Lets Just Focus on our Agreements!

[AlanFromWichita]

michaelgazin:

How do you all respond, when discussing and apologizing for the Catholic faith to others, and they respond with a plea to stop debating and just focus on what we have in common. Usually this is followed by pointing out something like, “We are both Christians, and there are many others out there who don’t even know Christ…that is who we need to evangelize to, not each other.”

If they don’t want to debate, then I’m not going to force myself on them or it is intellectual battery. Call their bluff. If they want to team up based on our agreements, then let’s get going and do it, and not just use that excuse as a discussion stopper. When they say “there are others” who need evangelizing, what I’m afraid they are saying is “go take it somewhere else because I don’t want to hear it.”

the important thing is not really to debate this subject in too great of detail…we need to focus on improving our walk with Jesus."

This is a cloaked attempt at holding others to higher standards than oneself. It is so subtle and sinister that I doubt the speaker even knew what message was being sent.

I cannot refute the point that it’s important for us to work together despite our beliefs, nor can I refute that regardless of our beliefs we need to focus on improving our walk with Jesus, and in a practical way that may not require us to have exactly the same intellectual beliefs.

What I do object to, is the assertion but by implication that if we “need to focus” our walk on Jesus, that must mean we need to defocus from debate. The assertion is also explicity states, “the important thing is not to debate this subject in too great of detail.” The clear message is that this debate is unimportant, and consequently do not worry about my soul because what you think is important is not important to me. While that may be the true feelings of the person, they have neatly dismissed your strongly held belief as unimportant, trying to hide it under something that we agree is important.

This is verbal bullying, done not out of skill of the person debating, but by their automatic defense system that guards against alien thought. The stuff about how important it is we get about working for Jesus then is just a red herring, trying to get us to take the bait and look the other way, while the other guy quicks chalks up a personal victory after telling you he wasn’t keeping score! Of course, the person has no idea he’s doing all that, but when he says theology isn’t important, it takes the pressure off him to examine himself.

If this person were actually sincere and not defensive, I’d expect something more like, “look, we have some serious discussion to do sometime, but I really don’t want to get into it now if you don’t mind. Maybe there’s something we can do together for Christ now, and maybe another time we can get back to this topic.”

That way the person can avoid an unpleasant theology debate without dismissing your beliefs as unimportant.

What is an appropriate response to give, to uphold the necessity of such discussion in coming towards one truth?

Lesson 1 in verbal self defense it to ignore the bait and attack the presupposition.

The bait is: “we need to focus on improving our walk with Jesus”

The presupposition is in here: “important thing is not really to debate this subject in too great of detail”

The presupposition is: “I am not interested in hearing those things that are important to you.”

If you say, "of course we need to improve … " at that point you have accepted the bait and implicitly bought the presupposition as less important. In this case, the bait is unimportant because this person is telling you that your concerns are undounded and silly. That’s what needs to be addressed, not whether we need to focus our walk on Jesus. He is trying to put your blinders on, not to focus on Jesus, but to hide himself from you.

So here’s what you do. Look slightly perplexed and say, “how long have you thought my theology is unimportant?” Notice this has its own presupposition that “you don’t think my theology is important,” stated tentatively, so this is a tiny bit presumptuous but your opponent isn’t advanced enough to realize that. Probably a kinder way to say it without accusation would be, "if I didn’t know you better, I might think you were telling me my theological views aren’t important.

All I could respond with was: 1 Tim. 1:3 Paul says “As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine.” and Titus 1:9 “he must hold firm to the sure word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to confute those who contradict it.”

Thanks for your thoughts and answers.

I think your answer was very good, but it probably went right over their heads. Did you get any reaction at all – even blank stares?

Alan

 

[InnocentIII]

AlanFromWichita:

We are indeed loved. Whether we “feel” it is another story. Most people I know only know about the love of God intellectually, and from brief moments of relief maybe. He may be telling the truth; he never felt loved in the Church, and you are also right that in fact, he IS loved by Christ. Therefore his feelings are not reliable as universal love detectors.

