10 Common Catholic Stereotypes, Myths, and Misconceptions

487 Comments

1. Hi Brittany! What a tremendous post! Exceptional! I was raised Protestant and my husband was raised Catholic. We are not Catholic now but we have benefited so much from the Catholic Church that I was so happy to see you post this…TRUTH is often hard to come by! Thank you for taking the time to get it right!

   1. I am curious if you don’t mind sharing–why are you not Catholic now? Is there a particular reason? And I can’t promise I’ll get it 100% but I’m sure trying my very best!!

2. Hi Brittany! First, I want to thank you for your posts, and for your openness in sharing your journey. It can be a very personal thing, but what you are doing will help many. I am Catholic, have been my whole life. At some points my ferver for my Faith has been stronger than others, as happens to many in their faith life, but I have always loved the beauty and the richness of the Church. I have also found that anytime I have had a question or concern, there is always a place to find the answer. I trust the Church’s teachings, as they are very difficult to refute when done humbly with an open mind AND heart. I will pray for you on your journey. It may be quite difficult at times, but just keep your eyes on Jesus and pray pray pray!! :). I do want to mention, I didn’t see anything (maybe I missed it) about the Eucharist in these posts. Where do you stand on belief in regards to Christ being present in the Eucharist. This is the source and summit of our faith. It is what keeps me firmly planted where I am, as nothing could ever cause me to walk away from Him. Just wondering where you are with this? Oh, and I second the comments and posts about reading Scott Hahns books (or listening to his cd’s in the car is fun too!) My husband was not Catholic when we got married. After a while he started going to some of Scott’s talks with me…as well as some other speakers like Tim Staples, Alex Jones, Jeff Cavins, and Fr. Larry Richards). He found truth in what they were saying, and although he was adamant about not becoming Catholic at first, eventually he said he came to realize the Church has the fullness of the faith. He became Catholic the year our first child was born. I think you will find Scott Hahns books very helpful. His conversion story is “Rome Sweet Home” His wife, Kimberly, had a much harder time with her conversion, and many can relate to her story. Also, there is a series done by Fr. Robert Barron called “Catholicism”. It is a phenomenal DVD set that walks you through the Catholic faith. It’s been on TV too. I have an extra set of this series I would be happy to let you borrow if you would like. I could mail it to you. I also have a bunch of different Scott Hahn (and others) books or CD’s I’d be happy to share! Either way, God bless you on your journey…and know that you have many peoples prayers that God leads you where He wants you to be. I look forward to reading more!!

   1. Hi, Michelle! Thanks for taking the time to respond! I didn’t include the Eucharist in this post because it isn’t really a myth–both Catholics and Protestants generally have a good understanding of WHAT the other believes, even if they don’t know why or don’t agree. But, you’re right, it is a huge teaching and it’s the one I’ll be covering next week! Hope to see you then!

   2. Just wanted to let you know that the post covering the Eucharist is now live. You can find it here: https://equippinggodlywomen.com/faith/is-the-eucharist-really-just-a-symbol/. Hope that answers your questions 🙂

3. The book “Rome Sweet Home” by Scott Hahn is a very good read about a Presbyterian ministers journey. As he climbs through the ranks of his church he begins to question things they do and things they incorrectly assume about Catholics. It explains the Catholics beliefs and traditions while pointing to where it relates in the bible. He was on his way to assume a high position in his church and his journey led him to be one of the strongest voices out there for the Catholic church.

   1. Thanks for the tip, Felix! I have read Rome Sweet Rome (in fact, its on my bedside table right now). I thought it was a little low on the diving in and explaining why, but their story was very interesting and helped me feel better about my own.

      1. I agree with you on ‘Rome, Sweet Rome’. Powerful, but light on biblical emphasis, which is implied by his knowledge and amount of research he did. That is why I seldom recommend it for those that are deep into biblical and historical reasoning. There are other choices that dive into that area much more thoroughly. I know you stated that most of your research has been done, but I also notice lots of questions. So, I hope these recommendations help.

