Why do so many Catholics act so superior?

[Sarabande]

Hear me out for a second. There have been so many threads on CAF started purely to minimize or point out bad behaviour of other people. I know that sometimes, people like to vent, but I can’t help, but think that a lot of well meaning Catholics tend to come across as being very superior.

Examples of topics where I see this all the time:

NFP vs. ABC threads
Modesty threads
Masterbation threads
Bringing children to mass threads
Marital problems threads (telling them to split up all the time)

Honestly, if I were not Catholic and I came on CAF, it would really put me off the idea of ever being Catholic. There’s no love coming from many posters on CAF.

How are we supposed to bring families and friends to the Catholic church if we are always condemning and frowning upon others telling them they are in mortal sin and giving this “holier than thou” attitude.

I really dislike it and it’s so unattractive. We as Catholics are supposed to be spreading love, compassion, empathy and grace. What happened?

I only read up to post #10 on the first page, so forgive if I’m repeating. On forums, I believe there is definitely a huge range of different kinds of people. You get those who just want to vent, those who want to have a meaningful discussion, those love being argumentative and abrasive, those who just want to learn more about themselves and about other people, people who like to exchange ideas, debate, etc. There are people who get offended, hurt and defensive often and people with nerves as hard as steel and doesn’t get bothered by anything.

Although there may be a some people who are really “holier-than-thou” and are ready to judge, or even some who have some major issues and use religion in an unhealthy way, I think most of the people are truly trying to be helpful and charitable in their own way. One of the problems is that most people are not used to conveying their thoughts and beliefs through the written (or typed) word. Before I go on, I will start by saying that I am definitely not perfect with this as I’ve had problems trying to convey my thoughts well at one time or another. Although I work professionally as a musician, I also have a degree in journalism and communications and worked in the field for a little while. One of the major things we looked at in our studies and in my work (I worked in corporate communications at a Catholic hospital for a while) was how the written and spoken word is conveyed, then translated by the receiver. Often, if we are not attuned and sensitive to how the receiver may interpret our words or tone (especially in the written word), it will more than likely be misinterpreted in a negative light.

I think this is what happens often in threads - at least when the advice is well-meaning. The person may think he/she is being charitable and kind, but in reality is coming off as being one, more or all of the various negative adjectives - arrogant, rude, cruel, holier-than-thou, judgemental, self-important, morally superioretc. It then become exacerbated by one or more people reading a particular post who gets put off by the misinterpreted post and wants to correct that person, make a point, etc. Some of those who wrote the original post may refuse to see or just can’t see the error of their writing skills (I don’t mean grammatical skills) and will then become defensive. I’m not saying that’s all the conveyor’s fault either. Then there are those who try to clarify what they originally meant, but one or more have already decided that they are going to brand that person whatever the negative adjective was.

Anyway, in short, I don’t think it’s particularily a Catholic problem. It’s more about how people, in general, convey their thoughts on the computer screen and how others receive them. You’ll get this in almost any kind of forum. That’s not to say that there aren’t people in these forums who believe that they are morally superior in some things, but I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and hope the best of them that it’s more of an issue of good written communication skills. I hope I conveyed my thoughts clearly enough.

 

[LilyM]

One of my friends is like that. She first heard of the Catholic religion through a “fire and brimstone” type thing, and hated it. Now if I try to talk to her about it, I get shut down. I know she would respond to a kinder approach than “accept this or you’ll go to Hell” (which turns me off as well). But she has burned that bridge.
She would have made a good Catholic, unlike me, she is very demure, non-questioning, quiet, and submissive. It is sad really.

That only works to a certain extent, though.

Imagine a medical school where the attitude was ‘never show the students blood, vomit, dead bodies etc etc, not under any circumstances, or they’ll never want to study here’.

Sure, you should expose them somewhat gradually and gently - not chuck them in the deep end on their very first day - but neither should you mollycoddle them too much, because the work of a doctor means you’re up to your neck in those things that the school is shielding them from.

And students DO need to be tested for their tolerance to it, because someone who can’t handle them won’t make a good doctor. In a lot of ways, getting rid of the unfit students sooner is better all round, saves a lot of wasted time and effort.

And by the way, how do you think those ‘sheltered’ students will feel when they face their first day on the job? They’ll say ‘this isn’t what I signed up for! Why didn’t my teachers TELL me about all this?’