Agreed, perhaps we need to know what the young man meant by “not feeling loved” but as the anecdote was presented it made it seem that “feeling loved” was what he came to church for and that it was “human love” he was seeking (or missing). This is why I dislike these type of “parables”. They sound good but in reality are very superficial and simplistic.

AlanfromWichita:

My guess is that in any given case like this, either this is a “dead” parish, or the kid really didn’t extend himself out to the others. I find that when I am somewhere I’m supposed to be and people are not very close, often I can strike up a conversation and help people get interested in each other. This kid needs me to go with him to Church a couple times; then I could show him how to go create the close atmosphere he craves instead of wishing somebody else would do it.

I have been called anti-social at times but I dislike being approached by some determinedly beaming “welcomer” who then asks me all kinds of personal questions as though this somehow showed love and concern. In my own parish I of course have friends but ones made in my own time. Welcoming has to come naturally. If this young man was a parishioner for 18 years and still felt unloved I would have to ask what efforts did he make? Did he attend parish social gatherings? or was he just a Sunday in and out person?

We need to have a deeper and more nuanced understanding of love and its expression than this anecdote implies and more information on what the situation of the young man and the parish was. Feel good stories and solutions are part of the mess our world is in.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I’m not into touchy, feelie stuff at all, but I will say this: I’ve started to notice that after Mass, the Catholics of my parish bolt for their cars (and I include myself in that number!). I found myself thinking yesterday, “Wow, I hardly know anyone in this parish, outside my fellow choir members.” I think the answer is to get involved, of one’s own volition, in the various groups in the parish. There are study groups, prayer groups, adoration groups, and service groups. I know the choir members because I sing in the choir. Other than that, I wouldn’t. I should think that that is what the young man needs to do. He isn’t going to find much joy in some of the larger Protestant mega-churches that are becoming a trend. Also, the word “love” and the issue of “love” are terribly important in the Church at large and in the local parish. Love, however, is not always a “squishy” feeling. It is an action. Finally, if the young man can look at a Crucifix and not experience the fact that he is loved, then I would question his formation as a Catholic, which, since he is 18, pretty much means wondering what his parents and priests were doing, and what this parish is truly like. I’m not sitting in judgement, he may well simply be wrong, but it’s a question I would ask.

 

[InnocentIII]

JKirkLVNV:

I’m not into touchy, feelie stuff at all, but I will say this: I’ve started to notice that after Mass, the Catholics of my parish bolt for their cars (and I include myself in that number!). I found myself thinking yesterday, “Wow, I hardly know anyone in this parish, outside my fellow choir members.” I think the answer is to get involved, of one’s own volition, in the various groups in the parish. There are study groups, prayer groups, adoration groups, and service groups. I know the choir members because I sing in the choir. Other than that, I wouldn’t. I should think that that is what the young man needs to do. He isn’t going to find much joy in some of the larger Protestant mega-churches that are becoming a trend. Also, the word “love” and the issue of “love” are terribly important in the Church at large and in the local parish. Love, however, is not always a “squishy” feeling. It is an action. Finally, if the young man can look at a Crucifix and not experience the fact that he is loved, then I would question his formation as a Catholic, which, since he is 18, pretty much means wondering what his parents and priests were doing, and what this parish is truly like. I’m not sitting in judgement, he may well simply be wrong, but it’s a question I would ask.

This happens at our parish too but Father always stresses that we should stay and pray after Mass and many do. This has created a bond among this core group at my parish. Also we have First Friday/Saturday devotions and Sunday Benediction and this has also built up close bonds. Part of the problem however is the decline (I would almost say death) of church social activities. When I was younger there were dances, dinners, outings etc that helped create bonds. Also people tended to grow up in a parish and have friends from childhood through to adulthood. Mass was about worship. Today so much is placed on the Mass because that is often the only time people come to church, it reminds me of schools where tghe actual learning gets lost amid the welter of responsibilities placed on them.

