Should I have fought back, or not?

[Sammie_Lenoir]

You did the right thing by letting go hun it is what i would have done.

 

[Kit15]

Personally I think you did alright given the circumstances. I’m not very good at spontaneously butting into conversations either. Even in online interaction when I can gather my thoughts before typing…something about the wording comes off as too emotional or abrasive and I just don’t represent well.

I have very few Catholic friends in my circle…and even fewer are practicing Catholics. Religion actually doesn’t come up that often but when it does, the husband seems to have worked out some sort of system on his own to squeak the Catholic thing in. But he’s not Catholic so I don’t think he fully realizes what he’s doing. I think he just wants to dispel the falsehoods regarding his wife’s faith. It is a very misunderstood religion.

If he hears something in the conversations related to Catholic teachings that sounds a little like the person doesn’t really know what they’re talking about he usually speaks out loud asking me a related question. “Hey Katie! Just how much money does the church have?” or “What exactly is purgatory anyway?” (after the Lost Finale party where someone was talking about Purgatory as if it were Limbo) or “What’s the Church’s position on abstinence if you’re a vegetarian?” (at a small gathering on a Lenten Friday where someone made a comment about “pointless” Catholic dietary rules and the “obvious” loopholes) I don’t particularly like being put on the spot so suddenly when he does it…but it actually is a pretty effective way of educating people without being pushy. The husband is a known Agnostic to no one thinks he’s shoving religion around. He asked me a question so people would reasonably expect me to answer. It also drains the emotion out of my response…I’m not butting in. I’m not jumping to correct something. I’m answering my husband’s friendly question.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Respectfully, I’m going to disagree with what most said about remaining silent because that is not what scripture calls us to do.

First off, silence has traditionally meant ACCEPTANCE. If one does not speak out against what is being said, the conclusion is that one is in agreement with what is being said. By not defending the Church, one gives the impression that one is in agreement with the attack against it.

Secondly, an attack upon Christ’s Church is an attack against Jesus Himself. Christ made this very clear when He appear to Paul in Acts 9:1-9. By not defending the Church, one is not defending Christ. And what did Jesus say about those that fail to acknowledge Him before man? According to Matthew 10:32, Jesus will not acknowledge them before His heavenly Father.

Finally, 1 Peter 3:15 instructs us that we should always be ready, willing and able to defend our faith – but to do so with gentleness and respect.

 

[Sir_Knight]

What happened to “love your enemies, do good to those who mistreat you, turn the other cheek.”??? (Jesus Christ quoted)

What happened to always being ready, willing and able to defend the faith as we are commanded to do in 1 Peter 3:15?

And, turning the other cheek has a completely different meaning from what you are implying.

 

[Norseman82]

Fighting back will only give cause for them to have loaded guns in regards to Catholicism, by not seeing the serenity and peace inside the Catholic that may draw them at some point…“Wow, look at that Catholic’s love.”

Remember, the ignorami/ignoramae were from a “non-denominational church”, so then the OP could then retort that they should remove the beam from their own eyes first…

 

[RobNY]

Respectfully, I’m going to disagree with what most said about remaining silent because that is not what scripture calls us to do.

First off, silence has traditionally meant ACCEPTANCE. If one does not speak out against what is being said, the conclusion is that one is in agreement with what is being said. By not defending the Church, one gives the impression that one is in agreement with the attack against it.

Secondly, an attack upon Christ’s Church is an attack against Jesus Himself. Christ made this very clear when He appear to Paul in Acts 9:1-9. By not defending the Church, one is not defending Christ. And what did Jesus say about those that fail to acknowledge Him before man? According to Matthew 10:32, Jesus will not acknowledge them before His heavenly Father.

Finally, 1 Peter 3:15 instructs us that we should always be ready, willing and able to defend our faith – but to do so with gentleness and respect.

Remember that Jesus Christ, in His passion, was silent ‘as a lamb before its shearers, He opened not His mouth.’

We share in a special way with Christ’s passion when we bear insults in silence.

On the other hand, it does fall to others to be prepared for a defense… as in 1 Peter 3:15.

It is an issue of prudence. Sometimes a silent example is a better testimony than with words. Other times words are necessary.

Since most people are not open to argument, it can be helpful to lead by example.

 

[gretahope]

Remember, the ignorami/ignoramae were from a “non-denominational church”, so then the OP could then retort that they should remove the beam from their own eyes first…

Yes, be ready to give an account for your faith…when asked, not provoked. If I understand this circumstance correctly these people had their mind made up and were not open at that point.