And I’ve seen Catholics on here who say exactly the equivalent of that - ‘artificial contraception is wrong? In ALL circumstances? I wasn’t taught that in RCIA!’ ‘We’ve got to go to Mass EVERY Sunday and it’s a sin if we skip it without good reason? Wasn’t taught that!’ etc etc.

All the result of doubtless well-meaning but misguided RCIA instructors and others who didn’t want to expose them to the heavy stuff, appear too ‘judgemental’ and scare them off. And these people feel like they’ve been deceived, sold a false bill of goods, induced to enter the Church under false pretences if you will.

How much better that they know at least some of what they’re in for beforehand, because the world ain’t often nice - for doctors or Catholics - like it or not.

 

[CountrySinger]

That only works to a certain extent, though.

Imagine a medical school where the attitude was ‘never show the students blood, vomit, dead bodies etc etc, not under any circumstances, or they’ll never want to study here’.

Sure, you should expose them somewhat gradually and gently - not chuck them in the deep end on their very first day.

And I’ve seen Catholics on here who say exactly the equivalent of that - ‘artificial contraception is wrong? In ALL circumstances? I wasn’t taught that in RCIA!’ ‘We’ve got to go to Mass EVERY Sunday and it’s a sin if we skip it without good reason? Wasn’t taught that!’ etc etc.

All the result of doubtless well-meaning but misguided RCIA instructors and others who didn’t want to expose them to the heavy stuff, appear too ‘judgemental’ and scare them off. And these people feel like they’ve been deceived, sold a false bill of goods, induced to enter the Church under false pretences if you will.

How much better that they know at least some of what they’re in for beforehand, because the world ain’t often nice - for doctors or Catholics - like it or not.

Can you get baptized under false pretenses? Maybe then I’m not really Catholic, I was pressured into it by my mom (I was 17). I know annullments can be granted if one party was forced. That brings up an interesting point. I didn’t really know what I was doing, all I know is that I was being forced to attend classes (which I hated), and then I had water and oil on my head. If you asked what I was doing, I would have replied, “I have no clue”. Then I had to start attending Mass (ugh).

My friend at the event was told that she would go to Hell for everything (at least that is what she took away from it). Telling people they are going to Hell isn’t the way to convert them. You can bring the unpleasant stuff later in RCIA (but before baptism), just get them sucked in, then hit them with all the rules.

 

[LilyM]

My friend in her time at an event like that was told that she would go to Hell for everything (at least that is what she took away from it). Telling people they are going to Hell isn’t the way to convert them. You can bring the unpleasant stuff later in RCIA (but before baptism), just get them sucked in, then hit them with all the rules.

For what purpose? To get them to attend RCIA for a few weeks or months, when it’s unlikely that they’ll go through to baptism? Or STAY in the Church - and practicing - once baptised when it’s unlikely that they’ll do so?

Because those ‘rules’ are going to hit them at some point, regardless, and they’re not all that likely to take kindly to finding out late in the day or after baptism, any more so than someone who takes out a home loan but has the fine print concealed from them.

It makes no sense. Jesus didn’t sugarcoat His ‘hard sayings’ in John 6, even when lots of people started leaving Him because of it. In fact He made it clear that the 12 could leave too, if they couldn’t accept. He didn’t say ‘oh, I’ll wait till AFTER the Last Supper and the Resurrection to tell them this, they’ll understand and accept it better then’.

 

[CountrySinger]

For what purpose? To get them to attend RCIA for a few weeks or months, when it’s equally unlikely that they’ll go through to baptism? That makes no sense.

Maybe something will sink in. Weirder things have happened. People can change their minds. And it never hurts to learn more about a religion.

looks up to find if a forced baptism is still valid

 

[LilyM]

Maybe something will sink in. Weirder things have happened. People can change their minds. And it never hurts to learn more about a religion.

looks up to find if a forced baptism is still valid

But if they are serious in their investigation, having one person tell them something stupid like that won’t put them off.

Yes it was probably valid, unless there was some defect in form. Remember even infants are baptised. Baptism is something God does to the soul - it’s your spiritual birth. You didn’t need your consent to be physically born, did you? Just needed your parents to create you.

So I’d say your active understanding and consent doesn’t really matter a whole lot in regards baptism.

 

[CountrySinger]

But if they are serious in their investigation, having one person tell them something stupid like that won’t put them off.

Yes it was probably valid, unless there was some defect in form. Ihnfants are baptised. Baptism is something God does to the soul. Your active understanding and consent doesn’t really matter.

