Why are Catholics so reserved, generally speaking, about sharing their faith?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WhiteDove
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
EA_Man:
IAlso how is it possible that I could have been poorly indoctrinated by an “infallible” teaching magesterium?
The doctrines of the Church are protected by the Holy Spirit because Jesus told the apostles that they would be. I have much more to tell you, but you cannot bear it now. But when he comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you to all truth… John 16:12-13

However, that does not mean there will not be teachers may mislead about the teachings. St. Paul warns the Galatians about false teachers:
As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one you received, let that one be accursed" Galatians 1:9

I don’t know if you were poorly indocrinated because of false teachers, or merely bad teachers, or if you simply somehow missed the good information that was presented to you. (Even the Corinthians who had St. Paul teach them fell into error and sin.)

I invite you to explore the doctrinal truths that the **Bible **tells us Jesus Christ promised the Holy Spirit would guide us to. If you doubt that the Holy Spirit protects Christ’s Church, then what you really doubt is that promise of Christ’ in the Bible.
 
Millardo:
Protestants also do that with the Bible. Is the Bible equated to Jesus as well then?
Protestants look to the Bible as their sole rule of faith, or at least they should. My guess is that in spite of the disdain that is implied here you yourself don’t deny that the Bible is the Word of God. I love what the Lord says because I love the Lord.

I have made reference to an actual radio program and something that was clearly stated by Karl Keating and could probably be found in Real Audio on this site if I had the time to search for it. My challenge to you, Millardo, is provide an example of a leading Protestant apologist who claims that it is okay to love the Bible more than Jesus Himself. Certainly you will find a good deal of reverence for the Holy Scriptures as the Word is God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16).

Christ’s church is composed of human beings. The creation cannot be put on the same level as the Creator. Even if I say I love Christ’s church (my brothers and sisters) it would be wrong for me to say I love them more than Christ Himself.

From Matthew 22:
**36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37 Jesus replied: “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment.”
Note, Jesus did not say “Love the Lord your God - and the church - with all your soul and all your mind, because they are the same.” Jesus’ command is that ALL is to be directed at God. He goes on to say the second is like it, loving your neighbor as yourself, but does not give the same emphasis.
No different really from how Protestants see the Bible, trying to live up to its rules and regulations. Note that we’re not trying to de-emphasize the Bible here, but merely to point out that the Protestant also puts it in such a regard the same way a Catholic regards the Church.
Not so. The Protestant view is that salvation is not attained by rules and regulations. Further, once again, the authority of God’s Word contrasted with the teaching of men many centuries of development later. Big difference.
Now that’s a personal problem [not having shared my faith before I came to Christ as a teenager] with you; do you blame the Church for that as well?
If “the Church” which is supposed to be the pillar of truth, is not spreading the Good News, well, yes, I would say “the Church” deserves some blame.
 
Forgive me Mallardo, for jumping on the questions posed to you. I hope you don’t mind if I respond too.
40.png
arcturus:
…the Bible is the Word of God. I love what the Lord says because I love the Lord.
We also love what the Lord says because we also love the Lord. The Bible is one of the beautiful ways that the Lord speaks to us. And we love the Church that gave us the Bible because the Magesterium of the Church is another way that God speaks to us. You may not believe that, but that is one reason why loyal Catholics love the Church.
arctus:
I have made reference to an actual radio program and something that was clearly stated by Karl Keating…
Christ’s church is composed of human beings. The creation cannot be put on the same level as the Creator. Even if I say I love Christ’s church (my brothers and sisters) it would be wrong for me to say I love them more than Christ Himself.
I did not hear the show, but perhaps these Bible quotes will share some perspective on the view that in loving the Church we love Jesus. St. Paul refers to the Body of Christ as being the members of the church.
For as in one body we have many parts, and all parts do not have the same functuion, so we, though many, are one body in Christ Romans 11:4-5
Now you are Christ’s body, and individually parts of it. I Corinthians: 27

So, while the Church is composed of individually flawed human members, it is also the Mystical Body of Christ.
arctus:
The Protestant view is that salvation is not attained by rules and regulations.
Hey, we share the same view then! I believe my salvation is a free gift from God. Following God’s rules and regulations given to me through the Catholic Church is the least I can do in responce to the wonderful gift of Salvation that He offers me.
arctus:
If “the Church” which is supposed to be the pillar of truth, is not spreading the Good News, well, yes, I would say “the Church” deserves some blame.
Mea culpa. I hope that perhaps I can make it up to you by sharing the Good News here. Jesus loves you. He loves you enough that He died for you, and He loves you enough that He left His Church to help guide you to heaven so you can be with Him there. He wants you to be part of His family,“the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.” I Timothy 3:15
 
