How to speak truth of the faith

[mia.s]

What's the best way to speak the truth of the faith when people ask about sins or are knowingly committing them?

For example-- I've heard a woman say she thought a brother was going to experience eternal damnation because he was raised Catholic, but has a Protestant wife and joined that church. This woman said that she was allowed to tell her brother that he was indeed, going to be eternally damned because he committed a sin.

Other scenarios are people who aren't Catholic receiving communion, or receiving when they didn't receive absolution first. The line I usually hear is "God will understand" or "Everyone else is receiving, why can't I?"

How do you express the truth without being a jerk or sugarcoating?

[Stella]

What's the best way to speak the truth of the faith when people ask about sins or are knowingly committing them?

For example-- I've heard a woman say she thought a brother was going to experience eternal damnation because he was raised Catholic, but has a Protestant wife and joined that church. This woman said that she was allowed to tell her brother that he was indeed, going to be eternally damned because he committed a sin.

Other scenarios are people who aren't Catholic receiving communion, or receiving when they didn't receive absolution first. The line I usually hear is "God will understand" or "Everyone else is receiving, why can't I?"

How do you express the truth without being a jerk or sugarcoating?

We first have to understand the difference between evangelising and proselytising. Benedict and Francis have both given lots of catechesis on this subject. The woman who thought it prudent to tell her brother he was going to experience eternal damnation is out of touch with Catholic teaching. Pope Francis spoke about this in January this year.

https://www.usccb.org/news/2023/evangel ... d's%20love.

Sharing the faith is the "oxygen" that "invigorates and purifies" Christian life, Pope Francis said.

Beginning a new series of catechesis focused on evangelization and apostolic zeal, the pope said that when Christian life loses its aim of proclaiming the Gospel, it becomes "self-referential" and "atrophied."

"Without apostolic zeal, faith withers," he told people gathered Jan. 11 in the Vatican audience hall.

The pope specified, however, that "to be a missionary, to be apostolic, to evangelize, is not the same thing as proselytizing," or actively seeking to convert someone.

Quoting the late Pope Benedict XVI, who died Dec. 31, Pope Francis said that "the church does not proselytize, but rather she grows by 'attraction'" to the beauty of God's love.

Evangelization "does not begin by seeking to convince others, but by bearing witness each day to the love that has watched over us and lifted us back up," he said.

"Communicate this beauty to convince people," Pope Francis said. "We are the ones who announce the Lord, we do not announce ourselves, nor a political party or an ideology. Put people in contact with Jesus without convincing them. Let the Lord convince them."

The pope mentioned his predecessor again while greeting German pilgrims, some wearing traditional Bavarian outfits at the audience. He said that Pope Benedict taught Christians "to look with faith at Jesus Christ, the savior."

Pope Francis also shared a story about a group of Korean women religious who came to Buenos Aires, Argentina, to run a hospital. Although the women did not speak Spanish, the hospital patients were pleased with them because their gaze "communicated Jesus."

"This is attraction, which is the opposite of proselytism," the pope said.

Pointing to the Gospel episode in which Jesus calls Matthew to follow him even though Matthew is a widely disliked tax collector, the pope said that Christians must look beyond people's labels.

"Jesus does not stop at adjectives, he always looks for the substance," he said, encouraging people to think about how they look at others. "So often we label people for what they do or think."

"Christians are called to do like Christ," reaching out especially to those who seem far off, the pope said.

And, he said, it is "fundamental" for Christians to go out and seek others rather than waiting for people to somehow find them.

Pope Francis ended the audience by inviting those present to pray with him in silence for peace in Belarus; he had placed on stage a Marian icon he said was venerated in the country.

[mia.s]

Thanks for sharing that. Are we supposed to proselytize? In the Bible there are plenty of things said about people who will not listen.

[gherkin]

What's the best way to speak the truth of the faith when people ask about sins or are knowingly committing them?

For example-- I've heard a woman say she thought a brother was going to experience eternal damnation because he was raised Catholic, but has a Protestant wife and joined that church. This woman said that she was allowed to tell her brother that he was indeed, going to be eternally damned because he committed a sin.

Other scenarios are people who aren't Catholic receiving communion, or receiving when they didn't receive absolution first. The line I usually hear is "God will understand" or "Everyone else is receiving, why can't I?"