Dang it. I was looking forward to not having anymore Catholic guilt. I’m having a crisis of faith and thinking of leaving the Church (ever since I moved to Seattle), can’t you tell?

 

[LilyM]

Dang it. I was looking forward to not having anymore Catholic guilt. I’m having a crisis of faith, can’t you tell?

Put it this way - I haven’t always liked my parents, and certainly have felt ‘guilt-tripped’ by them at times. Can’t deny my history with them, though, nor my DNA bond to them, regardless that I didn’t choose to be their child.

Mind you, they’ve become surprisingly so much better and nicer as I’ve gotten older As have I, I’m sure And looking back I see that so many times they were right, it’s just that I didn’t see it.

Same with the Church. There’ve been times when I’ve vehemently disagreed with one thing or another - usually due to my own lack of understanding or research. Don’t stress, keep praying and learning and frequenting the sacraments and it’ll come in time.

 

[CountrySinger]

Put it this way - I haven’t always liked my parents, and certainly have felt ‘guilt-tripped’ by them at times. Can’t deny my history with them, though, nor my DNA bond to them, regardless that I didn’t choose to be their child.

Mind you, they’ve become surprisingly so much better and nicer as I’ve gotten older As have I, I’m sure And looking back I see that so many times they were right, it’s just that I didn’t see it.

Same with the Church. There’ve been times when I’ve vehemently disagreed with one thing or another - usually due to my own lack of understanding or research. Don’t stress, keep praying and learning and frequenting the sacraments and it’ll come in time.

It is funny, the more I learn about the Catholic Church (from various books, priests, websites, etc.) And meet other Catholics, the less I like the Church. I hate Mass, I used to like it (I used to attend daily Mass). I used to be involved in the local youth group as the leader, now I can’t be bothered. The adult woman’s group I used to be in, the women make me want to vomit. I used to sing the choir, now the music makes me sick. Maybe Jesus and I need to take a break. I think going to Mass makes things worse. I can barely get the energy to pray, in fact, I only pray with my boyfriend.

I know someone here will say that the Devil is attacking me. PLEASE. Like I would be a good target.

I can’t even keep a thread on track. Sorry.

 

[LilyM]

It is funny, the more I learn about the Catholic Church (from various books, priests, websites, etc.) And meet other Catholics, the less I like the Church. I hate Mass, I used to like it (I used to attend daily Mass). I used to be involved in the local youth group as the leader, now I can’t be bothered. The adult woman’s group I used to be in, the women make me want to vomit. I used to sing the choir, now the music makes me sick. Maybe Jesus and I need to take a break. I think going to Mass makes things worse.

That’s kinda like a person thinking that avoiding going to the doctor will help cure their illness. Yes, it can be painful or embarrassing to go, but you’re probably not going to get better without it.

Sure, don’t participate in things like Youth Group or Women’s Group if you don’t feel they’re helpful to you, but certainly don’t avoid Mass, and add some Adoration if you can go.

And every potential target is a good one as far as the Devil’s concerned, you included. You think he’s picky?

 

[CountrySinger]

That’s kinda like a person thinking that avoiding going to the doctor will help cure their illness. Yes, it can be painful or embarrassing to go, but you’re probably not going to get better without it.

Sure, don’t participate in things like Youth Group or Women’s Group if you don’t feel they’re helpful to you, but certainly don’t avoid Mass, and add some Adoration if you can go.

And every potential target is a good one as far as the Devil’s concerned, you included. You think he’s picky?

I would think the Devil would pick people who could be useful to him. I mean, I’m a single (but in a relationship) woman who live with two cats. Who am I going to affect? My cats? My cell phone? My boyfriend is too devout to change. And my friends and family aren’t religious.
Come on, I would the person to “attack” if someone was lazy. No one would even notice. I would just would enjoy sleeping in on Sundays.

 

[Podo2005]

It is funny, the more I learn about the Catholic Church (from various books, priests, websites, etc.) And meet other Catholics, the less I like the Church. I hate Mass, I used to like it (I used to attend daily Mass). I used to be involved in the local youth group as the leader, now I can’t be bothered. The adult woman’s group I used to be in, the women make me want to vomit. I used to sing the choir, now the music makes me sick. Maybe Jesus and I need to take a break. I think going to Mass makes things worse. I can barely get the energy to pray, in fact, I only pray with my boyfriend.

I know someone here will say that the Devil is attacking me. PLEASE. Like I would be a good target.

