Parents' Anti-Catholicism

[CutlerB]

I may be a bit quick to call my parents anti-catholic, but certainly some degree of it is present. This morning, I told them about some liturgical changes we are implementing at our Anglican parish (which is my work). That got us onto the topic of Catholicism.

Mum was shocked, saying she didn’t want all the “old nonsense”, threatening we wouldn’t get anyone to attend. “Who is church for?”, she said, implying the people. After some more talk on that, they jumped onto the usual phrases:

“Sale of indulgences! You’re being brainwashed! Luther was the first to translate the Bible for the people! The Church is rich from the indulgences!”

I felt there was no point discussing any further after some time, as they just wouldn’t think about what I was saying. All I said got a big stamp saying “Brainwash”.

It may sound really bad, but it’s not that we wouldn’t get on with each other. We do, that just seems to be a sensitive topic. So my question is:

Do you think there are some good points to make about those topics, except for the brainwash stuff, which I will just ignore? For example: I could use some names of Bibl translations before Luther’s time. The difference between selling indulgences and granting one for alms. Alleged Church wealth.

Thanks.

 

[mommy_k]

In order to defend some practices of the past- it is helpful to read and study the point in time that it is occuring. To step back and look at these things from a historical viewpoint of the culture back then. What people understood is very different than today and payment was used to ensure sacrifice or penance of the giver.

 

[JRKH]

I wish I had some good references to offer you - but I’m sure others will provide some…

To me - and obviously to you - the accusation of “brainwashed” is a difficult and frankly hurtful and unchristian one. So I would suggest to you that you need to address this with your parents first and quite apart from any other issues.

I don’t wish to put words in your mouth…but I would think - and maybe ask them…
“Do you think so little of my intelligence that you believe I can be brainwashed?”
“Do you have so little respect for me that you believe I would not have given these matters careful and prayerful consideration?”
“Did you raise a child to be that stupid and gullible?”

Questions along these lines might just get them to thinking about how they are not just resisting the Catholic Church, but are actually attacking their own child. Attacking - not your points and arguments but attacking You personally.
Tell them how hurtful it is to you to be dismissed with such unloving rhetoric.

Then - tell them that you love them dearly - but - if “brainwashed” is to be considered a valid argument that you could make the same charge against them and their position.
However - since “brainwashed” is hurtful and useless, you would prefer to have real discussions with them about real points and issues and to do so in a mature and mutually respectful manner.

The above are just ideas about how to approach this matter, you would have to determine the right words for yourself and for them…but the essence is valid…so long as they dismiss you and your arguments as “brainwash”, you will make no headway no matter HOW many sources we can provide.

Peace
James

 

[CutlerB]

Thank you James!

 

[JRKH]

Thank you James!

You are welcome.

Sometimes we can miss these kinds of basic things. If you can get your parents to see how disrespectful they are being by this sort of dismissive comment, perhaps they can then begin to consider that maybe - just maybe - you might have some valid points. Things worth considering…

Peace
James

 

[CutlerB]

You are welcome.

Sometimes we can miss these kinds of basic things. If you can get your parents to see how disrespectful they are being by this sort of dismissive comment, perhaps they can then begin to consider that maybe - just maybe - you might have some valid points. Things worth considering…

Peace
James

I agree. Mum’s always been opposed to anything Catholic, but will not tell me why. Dad is rooted in Anglicanism because of family tradition. Mum isn’t very open to rational discussion, she says things like: “So what, this is my opinion” or “I’m right, because I am right”. She’s dismissive of anything Catholic immediately.

Dad has the impression that the Catholic Church is somewhat evil, and always very suspicious of what She says or teaches. For example:

I read a quote from Saint Ignatius once that says something like: “Let no man do anything without the bishop. …] Where Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” So what he replied was: “See, supervision! Don’t do anything alone.” Apart from that, there’s all thrill canards. Indulgences, bad Popes, Galileo, supposed extreme Church wealth, no women priests.

I can reply to all of them, but he will just not listen. Or rather, he doesn’t accept it. Luther’s the hero who stood up against the terror of Rome, in his view. I can’t find a way to get through.

