Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: ByzCat3000 on April 19, 2019, 05:39:53 PM
-
I'm probably one of the less stridently traditionalist members of *this* forum, but I'm still definitely more trad/have a more pessimistic view of the situation than any of the Catholics I know in real life, most of whom are converts and are themselves very serious about their faith, but are more comfortable than I am with Vatican II.
I realize there's a spectrum of opinion on this forum regarding precisely HOW bad the current crisis is, but there's a general across the board agreement that its pretty bad, that things aren't the way they need to be in the Church.
My question for all of you, no matter what position you take, you're going to have Protestants come to you and say "see, this is proof that the Church has failed. The Catholic Church really isn't what it says it is, look, Vatican II says, or at least strongly implies, that I don't seriously need to fear for my soul as I am, that I can be saved just as I am, so why do I even need to convert?"
I realize the nuances are gonna differ depending on the person, but just in general, how do you show a person that he needs the Catholic Church, in our current situation?
-
First start with the 4 marks of the Church.
Show how only the Catholic Church truly has all 4.
Show how the protestant churches lacked them and the decay that hit them faster and harder than the true Church.
Then show how the hierarchy failed by trying to be protestant at VII and since. Point out the rapid decline that then necessarily followed in the modern Church.
Show that those in the True Church who refused the novelty were preserved from the decay. Then point out those protestant parishes (Our Lady of Walsingham and other Anglicans) that sought to join even the Novus Ordo to escape the madness of their decaying false church.
You can draw parallels with Liberalism and Communism. Those false systems destroyed the peoples of the East. The West resisted for some time, but the Europeans began to adopt them and are starting to collapse. In America, we are following them but more slowly: the results however, will be the same.
-
Hit em with the EENS. Works every time.
-
Sedevacantism is the best answer to those Protestants, stating that the Church has been infiltrated and taken over by imposters. But even that's a difficult battle.
Otherwise, yes, that is a problem, if the Magisterium and Universal Discipline can go off the rails, to the point that the Novus Ordo lacks the marks of the true Church, then the Protestant criticisms of the Catholic Church are very difficult to overcome.
"Yes, Mr. Protestant, we must be subject to the Pope in order to be saved. But the Pope can become so bad that we cannot be subject to him sometimes." Say what? What if Martin Luther was one of those times?
Basically, the light of the Church to the world has gone into eclipse and has been hidden under a bushel.
-
Sedevacantism is the best answer to those Protestants, stating that the Church has been infiltrated and taken over by imposters. But even that's a difficult battle.
Are you a Sedevacantist yourself? From my browsing of the forum it seemed to me that you take some middle ground position?
Otherwise, yes, that is a problem, if the Magisterium and Universal Discipline can go off the rails, to the point that the Novus Ordo lacks the marks of the true Church, then the Protestant criticisms of the Catholic Church are very difficult to overcome.
"Yes, Mr. Protestant, we must be subject to the Pope in order to be saved. But the Pope can become so bad that we cannot be subject to him sometimes." Say what? What if Martin Luther was one of those times?
-
Hit em with the EENS. Works every time.
Except the Protestant will point to EENS and Vatican II as an example of Catholic theology contradicting itself, and will see it as a justification for their having split in the first place.
-
If they are of good will, they will convert, don't concern yourself to get credit their conversion, for conversion is a long process and ALL from God. Speak the truth, be a good example and move on. Even if you say and do all of the wrong things, it will have absolutely nothing to do with their non-conversion. If they do not convert, it is because they preferred to keep their toys (their sinful loves).
-
If they are of good will, they will convert, don't concern yourself to get credit their conversion, for conversion is a long process and ALL from God. Speak the truth, be a good example and move on. Even if you say and do all of the wrong things, it will have absolutely nothing to do with his non-conversion. If they do not convert, it is because they preferred to keep their toys (their sinful loves).
I don't care about credit. That's not really my point :)
-
I don't care about credit. That's not really my point :)
It was not my point either. Read the rest.