How do you express the truth without being a jerk or sugarcoating?

Of course that catechesis from Francis is not Church teaching and as is almost always the case with Francis, it's a muddled up mess. But that's not to say there's not some important stuff mixed up in there. So much depends on the status of the relationship, and the mode of teaching. If the woman you're speaking of has a solid, loving relationship with her brother where she can express her obviously legitimate fear for his soul, then it would be horrific for her to abstain. He won't be damned for committing a sin--we all do that--but because he's turned his back on the sacraments and is living in a persistent and apparently unrepented sin. That latter is irreformible Church teaching, without any doubt. Will the woman convince her brother? Of course not. The work of conversion is always the Holy Spirit's. But God has made it abundantly clear that we share in that work, and the Great Commission is not negotiable. It applies first to the Apostles and their successors, but in our own way to to each of us.

If someone at my Church were to say to me--and nobody in my life has ever done any such thing--that he receives communion while in grave sin because "everybody does it," my response would depend altogether on my relationship with that person. Quick reference to St. Thomas More, a gentle hint that you can always approach the priest in the communion line with crossed hands and simply receive a blessing instead, a "eating and drinking condemnation" mention; I dunno. There are lots of ways to respond, and which might be appropriate would vary wildly. Always keeping in mind that the state of a person's soul isn't ever open to me to know.

Sometimes, direct evangelization is probably not called for. I had an obviously gay student once, but that issue of course never came up between us as such. That would have been totally inappropriate given the relationship, and he never gave me a window where the professional relationship allowed for personal discussion at quite that level. But I do know that after having him in several classes, he generally softened towards Christianity, which he had previously held somewhat in contempt, partly due to difficulties with his largely evangelical family. Things can be complicated.

I wish I could claim to be a better role model in this regard, but I think the best response to your question is simply to pray fervently to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit whenever such moments arise. We've also got to know when to let it go. If, for example, your adult children aren't assisting at mass anymore, and you've let them know that this is a grave sin, after a few well-chosen talks, you can't keep harping on it. (Probably.) It just becomes divisive.

[Stella]

Thanks for sharing that. Are we supposed to proselytize? In the Bible there are plenty of things said about people who will not listen.

No to proselytizing. It's a form of communication that doesn't witness to Christ. It's like or else. My brother used to lead RCIA groups and commented that he noticed the difference between a person there with a gentle seeking and those who were keen on the proselytizing aspect in a way inspired by fire and brimstone, already having strong opinions about how the Church should be doing things. That was a tricky thing.

Scripture does have some harsh warnings for those who will not listen but but also gives us pastoral techniques making sure we aren't being hypocrits ourselves and damaging to another's soul. For example Paul to the Galatians...

My brothers and sisters, if anyone is detected in a transgression, you who have received the Spirit should restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness. Take care that you yourselves are not tempted. 2 Bear one another’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. 3 For if those who are nothing think they are something, they deceive themselves. 4 All must test their own work; then that work, rather than their neighbor’s work, will become a cause for pride. 5 For all must carry their own loads. Gal 6:1.

[Stella]

Of course that catechesis from Francis is not Church teaching and as is almost always the case with Francis, it's a muddled up mess.

I hear people claim that but I don't buy it. I especially appreciate his use of terms and parts of speech that give you a real grasp of issues. Terms like the Church being a field hospital and mercy being a medicine or a person being mercified. His got a gift for that kind of simple imagery and imagination grabbers.

[gherkin]

Of course that catechesis from Francis is not Church teaching and as is almost always the case with Francis, it's a muddled up mess.

I hear people claim that but I don't buy it. I especially appreciate his use of terms and parts of speech that give you a real grasp of issues. Terms like the Church being a field hospital and mercy being a medicine or a person being mercified. His got a gift for that kind of simple imagery and imagination grabbers.

He does. Unfortunately, the things he says are still a muddled mess. That's the charitable take, of course. He could be deliberately attempting to mislead Christ's faithful. But we have to assume he's just hopelessly inept as a thinker.

[Gandalf the Grey]

Of course that catechesis from Francis is not Church teaching and as is almost always the case with Francis, it's a muddled up mess.

I hear people claim that but I don't buy it. I especially appreciate his use of terms and parts of speech that give you a real grasp of issues. Terms like the Church being a field hospital and mercy being a medicine or a person being mercified. His got a gift for that kind of simple imagery and imagination grabbers.

