What Percent Can Defend Their Faith?

[Goya]

Thanks for the clarification Goya.

Our two experiences have obviously been quite different. I find very little of what you define as “guerrilla evangelization”. Rather I see many who are honestly trying to bring others closer to Christ.

The reason that they seem to find Catholics to be such “easy pickings” is, in large part, simply because of what I said earlier. Lousy Catechesis. But this is also too simple.

You brought out an interesting point above about people who claim to be “former Catholics” who did not have a relationship with Christ.
One has to ask - what sort of “former Catholics” could these be? My guess is that they are largely cradle Catholics who’s families did not really practice the faith, go to mass regularly, prayed at home etc…
I heard a number some time ago that said something like 20% of Catholics in the U.S. attend mass regularly. Well if 80 percent of those who identify as Catholic don’t even attend mass…is it any wonder that they don’t have a “personal relationship” with Christ??

Bottom line in this is that I don’t choose to blame those doing the evangelizing for Catholics leaving the Church. The problem being discussed here is defense and in the case of defending the faith, one needs to actually believe it, and to embrace it and to learn it.

Just some thoughts.

Peace
James

Ok, I should point out that I’ve know protestants of most every stripe–and yes, some are genuine and sincere–perhaps even most. But just to the story that started this little side-track–a radio talk show in Los Angeles. LA is mostly Catholic. Yet, conveniently, you have all these supposedly ‘lapsed Catholics’, calling in to a radio show, and so many have the same story (which conveniently aligns with an anti-catholic canned apologetic), that that is what stuck with the poster after so many years…that strikes me as much more suspicious, than concerning.

I admit, it’s just conjecture, but…I just feel like I seen that movie before.

Now, I’ll grant you, church attendence by percentage is down, and catechesis in general, could certainly–(frankly, always)–use some improvement. But most Catholics just don’t wear their faith on their sleeves–yet remain loyally Catholic.

As for Catholics’ ability to defend their faith–again, as i posted originally–that is also largely determiend by the nature of the attack or attacker. And protestants have a way of making it seem like they’re our friends…when sometimes they aren’t quite…or of concealing their attacks, so we don’t prepare to defend ourselves against such. That’s why I chimed in on Cordelil’s story–seemed like maybe it was such a case.

Let me address the point this way–are we losing more Catholics to:

Judaism?
Islam?
Buddism?
Hiduism?
Atheism?
Agnosticism?
Gnosticism? or
Protestantism?

Secondly, which of those above, are most Catholics least prepared to defend the Faith, against?

I believe protestantism stands out head & shoulders above the rest, on both counts–yet the Church continues to take a passive approach to protestantism. I just think it would serve the Church well, if she promulgated apologetic catechesis, directly at protestantism, rather than pretending the elephant in the room, isn’t really causing any hinderance.

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

 

[JRKH]

Ok, I should point out that I’ve know protestants of most every stripe–and yes, some are genuine and sincere–perhaps even most. But just to the story that started this little side-track–a radio talk show in Los Angeles. LA is mostly Catholic. Yet, conveniently, you have all these supposedly ‘lapsed Catholics’, calling in to a radio show, and so many have the same story (which conveniently aligns with an anti-catholic canned apologetic), that that is what stuck with the poster after so many years…that strikes me as much more suspicious, than concerning.

I admit, it’s just conjecture, but…I just feel like I seen that movie before.

Now, I’ll grant you, church attendence by percentage is down, and catechesis in general, could certainly–(frankly, always)–use some improvement. But most Catholics just don’t wear their faith on their sleeves–yet remain loyally Catholic.

As for Catholics’ ability to defend their faith–again, as i posted originally–that is also largely determiend by the nature of the attack or attacker. And protestants have a way of making it seem like they’re our friends…when sometimes they aren’t quite…or of concealing their attacks, so we don’t prepare to defend ourselves against such. That’s why I chimed in on Cordelil’s story–seemed like maybe it was such a case.

Let me address the point this way–are we losing more Catholics to:

Judaism?
Islam?
Buddism?
Hiduism?
Atheism?
Agnosticism?
Gnosticism? or
Protestantism?

Secondly, which of those above, are most Catholics least prepared to defend the Faith, against?