I can’t even keep a thread on track. Sorry.

Think of it in terms of a marriage…when you first get married you are accompanied by all the nice warm feelings about being in love… you feel like you are floating, everything is just wonderful! But then eventually those feelings go away and you go through a sort of dry period… you probably even wonder " why the heck did I marry that person?"… but you stay with your spouse…why? Simply because you love your spouse and have made a commitment to be united until death do you part.

Now apply that analogy to the Eucharist (The Mass)… Jesus Christ, the son of God, the image of the invisible God loves you so much that He wants to give you Himself in the Eucharist like a bridegroom offering himself to a bride. But just like in marriage we sometimes go through dry periods… and thats when we need to trust in the Lord, despite all the dryness & crosses we may bear, so that we can love the Lord with all our heart, mind, soul and body.

As for the part about the devil… don’t be decieved…"Be self-controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour." - 1 Peter 5:8…

Praying for you

Your brother in Christ,
Zachary

 

[ac_claire]

It makes no sense. Jesus didn’t sugarcoat His ‘hard sayings’ in John 6, even when lots of people started leaving Him because of it. In fact He made it clear that the 12 could leave too, if they couldn’t accept. He didn’t say ‘oh, I’ll wait till AFTER the Last Supper and the Resurrection to tell them this, they’ll understand and accept it better then’.

I’ve sure been agreeing with your a lot lately, LilyM! Here’s one more place, in your response to CountrySinger above…

I see a logical flaw in this entire thread. We discern what’s true in our faith by accepting God’s Revelation to us, right? Through His Church, through the Bible. How often were people in the Scriptures converted by the old saints and the prophets, by St. Paul and St. Peter after Pentecost, and the rest of the apostles, and by Christ Himself, precicely through the preaching and teaching of sin and conversion and fire and brimstone and hell? All the time. It’s everywhere in the Bible, it might even be the most-used form of preaching in the New Testament**. Nothing was sugar-coated or sweetened. (I suppose **that **would have ruined the sense of urgency in the first place, since we’re talking about the fate of immortal souls here, a little instillation of holy fear is not misused. And in the second place, it would have been a lie.) Nobody who “told it like it was” was condemned for being a wolf or a hypocrite.

At the same time, the “good” parts…The peace of mind, the love, the cozy bond with God, the consolation, the being a part of a family, etc…what I’ve read the saints refer to as the “sweetness”…wasn’t thrown out either. It was all preached as it was. But we have to be able to handle it all. That’s what the saints have taught about why God sends people through the dark night of the soul…to see if they can handle simple faith in who He is, and still love him for that, without the sweetness and consolations that make it all go down so much easier.

It’s not supposed to be *easy *to be Christian, especially not in this modern world. We’re told that we’ll be hated and mocked, and that our loved ones may turn against us. If it *is *a joy for us to be Catholic, then hallelujah and praise God! But to *expect *that that’s the way it’s supposed to be…? To have a sense of entitlement about it even? No…God, in fact, promised the opposite. If we can still follow him, even with that rosy picture, then that’s how I imagine a true strong faith can start to be developed.

**Just had a thought-- I might open a study on that in another thread if anyone in interested in joining me…don’t have much else to do in this next week or so while I’m waiting to go into labor.

 

[gretahope]

but serap, rudeness or forcefulness or what you call “superiority” is NOT how the good pastor defined wolves. he said

that’s not what’s happening here, right?

isnt it just enough to say, 'i dont like your tactics. they wouldnt work with me?" instead of calling whom you deem heavy-handed “wolves”?

In regards to Wolves vs Lambs: In a Bible Study I am attending we discussed the difference between Sheep and Goats, as several times this is addressed in scripture. Anyway, the leader looked at me and asked if I could do a little research for the group and bring it the next mtg.

It is very enlightening to do this! Goats are selfish, independent, do not stay put to eat the good stuff…they eat trash also, “butt heads” with each other, and so on. Sheep are humble, simple, they stay put in the pasture the Shepherd leads them to, and they eat good stuff…and they stay close to the ground, whereas goats wander around and eat the tops of plants only. Sheep don’t like agitated waters, but prefer peaceful settings and lush grass. They stay with the flock (except for the occasional lost sheep!). They, in essence, are easily managed and led VS the goat who seeks his own way and is very difficult to manage. (although a little dumb…but they are totally dependent on their Shepherd, and REALLY know his voice!)