I came from many years of being anti-Catholic, nondenom. background…and believe me, they were probably NOT ready to hear anything. There would have been unleashed probably a disaster in the midst of the party with anger flaring. I was part of these types of “debates”—it only brought up bigotry and hate. Actually it was the argumentative/“defenders” who argued with me and b/c they got so personally offended at questioning that it kept me out of the CC for about 15 years. Believe me, the 2000 year old Catholic church can stand up to her critics with gentle, loving, kind witness and people being open to study church history, when they’re ready.

For me and most converts I’ve spoken to…it was only through the gentle, caring, loving witness of a few faithful Catholics and a gentle, loving priest that I came into the CC. The serene, peaceful Catholic can move mountains

Please hear me b/c I was on the other side for a very long time…the VAST majority of people who bring up Catholicism who are no longer/not Catholic have HUGELY loaded guns, and they’re ready to fire at Catholics. I go along with the OP who took the high road and let it go.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Remember that Jesus Christ, in His passion, was silent ‘as a lamb before its shearers, He opened not His mouth.’

We share in a special way with Christ’s passion when we bear insults in silence.

On the other hand, it does fall to others to be prepared for a defense… as in 1 Peter 3:15.

It is an issue of prudence. Sometimes a silent example is a better testimony than with words. Other times words are necessary.

Since most people are not open to argument, it can be helpful to lead by example.

As I said earlier, by failing to defend Christ’s Church, we fail to defend Christ. And what did Jesus say would happen to those that did not acknowledge Him before others? [bibledrb]Matthew 10:32[/bibledrb]

 

[MichaelR]

I think you have to look at the nuances though, and the motivation of any reply.

These people weren’t attacking the OP and the OP’s faith and belief in particular, they were mouthing off in general about the Catholic Church. So what would the motivation of a response be?

If it is to defend the Catholic Church in general, well I have always believed that Catholics are confident enough in their faith not to have to constantly defend it unless under a serious attack…by having to defend something, you acknowledge that the content of what they were saying was worth a serious response instead of just taking it for the uneducated fluff it was, and in this case, it sounds like that is what it was…ridiculous twaddle that didn’t dignify a response. If it had been a pointed attack at the OP and their personal belief and faith, that would be different.

So if it is not to defend the faith, then it is to just defend yourself, and that, to me, can be seen as self indulgent, and in some ways on the same levels as what they were doing if it were to get into a fully blown argument…which it may have.

Of course, if it’s just a light hearted quip in response as others have suggested, that is harmless, then no harm done! Problem is, if you’re like me, you don’t think of something witty like that until after the event, so it’s best just to keep quiet LOL

To the OP…you left with far more dignity than they did…enough said!

 

[Sir_Knight]

I think you have to look at the nuances though, and the motivation of any reply.

These people weren’t attacking the OP and the OP’s faith and belief in particular, they were mouthing off in general about the Catholic Church.

And what is the faith and belief of the OP? Isn’t it Catholic? How is “mouthing off” against the Catholic Church not mouthing off against the faith and beliefs of the OP?

So what would the motivation of a response be?

To set the record straight so that others do not walk away with the false information that they were saying as being the truth.

If it is to defend the Catholic Church in general, well I have always believed that Catholics are confident enough in their faith not to have to constantly defend it unless under a serious attack…by having to defend something, you acknowledge that the content of what they were saying was worth a serious response instead of just taking it for the uneducated fluff it was, and in this case, it sounds like that is what it was…ridiculous twaddle that didn’t dignify a response. If it had been a pointed attack at the OP and their personal belief and faith, that would be different.

And why not take this opportunity to educate the uneducated and correct their incorrect comments?

So if it is not to defend the faith, then it is to just defend yourself, and that, to me, can be seen as self indulgent, and in some ways on the same levels as what they were doing if it were to get into a fully blown argument…which it may have.

Defending one’s belief is self-indulgent? Since when are we to be punching bags for others?

To the OP…you left with far more dignity than they did…enough said!

With nothing said to correct their false comments, how do you know where their dignity stands?

 

[MichaelR]

And what is the faith and belief of the OP? Isn’t it Catholic? How is “mouthing off” against the Catholic Church not mouthing off against the faith and beliefs of the OP?

To set the record straight so that others do not walk away with the false information that they were saying as being the truth.