I believe protestantism stands out head & shoulders above the rest, on both counts–yet the Church continues to take a passive approach to protestantism. I just think it would serve the Church well, if she promulgated apologetic catechesis, directly at protestantism, rather than pretending the elephant in the room, isn’t really causing any hinderance.

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

Good points - I wholeheartedly agree that it would be very helpful to have widely used apologetic materials specifically addressing Protestant arguments. Of course this material already exists and some of it is available right here as CA.

To my mind though is the need for people to be sure of their faith. The one who is sure of their faith has no need of fancy apologetics in order to resist any argument advanced by another person of any faith tradition (or none).

I am no great apologist. I don’t know the necessary arguments and cannot counter an evangelical protestant point by point…but what I do know is all that I need…I know WHY I am Catholic and why I am Catholic is sufficient for me to remain Catholic. No amount of clever argument - no amount of proselytizing will make me change my mind.
Of course if there is someone speaking error, I will try to correct them. If they ask me a question that I don’t know the answer to, I will try to get the answer.

But the bottom line keeping people in the faith is getting them to understand why they are Catholic to to be happy being Catholic.

I’m not trying to be a pain here…Just thinking…

Peace
James

 

[Goya]

Good points - I wholeheartedly agree that it would be very helpful to have widely used apologetic materials specifically addressing Protestant arguments. Of course this material already exists and some of it is available right here as CA.

To my mind though is the need for people to be sure of their faith. The one who is sure of their faith has no need of fancy apologetics in order to resist any argument advanced by another person of any faith tradition (or none).

I am no great apologist. I don’t know the necessary arguments and cannot counter an evangelical protestant point by point…but what I do know is all that I need…I know WHY I am Catholic and why I am Catholic is sufficient for me to remain Catholic. No amount of clever argument - no amount of proselytizing will make me change my mind.
Of course if there is someone speaking error, I will try to correct them. If they ask me a question that I don’t know the answer to, I will try to get the answer.

But the bottom line keeping people in the faith is getting them to understand why they are Catholic to to be happy being Catholic.

I’m not trying to be a pain here…Just thinking…

Peace
James

Sure, and most Catholics are 'sure of their FAITH’. That goes directly to my point. Sure in the Faith, and therefore quite resistent to, and well prepared to defend against attacks on or against ‘the Faith.’

The problem with protestantism, is that it mimics the Faith; same conception of God (Trinity); same book (the Bible); same central ‘character’ (Christ); same salvatoin narrative, etc., etc.; same language (for the most part–there are numerous nuances in the language employed, and how it is employed, but I’ll defer on that point for now)–consequently, they’ve essentially pirated the intellectual property of Christianity, and proceeded to sell it off as their own. (The analogy works even more compellingly, when you follow the money).

It’s like having a virus or bacterial infection that your immune system cannot fight, because it cannot detect or recognize it, since it mimics healthy tissue–yet it keeps advancing, and compromising the organism.

Focusing on apologetics from the Pope, down through the Bishops’ seats, that emphasize the error of protestantism, how to detect the errors, and how we as Christians have an obligation to go forth and correct such errors, would go a long way, imo, to beefing up defenses, against this ‘virus’ that mimics legitimate tissue function (or chineese manufacturers appropriaring intel. prop., for their own benefit).

Note how helpful the Cathecism has been overall, in solidifying the faithful–and yet even the CCC, powder puffs protestantism. Imagine how effective an official, easily readable and highly accessible resource that clearly identifies the errors of protestantism and the stealthy modes used to confuse Catholics, would be…

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

 

[JRKH]

**Imagine how effective an official, easily readable and highly accessible resource that clearly identifies the errors of protestantism and the stealthy modes used to confuse Catholics, would be… **

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

How many of these already exist?

Peace
James

 

[Auntie_A]

How many of these already exist?

Peace
James

I wish I knew…But I probably agree with the “2%” quote or something under 10%. My parents generation were much better educated in apologetics. It was so deeply taught and felt that it was not about “winning” debates or arguments; it was simply knowing the truth, knowing that the same attacks on the truth have happened before and quietly redirecting the antagonistic question with a simple answer. If someone wanted to know more, then they would refer the person to some good books or pamphlets (The Answer Box, for one); if someone wanted more argument for the sake of a fight, they would be gently redirected or discussion ended.