already have an idea of the reason why she has adopted this opinion. You need to pray for her and her children, and that her son will hold fast to the Church and try to convert his wife by example through the help of the Holy Spirit. It might also be a good idea to alert your Priest or Pastor about this so that they can talk to her about the gravity of this. She and her family have my prayers.

 

[kvw]

It might also be a good idea to alert your Priest or Pastor about this so that they can talk to her about the gravity of this. She and her family have my prayers.

I appreciate your prayers for her and her family. Maybe I should talk to our priest about this.

The latest thing from her was how do “they” get away with using real wine instead of alcohol-free wine since there are children receiving communion and it is against the law to serve alcohol to minors. I had lots of immediate responses in my head, with the couple of foremost being whose authority matters more, God’s or Caeser’s, real wine was good enough for Jesus, and only the priest is required to consume both species, so parents who have her concern could simply have their children refrain from consuming the precious blood.

Know that this woman often attends daily Mass and volunteers at hospice, etc., etc. So she is a compassionate, good woman. Her ideas are just muddled on kids being okay to leave the faith and real wine versus non-alcoholic wine (so far! Do you think there is a pattern here?). I wanted to pray about this before I fully responded to her, though, beyond my mere comment that the Church’s present practice has been good enough for 2000 years.

I will pray about this, and eagerly listen to advice, before I see her again in the next week or so. Right now I am leaning toward reminding her that the body, blood, soul, and divinity can be received by a child consuming the host only, so she needn’t worry about his/her consumption of the wine; although I personally do not think a couple of drops of alcoholic wine should be a concern at all.

 

[Disciple96]

I’d say it’s like going to the airport and saying it doesn’t matter what airplane you get on because we’re all trying to end up in the same place.

I’ve thought about this a lot over the years and I’ve read a lot about it too. But that’s gotta be one of the best answers I’ve ever seen!

I used to think there were many paths up the mountain and all paths led to the top…until I took a few road trips and found out that all paths do NOT lead to the top. Some don’t seem to go anywhere. Some stop halfway up, some go round and round while some lead straight down.

As for myself, I prefer paths traveled by other seekers who have left markers and maps. And long years of searching, I’ve found no better map than the one provided by Holy Mother Church.

 

[losh14]

Her ideas are just muddled on kids being okay to leave the faith and real wine versus non-alcoholic wine (so far! Do you think there is a pattern here?). I wanted to pray about this before I fully responded to her, though, beyond my mere comment that the Church’s present practice has been good enough for 2000 years.

I don’t think this is so much a rationalizing of her children leaving the Church as the cause - if you raise your kids to believe that they can believe whatever they want, don’t be surprised when they do so. It’s perilous to give immature persons total freedom without telling them the truth about what it entails.

Maybe she’s afraid that they would grow up and despise the Church, especially if they married outside the Church. The counter to this is that no one will despise the Truth if the Truth is lived as it is taught.

Her contention with the wine misses the point - the kids don’t need to drink the wine in order to receive the Eucharist, and even if they do, I’ve never heard of anyone getting in trouble with the law over liturgical wine (unless it’s used non-liturgically).

Would she also refrain from preaching the Gospel for fear that someone might be offended?

 

[1ke]

There is a woman at my parish who has brought up, for the second time now, this second time at a Bible study where about five parishoners meet, that it doesn’t matter what religion you are in really, because we are all trying to end up in the same place. A couple of her three grown children have left the Catholic Church. One has become a minister in his church. She encouraged the other one to leave just prior to his marriage, so they could share the same faith and raise their future children in a unified household.

I don’t know why she keeps bringing this up, and rather adamantly, except maybe to convince herself that her kids are okay or that her participation in helping them leave church was okay. When she says it is easier for a married couple to share the same faith, I agree with her, to try to establish common ground. Otherwise, I just listen incredulously to the rest and don’t know what to say. A couple times a month we work together at a church activity or see each other at a meeting, so I can’t just avoid her if I come up with a response which angers her. Any ideas? Oh, I suppose she goes on my prayer list, for starters.

The next time she brings it up, have at the ready a photocopy of the Catechism section linked here (especially highlighting paragraph 846) and the encyclical Dominus Jesus which you can print off from the internet.

 

[kvw]

That is a great idea. I’ll print those out. Thanks.

 

[kvw]

The latest thing from her was how do “they” get away with using real wine instead of alcohol-free wine since there are children receiving communion and it is against the law to serve alcohol to minors. I had lots of immediate responses in my head, with the couple of foremost being whose authority matters more, God’s or Caeser’s, real wine was good enough for Jesus, and only the priest is required to consume both species, so parents who have her concern could simply have their children refrain from consuming the precious blood.

Know that this woman often attends daily Mass and volunteers at hospice, etc., etc. So she is a compassionate, good woman. Her ideas are just muddled on kids being okay to leave the faith and real wine versus non-alcoholic wine (so far! Do you think there is a pattern here?). I wanted to pray about this before I fully responded to her, though, beyond my mere comment that the Church’s present practice has been good enough for 2000 years.

I will pray about this, and eagerly listen to advice, before I see her again in the next week or so. Right now I am leaning toward reminding her that the body, blood, soul, and divinity can be received by a child consuming the host only, so she needn’t worry about his/her consumption of the wine; although I personally do not think a couple of drops of alcoholic wine should be a concern at all.

Probably not a good idea to quote myself. I am still learning, and I think this should probably have been a new thread!

Losh14 found it. Thanks for your comments!

 

[wcknight]

The best reply I heard about the advantages of being in the Catholic Chruch was from a recent convert. He said, joining the Catholic Church versus being protestant was like trying to cross the ocean in a luxury liner instead of a row boat.