His writings are littered with at least intellectual contradictions if not flat-out or performative contradictions on his part. A lot of pandering platitudes with not very much at all in the way of actual substance.

His writing is like watching a baker who makes the worst and most tasteless little tiny cakes and then heaps huge portions of icing on top in order to cover over and distract from how little is actually there.

[Kage_ar]

What's the best way to speak the truth of the faith when people ask about sins or are knowingly committing them?

For example-- I've heard a woman say she thought a brother was going to experience eternal damnation because he was raised Catholic, but has a Protestant wife and joined that church. This woman said that she was allowed to tell her brother that he was indeed, going to be eternally damned because he committed a sin.

Other scenarios are people who aren't Catholic receiving communion, or receiving when they didn't receive absolution first. The line I usually hear is "God will understand" or "Everyone else is receiving, why can't I?"

How do you express the truth without being a jerk or sugarcoating?

There is an old saying about not responding to every fight you are invited to. Do not get into it with those folks, change the subject or walk away or both.

When someone receives Communion, that is between that person, their priest and God. Even Extraordinary Ministers of Communion are not allowed to refuse the Eucharist to someone who approaches.

If I have invited a non-Catholic to Mass, I would be wise to remind them that only Catholics who are in a state of Grace are to receive. If they go up and receive anyway, it is not my job to tackle them or to fuss at them later.

We are to share Christ the way the Scripture tells us "let your light so shine before men that they see your good works and glorify your Father in Heaven". People need to notice your love, your light.

[gherkin]

There is an old saying about not responding to every fight you are invited to. Do not get into it with those folks, change the subject or walk away or both.

When someone receives Communion, that is between that person, their priest and God. Even Extraordinary Ministers of Communion are not allowed to refuse the Eucharist to someone who approaches.

If I have invited a non-Catholic to Mass, I would be wise to remind them that only Catholics who are in a state of Grace are to receive. If they go up and receive anyway, it is not my job to tackle them or to fuss at them later.

We are to share Christ the way the Scripture tells us "let your light so shine before men that they see your good works and glorify your Father in Heaven". People need to notice your love, your light.

Kage, you're leaning towards making some of the same mistakes that Francis does. First, a discussion isn't a fight, at least, not always. You can have conversations about hard stuff without having hard feelings. This is kind of the point I'm making above about paying attention to the realities of the relationship you've got with people. Second, Scripture doesn't tell us to share Christ ONLY in the way you mention. Even that famous line from St. Francis about preaching the Gospel always, using words when necessary, notes that we've got to talk sometimes. And St. Francis, who really did preach the Gospel virtually always in his acts, did not exactly shy away from preaching with his words.

As is standard to mention: we're both/and people, not either/or people.

[Kage_ar]

My point about attending every fight is when people are discussing so and so parishioners and what they have done or if they are going to hell for marrying outside the church, that does not mean I have to chime in on either side. I'm not quite the addle brained squishy person that my vibes apparently give off.

Christ did give the office of preaching and teaching instruction, thing is, not all of us are called to be preachers, and the circle of teaching authority responsibility is small for the majority of us. Most of us are called to instruct our children, to be an influence to those in our close circle, and for the rest to be salt and light.

[gherkin]

My point about attending every fight is when people are discussing so and so parishioners and what they have done or if they are going to hell for marrying outside the church, that does not mean I have to chime in on either side. I'm not quite the addle brained squishy person that my vibes apparently give off.

Right, I wouldn't want to chime in on a discussion about the state of someone else's soul, either. But I don't think that was the kind of case mia had in mind.

Christ did give the office of preaching and teaching instruction, thing is, not all of us are called to be preachers, and the circle of teaching authority responsibility is small for the majority of us. Most of us are called to instruct our children, to be an influence to those in our close circle, and for the rest to be salt and light.

I completely agree with this, but again I do think you're leaning a bit either/or here. Am I preaching or taking some position of teaching authority in a case like mia describes?