         There are some gems out there that do this. For a more biblical approach I feel that David Currie’s “Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic” is far better. It is his conversion but much more meaty in all subjects.

         For Baptism and the Eucharist, Steve K. Ray’s “Crossing the Tiber” is more like ‘scripture analysis’, after a chapter on his conversion. I also hold his other book “Upon This Rock” as well researched in seeking and supporting the papacy; a surmountable obstacle for many.

         To know what the early church/Christians believed and the Church Fathers, which is what you are trying to do also, I recommend these: Jimmy Akin’s “The Fathers Know Best”, Michael O’Brien’s “Theophilos”, and Rod Bennett’s “Four Witnesses: The Early Church in Her own Words”. I have known for many years and I am familiar with Jimmy’s work (outstanding). I came across Bennet’s work lately, and not only is it thorough, but a true joy to read or listen to (I have heard from those who bought the audio version of the book). O’Brien’s is the only one I have not read, but he comes highly recommended and is lumped together with Akin and Bennett by those that have read all three. He is next on my list of books.

         For the Communion of Saints (praying to/with the saints) the most thorough is Patrick Madrid’s “Any Friend of God is a Friend of Mine”. It is a fairly small book, but very dense, and covers ‘all’ corners.

         Regarding the Catholic Rites (the variety of Liturgical expressions within the Church) I think you may find this conversion story in the Coming Home Network by a Ukrainian Byzantine priest most illuminating. He struggle with ‘where’ to serve the Church and he talks a bit about the rites in a most beautiful way (toward the end). Here is the link:
         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQCD4jKHeOU

         I hope, if these are not on your list of must haves, that you consider these recommendations to dig in when you have more time. I remember when I did my journey (I love the truth), as I began to sift through the ‘obvious’ errors and then dove deeper into learning and gained a thorough understanding of things, it became an unquenchable thirst for Truth that lasted roughly 18 months.

         Since your desire is Truth, I am afraid you have probably embarked in a similar journey. In the end we know in our hearts and souls that Absolute Truth exists. The question is if we can find it and encounter it here on earth during our lifetime, and the answer is yes. Jesus! But ‘which’ Jesus?
         The Muslims worship the God of Abraham. The Jews also worship the God of Abraham. Similarly, the Samaritans, the Catholics, the Orthodox, smaller ancient heretical groups that have survived, the wide array and flavors of ‘born-again’ Christians, the Mormons, the JW, and Unitarians also worship the God of Abraham.
         The God of Abraham is believed by all to be THE Absolute Truth, yet all views differ from minor to substantial, and radical. When we look at Christianity, this is a similar dilemma, but in a narrower sense, where Jesus is the focal point.

         Just thought I would give some ‘food for thought’, which I had to digest myself years ago.
         In my prayers.

4. What would you say of a man who was given a wrecked car and told to restore it to the same condition as it was before the wreck, only to return to you half-done? You certainly wouldn’t think very much of his workmanship and you would probably warn your friends and co-workers to avoid his shop at all costs. A job half-done is a job not done at all.
   Yet this is exactly what Protestantism teaches about the Redemption of our Lord in denying the Queenship of our Lady and Her right to our honor. This problem comes from the highly individualized view of salvation extant in Protestantism. Everything is viewed from the aspect of “what’s in this for me?” instead of the overview of God’s salvific work in all of Creation. It is a very truncated and narrow view of God’s redemptive work.
   The Last Adam as man does what first Adam failed to do. The first Adam, through his sin, forfeits the possibility of becoming everything that the Last Adam does become. In Christ Jesus, every effect of the Fall is reversed and all that mankind possesses in the Garden is restored. Rev. Ralph Smith, a Reformed writer, states the same thing:

   “It is what salvation is all about because salvation is restoration – not merely restoration to the original state in Eden but to the attainment of the goal of Eden.”