And why not take this opportunity to educate the uneducated and correct their incorrect comments?

Defending one’s belief is self-indulgent? Since when are we to be punching bags for others?

With nothing said to correct their false comments, how do you know where their dignity stands?

I believe the difference was that they weren’t persecuting the OP for their personal belief. They were speaking generically. It doesn’t mean that what they said was right, but that it wasn’t a direct attack. And because it wasn’t an actual direct attack, it doesn’t mean you have to lift the defence shutters immediately. Sometimes, just letting someone say what they think proves more about their ill educated and bias views than anything that someone else can reply to them. I mean, if someone says something as sterotypical and silly as ‘well, everyone knows what blondes are like’, I’ll just think to myself ‘yeah, whatever, grow up’ but it’s so stupid I don’t need to pick them up on it because they’ve just shown themselves up to be childish and silly. However, if they were to say to me ‘you’re a stupid blonde’, then you can rest assured I would. (Even though I’m not blonde LOL Well, not reallly…ish).

If what they were saying was as unsubstantiated and ridiculously facile as it sounds, then no one is going to go away with the opinion that they were right, only that they were rude, childish and foolish…and it would be their own words that proved any foolishness in them, not anyone elses’. Sometimes, I think it’s good to have a little faith in human nature for people to be sensible enough to make up their own minds and see the truth for themselves.

As for ‘Defending one’s belief is self-indulgent? Since when are we to be punching bags for others?’…turn the other cheek? A whimsical reply I know, and I don’t mean it to be. But on a serious note, I didn’t say you had to be. I was just putting forward my personal opinion, and you’re free to disagree with it. I just personally think that sometimes it’s easy to respond to something like that as a way to make yourself feel better and superior about yourself rather than to prove a real point…just to prove you’re right and get the last word. I didn’t believe in this case there was a real point to prove…the rudeness of these people proved the point from the start, it didn’t need doing. Unfortunately, a lot of people snap back just to prove they’re right and the other person is wrong; it doesn’t matter what the subject is, they just like being right in front of others. That’s what I don’t agree with. Fortunately, that seems to be a minority of people I know though.

If I’m genuinely under attack, then of course I’ll respond in defence, but if I feel that what they’re saying is unfounded rubbish, I just ignore it or say ‘if you say so’ because it’s so unintelligent I don’t even perceive it as a threat.

And I know where their dignity stands despite no false comments being corrected because of their behaviour. And the way they behaved, they not only showed themselves up, but left their dignity clinging to the floor. By walking away from it I, personally, feel that the OP had far greater dignity for not sinking to their level. Especially as it could have turned into a full blown argument during someone elses hospitality in someone elses home and personal space. But, that’s just my personal view. I’m not saying it’s a definitive answer, and I’m certainly no Priest.

 

[gretahope]

I think you have to look at the nuances though, and the motivation of any reply.

These people weren’t attacking the OP and the OP’s faith and belief in particular, they were mouthing off in general about the Catholic Church. So what would the motivation of a response be?

If it is to defend the Catholic Church in general, well I have always believed that Catholics are confident enough in their faith not to have to constantly defend it unless under a serious attack…by having to defend something, you acknowledge that the content of what they were saying was worth a serious response instead of just taking it for the uneducated fluff it was, and in this case, it sounds like that is what it was…ridiculous twaddle that didn’t dignify a response. If it had been a pointed attack at the OP and their personal belief and faith, that would be different.

So if it is not to defend the faith, then it is to just defend yourself, and that, to me, can be seen as self indulgent, and in some ways on the same levels as what they were doing if it were to get into a fully blown argument…which it may have.

Of course, if it’s just a light hearted quip in response as others have suggested, that is harmless, then no harm done! Problem is, if you’re like me, you don’t think of something witty like that until after the event, so it’s best just to keep quiet LOL

To the OP…you left with far more dignity than they did…enough said!

…and I thought on a generic level of the Proverb: “A soft answer turns away wrath.”
Very well said, MichaelR! Your post covers a lot of ground, and you said it much better than I could have.

 

[Sir_Knight]

I believe the difference was that they weren’t persecuting the OP for their personal belief.

No, they were persecuting the Church that she belonged to. The Church that Jesus said He and it were one and the same. If someone made negative comments about our Lord, would you also remain silent? If so, how do you square those actions with Matthew 10:32? If not, why defend negative comments about our Lord but not about His Church especially when Jesus said that He and His Church are one. Accept His Church, accept Him. Reject His Church, reject Him. Say negative things about His Church, say negative things about Him.