40.png
arcturus:
My challenge to you, Millardo, is provide an example of a leading Protestant apologist who claims that it is okay to love the Bible more than Jesus Himself. Certainly you will find a good deal of reverence for the Holy Scriptures as the Word is God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16).
Reverence is good. Even we Catholics see Scripture to be rightly respected and dignified, but not to the point Protestantism had made it that it is made at a par with Jesus Himself.
Christ’s church is composed of human beings. The creation cannot be put on the same level as the Creator.
That is true; what’s your point then?
From Matthew 22:Note, Jesus did not say “Love the Lord your God - and the church - with all your soul and all your mind, because they are the same.” Jesus’ command is that ALL is to be directed at God. He goes on to say the second is like it, loving your neighbor as yourself, but does not give the same emphasis.
Jesus actually gave it the same emphasis, saying that the second is like it, or lamost like it. Strangely, He does not take both apart, but see them as one complimenting the other.
Not so. The Protestant view is that salvation is not attained by rules and regulations.
Protestantism has long ignored the verses which shows God judging us by what we’ve done.
Further, once again, the authority of God’s Word contrasted with the teaching of men many centuries of development later.
The question is, though, who did Christ give authority to? Is it Scripture or to His Apostles? Where in the Bible do you find Him saying that?
Big difference.If “the Church” which is supposed to be the pillar of truth, is not spreading the Good News
Funny notion. Last time I checked, the Church is still sending missionaries. Cathechists and apologists are also busy spreading the Gospel.
 
40.png
EA_Man:
I don’t believe that the answer to questions about doctrine are answered by more doctrine.

I wanted a genuine, personal, relationship with Jesus Christ. And I came to the conclusion that I didn’t require an army of intercessors to allow that to happen.

Also how is it possible that I could have been poorly indoctrinated by an “infallible” teaching magesterium?
You were taught by the magesterium, thats funny I was taught by my parents the BVMs and the Christian Brothers. :rolleyes:
 
I think that a great part of this “reservedness” that WD spoke of is really just that Catholics are not indoctrinated with the concept that “witnessing” to others is indicative of the level of their Christian life the way most n-Cs are.

I know for a fact that in all the Baptist and Assembly of God churches that I was part of that “witnessing” was sort of the litmus test of one’s spirituality, to the neglect of the things clearly laid out for us in Matthew 25:31-46, which Catholics are taught to carry out as well. In that context, I submit that no one who was ministered to by Mother Teresa or her sisters in their blue and white habits had to have a word said about Christ since their testimony was spoken in wordless volumes.

I think that Catholics here in the US are learning (in part because of sites like this one) to be better able to speak up for what is true and right. There are many very active Catholics doing things that are direct results of their faith and are an undeniable witness to the world around us.

I also think that the whole sales pitch of the “sinner’s prayer and get saved” is a drastic over simplification of what the NT really teaches about conversion.
Pax vobiscum,
 
Originally Posted by EA_Man
I don’t believe that the answer to questions about doctrine are answered by more doctrine.
I wanted a genuine, personal, relationship with Jesus Christ. And I came to the conclusion that I didn’t require an army of intercessors to allow that to happen.
Also how is it possible that I could have been poorly indoctrinated by an “infallible” teaching magesterium?
Because like me and a lot of others you didn’t pay attention… :cool:

BTW: Doctrine IS Christianity, since doctrine (what you believe) is what informs your faith and by the work of the Holy Spirit, leads you to conversion.
 
I have had trouble twice on the Wondir website. The first time was an unacceptance by non-Catholics of the scritpture at 1Corinthians3:10-15. The second big problem at that site was trying to provide an explanation as to Mary and the Saints hearing our prayers, and praying for us. The person challenging wanted scripture, all I could provide was E.W.T.N.'s explanation,with scripture, but this was not sufficient for the person asking the question. I do not “push” the Catholic church on persons, but Being Catholic I often feel obligated to present the Catholic truth, along with an answer that persons of all Chrisitan faiths can use. I hope in this way to bring all to Jesus that I can, and Present the truth of the Catholic Church.
 
Basically, I agree with the majority that Catholics are not well informed about their faith. I know that this is true because I facilitate a study group. This is a common topic of conversation.

However, I also believe that the fact that it was so difficult for our ancestors to be Catholic and to fit into the American culture is a deep rooted in the fact that we don’t talk about our faith asmuch as we should.
 
