When someone says "Catholicism is so stupid"

When someone - a stranger, a friend or a family member - says “Catholicism is so ****ing stupid, it denies science and should not be taken literally” - what is an appropriate response?

Tell them it isn’t smart to talk about things they don’t understand.

“Perhaps you’re mistaking Christian Fundamentalism for Catholicism.”

As Petra sang in Fool’s Gold:

"Some may call me foolish,
Some may call me odd,
But I’d rather be a fool in the eyes of man
than a fool in the eyes of God."

As a side note, we must remember that Christ was mocked, so those who follow him should expect to be mocked as well.

“If any one serves me, he must follow me;
and where I am, there shall my servant be also;
if any one serves me, the Father will honor him.” (John 12:26, RSV)

“Blessed are you when men revile you and persecute you
and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account.
Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven,
for so men persecuted the prophets who were before you.” (Matthew 5:11-12, RSV)

Remember, in all things be charitable.

If you know the person is a more reasonable and calm person, you might try to ask what objections they have specifically and then go from there. Remember, you have a duty to not only defend your Faith but also to inform the ignorant, but always with charity and understanding.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Ask them if Msgr. Georges Lemaitre, Nicholas Copernicus, Gregor Mendel, etc. were stupid.

The Catholic Church denies science??? God is the author of nature and science! and the Catholic Church! Trying to disprove God by science is like studying bear tracks and trying to prove that there are no bears!

Ask them how the Church denies science then correct them. Then you might want to mention the fact that Western science can be traced back to a bunch of people with Father or Brother in front of their names. Kinda hard to deny science when the deniers are the ones starting/doing it.

science.INVENTED

Below:

:rotfl:

(of course remembering truth with charity)

examples from my friend -

1.) “catholics are taught that masturbation is wrong, not because sexual gratification should be shared with one’s spouse BUT because each…emission…murders millions of people, and it’s just a double standard because using this logic women are free to masturbate because they don’t kill people when they do. to people who believe in science, sperm are cells, they are not people so murder is not possible unless fertilization occurs.”

2.) “NFP is still birth control and has an incredibly high failure rate anyway since we can’t predict with 100% certainty what our bodies are doing on the inside, not even with fertility aids you can get at the drug store. god and procreation are just not that simplistic. and it’s ridiculous that someone could think it is morally wrong to take control of your own body and have the right to choose how many children you have/don’t have or at what times you have them. gone are the days when women would die at age 40 from having a new baby every 10 months of her life and end up having 25 children…to work in the fields. couples should be allowed to decide how many children they want, if any, without offending god to the point of them being thought of as an abomination. in today’s economy people are cutting wages and laying people off left and right, people are having to go 6 months to up to 2 years before they find their next job and it is irresponsible to knowingly bring many children into your home when you know you don’t have the ability - financial or otherwise - to take care of them all. and before you say it, government help isn’t always a moral thing - you’re still relying on someone else’s dollar to raise YOUR kids.”

3.) “is it not possible that mary was not a virgin when she conceived jesus, and that she still gave birth to the son of god? the concept of miracle just means we have no explanation for it yet - that doesn’t mean there isn’t one. a virgin birth is just too science fictiony for my ability to make sense of it. it IS possible to become pregnant after certain types of sexual contact that leave the hymen still intact. girls did not have very much protection back then - it is also possible that mary was raped and couldn’t report it to anyone for fear of rejection or safety. i don’t think this would have changed who jesus was!”

i have to disagree here…humans invented the catholic church just like humans wrote the bible. man is flawed so we should expect some imperfections from both. here’s an example, how to explain that god invented science and also invented catholicism but when catholicism contradicts science, well… man’s interpretation of science can be flawed too… but my friend says that science is based on valid things like testing and experimentations and by contrast religion is based on feelings and rules that people make up to reflect how they feel about the world personally. :shrug: maybe you have proof that the catholic church USES science, but saying that the catholic church INVENTED science is arrogant to me…that’s like saying the catholic church invented god. :eek:

Why do you care about what your ignorant friend says with respect to a Church you think is false?