Maybe it’s the goats who are the independent “superior” ones in any church who bring the turmoil/turnoff you’re speaking of…

Jesus separates the Sheep from the Goats in scripture also in terms of how they treat the lowly/poor. This was a sobering piece of research….

 

[Norseman82]

In regards to Wolves vs Lambs: In a Bible Study I am attending we discussed the difference between Sheep and Goats, as several times this is addressed in scripture. Anyway, the leader looked at me and asked if I could do a little research for the group and bring it the next mtg.

It is very enlightening to do this! Goats are selfish, independent, do not stay put to eat the good stuff…they eat trash also, “butt heads” with each other, and so on. Sheep are humble, simple, they stay put in the pasture the Shepherd leads them to, and they eat good stuff…and they stay close to the ground, whereas goats wander around and eat the tops of plants only. Sheep don’t like agitated waters, but prefer peaceful settings and lush grass. They stay with the flock (except for the occasional lost sheep!). They, in essence, are easily managed and led VS the goat who seeks his own way and is very difficult to manage. (although a little dumb…but they are totally dependent on their Shepherd, and REALLY know his voice!)

Maybe it’s the goats who are the independent “superior” ones in any church who bring the turmoil/turnoff you’re speaking of…

Jesus separates the Sheep from the Goats in scripture also in terms of how they treat the lowly/poor. This was a sobering piece of research….

Maybe the independent goats butting heads and causing turmoil are a description of people who will not accept correction when they are wrong but instead accuse the correctors of acting “holier than thou” and “superior”??

 

[monicatholic]

noreseman, that’s how i read it too-- that the goats are uncorrectable. stiff necked.

Q: Why do so many Catholics act so superior?

A: Catholic who have fully assented to the teachings of the Church have accepted the superior revelation of God to man. those who have, know it’s not theirs to tamper with. don’t confuse a sense of being in posession of superior Truth with a sense personal superiority.

from Francis Cardinal George:

"No one is a Catholic on his or her own terms: not the pope, not bishops or priests, not religious, not lay people. It is necessary to accept with integrity the body of belief which the Church, the Body of Christ, holds to be true."

 

[ac_claire]

Q: Why do so many Catholics act so superior?

A: Catholic who have fully assented to the teachings of the Church have accepted the superior revelation of God to man. those who have, know it’s not theirs to tamper with. don’t confuse a sense of being in posession of superior Truth with a sense personal superiority.

from Francis Cardinal George:

"No one is a Catholic on his or her own terms: not the pope, not bishops or priests, not religious, not lay people. It is necessary to accept with integrity the body of belief which the Church, the Body of Christ, holds to be true."

Excellent!

 

[CradleCath]

Maybe the independent goats butting heads and causing turmoil are a description of people who will not accept correction when they are wrong but instead accuse the correctors of acting “holier than thou” and “superior”??

So you’ve noticed too.

 

[EasterJoy]

Dang it. I was looking forward to not having anymore Catholic guilt. I’m having a crisis of faith and thinking of leaving the Church (ever since I moved to Seattle), can’t you tell?

Something that Catholics are not taught often enough is to remember that guilt and shame are not the same thing. Our pastor taught us this, when he preached on the sacrament of reconcilliation, and when I was preparing kids for their first confession, I’d tell them the same thing: Guilt is like a smoke detector. Sometimes, it goes off when there is no fire. Sometimes, it goes off, and there is a fire. When you feel guilt, then, investigate. Honestly ask if yourself if you have sinned. In either case, once you have attended to the situation, it is allowed to turn the guilt off. You can fight a fire without the smoke detector blaring. Likewise, you do not have to hang onto your guilt until you drag a sin to confession to have it absolved. All you have to hold on to is turn to God and be firm in your purpose of amendment. If you don’t get yourself to confession eventually, though, or if you don’t amend the situation, the guilt is going to come back on, just like your smoke detector will come back on, if you hit that button and then don’t get the smoke from the scorched toast cleared out of the kitchen. That is OK. That what guilt is there for. It is kind of irksome, sometimes, but it is supposed to serve a positive purpose. It can serve that purpose without driving all the joy out of your life, though.

Shame is another thing altogether. Shame is the feeling that your sin has made you into a thing that God will not want to look on, instead of still being a person He made in order to love and be loved. It is why Adam and Eve, having eaten of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, didn’t want God looking at them. If you respond to guilt by hiding yourself, that is shame in operation. That is the work of the devil, and shaming people goes against God’s desire that people approach him without fear for reconciliation.

