INTRODUCTION TO CATHOLICISM

@SSSS_Dynazion

Original text may be found at https://textup.fr/621922xA

S/O to @_bonaventurian & others whose works were provided here

Mentioned Bible verses are taken from the Douay-Rheims Bible translation

What is a Catholic?

What does a Catholic believe in?

A complete list of everything Catholics believe in and the various levels of assent they have to give to each belief is much beyond the scope of this guide, and beyond the scope of basic catechism. In this specific section, we will go over the broad Christians beliefs central to the faith, by looking at the Apostle's Creed. The Catechism of Saint Pius X will often be referred to for further details, or quoted directly.

The Apostle's Creed is one of the first statements of faith drawn up by the Church. It clarifies the divinity of Christ and His Incarnation, and also reproduces the most early statement of faiths the Christians agreed on :

I believe in God the Father almighty,

Creator of heaven and earth.

And in Jesus Christ, His only Son,

our Lord, Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,

born of the Virgin Mary,

suffered under Pontius Pilate,

was crucified, died, and was buried.

He descended into hell; the third day

He rose again from the dead;

He ascended into heaven, and sits at

the right hand of God the Father

almighty, from thence He shall come

to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,

the holy Catholic Church,

the communion of saints,

the forgiveness of sins,

the resurrection of the body

and life everlasting.

Amen.

Let us define the most important Christian beliefs this Creed expresses, two of them being the most important beliefs of the Christian religion, the Trinity and the Incarnation.

The Trinity is the doctrine according to which God is three Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. In the words of the Athanasian Creed: "the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God." In this Trinity of Persons the Son is begotten of the Father by an eternal generation, and the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son. Yet, notwithstanding this difference as to origin, the Persons are co-eternal and co-equal: all alike are uncreated and omnipotent.

This may be confusing or obscure at first, but before peering any deeper into its meaning, one should try to keep in mind the basics that have been laid down.

The Incarnation is the doctrine according to which the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, the Son, united human nature to His divine nature, inseparably yet distinctly, and walked among us as Jesus Christ.

The Gospel, or Evangelion in Greek, that is : Good News, of Christianity is that the Son of God took human flesh, becoming true God and true Man, to bridge the gap between humanity and divinity. He let himself be crucified for our sins, reconciling us with God, and ascended to Heaven, where he can truly Mediate for us to the Father, dispensing His grace to us. He founded the Church and left us the Seven Sacraments to guide us in the way he opened, and let us receive His graces.

An explanation of all of the 12 articles of the Creed is provided most succinctly and clearly in the Saint Pius X Catechism, section "The Apostle's Creed".

How do I become Catholic?

A Catholic, or a member of the Catholic Church, is a baptized person who believes in the Catholic faith. Let us go over each of these points individually.

The Church

The Church is the society of believers. It is composed of both a human element, the believers themselves, and the hierarchy in which they are organized, and a spiritual element, the guidance of God through the Holy Spirit towards the salvation of its members.

— this part left blank —

Baptism

Baptism is the first Sacrament^[1] of the Church, by which a person is cleansed from Original Sin^[2] and their personal sins, and the baptized person enters the Church.

Finally, to be a member of the Catholic Church, one must assent to all that has been defined as Catholic dogma, i.e beliefs that have been declared binding on all believers. The Apostle's Creed and other beliefs cited in I-1) are dogmatic, for example.

N.B : For further questions on the Seven Sacraments, the Church in General, and Original Sin, we refer to the Catechism of Saint Pius X, in the sections of the same name.

What is the difference between a Catholic and other Christians ?

Strictly speaking, there is no difference between a Catholic and a Christian, and only a Catholic may truly be a Christian. But through multiple historical schisms and separations, multiple sects have spawned, claiming for themselves, with more or less legitimacy, the term "Christian". The two major groups considered alongside Catholics are the Eastern Orthodox and the Protestants.

The Eastern Orthodox are the various Churches of the East, present mainly in Greece and later in Russia, who split from the Church over the course of 1054 to 1452. The main difference between Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox lies in the role of the Pope, i.e the Bishop^[3] of Rome, in the organization of the Church. Catholics believe the Bishop of Rome reigns supreme over all the other bishops, having a true authority by divine right over them, and to be the hierarchical head of the Church on Earth. The Orthodox believe all the Bishops have the same authority, and that none has a supernatural right over any other. Another difference presented between Catholics and Orthodox is the Filioque, but it is of much lesser importance, and explaining its intricacies requires additional prior knowledge.

The Protestants are various groups who appeared after the Protestant Revolution, a theological and political revolt started by Martin Luther. The previously Catholic monk exploited and exaggerated problems with abuses to push false theological conclusions, taking away a great number of Christians from the Church. A great number of sects arose from the split, and multiplied even further over the centuries. There are probably a few dozens of different Protestant sects with substantial differences in their beliefs, so it is impossible to go over them all. We will cite their two major errors, in which they are all united.