 

[Rosinante]

First:

A must read–Where We Got the Bible–our Debt to the Catholic Church, by Henry Grahaam (a Scotsman, btw):

catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/protestantism/wbible.htm

^^^note–the entire book is online; no need to pay a penny, or fish for it…

Excerpt:

CHAPTER XI. Abundance of Vernacular Scriptures before Wycliff

I HAVE said that people who could read at all in the Middle Ages could read Latin: hence there was little need for the Church to issue the Scriptures in any other language. But as a matter of fact she did in many countries put the Scriptures in the hands of her children in their own tongue. (I) We know from history that there were popular translations of the Bible and Gospels in Spanish, Italian, Danish, French, Norwegian, Polish, Bohemian and Hungarian for the Catholics of those lands before the days of printing, but we shall confine ourselves to England, so as to refute once more the common fallacy that John Wycliff was the first to place an English translation of the Scriptures in the hands of the English people in 1382.

To anyone that has investigated the real facts of the case, this fondly-cherished notion must seem truly ridiculous; it is not only absolutely false, but stupidly so, inasmuch as it admits of such easy disproof; one wonders that nowadays any lecturer or writer should have the temerity to advance it. Now, observe I am speaking of the days before the printing*press was invented; I am speaking of England; and concerning a Church which did not, and does not, admit the necessity of Bible-reading for salvation; and concerning an age when the production of the Scriptures was a most costly business, and far beyond the means of nearly everybody. Yet we may safely assert, and we can prove, that there were actually in existence among the people many copies of the Scriptures in the English tongue of that day. To begin far back, we have a copy of the work of Caedmon, a monk of Whitby, in the end of the seventh century, consisting of great portions of the Bible in the common tongue. In the next century we have the well-known translations of Venerable Bede, a monk of Jarrow, who died whilst busy with the Gospel of St. John. In the same (eighth) century we have the copies of Eadhelm, Bishop of Sherborne; of Guthlac, a hermit near Peterborough; and of Egbert, Bishop of Holy Island; these were all in Saxon, the language understood and spoken by the Christians of that time. Coming down a little later, we have the free translations of King Alfred the Great who was working at the Psalms when he died, and of Aelfric, Archbishop of Canterbury; as well as popular renderings of Holy Scripture like the Book of Durham, and the Rushworth Gloss and others that have survived the wreck of ages. After the Norman conquest in 1066, Anglo-Norman or Middle-English became the language of England, and consequently the next translations of the Bible we meet with are in that tongue. There are several specimens still known, such as the paraphrase of Orm (about 1150) and the Salus Animae (1050), the translations of William Shoreham and Richard Rolle, hermit of Hampole (died 1349). I say advisedly ‘specimens’ for those that have come down to us are merely indications of a much greater number that once existed, but afterwards perished. We have proof of this in the words of Blessed Thomas More, Lord Chancellor of England under Henry VIII who says: ‘The whole Bible long before Wycliff’s day was by virtuous and well-learned men translated into the English tongue, and by good and godly people with devotion and soberness well and reverently read’ (Dialogues III). Again, 'The clergy keep no Bibles from the laity but such translations as be either not yet approved for good, or such as be already reproved for naught (i.e., bad, naughty) as Wycliff’s was. For, as for old ones that were before Wycliff’s days, they remain lawful and be in some folks’ hand. I myself have seen, and can show you, Bibles, fair and old which have been known and seen by the Bishop of the Diocese, and left in laymen’s hands and women’s too, such as he knew for good and Catholic folk, that used them with soberness and devotion.’ (2) But you will say, that is the witness of a Roman Catholic. Well, I shall advance Protestant testimony also.

…

Secondly, I’d offer this for context/perspective:

Yes the Catholic Church is the richest institution on the planet–but who gets to use her wealth?

Notice–when PJPII died–the leader of teh world’s largest Church, the worlds richest institution–he died…IN HIS APARTMENT. Really, not even HIS; rather it belonged adn bleogns, to the Church. What’s more, when he did, he left a small sampling of PERSONAL EFFECTS. No issue; no heirs; no huge trust fund, or probate estate. Nope. jsut some personal effects. That’s all.

Contrast that, with your larger protestant churches. Notice the television smiles, the trophy wife, the spoiled rotten kids… that’s where their money goes. (sure I realize not all pro. churhces are like this-but enough that it isn’t exactly ‘atypical’).

Now, any one on the planet–jew, muslim, aatheist, protesant, Catholic–no matter–is welcome in any, beautifully, ornately, reverently decorated Catholic Church on the planet. Anyone. Anywhere. For the entire world to enjoy. Come in, pray, take pictures…

That’s where Catholic money goes (that, and charity, of course).