   This is an amazing statement, but Rev. Smith has not followed his thinking to the logical outcome. There was another person in the Garden. The covenant helpmeet. What of her? If Eve is not restored in full, then the work of God’s redemptive plan is only half done. Everything must be restored completely to the condition that it was in before the Fall. Before the Fall, there was a human mother of all with a nature uncorrupted by sin and the possibility of becoming a queen next to her king husband. If God restored Adam as male human being, then in order to fully restore that which He created in the Garden, He must also restore Eve in the person of a female human being. To leave Eve out of the equation would be to leave the redemptive work of the Father incomplete. There would be no regeneration. Certainly the Early Church Fathers understood this, for they referred to the Blessed Virgin as the New Eve.
   Let’s look at some of the parallels between Eve and Mary, beginning with their creation as human beings.
   Eve was created by the work of God in splitting open Adam’s side. The Blessed Virgin was created in the same way, by the splitting open of the side of the Last Adam. Both were created sinless. The difference is, of course, that Eve had no sin in her creation, while Mary, on the other hand, required a blood sacrifice to entirely cleanse Her at the moment of Her conception. I find it interesting that in both cases, we see the shedding of blood, which is always part of a covenant cutting ritual. Without the death of Christ for sin, His covenant Blood could not have been applied to Mary for her original sin at the instant of her conception to make her created in the exact same way that Eve was – innocent and sinless.
   Eve was the wife of a prince. As son of the Great King – God – Adam had kingship and rulership in front of him, which means that Eve would have been a queen to rule with him.
   Since the Bible portrays the Church as the Bride of Christ, this Marian image is certainly related to and appropriated from that one. Building on the biblical image of Christ as the “Last Adam,” early Christians spoke of a “New Eve,” a feminine cooperator with Jesus in the economy of the redemption. Second century writers Saints Justin Martyr and Irenaeus of Lyons perceived Mary as this second Eve, who undid the sin of the first one:

   “Christ became man by the Virgin that the disobedience which issued from the serpent might be destroyed in the same way it originated. Eve was still an undefiled virgin when she conceived the word of the serpent and brought forth disobedience and death. But the Virgin received faith and joy, at the announcement of the angel Gabriel…and she replied, “Be it done to me according to your word”. So through the mediation of the Virgin he came into the world, through whom God would crush the serpent and those angels and men like him, who delivers from death those who turn from their evil ways and believe in him.”

   “The seduction of a fallen angel drew Eve, a virgin espoused to a man, while the glad tidings of the holy angel drew Mary, a Virgin already espoused, to begin the plan which would dissolve the bonds of that first snare…For as the former was led astray by the word of an angel, so that she fled from God when she had disobeyed his word, so did the latter, by an angelic communication, receive the glad tidings that she should bear God, and obeyed his word. If the former disobeyed God, the latter obeyed, so that the Virgin Mary might become the advocate of the virgin Eve. Thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so it is rescued by a virgin; virginal disobedience is balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience.”

   In like manner, the Blessed Virgin, as the new Eve to the Last Adam, is the helpmeet. She bears rulership with Him, not of herself intrinsically, but of God, in the same way that Adam and Eve would have borne the authority of God had they not fallen. When titles such as Intercessor, Mediator, and others which drive Protestants just wild, are given to her, they are given because she, as helpmeet, equally bears that authority that her human son, the Last Adam, has been given in heaven.
   Remember, it is a man who rules in heaven. Yes, a special man who is, in a mystery both human and divine, two natures not co-mingled, yet existing in one person – a man. A man and a woman – a human king and queen in heaven ruling as the covenant heads of the family. This was exactly what God had planned for Adam and Eve and exactly what He restored in Jesus and the Virgin Mary – Kingship and Queenship over the created world.

5. So far, I have been adding comments as replies and clarifications from someone who is Catholic and did a lot of studying and dialogue with non-Catholic Christians also.
   Your endeavor is a wonderful one, and I will be praying for the Lord to guide you where He wants you to serve Him. I do hope it be the Catholic Church in the end, because I have come to believe with all my heart and mind to be the “Bulwark and Foundation of Truth”, but His ways are far above mine.