I just voted "other"

Even those among us who know (or have recently learned) our faith adequately have a tendency to be shy, I think for two paired reasons

1. Many of us see some other Christians with a strong, although incomplete, relationship to our Lord Jesus. We feel that these people can receive God’s grace in good enough fashion to eventually be saved.
Code:
 (That thought paired with:)
2. We then find it more generous (or less confrontational?) to leave them alone, rather than to cause them to question the finer points of their faith…

A.P., one of my apologetics friends with a more “competitive” nature, is like a loaded gun, waiting to “ambush” the first non-Catholic Christian who might challenge his Catholic faith.
Then he opens up with both barrels.

But he just will not bring up his Catholic faith until someone challenges him!

Perhaps this is common among those of us who have an *intellectual *conversion before a true conversion of the heart.

My wife, on the other hand, has the conversion of her heart way ahead of intellectual knowledge. She shares so easily with her non-Catholic friends, usually on the Eucharist, Mary and other favorite saints. Her position is that it’s not fair to withhold from them a chance at the rich spiritual relationships she has encountered with the full Body of Christ, including the Eucharist and the saints…

She even fields questions she can’t answer and she’s not shaken! She just tells them “I’ll get you that answer from my husband or his friend”. I guess our version of sharing, then, is pure teamwork.
 
Lack of courage,boldness,and of course fear,rejection,ect. 😦 God Bless
 
Friends,

I believe many Catholics believe the faith is too complex to explain. I think they are wrong but it may be that they haven’t been taught well. That may be due to a combination of things: Poorly trained priests and not enough priests overall may be two of the factors. In reality, Catholics as a group are better trained than their Protestant counterparts. I know. I’m a convert. I was a United Methodist Pastor for 27 years.

If one ignores some basic issues of the truth as most Protestants do the faith may seem easier to explain. In fact the small portion emphasised by many Protestants have been put into bite sized chunks for those who do evangelize. How difficult is it to explain the “Four spiritual laws”, for example? How difficult is it to explain “All you need is a personal relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ”?

Yet the disparities are easier to overcome than we imagine, if the Church will control the seminaries. Let us assume average Joe or Jane Catholic in a well led parish. This would include a priest who really cared about catechesis. Take the Creed, either one, and use it as the basis for ones teaching and understanding. Oh, it’s already been done for us. It’s called the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Simplify it using some of the good footnotes provided and there you have it. Start at any one of the four sections of the Creeds depending upon the situation. Train people using some hands on experience to be conversant with the faith through home visits.

This is the method I use in teaching Theology 101. I use Peter Kreeft’s, Fundamentals of the Faith book to supplement but really one doesn’t even need that.

In the 1970’s the Charismatic movement, though not perfect, offered some simplified ways to explain the fatih also. I would think Stuebenville has some good materials as well and of course Catholic Answers is a good resource as well.

We have the completion of faith. Believe it. Learned it in ways that each can communicate and watch what the Holy Spirit does with your faithfulness.

Dan L
 
40.png
Peace-bwu:
I went through CCD in the '80’s and Catholic teen youth group in the 90’s I simply was not given everything I needed to know and defend the Catholic Church. This is the biggest crisis we face. This is why so many Catholics have looked for other denominations, or believe false doctrine or simply quit going to Mass. The comment I hear most often is that “as long as a person is good, they will go to heaven…”
I think a lot of this is “liberal” teaching hanging on from the 60s. Many people in the church still explain Catholicism like this. "The protestants are going to heaven, we’re going to heaven, the Muslims are going to heaven. Don’t worry too much about that doctrine stuff. It isn’t important.’ The idea that getting to heaven involves a spiritual journey that is not easy has been dropped in much of the church. Many homilies just seem to assume all the hearers are going to heaven, and don’t challenge enough. The trouble is, this produces weak Catholics who only get enthusiastic when they come in contact with meatier-seeming Evangelical teachings.
Most Catholics who fit into this slot simply dont’ want to hurt another person’s feelings or infringe on a fellow American’s religious freedom, or they have been verbally insulted so many times they have clammed up, because they either don’t know how to explain why we dont’ worship Mary, or no matter how they explain it seems to do no good, because the person they are talking to doesn’t listen and continues the attack.
There are two kinds of people. Those who come with an agenda and those who are open. The open ones will listen.
The solution to the problem is for better Catechesis, Apologetics during the homily, classes taught by people who know Catholic Docrine, a focus on REAL, affordable Catholic schools, Catholic homeschool (I cant’ afford the local Catholic Elem. so we homeschool) young people need to know what an unparalleled gift they have with Apolostolic Tradition and a responsiblity toward that gift.
Exactly. As soon as people known their Faith again, they will be more enthusiastic about sharing it.
 