Envision: Bob says to me, "yeah, I'm in mortal sin but I receive Holy Communion anyway because God will understand." Like I said, I've never encountered such a situation myself, but we're imagining here. What do I say? Obviously, it's not my place to try to prevent Bob from receiving Holy Communion. Even if I were an EMHC, as you point out, I couldn't withhold communion from him after having such a conversation. But surely by sharing this with me Bob is in some sense inviting himself into what you call my circle of teaching. I take it as obvious that I can't just giggle it off and in effect show approval of what he's doing. Do I just change the subject? Awkward. So in my post I mentioned a few things that I might try saying, depending on how well I know Bob, and what I know about him. There are of course many other ways to reasonably approach this kind of discussion apart from the few I mentioned.

The bigger point is that if I give Bob a sensitive and sound reply, I am not "proselytizing" or picking some kind of fight. Nor am I gossipping, nor am I trying to tackle Bob and keep him from receiving the Host. I am in some sense evangelizing, and the Great Commission suggests to me that this is a requirement of the Christian life, in the ways that are appropriate to us in our state of life. I fear that the "be salt and light" thing can become a way to evade that responsibility, especially when you couple it with the kind of stuff that Francis does, spiritualizing way one's abandonment of this responsibility, and pretending that the alternative is always somehow aggressive or negative. I expect St. Francis would be more than a little surprised to hear that kind of thing.

Your vibes do not suggest addle brained.

[Kage_ar]

What's the best way to speak the truth of the faith when people ask about sins or are knowingly committing them?

For example-- I've heard a woman say she thought a brother was going to experience eternal damnation because he was raised Catholic, but has a Protestant wife and joined that church. This woman said that she was allowed to tell her brother that he was indeed, going to be eternally damned because he committed a sin.

Other scenarios are people who aren't Catholic receiving communion, or receiving when they didn't receive absolution first. The line I usually hear is "God will understand" or "Everyone else is receiving, why can't I?"

How do you express the truth without being a jerk or sugarcoating?

Going back to mia's original, I took both of these to be sort of a 3rd party situations. In the first, unless the lady is asking "Kage, what do you think about my brother?" I'd likely advise her to speak to her pastor. The second, well, unless it is someone I am very very close to, I have no way to know that that person did not go to absolution. If they said "I am stomping puppies in my free time, I did not go to confession and I am going to receive communion anyway because God will understand", I'd then offer guidance. If it is a third party situation "did you see so and so going to Communion? I heard that she stomps puppies!", I would advise that we pray for "her".

In the theoretical issue with Bob, proverbial you and Bob are close enough, or Bob thinks enough of you, that he is asking. That opens the door for a good conversation.

For me, I take each situation as it comes. I do not feel the need, or the calling, to be preaching

[gherkin]

Going back to mia's original, I took both of these to be sort of a 3rd party situations. In the first, unless the lady is asking "Kage, what do you think about my brother?" I'd likely advise her to speak to her pastor. The second, well, unless it is someone I am very very close to, I have no way to know that that person did not go to absolution. If they said "I am stomping puppies in my free time, I did not go to confession and I am going to receive communion anyway because God will understand", I'd then offer guidance. If it is a third party situation "did you see so and so going to Communion? I heard that she stomps puppies!", I would advise that we pray for "her".

In the theoretical issue with Bob, proverbial you and Bob are close enough, or Bob thinks enough of you, that he is asking. That opens the door for a good conversation.

For me, I take each situation as it comes. I do not feel the need, or the calling, to be preaching

Yo. I'd say we're totally on the same page. Sorry if that's hurtful to say.

[Kage_ar]

Going back to mia's original, I took both of these to be sort of a 3rd party situations. In the first, unless the lady is asking "Kage, what do you think about my brother?" I'd likely advise her to speak to her pastor. The second, well, unless it is someone I am very very close to, I have no way to know that that person did not go to absolution. If they said "I am stomping puppies in my free time, I did not go to confession and I am going to receive communion anyway because God will understand", I'd then offer guidance. If it is a third party situation "did you see so and so going to Communion? I heard that she stomps puppies!", I would advise that we pray for "her".

In the theoretical issue with Bob, proverbial you and Bob are close enough, or Bob thinks enough of you, that he is asking. That opens the door for a good conversation.

For me, I take each situation as it comes. I do not feel the need, or the calling, to be preaching

Yo. I'd say we're totally on the same page. Sorry if that's hurtful to say.

Dude, way to ruin my birthday week

[gherkin]

Dude, way to ruin my birthday week

It's my birthday week, too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[mia.s]

I should've clarified a bit in my OP.