If they are of good will, they will convert, don't concern yourself to get credit their conversion, for conversion is a long process and ALL from God. Speak the truth, be a good example and move on. Even if you say and do all of the wrong things, it will have absolutely nothing to do with their non-conversion. If they do not convert, it is because they preferred to keep their toys (their sinful loves).
-
Except the Protestant will point to EENS and Vatican II as an example of Catholic theology contradicting itself, and will see it as a justification for their having split in the first place.
I was joking. It doesn’t work.
Yes, it’s very hard to explain the crisis and still expect them to want to convert. I have a friend in one my classes who grew up Catholic but fell away. I invited him to Latin Mass and he loved it. He’s been asking me to go again a couple times. It’s going to be difficult for me to try and explain why he shouldn’t attend the Novus Ordo and why he should only go to priests ordained in the Old Rite. It’s a lot to expect someone to believe in the indefectibility of the Church when you tell them all these things. But we must remember that conversion is a work of the Holy Ghost and we are simply here to be used as instruments. Ultimately, God chooses them, they don’t choose God. And if it be God’s Will for them to convert than it will happen provided they cooperate with his grace.
-
Refer them to solid, pre-Vatican 2 literature. And this only if they express interest or come to you spoiling for a fight. If they're trying to convert you, excellent! It means they know their "faith" and the Bible. Be careful on the Bible issue. Conservative Protestants can quote circles around most Catholics, even of the traditional variety. And the Bible issue does not mainly focus on the fact that we have different Bibles, although true. Example, what most Catholics believe about Martin Luther's addition of "alone" hasn't been found in Protestant bibles since the early 1900s, not even in the King James version used by fundamentalists. It's also very helpful to know the Protestant definition of certain words we hold in common. When a Catholic says, "saved," he speaks of a soul in Heaven. To a Protestant, this means you've come to a point in your life when you made a decision to follow Christ. Usually, although not always, it's the result of a crisis of some sort and is based heavily or entirely on emotion, not dogma. To "convert" has two meanings to Catholics. To Protestants, it means to leave one religion for another. Even the words "church" and "catholic" mean completely different things. On the whole, Protestants are gnostics.
Evangelizing a Protestant also entails great humility. Trying to ramrod through, "Outside the Church, there is no salvation!" though true, will not be understood by a Protestant and is resorting to those Protestant techniques that are ineffective, mocked, and rejected. Be ready to say, "I'm not sure how to answer your question, but I'll find out and get back to you." Also, pray for the wisdom to know when it's time to back off or back out.
If asked about pervert priests, a communist pope, Catholics they know who live in open sin yet hear Mass every week, certain "Catholic" politicians, it's just as easy these days to name equally corrupt Protestants and people of all religions. Remember the televangelists of the 70's, 80's and 90's? Steer the discussion back to the Faith, not others who fail to practice what they preach. These have exactly zero influence upon what is Truth and what is error. Hopefully, you can point to the good fruits of the Faith in your own life. Just because Cardinals were found to be perverts, doesn't make you or the majority of Catholics or priests the same!
If they love a fiery argument, give them one of Bishop Williamson's sermons or conferences, one that isn't mainly about the SSPX, as that will be unknown to most Protestants. There's one he gave to what I think was called The London Forum. If that doesn't start a serious dialogue, nothing will. But be careful who you give it to.
Also, form a friendly relationship with the person. With most people, it's the only way they'll take what you say seriously. Of course, there ARE exceptions. If you must be extreme to defend Our Lord, then do it. Don't be a Vat. 2 wussy who speaks "luv" to someone who curses or desecrates Our Lady, the Church, the Saints, or anything Holy. I once had to yell at a Baptist work colleague who mocked praying the Rosary. "Do not ever say that again!" and I walked out, abruptly slamming her door.
