Invincible Ignorance

[jhnsn]

Here's some background on the people I’m dealing with.

First – I’m in conversation with a woman who follows a Methodist tradition of some kind and she mentioned that she had heard of Scott Hahn and would like to read something from him. I let her borrow “Father who keeps his promises”. After a couple of weeks she returns it to me quickly and said
“ I was raised very conservatively and I am not open to this” I said something like
“Well, at lest you learned something” and she said “Yes”
Now a couple of months have passed and we talked about seeing the “Passion” and at first I thought she was open to seeing it but after I saw it and I was giving my review she said
“I’m not going to see it because it is bible based” From that, I gathered she is not open to other interpretations of the bible.
She plays the flute and is very active in her church. She mentioned that she knows a Catholic who claims she is an atheist. I said she sound like a ‘hypocratic’ atheist. she laughed. This lead us to a discussion on how to help her friend realize there is a God. I brought up C.S. Lewis and she mentioned the she would be interested in reading his books. So I let her borrow “The Great Divorce” and “The Screwtape Letters” I didn’t have “Mere Christianity” available but as soon as I get my copy back I was going to suggest this book as well.

Second - He was raised Irish Catholic ( in Philly) (his cousin is a priest, sounds very Orthodox) but left during his teenage years ( sounds like his father was not a very good christian). He has become very anti-catholic. He doesn’t believe in the Trinity and believes that Luther was inspired. He loves Christian songs and hates liturgical prayer. While I’ve made the point that just because you don’t like something that doesn’t mean it’s wrong. He was open to read a book so I gave him Jeff Cavins book “My life on the Rock ..” he agreed he made some good points but he isn’t a bible scholar. Then he shut the door and said I’m not interested in any more books.

He is adamant that the church is the whore of Babylon and while he doesn’t think the current Pope is the anti-Christ he knows that one day the pope will be the anti-Christ . So it seems no matter what logical argument I can come up with that shows the Catholic Church is the true church it would be trumped by the thought that the anti-Christ is going to a future pope.

Any help would be appreciated.

[_Christopher_]

He is adamant that the church is the whore of Babylon and while he doesn’t think the current Pope is the anti-Christ he knows that one day the pope will be the anti-Christ . So it seems no matter what logical argument I can come up with that shows the Catholic Church is the true church it would be trumped by the thought that the anti-Christ is going to a future pope.

What are his "reasons" for that?

[beng]

Give him the REAL Luther


See his quotes here


And ask him whether ANY of the Church father EVER taught Sola Scriptura or Sola Fide.



Appeal to the Early Fathers. Give him William Jurgen book on The Faith of The Early Fathers. The small one, not the three complete series. Let him read teh Fathers and come to his own conclusion.



And you mihgt want to give him Surprised by Truth (by Patrick Madrid). Stories of Converts

[Pere i Pau]

Are you asking if he is invincibly ignorant? If so, I would think not.

[Shibboleth]

Originally Posted by beng

Give him the REAL Luther


See his quotes here

I will say this once again and probably many more times. Although Luther was inspired, he was not infallible. He said many, many things that the Lutheran church does not abide by and find down right against scripture.

Luther is not a measure of the Lutheran church. Luther was subject to some of the beliefs of the time just as any other man, Catholics you can exclude the Pope from this statement if you wish. He said many venomous things about Ana-Baptists, the Jewish, and others – in very earthy language nonetheless, but these things are generally disregarded by the Lutheran faith.

[beng]

Originally Posted by Shibboleth

I will say this once again and probably many more times. Although Luther was inspired, he was not infallible. He said many, many things that the Lutheran church does not abide by and find down right against scripture.

Luther is not a measure of the Lutheran church. Luther was subject to some of the beliefs of the time just as any other man, Catholics you can exclude the Pope from this statement if you wish. He said many venomous things about Ana-Baptists, the Jewish, and others – in very earthy language nonetheless, but these things are generally disregarded by the Lutheran faith.

But he (the friend) believes that Luther was inspired. Those quotes surely put him to the test.

[Pere i Pau]

Originally Posted by Shibboleth

I will say this once again and probably many more times. Although Luther was inspired, he was not infallible. He said many, many things that the Lutheran church does not abide by and find down right against scripture.