Also note that when we inform the ignorant we are often informing ourselves. For I know that when I have to look up information about my faith and learn the truth about, I inform my own ignorant self.

Where did he get the idea that Catholics think sperm cells are human persons??? We agree that there is no human life prior to conception. The Catholic Church has never condemned masturbation as a form of murder, so this person’s attack on Catholic beliefs is a straw man fallacy. For what the Catechism teaches on why masturbation is immoral, please read CCC #2352 and CCC #2396 (note that the Catechism labels this as a sin against chastity and not as a violation against the commandment which condemns killing.

2.) "NFP is still birth control anyway since we can’t predict with 100% certainty what our bodies are doing on the inside, not even with fertility aids you can get at the drug store. god and procreation are just not that simplistic…

But NFP regulates children in a natural way, not an artificial way. That is the main difference. But even among Catholic couples who faithfully utilize NFP, the Church teaches them not to misuse NFP by adopting a “contraceptive mentality” (i.e., they should have an overall openness to the begetting of life).

“…and has an incredibly high failure rate”

No, it has an “incredibly high” failure rate among those who are mathematically challenged. But there still can be a small failure rate for those who do careful calculations, which is why they are supposed to have (as I stated above) an overall openness to the begetting of life. Plus, no artificial contraceptive is 100% fool proof either.

…and it’s ridiculous that someone could think it is morally wrong to take control of your own body and have the right to choose how many children you have/don’t have or at what times you have them. gone are the days when women would die at age 40 from having a new baby every 10 months of her life and end up having 25 children…to work in the fields. couples should be allowed to decide how many children they want, if any, without offending god to the point of them being thought of as an abomination.

And exactly how are these concerns not addressed by NFP?

…in today’s economy people are cutting wages and laying people off left and right, people are having to go 6 months to up to 2 years before they find their next job and it is irresponsible to knowingly bring many children into your home when you know you don’t have the ability - financial or otherwise - to take care of them all. and before you say it, government help isn’t always a moral thing - you’re still relying on someone else’s dollar to raise YOUR kids."

Once again, exactly how are these concerned not addressed by NFP? And in the cases of people receiving government assistance to help with children, does this person actually believe that most of these people were practicing NFP? Give me a break!

3.) "is it not possible that mary was not a virgin when she conceived jesus, and that she still gave birth to the son of god? the concept of miracle just means we have no explanation for it yet - that doesn’t mean there isn’t one.

No, the concept of a miracle means that there is not explanation (when one considers the event as well as the timing of the event) apart from divine intervention. That’s the whole point.

…a virgin birth is just too science fictiony for my ability to make sense of it.

In other words, this guy has a problem with the whole “leap of faith” concept.

it IS possible to become pregnant after certain types of sexual contact that leave the hymen still intact.

So it is possible for humans to do this, but not the Holy Spirit?

…girls did not have very much protection back then - it is also possible that mary was raped and couldn’t report it to anyone for fear of rejection or safety.

Or it is possible that God fulfilled the promised coming of the Messiah through Mary.

“i don’t think this would have changed who jesus was!”

He would not have fulfilled one of the aspects of the messianic prophecies (i.e., born of a virgin), so, yes, this would have changed who Jesus was.

1.) Wrong - the Catholic Church teaches that masturbation is wrong because it entails completion of the act of sex outside the context of a marital relationship and it closes off the sexual act to the possibility of life. This denies God’s intent of the unitive and procreative nature of sex.

2.) Wrong - Studies have shown that NFP, when properly practiced, has between a 98 and 99.6 percent effectiveness at preventing pregnancy (see this post on another thread for links). NFP is used to prevent pregnancy, true, but differs from artificial birth control in that it is not specifically designed to prevent pregnancy and that it uses solely natural methods (knowledge of how the body works). The Church encourages use of NFP because it recognizes that a married couple may need to delay or prevent pregnancy based on socioeconomic concerns…it does not encourage couples to irresponsibly “knowingly bring many children into your home when you know you don’t have the ability - financial or otherwise - to take care of them all.”