She came to me several hours later to apologize. She hadn't intended to offend me. Which gave the opportunity to explain that the real problem wasn't that I was offended so much as that Our Lord was offended. After all, how would you feel if I made a mockery of your mother? She gave me the usual misinterpreted verses to refute praying to Mary. I gave her a refutation by St. Francis de Sales. She read it and still disagrees, but it put an end to all mocking commentary at work. She declined to keep the copy I gave her, but she knows where I have it, in case she'd like a second look. We've remained casual friends.
-
First start with the 4 marks of the Church.
Show how only the Catholic Church truly has all 4.
Show how the protestant churches lacked them and the decay that hit them faster and harder than the true Church.
Then show how the hierarchy failed by trying to be protestant at VII and since. Point out the rapid decline that then necessarily followed in the modern Church.
Show that those in the True Church who refused the novelty were preserved from the decay. Then point out those protestant parishes (Our Lady of Walsingham and other Anglicans) that sought to join even the Novus Ordo to escape the madness of their decaying false church.
You can draw parallels with Liberalism and Communism. Those false systems destroyed the peoples of the East. The West resisted for some time, but the Europeans began to adopt them and are starting to collapse. In America, we are following them but more slowly: the results however, will be the same.
Good points!
Such apologetics are occasionally on my mind.
If I happened upon a prot who was sincerely interested to talk, I'd try to explain that the Church has been hijacked by the ʝʊdɛօ-masonics and that it's temporarily in "eclipse".
Our Lady of LaSalette had warned us that this was going to happen in 1848:
Here are some of the words she spoke that are part of those secrets she gave to the children to spread:
- 1. Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the Antichrist;
- 2. Woe to the Princes of the Church who will not be occupied except to pile up riches upon riches, to safeguard their authority and to dominate with pride;
- 3.The priests, ministers of my Son, by their wicked lives, their irreverence and their impiety in the celebration of the Holy
- Mysteries, by their love of money, their love of honors and pleasures, the priests have become cesspools of impurity;
- 4. The Church will have a frightful crisis;
- 5. Many convents are no longer houses of God, but the pastures of Asmodeas [the Devil of impurity] and his sort;
- 6. The Church will be in eclipse, the world will be in dismay.
Once you established the understanding and agreement that the VII Conciliar church represents the eclipse, then you can explain why the Church is and will remain the Ark of Salvation.
-
That is a well made point IF Protestants themselves were united but they and contradict each other.
Every organisation has to have leadership setting out its agenda with rules that apply to the body as a whole so as to keep order.
Without one supreme head over all (not different leaders over contradicting groups) subjective individual interpretations of Bible-only-truthers will continue to spread just as did the brooms in the Sorcerer's Apprentice.*
The Pope as supreme head of the Catholic Church is a sinner like all of us to be obeyed when teaching on faith and morals. If he deviates from what has been handed down to him from the first Apostles then we already have a precedent set by Peter himself when he denied his Master - or like his chosen apostle Judas who betrayed him. Nothing alters the fact that post-Vatican II Popes are true Popes or that Christianity itself can only be united under his supreme headship as laid out by Christ Himself.
The upside of this seeming disaster is that like an erupting volcano the lava spews out for all to see that those who have never had the faith are exposed albeit victorious for the time needed for the grace that comes only from true faith and penance purges our own souls. That is, when all those not wearing white garments are evicted from the Bridegroom's Wedding and those outside the fold are guests.
________________
Not to be taken literally:
*The poem begins as an old sorcerer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_(paranormal)) departs his workshop, leaving his apprentice (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apprentice) with chores to perform. Tired of fetching water (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water) by pail, the apprentice enchants a broom (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broom) to do the work for him – using magic in which he is not yet fully trained. The floor is soon awash with water, and the apprentice realizes that he cannot stop the broom because he does not know how.
The apprentice splits the broom in two with an axe – but each of the pieces becomes a whole new broom that takes up a pail and continues fetching water, now at twice the speed. When all seems lost, the old sorcerer returns and quickly breaks the spell. The poem finishes with the old sorcerer's statement that powerful spirits (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit) should only be called by the master himself.