*I am not sure why it is the case that Catholics, especially here in the UK, are so reluctant to share their faith, especially with other Christian Faiths. I have been very fortunate that I have been involved with the At Your Word Lord renew program here in the Westminster Diocese in London. In this program that all the parishes in the diocese has adopted we are encouraged to form small house groups and to meet during Lent and Advent for Faith Sharing sessions. We are into our second year now. At first the participants found it VERY difficult to share their faith. But as the time has gone on we started to share more openly and freely which lead to some healthy debates. It has gone so well that the Group that I belong to has started meeting every fortnight throughout the year in order to keep sharing our lives.

So there is hope 👍

Just thought I would share that!*
 
40.png
WhiteDove:
Why are Catholics generally shy and not on fire about evangelizing or speaking of their faith??? 🙂
Sorry, just not ready to discuss it at this time…
 
As some wrote
“I believe it may be due to the fact that many Catholics, who are themselves the product of inadequate/poor catechesis.”

We can explain some of the poor catechesis by liberal or dissident priests. But most priests are good and doing the best they can.

We have inadequate catechsis because the bishops don’t listen to the Pope. They refuse to take the directives of the Pope seriously. The Catechism says that the
  1. “The liturgy is the summit toward which the activity of the Church is directed; it is also the font from which all her power flows.” [[13]](file:///e:/WP51/Daddy/Apologetics/Apol.%20St.%20Peter/Catechism%20of%20the%20Catholic%20Church.html#9G13) It is therefore the privileged place for catechizing the People of God.
The liturgy includes all the sacraments but especially the mass.
The mass, during the homily is the "privileged place for catechizing the People of God."

The teaching coming from the Pope in the “Directory for Catechesis”
is that the **CATECHISM IS **
"a sure norm for teaching the faith": (421) the Catechism of the Catholic Church offers a clear response to the legitimate right of all the baptized to know from the Church what she has received and what she believes; it is thus an obligatory point of reference for catechesis and for the other forms of the ministry of the word.

How often are homilies based on a commentary of the readings. How often do we have homilies which just repeat the readings we just read. The Church teaches the Catechism is an "obligatory point of reference for catechesis and for the other forms of the ministry of the word", NOT THE SCRIPTURES.

All this what the Popes have always taught. But almost everyone in the Church ignores the Pope and the teachings of the Church and instead they listen to theologians and scripture scholars before the Church.

Lets make this clear. The Church teaches in the Catechism, approved by the Pope, that the liturgy is the privledged place for catechizing. The Directory for Catechsis, promoted and approved by the Pope dictates that this catechesis (during the homily, etc, )MUST be based on the catechism. ALL forms of catechesis MUST be based on the Catechism.

Instead we have homiles that are based on giving an exegesis of the readings, (an explanation of the readings). So all we get is a repeat of what we just read.

The homily is supposed to take some point of the readings, such as baptism, or grace or sin, and giving an exposition of this point, based on the Catechism, then use all the scriptures related to it, to noursh or illuminate this point. (not to prove the point).

This is how the homiles are supposed to be given.
I have talked to priests who all said at the seminary they were told the homily is supposed to only be on the content of the readings, and to explain the readings. So they only end up giving a commentary on the scriptures instead of teaching the faith.

It is the bishops who are supposed to get this right and obey the Pope when it comes to the directives in the Catechism and the Directory for Catechsis. And if they don’t understand what these documents say, they should get the correct understanding from Rome. Evidently they have not done so. They listen to theologians instead, and so far not one single theologian understands what Rome is saying. Thus the bishops don’t understand what Rome is saying. They need to swallow their pride and find out from Rome exactly what these directives mean. They need to say, “look, we are ignorant, what exactly does the GIRM and the Catechisms and the Directory for Catechesis” mean when they give instruction on the homily at mass.
 
I have a feeling all their false understanding is based on Protestant influence.

If you ask a Protestant what is the Gospel, he will hold up a bible.
The Catholic Church’s understanding of the Gospel IS NOT THE BIBLE. What is in the bible is only PART of the Gospel, and none of the teachings of the bible are clear and explicit and none are in a teachings form. The bible is in the form of salvation history. It was never intended to be a norm for teaching the Gospel. Therefore God purposely made it impossible to learn the Gospel by reading or by explaining the bible, even if it is done with a perfect understanding of the passages mean.