I believe we have to get back to the idea of the Church as our family. IMO this was the greatest error of the “protestantisers”, to destroy the sense of the Church as a family embracing the saints in heaven, the souls in purgatory and the bodies on earth. At the local level this shattered the family bonds of the parish, and so like Protestants we became “Sunday people” instead of “every day people”.

Pray together, play together, stay together .

 

[AlanFromWichita]

InnocentIII:

I have been called anti-social at times but I dislike being approached by some determinedly beaming “welcomer” who then asks me all kinds of personal questions as though this somehow showed love and concern. In my own parish I of course have friends but ones made in my own time.

Same way with me. I assume someone like this and needs help, so I might interrupt with, “how can I help with any of this?” Especially if someone is actually in crisis they might rattle on and not know what they need to get to first. Usually not, though.

There’s one thing thought that used to drive me up the wall. It’s when someone calls and asks how you are doing before you know who it is. “How are you” “Who wants to know” kind of thing.

Once in a particularly emotional moment I decided to do something about it. Phone rang, “hello” says I. Some dude who can’t pronounce my name says “gut afternoon meester allah-an zeegamund. how are you this evening?” Ahh, a victim…

Omigod. Years worth of frustration seemed to pack themselves in when I said, “siggghhh. you know, I really was hoping someone would call and ask that. This morning we just got done burying the cat so the kids had to paint a memorial and we had a little service and talked all day about why the cat and grandpa both had to die. Then we had to go to the doctor and turns out my son does have strep throat, and just now we were at the bankruptcy attorney to discuss how to handle my recently widowed mother’s finances and mine since I’ve lost my job and been on mental disability and have a family of eight to support. You haven’t ever experienced being in a locked up ward, have you?”

pure evil omigod I felt awful.

Then you know what? The guy took about ten minutes or so and talked to me. He was really nice, and we both enjoyed the conversation. He’s had some rough times, too, and really knew what to say. I asked him about how he feels when people are mean to him on the phone and he had some sage advice. Finally I said, “I know you need to get back to work. What was it you were selling?” He answered, “I’m from a charity. Right now I think you need to keep your money for your family. Thank you for the nice conversation, God bless and good bye.”

Alan

 

[Church_Militant]

My biggest problem is that the fundamental doctrines of n-C denoms are based upon things that we cannot even begin to agree to.

Sola Scriptura removes almost all of the common ground and Sola Fide sort of rips the rest away to create a huge chasm that can scarcely be talked accross, much less considered common ground. These are not of Catholic making, and a great deal of the time there is so little understanding of real Catholic beliefs that even when we find ourselves at the same place in our journey of faith, we have arrived there by widely divergent ways.

To me “Lets Just Focus on our Agreements” is just another way of saying you do your thing and I’ll do mine and we’ll just be the very bestest of buddies, but we won’t talk about truth because that will mean that one of us might be wrong and get our feelings hurt.

There is also a double standard in the minds of a great many n-Cs that allows them to feel that it’s just fine to attack Catholic teachings to Catholics in order to proselytize, but we are never supposed to offer any defense because that’s not charitable and is divisive.

The only common ground that I’ve been able to find with n-Cs since my reversion to the faith has been with those who are honestly committed to following the truth regardless of where they encounter it and regardless of where that leads them.
Pax vobiscum,

 

[NotWorthy]

In regards to the conversation between Alan and Innocent, and in reference to the story about the young man who “was not loved”, I think you can look at most parishes and file people into several types of groups:
A) Hardcore Catholic: Got their spiritual acts together and know what they are at Mass for: for Worship.
B) Country Club Cathoics: Go to Church to be seen and to socialize. The minute something offends them, they are likely to bolt to another church.
C) Cradle Catholics: Go to church because they always did. They may miss every now and then. Their kids quit going as soon as they’re out of the house.
D) Looking for a Home: These people are searching for the right faith, and have given the Catholic Church a chance.