I have also had to teach my kids this: making amendment when you’ve done wrong is your job, but how people decide to feel about your actions is not on your head. That’s their choice, and they are entitled to feel what they feel. You should worry about actually hurting other people, whether they act hurt or not. You should not worry if they try to manipulate you by playing up their hurts. That is not what should guide your moral life.

If your parents are trying to guide you to do what is right, and you feel guilty, then look at your actions. Are your actions moral? Are they not moral? Are they taking you closer or farther from grace and virtue, which is where both your salvation and your happiness lie? Pursue those good things. But if your parents are trying to manipulate you into doing what they want, instead of respecting the gift of free will that God gave you, then it is OK, with all love and respectfully, to ignore their efforts. You can let it slide like water off of a duck’s back, and sleep like a baby. That is OK.

Should we not concern ourselves whether we are “killing our mothers”? Not so much as we should concern ourselves with whether or not we are pleasing God and whether or not we are becoming, as Matthew Kelly puts it, the best version of ourselves, which God intends us to be. I don’t think we get much credit for evading emotional manipulation. Being a rat in a cage who acts only so as to avoid getting a shock is a very poor substitute for real virtue. Life comes from living for love’s sake, no matter what emotional ploys other people are trying to run on us. That is what it takes to be rooted in solid ground, well-watered and secure.

 

[Norseman82]

Something that Catholics are not taught often enough is to remember that guilt and shame are not the same thing. Our pastor taught us this, when he preached on the sacrament of reconcilliation, and when I was preparing kids for their first confession, I’d tell them the same thing: Guilt is like a smoke detector. Sometimes, it goes off when there is no fire. Sometimes, it goes off, and there is a fire. When you feel guilt, then, investigate. Honestly ask if yourself if you have sinned. In either case, once you have attended to the situation, it is allowed to turn the guilt off. You can fight a fire without the smoke detector blaring. Likewise, you do not have to hang onto your guilt until you drag a sin to confession to have it absolved. All you have to hold on to is turn to God and be firm in your purpose of amendment. If you don’t get yourself to confession eventually, though, or if you don’t amend the situation, the guilt is going to come back on, just like your smoke detector will come back on, if you hit that button and then don’t get the smoke from the scorched toast cleared out of the kitchen. That is OK. That what guilt is there for. It is kind of irksome, sometimes, but it is supposed to serve a positive purpose. It can serve that purpose without driving all the joy out of your life, though.

Shame is another thing altogether. Shame is the feeling that your sin has made you into a thing that God will not want to look on, instead of still being a person He made in order to love and be loved. It is why Adam and Eve, having eaten of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, didn’t want God looking at them. If you respond to guilt by hiding yourself, that is shame in operation. That is the work of the devil, and shaming people goes against God’s desire that people approach him without fear for reconciliation.

I have also had to teach my kids this: making amendment when you’ve done wrong is your job, but how people decide to feel about your actions is not on your head. That’s their choice, and they are entitled to feel what they feel. You should worry about actually hurting other people, whether they act hurt or not. You should not worry if they try to manipulate you by playing up their hurts. That is not what should guide your moral life.

If your parents are trying to guide you to do what is right, and you feel guilty, then look at your actions. Are your actions moral? Are they not moral? Are they taking you closer or farther from grace and virtue, which is where both your salvation and your happiness lie? Pursue those good things. But if your parents are trying to manipulate you into doing what they want, instead of respecting the gift of free will that God gave you, then it is OK, with all love and respectfully, to ignore their efforts. You can let it slide like water off of a duck’s back, and sleep like a baby. That is OK.

Should we not concern ourselves whether we are “killing our mothers”? Not so much as we should concern ourselves with whether or not we are pleasing God and whether or not we are becoming, as Matthew Kelly puts it, the best version of ourselves, which God intends us to be. I don’t think we get much credit for evading emotional manipulation. Being a rat in a cage who acts only so as to avoid getting a shock is a very poor substitute for real virtue. Life comes from living for love’s sake, no matter what emotional ploys other people are trying to run on us. That is what it takes to be rooted in solid ground, well-watered and secure.

Very well-thought out and sound advice.

As for the smoke and fire analogy, we must also bear in mind that even if the fire is out and the house is livable, sometimes smoke damage can be permanent, and we can get aggravated by that, since we may not want to be reminded of the previous fire.