   I will be praying the Lord may help you with discernment, wisdom, and humility. I will also pray that He grants you the graces you will need to understand the seamless, yet complex faith that is the Catholic Faith. So complex that you could spend a lifetime exploring it, yet so simple that a little child grasps readily. And finally, that the perspective that you have been trained to see and understand things may not hinder you from seeing the beauty that the Lord wants you to see and experience.

   ps: Recommendation = Relax on the deadlines. You may not be able to do justice on some topics if you put yourself against a corner. Let the Lord guide and lead you.
   I remember when I did my digging, I was spending 16 to 18 hours every day absorbed by the insatiable quest for Truth which took me almost two years. Then tapered off for another year.

   1. Thanks for the prayers, Antonio. I’ve already done much of the research–now I just need to type everything up. Not that I know anywhere near enough (or ever will). My purpose isn’t to provide every single irrefutable detail though–just to share my store and provide a foundation that will encourage others to examine the truth for themselves.

      1. Understood.
         Will be praying that the Lord may guide you on your writing and touch others.

6. Like you, I was raised in a Protestant tradition, and have attended the Catholic church for most of my 27 years of marriage. We raised our children to be ‘Christian.’ Also like you, I have worked to reconcile much of what I was taught about the Catholic Church while growing up – especially a lot of propaganda which was spouted in one particular denomination which shall not be named. I now see myself as a catholic (small-c intentional) Christian built upon a strong Mennonite Christian foundation.

   Too many people view their particular Christian perspective (or church/denomination) like a football team. i.e. – I used to be a Methodist, but now I am a Catholic — kind of like ‘I used to be a Bronco’s fan, but now I am a Redskins fan.’ I believe such language gives us all the wrong idea about Christianity. Denominational perspectives are not in competition with each other. We are all Christians who should be focused on finding the truth – not denominational cheerleaders trying to outdo each other. I believe such a focus is really the very clever work of the devil.

   In fact, I also believe that our overuse of the word ‘religion’ when we really mean ‘Christian tradition’ is also the work of the devil. Think of how casually you say, ‘Catholic religion’, or ‘Protestant religion’, or ‘Lutheran religion’ when discussing different Christian traditions. Use of the word ‘religion’ in this context implies that these different Christian perspectives have ‘religion’ status relative to each other. That is not the case. Christianity is a religion – as opposed to Islam, which is an entirely different religion. Catholicism is a particular Christian tradition/perspective with a deep history. The Lutheran perspective has its own particular Christian perspective and history – but it is not sufficiently different from Catholicism to warrant separate ‘religion’ status. So – the devil has effectively divided us…and thus conquered in a very effective way. If he can keep us focused on arguing with each other about who is more ‘right’, then we are not spending our time focusing on the message of Jesus Christ.

   A very good way to introduce a Protestant to the history of the Catholic tradition is to say, ‘the first 1,500 years of Christianity were under the leadership and guidance of the Catholic church. These Catholic ‘faith ancestors’ and this Christian history belongs to you just as much as it does to me. I would love to introduce you to some of your Christian ancestors – the fathers of the Church.’ This is a much better approach than, ‘our Church was founded by Jesus Christ’ – which implies that their church was not – and now you have just started a fight and the devil has won.

   I applaud your efforts to combat these misrepresentations about the Catholic tradition. There are plenty of misrepresentations about the various Protestant Christian perspectives which need to be addressed as well. Hopefully someday we can all just focus on living as Jesus called us to live.

   1. Hi, James! Agreed. As I’ve told many others, I’m not seeking a denominational label. Just searching out the truth wherever I can find it. The labels are helpful for providing a framework, but they definitely aren’t meant to be confining, if that makes sense. It’s not a competition, but a journey towards the truth.