3.) This is in fact a miracle and one of the mysteries of our faith. Despite the fact that much about our religion can be explained through logic and evidence, there are still some things that just have to be taken on faith. This is one of them.

The thought of any women being raped is abhorrent - the Virgin Mother particularly so.

Well, Jesus invented the Catholic Church, so the Church itself is perfect. However, humans within the Church are indeed flawed, and many imperfect things have been done in the Church’s name. This does not negate the holiness of the Church itself.

Science is born of logic. Logic is born of reason. Reason is born of free will. Free will is a gift from God. We wouldn’t even be capable of “testing and experimentation” were it not for God.

The Church did not “invent” science (I strongly suspect the poster that said so was being humorous), but it certainly has done a great deal over the years to increase our knowledge of the world around us through the development of scientific techniques and methods.

The Church did not “invent” science (I strongly suspect the poster that said so was being humorous), but it certainly has done a great deal over the years to increase our knowledge of the world around us through the development of scientific techniques and methods.

Not a joke. Click here and read the thread. Fr. Roger Bacon invented empirical testing of hypotheses, aka the scientific method.

Why is it that Western civilization has such amnesia of its own heritage?

The result of this thinking is abortion. Until people understand the sanctity of life, we will have to live with the scourge of abortion.

Ugh. Well, I’m certainly not going to be the springboard to resurrect a year-and-a-half old argument. Suffice it to say that I don’t believe that religion and science are mutually exclusive. That’s all I have to say on the matter and I will not respond further on this thread in that vein.

As others have pointed out, this is a straw man argument since sperm are not human beings.

2.) "NFP is still birth control

So is abstinence. NFP is just abstinence practiced selectively.

and has an incredibly high failure rate anyway since we can’t predict with 100% certainty what our bodies are doing on the inside,

Abstinence has a 0% failure rate.

not even with fertility aids you can get at the drug store. god and procreation are just not that simplistic. and it’s ridiculous that someone could think it is morally wrong to take control of your own body

Abstinence is by definition taking control of your own body instead of being a monkey.

and have the right to choose how many children you have/don’t have or at what times you have them.

You can choose how many children you want to have by not having sex. Duh.

gone are the days when women would die at age 40 from having a new baby every 10 months of her life and end up having 25 children…to work in the fields.

Those 25 children would grow the economy and pay for Social Security for the older generations.

couples should be allowed to decide how many children they want, if any, without offending god to the point of them being thought of as an abomination. in today’s economy people are cutting wages and laying people off left and right,

Because there are not enough consumers to buy the products these companies are making. There’s no shortage of resources, there IS a shortage of humans.

3.) "is it not possible that mary was not a virgin when she conceived jesus, and that she still gave birth to the son of god? the concept of miracle just means we have no explanation for it yet - that doesn’t mean there isn’t one.

This leaves out the fact that God can and does use naturally explainable phenomena in extraordinary ways.

a virgin birth is just too science fictiony for my ability to make sense of it.

Parthenogenesis is not science fiction.

it IS possible to become pregnant after certain types of sexual contact that leave the hymen still intact. girls did not have very much protection back then - it is also possible that mary was raped and couldn’t report it to anyone for fear of rejection or safety. i don’t think this would have changed who jesus was!"

Ask him if he would be willing to walk into a battered women’s shelter and say this.

i have to disagree here…humans invented the catholic church just like humans wrote the bible. man is flawed so we should expect some imperfections from both. here’s an example, how to explain that god invented science and also invented catholicism but when catholicism contradicts science, well…

Catholicism does not contradict science.

man’s interpretation of science can be flawed too… but my friend says that science is based on valid things like testing and experimentations and by contrast religion is based on feelings and rules that people make up to reflect how they feel about the world personally.

I think your friend has evangelicalism (which is by and large based on feeling) and Catholicism confused. Catholicism is based off of logic, reason, philosophy (in particular that of Socrates and his school) and special revelation (e.g. the Bible).

:shrug: maybe you have proof that the catholic church USES science, but saying that the catholic church INVENTED science is arrogant to me…that’s like saying the catholic church invented god. :eek:

The Catholic Church did invent the scientific method, the university, the hospitals, etc.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.