-
Not to be taken literally:
*The poem begins as an old sorcerer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_(paranormal)) departs his workshop, leaving his apprentice (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apprentice) with chores to perform. Tired of fetching water (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water) by pail, the apprentice enchants a broom (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broom) to do the work for him – using magic in which he is not yet fully trained. The floor is soon awash with water, and the apprentice realizes that he cannot stop the broom because he does not know how.
The apprentice splits the broom in two with an axe – but each of the pieces becomes a whole new broom that takes up a pail and continues fetching water, now at twice the speed. When all seems lost, the old sorcerer returns and quickly breaks the spell. The poem finishes with the old sorcerer's statement that powerful spirits (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit) should only be called by the master himself.
This same sorcery has been unleashed by apprentice Bp. Fellay.
(http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/sorcerers/images/9/99/01_-_Apprentice_Mickey%27s_Broomsticks.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20120209230246)
Therefore, the SSPX will soon be awash with every manifestation of modernist compromise.
-
My question for all of you, no matter what position you take, you're going to have Protestants come to you and say "see, this is proof that the Church has failed. The Catholic Church really isn't what it says it is, look, Vatican II says, or at least strongly implies, that I don't seriously need to fear for my soul as I am, that I can be saved just as I am, so why do I even need to convert?"
I realize the nuances are gonna differ depending on the person, but just in general, how do you show a person that he needs the Catholic Church, in our current situation?
How did you come to accept the truth?
I ask this because it works pretty much the same for every individual, just as it did for you. *All* those who sincerely want to know the truth will come to find the truth. It might take a little or a lot of explaining to help those who seek the truth filter it out from all the confusion, but if they really want to know what the truth is, we have God's promise that He will make sure they find it.
Which is to say - and this can be a very hard pill to swallow - those who do not know the truth, do not know it because they do not want to know it - and on that account will never find that which they are not looking for no matter how poorly, or how well you explain the situation in the Church today.
As for those of us who know the truth, all we need to do is persevere in it our whole lives, right up unto the end.
-
How did you come to accept the truth?
I ask this because it works pretty much the same for every individual, just as it did for you. *All* those who sincerely want to know the truth will come to find the truth. It might take a little or a lot of explaining to help those who seek the truth filter it out from all the confusion, but if they really want to know what the truth is, we have God's promise that He will make sure they find it.
Which is to say - and this can be a very hard pill to swallow - those who do not know the truth, do not know it because they do not want to know it - and on that account will never find that which they are not looking for no matter how poorly, or how well you explain the situation in the Church today.
As for those of us who know the truth, all we need to do is persevere in it our whole lives, right up unto the end.
We are however called to evangelise, so his questions are important and valid. While yes, Protestants can find the truth on their own, clearly we aren't just meant to sit back and let things fall as they may, for we were called to evangelise and convert the world.
-
We are however called to evangelise, so his questions are important and valid. While yes, Protestants can find the truth on their own, clearly we aren't just meant to sit back and let things fall as they may, for we were called to evangelise and convert the world.
I'm not disagreeing with this.
I am saying that given the situation today, while it might seem impossible to explain the necessity of belonging to the Church and what happened to it, it really is entirely possible even if one cannot explain it well or explain it fully - that ultimately it is dependent upon the person listening, if they sincerely want to know the truth of the matter, they will find the truth of the matter. If they really want to know, then your explaining it to them will prompt them to do their own seeking and searching, in that way there is much they will find out to put them on the right road.
Conversely, no amount of explaining will suffice to those who really do not want to know.
-
I'm not disagreeing with this.
I am saying that given the situation today, while it might seem impossible to explain the necessity of belonging to the Church and what happened to it, it really is entirely possible even if one cannot explain it well or explain it fully - that ultimately it is dependent upon the person listening, if they sincerely want to know the truth of the matter, they will find the truth of the matter. If they really want to know, then your explaining it to them will prompt them to do their own seeking and searching, in that way there is much they will find out to put them on the right road.
Conversely, no amount of explaining will suffice to those who really do not want to know.
Ah, I get your point now. True enough.