Now, I know this is overly simplistic, and I’ve only recently thought of it this way. But the groups in C) and D) are the people that need ministering to. Their faith is not quite there, yet. I feel we need to try and encourage them to take a more active part in the stewardship of the Church, not necessarily socializing, but encourage them to devote some of their time and talents to the parish in some way that best fits their comfort zones. If so, we are helping to create an atmosphere, where if they can hang around long enough, the Spirit may move in them and they become the True Catholics that we all are called to be.

In regards to the young man in the story, it doesn’t matter what his motives were. The reason it struck a chord with me is I saw our parish in that story. And I will NOT let our parish stagnate! I’m sick and tired of seeing kids go off to college and quit going to the Catholic Church. I am wounded every time I meet up with a childhood friend from CYO and find that they’ve left the Church.

NotWorthy

 

[Curious]

I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth. I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord. He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit, and born of the Virgin Mary. He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended into the dead. On the third day he rose again. He ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.

The Apostles’ Creed

Catholics believe this. Protestants believe this. I’m of the opinion that the apostles’ creed “sums up” the core beliefs of all Christians very nicely. And yes, sometimes I’ve thought that way too much time has been wasted in Protestant and Catholic debates. The Church acknowledges the basic “Christian-ness” of most Protestants, and reasonable Protestants acknowledge the “Christian-ness” of the Catholic Church. Whenever I hear of Bible thumpers wanting to go get the Catholics saved, I want to hurl myself to the ground and gnash my teeth in a moment of complete melodrama and scream, “WHY ARE YOU AFTER PEOPLE THAT ARE ALREADY CHRISTIAN???!!! GET OUT THERE AND GET THE HEATHEN!!!”

But I also recognize the place of apologetics because, hopefully out of sincerity and love, every Christian wants all of their fellow Christian to walk in the fulness of truth. Not only do non-Christians need tending to, but so do our own lives. When done right, I believe there is fruitfulness in both endeavors.

 

[NotWorthy]

John 13:35 - ***This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another

***NotWorthy

 

[michaelgazin]

The whole problem I believe is just an extreme over-simplification of Christ and His Church. I would say that the majority of people on Earth would sum up their religious stance in about one sentence, “I believe in Jesus, and love Him, therefore I am going to heaven.”

I would say that the majority of Christians don’t know what a doctrine is, much less understanding that doctrines are what make a faith true or not. For most, faith is a matter of convenience and emotion, but not theology. As someone recently commented, “catholicism and protestantism are both unique and beautiful *styles *of worship.” That, I think, is the common view…that religious differences are merely different *styles *of worship. That way, you choose whichever style suits you best…its all about appeal.

For most, doctrine is associated with a loss in appeal. For some reason, they think that doctrine and Jesus are at odds with each other, that you can have either one or the other…the more doctrine you have, the less “plain, good 'ole Jesus love” you can have.

http://bestsmileys.com/thinking/1.gif
So the question is, how do you go about explaining the importance of doctrine? As soon as doctrine is brought up, people immediately get anxious for fear of losing their simple, uncomplicated relationship with Jesus. Doctrine is a complication, not a necessary guideline.

 

[joshua1]

This is kinda strange to me because I have been in many debates with protestants. After alot of wrangling, I would always say, why cant we just find common ground and what we agree on. They always brush it off and start quoting more Bible verses trying to prove me wrong. I have yet to find one protestant who will agree with a CAtholic on anything. What am I doing wrong. I dont know?

 

[NotWorthy]

joshua1:

This is kinda strange to me because I have been in many debates with protestants. After alot of wrangling, I would always say, why cant we just find common ground and what we agree on. They always brush it off and start quoting more Bible verses trying to prove me wrong. I have yet to find one protestant who will agree with a CAtholic on anything. What am I doing wrong. I dont know?