VIVAT JESUS!

 

[ahs]

I may be a bit quick to call my parents anti-catholic, but certainly some degree of it is present. This morning, I told them about some liturgical changes we are implementing at our Anglican parish (which is my work). That got us onto the topic of Catholicism.

Mum was shocked, saying she didn’t want all the “old nonsense”, threatening we wouldn’t get anyone to attend. “Who is church for?”, she said, implying the people. After some more talk on that, they jumped onto the usual phrases:

“Sale of indulgences! You’re being brainwashed! Luther was the first to translate the Bible for the people! The Church is rich from the indulgences!”

I felt there was no point discussing any further after some time, as they just wouldn’t think about what I was saying. All I said got a big stamp saying “Brainwash”.

It may sound really bad, but it’s not that we wouldn’t get on with each other. We do, that just seems to be a sensitive topic. So my question is:

Do you think there are some good points to make about those topics, except for the brainwash stuff, which I will just ignore? For example: I could use some names of Bibl translations before Luther’s time. The difference between selling indulgences and granting one for alms. Alleged Church wealth.

Thanks.

It’s likely to be a rough ride for a time. Pray for them and patiently and lovingly express the Faith. Some things you could offer your parents for thought (NOT debate):

-Was it indulgences that were sold, or wasn’t this scandal, which the Church did finally put a stop to, related to almsgiving? The Church has never “sold indulgences”…such would not be possible because an “indulgence” is not something that could be purchased. (This may or may not encourage them to actually research the topic.)

-How wealthy is the Church? What is it’s annual budget compared, for example, to Harvard University? How much money exactly has been made from these supposed “indulgences”…based on actual reliable information which can be substantiated.

-Were there no Bibles for people prior to Luther? When was the printing press invented, and how were Bibles printed before that? How long do you suppose it took to handprint 1 Bible, and how many people in those days were literate enough to actually read a Bible if one was handed to them?

 

[dshix]

i wish i had some good references to offer you - but i’m sure others will provide some…

To me - and obviously to you - the accusation of “brainwashed” is a difficult and frankly hurtful and unchristian one. So i would suggest to you that you need to address this with your parents first and quite apart from any other issues.

I don’t wish to put words in your mouth…but i would think - and maybe ask them…
“do you think so little of my intelligence that you believe i can be brainwashed?”
“do you have so little respect for me that you believe i would not have given these matters careful and prayerful consideration?”
“did you raise a child to be that stupid and gullible?”

questions along these lines might just get them to thinking about how they are not just resisting the catholic church, but are actually attacking their own child. Attacking - not your points and arguments but attacking you personally.
Tell them how hurtful it is to you to be dismissed with such unloving rhetoric.

Then - tell them that you love them dearly - but - if “brainwashed” is to be considered a valid argument that you could make the same charge against them and their position.
However - since “brainwashed” is hurtful and useless, you would prefer to have real discussions with them about

real points and issues and to do so in a mature and mutually respectful manner.

The above are just ideas about how to approach this matter, you would have to determine the right words for yourself and for them…but the essence is valid…so long as they dismiss you and your arguments as “brainwash”, you will make no headway no matter how many sources we can provide.

Peace
james

Yeeaaahh!! :coolinoff:

 

[ahs]

I can reply to all of them, but he will just not listen. Or rather, he doesn’t accept it. Luther’s the hero who stood up against the terror of Rome, in his view. I can’t find a way to get through.

You don’t need to get through…just be Catholic. Show them what a Catholic is by doing what a Catholic does…by loving and living the life Christ gave you to live. It may be decades before they open up to another view…and that is okay.

You might ask your dad, if he is open to the historical writings (not one of those that believe that all the histories have been destroyed and re-written…in which case you might invite him to provide some credible source to substantiate that), to read the book of Acts (in one sitting) and then each of the Letters/Epsitles, one at a time, each in its entirety, not a few verses here and there, and then follow up with reading the early Church Fathers.

 

[ahs]

I wish I had some good references to offer you - but I’m sure others will provide some…

To me - and obviously to you - the accusation of “brainwashed” is a difficult and frankly hurtful and unchristian one. So I would suggest to you that you need to address this with your parents first and quite apart from any other issues.