First of all, the protestants deny all sorts of hierarchy within the Church. So they do not believe there to be any bishop with real authority over the faithful, or priest who is truly different from the lay^[4] Catholic. It goes without saying they do not accept such a thing as a Pope. They also differ from Catholics on the topic of salvation. Catholics believe it is attained by assenting to the revealed doctrine (which is how Catholics define faith) , and by keeping God's grace obtained by baptism. Protestants say faith is either a simple trust in Christ's salvation, or a personal relationship with him, and deny any change effected in the soul by baptism, reducing salvation to keeping faith as they define it.

What is salvation and how do I obtain it ?

Salvation is entering Heaven, and eternally having the beatific vision, which is an immediate knowledge of God, resulting in perfect happiness.

Upon baptism, a Catholic receives sanctifying grace, by which Our Lord deigns to dwell within us as a king in his palace; and keeps us united to Himself by the virtues of faith, hope and charity. While that grace may be lost upon committing a mortal sin^[5], it can be recovered by the Sacrament of Confession. We refer to the Catechism of Saint Pius X for more on the theological virtues and Confession.

It is important to note that there is no Salvation Outside the Catholic Church, and that one must stay in the Church and in communion^[6] with its members, most importantly their Bishop and the Pope, which implies obedience to both.

If your question is "Will I be saved?", if you are baptized keep the commandments and frequent the sacraments, you can hope ^[7] to be saved. Hope is a supernatural virtue, infused by God into the soul, by which we desire and expect that eternal life that God has promised to His servants, as well as the means necessary to attain it.

On the salvation of non-Catholics, we do not strictly pronounce ourselves on their end. While we cannot reasonably hope they may be saved, we can pray that through special graces from God, they may be saved. It is important to know that the Church is the sole principle of Salvation and it is only through her that anyone may obtain eternal life.

Why would I become a Catholic?

Why would I become a Christian?

Before giving some basic proofs for the reality of the Christianity, let us establish some principles on the necessity of a true religion. We presuppose here the existence of God, and the absurdity of materialism, and will give proofs for both later.

It is undeniable that man tends towards good things. We all appreciate good food, spending time with people we love, and achieving success. Therefore it is natural for us to tend towards higher goods. But man is also a supernatural creature. Therefore we must tend towards, not only supernatural goods, but the highest supernatural good, which we call God. We cannot reach that good on our own, as it is necessarily superior to us, but need to be drawn to it, by what we know as religion. Therefore not only must we search for that religion, for it would be unreasonable to neglect the highest good for lower goods, but we must find the true religion by which God draws people to Him, for it would be contrary to divine goodness that God wants us to wander around beliefs and religion, instead of giving us a way to reach Him.

We will set out to give proofs that Catholicism is that true religion, as its conception of God conforms to what we can reach with reason and its revelations have been proven by miracles.

Metaphysical proofs, and conformity of the Christian God to reason

We admit that, on their own, metaphysical proofs are insufficient to convince people of the existence of God. But from them we can form a foundation to the belief of the existence of God, and help understand what He is. We can then draw conclusions as to how we can expect God to act. We shall do this with Saint Thomas of Aquinas's third and fourth proof of God, also called the argument from contingency and argument from goodness.

Argument from contingency :

In the world we see things that are possible to be and possible not to be. In other words, perishable things. But if everything were contingent and thus capable of going out of existence, then, nothing would exist now. Therefore, there must be something that is imperishable: a necessary being. This everyone understands to be God.

Since God is necessary, it is his very nature to exist. But there exists only one religion where God has defined himself as that which exists, and it is the Christian religion, as we see in the book of Exodus Chapter 3 Verse 14, after God is asked by Moses for His name : "I am the God who IS; thou shalt tell the Israelites, THE GOD WHO IS has sent me to you.". Therefore the Christian God defines Himself exactly how God would be expected to.

Argument from goodness :

We see things in the world that vary in degrees of goodness (Some substances are better than others, since living things are better than non-living things, for example). But judging something as being "more" or "less" implies some standard against which it is being judged. Therefore, there is something which is best. From this we deduce that there exists some most-good being and this – everyone understands – to be God.

Therefore God is He who is most good. But it is the nature of goodness to diffuse itself, the way the virtuous man shares his wealth. And we know of one religion where God has loved man so much that He united His divine nature to human nature, and laid down His life for man, in a supreme act of love, and it is the Christian religion. Therefore the Christian God acts the most like how God would be expected to.

We can recommend these channels and videos for further on the rational proofs for God : https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLpzmRsG7u_gpMogZpIcZnS0BsD3z8_x3n; https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXbTJn6BGgw94T2UvAm7rnUPgm1_2_Glr; https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TVaeZAtP70U5Co5WOirhinQ

For more on the existence of God : Summa Theologica, I, Q. 2; https://archive.is/QGWfG; CIRCA DE EXISTENTIA DEUS

Proof from miracles

It is most fitting, and most possible for God, Lord of all things, to confirm His revelations by miracles. Two objections are often raised to proofs by miracle :

• First, that miracles are impossible. But that is an a priori statement with no justification and, which is unable to explain the actual evidence for miracles, and that humans since the beginning of time have believed in the supernatural.