7. I love how you so casually and cavalierly gloss over priest pedophilia. “Scandals in *every* church!” Give me a break. The Catholic church shuffled pedo priests from parish to parish for decades, aware of the atrocities being committed by supposed men of God. The Vatican knew and did *nothing* to stop this. Cardinals knew and did nothing. Bishops and Archbishops knew. They did nothing. Please tell me again how “it isn’t really fair to blame the entire Church or dismiss the Church’s core teachings for what a few did.” Better yet, tell the victims.

   1. I cannot even image the horror that the victims experienced. It’s absolutely heartbreaking, and I don’t mean to gloss over it. But ultimately, it is the individuals involved who were responsible (including those who did things and those who failed to). Just like in our country–we have murderers, thiefs, etc. There are plenty of bad people and plenty of people who do nothing to stop it. It doesn’t make American laws bad because the people don’t follow them. It makes the people bad. Similarly, it doesn’t make Catholic beliefs wrong because of the people who didn’t follow them. If the official church teaching was encouraging this–that’d be totally different. Instead, it was a minority of the people in the church who did NOT listen to church teaching. I hope that makes sense.

      1. Your blog would have been strengthened had you worded that section closer to what you said here. Thanks for your reply.

      2. How can anyone have faith in a church who actually, from the top down, hide and protect criminals? To compare the rape and homosexual abuse of innocent children in the RCC, with civilian crimes is almost being dismissive. The point is really: what kind of church spends millions of $ hiding criminal ‘priests’. The popes themselves were aware of these goings on for decades. These are not your average on-the-street civilian, these are people who claim they are doing God’s work and (in the case of the pope) speak on behalf of God, and entrusted with authority over innocent children! May I ask you a question? Do you think your response would be quite so mild and understanding if it were your children that had been sexually abused?

      3. The same way we can have faith in our country. There are a TON of crooked politicians in America. Does that make the principles that founded this country invalid? Does that make every politician or every American a criminal–just because some are? I’m not saying there isn’t blame here–just that it needs to be rightly placed.

         And if it were my children, I am sure it would change my perspective in that I would be more saddened, more outraged, more determined for change. BUT, no, I honestly do not believe it would change my perspective on the church in general. The actions of the portion of people who did NOT follow the church’s teaching don’t invalidate the teachings.

         To give an example: Say you had a medicine. One person took it, the other didn’t. The one who took it lived. The one who didn’t died. You wouldn’t say “What a horrible medicine–the second person died!” Well… he didn’t take it. It’s the same here. The fact that the priests didn’t follow the teachings and then horrible things happened doesn’t reflect on the teachings that they weren’t following. If the official church teachings said to do this, that’d be different. But there’s a big difference between what the church officially teaches and what people do in real life. And I think that distinction is crucial.

   2. I think your point Bob G. is interesting.
      Last year, between January and April there were 120+ sexual abuse cases in the school systems. Some Representative from the House of Reps, can’t remember his name, wanted to introduce a law that the victims could sue the schools for not doing better at protecting the children. During that time, one priest was accused in the USA. Anyway, the law *never* saw the light of day.

      Here is another one that is a real beauty. If you do a search for ‘pastor charged with sexual’ you will get a ton of Protestant pastors that were charged within the last week or two.

      Last year, on the month of June (could have been May) there were 25 or 26 pastors charged with sexual assault of minors and children. Of all of those, *only ONE* was a Catholic priest, the rest were a variety of Christian pastors and ministers. I remember when there were all the news about the Catholic priests, there was a non-Catholic pastor that was charged with *over* 130 counts of sexual assault on children and minors. He had been doing some church *hopping*.

      Doesn’t it make you wonder why such difference in news coverage? If it is a Catholic priest, he gets *national* and *international* spotlights on the news, but if it is 20+Protestants that are arrested in a month (some with a *much* greater number of assault charges than any priest), they make the local news, and very few people are aware of it. Don’t you *hate* double-standards?