I don’t wish to put words in your mouth…but I would think - and maybe ask them…
“Do you think so little of my intelligence that you believe I can be brainwashed?”
“Do you have so little respect for me that you believe I would not have given these matters careful and prayerful consideration?”
“Did you raise a child to be that stupid and gullible?”

Questions along these lines might just get them to thinking about how they are not just resisting the Catholic Church, but are actually attacking their own child. Attacking - not your points and arguments but attacking You personally.
Tell them how hurtful it is to you to be dismissed with such unloving rhetoric.

Then - tell them that you love them dearly - but - if “brainwashed” is to be considered a valid argument that you could make the same charge against them and their position.
However - since “brainwashed” is hurtful and useless, you would prefer to have real discussions with them about

real points and issues and to do so in a mature and mutually respectful manner.

The above are just ideas about how to approach this matter, you would have to determine the right words for yourself and for them…but the essence is valid…so long as they dismiss you and your arguments as “brainwash”, you will make no headway no matter HOW many sources we can provide.

Peace
James

Oh, wow…I missed this post!

 

[JRKH]

I agree. Mum’s always been opposed to anything Catholic, but will not tell me why. Dad is rooted in Anglicanism because of family tradition. Mum isn’t very open to rational discussion, she says things like: “So what, this is my opinion” or “I’m right, because I am right”. She’s dismissive of anything Catholic immediately.

Dad has the impression that the Catholic Church is somewhat evil, and always very suspicious of what She says or teaches. For example:

I read a quote from Saint Ignatius once that says something like: “Let no man do anything without the bishop. …] Where Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” So what he replied was: “See, supervision! Don’t do anything alone.” Apart from that, there’s all thrill canards. Indulgences, bad Popes, Galileo, supposed extreme Church wealth, no women priests.

I can reply to all of them, but he will just not listen. Or rather, he doesn’t accept it. Luther’s the hero who stood up against the terror of Rome, in his view. I can’t find a way to get through.

Perhaps for your dad you could read some of Luther’s writings and give your dad some quotes that might stand his hair on end…Like Luther saying that the reformers owe a great debt to the Catholic Church because without her, they would have no bible.

Or the fact that Luther had a great devotion to Our Lady - or that in his description of prayer he included making the sign of the cross…
There are also some things from later in his life when he was becoming more and more concerned about all the different interpretations of Scripture…

Oh - and by the way - doesn’t the CofE have “Bishops”? hhmmmm…

But most importantly…as ahs said above…just be Catholic. Be the best Catholic you can be and the Love of God will shine through you.

Peace
James

 

[CutlerB]

Perhaps for your dad you could read some of Luther’s writings and give your dad some quotes that might stand his hair on end…Like Luther saying that the reformers owe a great debt to the Catholic Church because without her, they would have no bible.

Or the fact that Luther had a great devotion to Our Lady - or that in his description of prayer he included making the sign of the cross…
There are also some things from later in his life when he was becoming more and more concerned about all the different interpretations of Scripture…

Oh - and by the way - doesn’t the CofE have “Bishops”? hhmmmm…

But most importantly…as ahs said above…just be Catholic. Be the best Catholic you can be and the Love of God will shine through you.

Peace
James

If I only were one already, I’m having trouble getting in contact with the nearest parish…

 

[JRKH]

If I only were one already, I’m having trouble getting in contact with the nearest parish…

Hang in there

 

[QNDNNDQDCE]

Perhaps for your dad you could read some of Luther’s writings and give your dad some quotes that might stand his hair on end…

Another good one is the section from the Small Catechism on confession.

What is Confession?

Confession has two parts. First, that we confess our sins, and second, that we receive absolution, that is, forgiveness, from the pastor as from God Himself, not doubting, but firmly believing that by it our sins are forgiven before God in heaven.

. . .

What is the Office of the Keys?

The Office of the Keys is that special authority which Christ has given to His church on earth to forgive the sins of repentant sinners, but to withhold forgiveness from the unrepentant as long as they do not repent.

Where is this written?

This is what St. John the Evangelist writes in chapter twenty: The Lord Jesus breathed on His disciples and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.” (John 20:22–23)

What do you believe according to these words?

I believe that when the called ministers of Christ deal with us by His divine command, in particular when they exclude openly unrepentant sinners from the Christian congregation and absolve those who repent of their sins and want to do better, this is just as valid and certain, even in heaven, as if Christ our dear Lord dealt with us Himself.
cph.org/t-topic-catechism-confession.aspx