They were speaking generically. It doesn’t mean that what they said was right, but that it wasn’t a direct attack. And because it wasn’t an actual direct attack, it doesn’t mean you have to lift the defence shutters immediately. Sometimes, just letting someone say what they think proves more about their ill educated and bias views than anything that someone else can reply to them. I mean, if someone says something as sterotypical and silly as ‘well, everyone knows what blondes are like’, I’ll just think to myself ‘yeah, whatever, grow up’ but it’s so stupid I don’t need to pick them up on it because they’ve just shown themselves up to be childish and silly. However, if they were to say to me ‘you’re a stupid blonde’, then you can rest assured I would. (Even though I’m not blonde LOL Well, not reallly…ish).

Even if it was not an “attack”, they were spreading incorrect information. Why not take the opportunity to educate them and others who MIGHT take stock in what they say?

Earlier this year I was at a non-religious meeting on Veteran’s Day when a Protestant Minister came up to speak. In the middle of his remarks he made a comment that the public schools were off on that day to honor veterans while the Catholic schools were in session and his conclusion was that Catholics didn’t recognize or honor the contributions of our veterans.

I politely interrupted and pointed out that the Catholic School children were in school learning about the contributions that the veterans had made and were offering up prayers for them while the public school children had a just another day off and I asked him how many of those children even though about veterans that day? Never mind saying a prayer for them. That said, who honored the veterans more?

My point was made. Not only did I educate the individual who made the ignorant comment but by correcting what was said, I made sure that others present walked away with a more accurate understanding of things.

If what they were saying was as unsubstantiated and ridiculously facile as it sounds, then no one is going to go away with the opinion that they were right, only that they were rude, childish and foolish…and it would be their own words that proved any foolishness in them, not anyone elses’. Sometimes, I think it’s good to have a little faith in human nature for people to be sensible enough to make up their own minds and see the truth for themselves.

You never know what some people will accept as factual and what they will reject as utter rubbish. I’ve heard the comment that “the Catholic church has more money than the mob” numerous times and many people believe it. Why take the chance that some may walk away believing it? Why not take the opportunity to correct the false information?

… Continued in NEXT Post ***

 

[Sir_Knight]

*** Continued from PREVIOUS Post …

As for ‘Defending one’s belief is self-indulgent? Since when are we to be punching bags for others?’…turn the other cheek? A whimsical reply I know, and I don’t mean it to be. But on a serious note, I didn’t say you had to be. I was just putting forward my personal opinion, and you’re free to disagree with it. I just personally think that sometimes it’s easy to respond to something like that as a way to make yourself feel better and superior about yourself rather than to prove a real point…just to prove you’re right and get the last word. I didn’t believe in this case there was a real point to prove…the rudeness of these people proved the point from the start, it didn’t need doing. Unfortunately, a lot of people snap back just to prove they’re right and the other person is wrong; it doesn’t matter what the subject is, they just like being right in front of others. That’s what I don’t agree with. Fortunately, that seems to be a minority of people I know though.

It isn’t a matter of proving yourself right but of standing up for what you believe in. Remember, silence means acceptance.

If I’m genuinely under attack, then of course I’ll respond in defence, but if I feel that what they’re saying is unfounded rubbish, I just ignore it or say ‘if you say so’ because it’s so unintelligent I don’t even perceive it as a threat.

Exactly what has to be said about the Catholic faith to warrant a defense? Are only big lies to be addressed? Why let any false statements go unchallenged?

And I know where their dignity stands despite no false comments being corrected because of their behaviour. And the way they behaved, they not only showed themselves up, but left their dignity clinging to the floor. By walking away from it I, personally, feel that the OP had far greater dignity for not sinking to their level.

Some people are so caught up in themselves they don’t know where their dignity lies. I could say something to illustrate my point but it would take too long to type out and I don’t want to hi-jake this thread with that story.

Especially as it could have turned into a full blown argument during someone elses hospitality in someone elses home and personal space.

When I was younger, I use to think the same way. Let offensive remarks slide in order to keep the peace and not make waves. However, while we are to treat our brother like ourselves, our brother is ALSO to treat us like himself. Which means that his rights are not greater than our’s where he can say incorrect or offensive comments at our expense.

But, that’s just my personal view. I’m not saying it’s a definitive answer, and I’m certainly no Priest.

Ditto.