Luther is not a measure of the Lutheran church. Luther was subject to some of the beliefs of the time just as any other man, Catholics you can exclude the Pope from this statement if you wish. He said many venomous things about Ana-Baptists, the Jewish, and others – in very earthy language nonetheless, but these things are generally disregarded by the Lutheran faith.

Are we talking about the same man who claimed to be divinely inspired to leave the Church and post the 95 theses? You mean his credibility when it comes to the basis for the Protestant revolt is not important?

So I assume the legitimacy of the revolt does not lie in the fate of the character of this man?

The reason there are authors that write books like "The Gospel of Thomas" or "DaVinci Code" is an attempt to discredit the character of those who give witness. Why? Because in doing so, if someone can prove them to be fraudulent, then Christianity is a scam.

Please don't take it my questions in any other way then they are intended my brother.

[RJS]

On defending the papacy against the anti-Christ arguments I would get yourself a copy of Pope Fiction by Patrick Madrid. This discuses a lot of the arguments against the papacy very well. You can also listen to some of the arguments from ewtn (# 6 talks directly about what you are dealing with)

[jhnsn]

I believe both people ar invincible in their ignorance. They are not open to the information I present them.
Referencing the second person, we have basically "agreed to disagree".
He looks at me like I would look at a Mormon or a JW, I'm a nice gut but totally deceived.

Thanks for the input and links.

[Pere i Pau]

I disagree with that conclusion. If that be the case, everyone not a Catholic would be invincibly ignorant.

[Shibboleth]

Originally Posted by Pere i Pau

Are we talking about the same man who claimed to be divinely inspired to leave the Church and post the 95 theses? You mean his credibility when it comes to the basis for the Protestant revolt is not important?

So I assume the legitimacy of the revolt does not lie in the fate of the character of this man?

The reason there are authors that write books like "The Gospel of Thomas" or "DaVinci Code" is an attempt to discredit the character of those who give witness. Why? Because in doing so, if someone can prove them to be fraudulent, then Christianity is a scam.

Please don't take it my questions in any other way then they are intended my brother.

One of his basic premises of Lutheran teachings is that we all are by nature sinners and will sin. Luther was no different. His credibility is very important, but he did say things that are not considered acceptable by the Lutheran church but he did say some intelligent and insightful things in the process.

The legitimacy of the revolt relies on the credibility of the principles on which they were revolting not on the credibility of a man.

[Pere i Pau]

And intent.

[Amie]

For your methodist friend, why not give her Scott Hahn's "Rome Sweet Home" book first to document his conversion. It's more story-like and sounds a bit "Protestant" because it's his testimony. This may snag her into wanting to read something else of his and being open to RC again. Pray for her.

As for your other friend, he sounds disillusioned and hurt. Although you may try to come at him with reason, he is obviously beyond that and is throwing out, "whore of babylon" to get you off his back. I would first pray for him, and stop coming at him with logical arguments. It's not working. You can lead a horse to water, etc. Instead, ask him if he is open to allowing you to pray a novena to Our Lady for healing. And if he says yes, do it. Only God can open hearts. Once you've prayed for him for a while, invite him to mass. The mass is powerful, and if he recalls the faith of his youth, it may be what he needs to start the journey home.

Keep the faith, and God bless,
-Amy

[jhnsn]

Originally Posted by Pere i Pau

I disagree with that conclusion. If that be the case, everyone not a Catholic would be invincibly ignorant.

I guess that's what I'm saying. You must be able to claim perfect ignorance that the Catholic Church is not the true church of christ to be invincibly ignorant. Even the slightest doubt would cause you to loose your invincibility.
For example -you could have no knowledge of the truth (Native American Indians before Columbus) or imperfect knowledge (Ghandi). in both cases they are invincibily ignorant. Let me clarify this by saying I am not their judge.
Jesus will judge their invincibility on the last day.
That is why I picked this title of the thread, to explore this topic.

[Ichthus]

Originally Posted by Pere i Pau

Are you asking if he is invincibly ignorant? If so, I would think not.

We are forbidden by the Church to make judgments on who is invicibly ignorant of their moral obligation to elicit the Faith