I think the answer is simple. For any Protestant Denomination to be correct in their belief system, then the Catholic Church MUST BE WRONG!!! If the Catholic Church is right, then any group that splinters off has some heretical teaching. Don’t believe me? Look it up in the Bible!

If this is so, wouldn’t you hope in your heart that you were right, to the point of not even convceiving that the Catholic Church may actually be right? It’s like the axiom: First plot the points, then draw your line. I think all too often the line is drawn (i.e. the CC is wrong) then the points are plotted (i.e. OSAS, Sole Fidele, Sola Scriptura, etc.)

I don’t know, maybe my reasoning is,

Notworthy

 

[jusher7281]

joshua1:

This is kinda strange to me because I have been in many debates with protestants. After alot of wrangling, I would always say, why cant we just find common ground and what we agree on. They always brush it off and start quoting more Bible verses trying to prove me wrong. I have yet to find one protestant who will agree with a CAtholic on anything. What am I doing wrong. I dont know?

joshua1,

The only thing you’re doing wrong is debating with people who refuse to open their minds and hearts to the truth. They aren’t interested in the truth because they already have a preconceived notion of what truth is (which is most likely their own or someone else’s interpretation of truth). I say, don’t cave in and just ask “Why can’t we just find common ground?” After all, the only common ground we share with non-Catholic denominations is that which they borrowed or inherited from the Catholic Church anyway. To do that just downplays the real doctrinal differences, many of which, in my opinion, are matters of necessity for salvation. It sounds like the people you’ve debated with are only trying to prove you wrong, but I think the burden of proof is on them, not you. When they start hurling Bible verses at you, have them prove to you that their interpretation of those verses is correct, and have them show you, in context. They will have great difficulty doing so.

JU

 

[Pug]

**

If the person shows in the tone of voice or body language that they are unwilling to listen or reason, then you stop immediately because it’s a waste of time.

**Something about this almost begs to have a pronoun added: it is a waste of YOUR time. I realize the prounoun is not there, but somehow I worry that it is echoing there anyway. If it is, then the person you are talking to will probably hear it.

I am more inclined to give the reason for stoping as it would not profit or help my neighbor at that time. It would probably hurt them.

Alan, thanks for your phone story.

 

[InnocentIII]

NotWorthy:

I think the answer is simple. For any Protestant Denomination to be correct in their belief system, then the Catholic Church MUST BE WRONG!!! If the Catholic Church is right, then any group that splinters off has some heretical teaching. Don’t believe me? Look it up in the Bible!

If this is so, wouldn’t you hope in your heart that you were right, to the point of not even convceiving that the Catholic Church may actually be right? It’s like the axiom: First plot the points, then draw your line. I think all too often the line is drawn (i.e. the CC is wrong) then the points are plotted (i.e. OSAS, Sole Fidele, Sola Scriptura, etc.)

I don’t know, maybe my reasoning is,

Notworthy

This we agree on. All Protestant denominations point to a human founder no matter how much they claim to be founded on the word of God. The Catholic Church (East and West) alone can claim foundation by Christ himself. Therefore the only way a Protestant can justify not being part of the Catholic Church and still claim to be following Christ is to absolutely maintain that the Church is wrong.

For that reason compromising with them only reinforces their belief in our wrongness. As for “lets concentrate on what we agree on” its intended to block any discussion of our real differences on the basis of the lowest common denominator ie belief in Christ and in my experience (not definitive I might add) generally occurs at the point where the debate turns to the issue of the foundation of the resepctive churches, because it is here that protestantism is most vulnerable.

Re Curious and the Apostles Creed.

There are two lines in the Apostles Creed that prevent this being considered a common base. While Protestants and Catholics may say the same words the meanmings are quite different. Those lines are “the holy catholic Church” and the communion of saints". The first refers to the visible body of Christ joined in the Catholic Church and the second to the unity of the Church militant, expectant and triumphant. Neither is believed by Protestants.