We're sometimes told "the truth can be harsh." Why can't we be that way with the faith? For example, if my non-Catholic IL decides to receive during Mass, why can't I tell her she's receiving unworthily and she can't have it? Yes, that's kind of mean to say, but isn't that the truth?

I've encountered situations where non-Catholic family members receive communion, where Catholic family members receive without going to confession, where they don't attend holy days of obligation, where they think contraception is okay because "people gotta eat," etc. Same thing with outside of my family. Many of these things are just the way modern Catholics think.

Is it permissible to evangelize in a way that seems like thumping the Bible or catechism over people's heads?

[gherkin]

Is it permissible to evangelize in a way that seems like thumping the Bible or catechism over people's heads?

Absolutely, if that's what you're called to do in the circumstances. The difficulty with being provocative like this is that it can be desperately difficult to tell if you're really evangelizing out of love and concern for the person's soul, or if instead you're just asserting yourself to lord it over the person or feel superior. Of course, the flip side is that if you try to evangelize along the lines of just "showing people the Gospel through your life," it can be terribly difficult to tell if you're actually preaching the Gospel in deeds rather than words, or if you're just too much of a coward to speak up. Life is full of such dangers, and there's never a really simple answer or safe path.

I do think the point about relationships is important. If the Catholic IL you mention is someone you can have hard, real conversations with because they know you and trust that you've actually got their best interests at heart, then speaking up forcefully makes a lot of sense. But if you're already on difficult terms with that person, then the frontal assault is probably unwise.

[Kage_ar]

Is it permissible to evangelize in a way that seems like thumping the Bible or catechism over people's heads?

Absolutely, if that's what you're called to do in the circumstances. The difficulty with being provocative like this is that it can be desperately difficult to tell if you're really evangelizing out of love and concern for the person's soul, or if instead you're just asserting yourself to lord it over the person or feel superior. Of course, the flip side is that if you try to evangelize along the lines of just "showing people the Gospel through your life," it can be terribly difficult to tell if you're actually preaching the Gospel in deeds rather than words, or if you're just too much of a coward to speak up. Life is full of such dangers, and there's never a really simple answer or safe path.

I do think the point about relationships is important. If the Catholic IL you mention is someone you can have hard, real conversations with because they know you and trust that you've actually got their best interests at heart, then speaking up forcefully makes a lot of sense. But if you're already on difficult terms with that person, then the frontal assault is probably unwise.

Amen to this.

I think of when my adult child was living with his fiancee. He knows Church teaching, likely better than I do! We had one conversation, that was enough. What was the point of my bringing it up every time he came over? Neither of them were hostile to the Church. His fiancee was shocked at first that I was kind to her, as she said I was a "super Catholic" and she had experience in her family of Catholics who were not kind. Son would still come to Mass with me (abstaining from Communion) on Mother's Day, Christmas, etc. They came together to Our Lady of Guadalupe (she is of Mexican heritage). They began the process for marriage, and it was going to be in the Church.

The relationship ended, son went to Confession and came back to fully practicing.

It all depends on the relationship and the person.

[mia.s]

Is it permissible to evangelize in a way that seems like thumping the Bible or catechism over people's heads?

Absolutely, if that's what you're called to do in the circumstances. The difficulty with being provocative like this is that it can be desperately difficult to tell if you're really evangelizing out of love and concern for the person's soul, or if instead you're just asserting yourself to lord it over the person or feel superior. Of course, the flip side is that if you try to evangelize along the lines of just "showing people the Gospel through your life," it can be terribly difficult to tell if you're actually preaching the Gospel in deeds rather than words, or if you're just too much of a coward to speak up. Life is full of such dangers, and there's never a really simple answer or safe path.

I do think the point about relationships is important. If the Catholic IL you mention is someone you can have hard, real conversations with because they know you and trust that you've actually got their best interests at heart, then speaking up forcefully makes a lot of sense. But if you're already on difficult terms with that person, then the frontal assault is probably unwise.

I appreciate this distinction. As a Christian, and namely a Catholic, I've struggled with the right balance of tactfully stating the truth without allowing a viper tongue to overshadow my actions. With my IL, I have a good relationship, but she'd take it badly if she was told that receiving was not wise. Her justification is "I had confirmation and I should be able to receive." It would cause an argument, and honestly I think a further discussion should be between her and her husband.