Only the apostles received the full Gospel. Only they received the teachings of Jesus before He died, after He died and from the Holy Spirit. And the Gospel they taught and preached is NOT recorded anywhere in the bible. Thus, we cannot learn the Gospel no matter how much we study the bible. Because it is not there. All we have is some of the teachings of Jesus before He died, and some indirect teachings from the rest of the NT and none of these are perfectly clear.

But anyone, even an athiest can study early Christian history and learn some basics of what the early Christians believed. Since their faith came from the apostles, we then know what the apostles taught. And anyone with knowledge of the writings of the early Fathers know that what the apostles taught is the same teachings we have today on the sacraments, on praying to the saints, on honoring the Blessed Virgin Mary, on purgatory, on the authority of the Church, on the primacy of the Pope etc. These teachings have been handed down by Tradition by the bishops through apostolic succession.

In other words, the Gospel the apostles taught is contained in the Catechism of the Church today. And because their is a growth in understanding this Gospel their is even more than the apostles explicitly taught in the Catechism. This is because the teaching authority of the Church is a living teaching authority. It is not dead and stuck on the past.

Thus, the catechism is a summary of everything the apostles taught. It is thus, a summary of the Gospel. The Catechism says only some of what the apostles taught is written in the scritpures but ALL OF IT is contained in Tradition and the Catechism and other Church approved Catechisms ALONE presents this living Tradition

Thus, in order to learn the whole Gospel, teachings must be based on the Catechism which ALONE presents the whole entire teaching of the apostles. Since these teachings of the apostles came from God, these teachings in the Catechism are the WORD OF GOD. Since the teachings of the Catechisms are what the apostles taught and preached, then the Catechism presents the Gospel of Jesus Christ. And only the Catechisms present all the Gospel teachings in a “organic and systematic” way. For example, one cannot learn the teachings about baptism by reading the bible from one end to the next. One
cannot learn about baptism by listening to the readings, even it one goes to mass every day.
The apostles taught the Gospel in a fundamental (organic) and systemic way, thus the Catechism also presents God’s word in a fundamental and systemtic way. The bible does NOT do this. The bible presents God’s word as salvation history.

The catechism is not a summary of the bible. It is summary of the Gospel that the apostles taught. Therefore it contains the Word of God that the apostles taught.

Protestant catechisms are a summary of their interpretation of scripture. Thus they are man’s interpretation of unclear teachings found in salvation history.

Catholic catechisms are a summary of what the apostles taught and preached, and since everything they taught comes from God, then it is a summary of the Word of God, a summary of the Gospel that they taught.

That is why the Catechisms and NOT scripture are a sure norm for teaching the faith. That is why the Catechisms and NOT scripture are an obligatory point of reference for the ministry of the word.

After doctrines are taught, by teachers, (especially priests) then scriptures should be used to nourish these teachings, but NOT a proof of these teachings, since the teachings don’t come from scripture, but from the apostles and are handed down in Tradition.
(every day at mass we hear, “the holy faith which comes to us from the apostles” NOT “that comes to us from the bible.”)

Until the bishops understand this and explain it to the seminary teachers, we will continue to only get commentaries on scripture and Catholics will continue to be ignorant and to leave the Church
 
I checked other because I know the basics of my faith but I do not know all the teachings of my Church. From what I am seeing here, the Chatholic Church is the one and only true Church and only Catholics are going to heaven. I never knew that and I don’t think I believe that. A person has to be knowledgable in the full teachings of their Church in order to evangelize.

I have a deep faith in God and I can evangelize that way.
 
kxaddiso said:
*I am not sure why it is the case that Catholics, especially here in the UK, are so reluctant to share their faith, especially with other Christian Faiths.!

*

I wonder if this reluctance is specific to RCs in English-speaking countries? We’d have to exclude Eire from that list, of course.

My own reasons are:
1.) that, to me, religion is private. I want to be lft alone (if it were up to me shooting prosletysers like JWs & Mormons would be a misdemeanor) and I leave others alone.

2.) I guess I’ve always considered prosletysing, missionary work, whatever you want to call it, the job of “the professionals.”

3.) I’m not a very good Catholic. A lot of doctrinal issues I really don’t care about that much – I accept the Church’s teaching on some things solely because it is the Church’s teaching. That wouldn’t make me a strong advocate.

OTOH, it is fun when some fundie asks me if I’m a Christian and I say yes they always ask what church I attend & I proudly tell them, “Our Lady of Mt. Carmel!” Talk about faces falling 😃

One area where I do get into it (and where I’m on a lot more solid ground) is ppointing out the history of anit-Catholiciism in the US :mad:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top