      Just wondering. Have you heard about any of these other Christian pastors?
      Anything about all these latest ones?
      Don’t you think that those 20+ in one month should have made the *big* news? I would imagine so.
      Ooops. Forgot!
      They are *not* Catholic.
      How about all these non-Catholic pastors that were arrested for sexual assaults on children in the last couple of weeks. Did you hear anything about it?

      The way you are talking and condemning the Catholic faith for it’s sinners, then *every body* should leave their churches and Christianity altogether because sexual corruption is everywhere.

8. What about the Council at Nicea where they decided arbitrarily what was to be included in “the official Bible” and what was not?

   Its all made up as Fredric Niche said: ” Organized religion is a natural psychological phenomenon used to by oppressed people, long enslaved to make sense of their suffering. Justice would be meted out in the “nether-world” to those who oppressed them in order to balance the scales.

   When you die, you are dead. Just like the dandelion in your garden. You had your shot at life, you lived it and now you’re gone.

   I’d love it if there were a heaven where we all would party and love one another after all this, but I’m partying now and loving now. Just sayin!

   1. Well, the issue of whether or not there’s even a God at all is a topic for a whole other series (and one I’d like to do this summer. There really is logical proof behind our beliefs!) For this series, however, we are simply starting with the assumption that there is a God and that Christianity is true. Now we’re just hammering out the details…

   2. Gary, the Council of Nicea had nothing to do with the Cannon of Bible. You have your info mixed up. Sorry to hear you don’t believe in God. You remind me of a young man that was in college with me back in 2002. Born into an atheist family, claimed to be an atheist. There were some one-of-a-kind events that took place between the two of us that changed him completely and deepened my faith. We seldom talked religion or God because it would have been a complete waste of my time. The very last conversation we had, as I was walking away I said to him: “I will be praying for you, J … !”
      And he replied in a loud voice, since the distance was increasing (outdoor college campus): “I will pray for you too!”

      I am going to give you a challenge, and I hope you have the ‘courage’ (the guts) to take it on. Her is the challenge:
      Every day ask God to show you He exists. Ask Him to give you a sign that you cannot refute.

      But there is a catch to this; the responsibility of your response. When the time comes, I have absolute confidence that God will provide you with some proof of His existence which will be irrefutable in ‘your heart and mind’. This will be a decisive moment for the rest of your life. Your freedom to chose and accept or reject what you will witness/experience will determine your eternity. I will keep you in my prayers, Gary.

      FYI: From your quote of Niche, he has no idea either why or what I believe. To show how far off the mark he is, let me make an analogy. If he was a sniper on a roof top with a rifle and scope, he would miss every single shot, and the enemy would be walking around without worries. Bad philosophers usually ASSUME what the argument is, but some are so arrogant that they don’t even bother to study beforehand what it is. That is a fallacy in philosophy. Do you remember Philosophy 101? It is there. Clue = str…
      Niche is very influential with some, but he missed the mark on that one.

9. Thank you for starting this series! I grew up Protestant, but converted to Catholicism a few years ago? I had many questions, some of which you addressed here, and asked many questions and listened intently to homilies on these questions.
   One was about works. When I walked into Mass and the priest talked about works, I listened. It’s the same as in many Protestant Churches, Faith in Jesus is what gets you into Heaven. Works is glorifying God in what we do!
   I’m looking forward the rest of your articles.

   1. Thanks Carol!

10. Just to clarify some of your responses to the myths since you are still on your journey.

    1. Catholic priests can’t marry. That one is not a myth. Once a man is ordained a deacon (all priests are first ordained deacons) he is no longer free to marry. However, a married man (in the Eastern Churches and former Anglican/Lutheran ministers in the West) can be ordained to the priesthood. In short hand … a married man can be ordained but an ordained man cannot marry.

    2. The Church is not opposed to “birth control” but only certain methods of birth control. There are methods of birth control that are morally acceptable (and effective)
    .

    1. Thanks for the clarification. I edited the post a little bit to make it more clear.

Comments are closed.