• Second, that other religions have miracles too. That can be answered in three ways. First, that other religions claiming miracles does not mean they can prove them, the way Catholics can. Second, that other entities can effect things which can appear supernatural. But Catholics can claim truly supernatural miracles, beyond the scope of what other religions claim, such as the Resurrection of the dead or prophecies. Finally, the miracles of the Christian religion confirm a truly coherent and moral belief, and are often claimed by truly selfless wonderworkers which have never gained anything from their miracles, such as Jesus Christ Himself, His Apostles, Saint Francis of Assisi or Saint Padre Pio. But that is not the case of other religions, which have inconsistencies in their beliefs, defective moral codes, and prophets who are clearly motivated by greed or power.

We will now offer examples of Christian miracles and the evidence which supports them, starting with the chief miracle of all, the Resurrection of Christ. We encourage the reader to spend some time on this one, as it is the most important. We will propose complete detailed proof in various forms, and the reader may choose one to his liking, and then summarize the basic arguments (Please note that the reliability of the gospels goes in pair, as a subject, with that of the Resurrection).

Playlist on the historicity of the New Testament : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rml5Cif01g4&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TW70EEo4e2onJ4lq1QYSzrY

Playlist on the Resurrection of Jesus : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ErnJF_nwBk&list=PL1mr9ZTZb3TUYymBPce08oyuhnHLLkR_B

Simple articles on the reliability of the gospel and the Resurrection : https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/the-authenticity-of-the-gospels; https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/explaining-away-jesus-resurrection-1

A complete apological article on the question, translated from the very good Manual of Apologetics by Abbe Boulenger : https://textup.fr/621548UT

Good article on the Shroud of Turin : https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/trial-of-the-shroud-of-turin; https://archive.is/Y5G21

For the more patient reader, we refer to The Case of Jesus by Brant Pitre, a full book on the question.

For the impatient reader, we summarize the argument thus :

• The man Jesus of Nazareth was a 1st century preacher in the province of Judea who was crucified around 30 AD by Roman authorities.^[8]

• Sometimes after his death, his disciples began to preach of his resurrection. This we know from the gospels, but also from the letters of Saint Paul, among them the first letter to the Corinthians (Chapter 15, verses 11-14), dated unanimously by scholars in the 50s AD.^[9] That same letter also claims 500 people saw Jesus resurrected, a fact that would have been at the time extremely easy to verify, as it would have been barely 20 years after the fact, and many of the witnesses would still be alive.

• The Apostles and the early disciples laid down their lives in martyrs, and suffered great persecution in defense of their faith.^[10] We give as two examples the two apostles whose martyr we can historically prove most easily, that of Saint James the Greater, whose martyr is recorded in the book Acts (Chapter 12 Verses 1-3) and that of Saint James the Lesser, whose martyr is attested by the 15th chapter of the book of Acts, and by the Jewish historian Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews, XX, ix, 1)

• Therefore we can trust the disciples were honest in their testimony. Various hypotheses such as hallucinations and the survival of Jesus are treated in the more complete resources above, but for the purpose of brevity, we will end the argument here and assume it is a sufficient argument for the Resurrections of Christ, and move on to more recent miracles.

The next miracle we will consider is the apparition of the Virgin Mary in the town of Fatima, Portugal, in 1917. Three shepherd children reported seeing the Virgin Mary from the 13th of May to the 13th of October. From her, they received many messages and prophecies, asking them to pray to God and calling people to conversion. The Virgin Mary confirmed the divine nature of her message in the Miracle of the Sun, an event in which tens of thousands of people, Catholics and non-believers, simultaneously witnessed the sun changing color and "dancing in the sky" and changing color.^[11]

We will now consider the liquefaction of the blood of Saint Januarius. This one is quite impressive as it can be directly watched multiple times a year, with video evidence to prove it.^[12] The vial which the priest moves around is reported to contain the blood of the 4th century martyr, Saint Januarius, and twice to three times a year, liquifies in a ceremony which has been recorded since 1382.^[13] Spectrographic analysis has shown that the substance inside the vial does indeed contain blood. Even in the hypothesis that there was no blood inside the vial, or that the content is not solely blood, one would still have to explain how a liquid can liquifies or solidifies "on command", with no relation to temperature (as the time it takes to change state has no correlation to ambient temperature) and even has been reported to change volume and mass.^[14] While similar substances may be produced now, their production would be extremely complicated for 14th century chemists, who could not have thought of combining all the materials and putting them through the proper process.

The final example we will consider is Saint Padre Pio. It could be said, and it has been said that the entire life of Saint Padre Pio is a miracle. There are many miracles of healing, mind reading, speaking in another language, being at two places at the same time etc. no amount of hypotheses could explain them away. All by a monk who has lived his entire life in seclusion and poverty. We will focus here on the miracle he was most known for, the "stigmatas" (wounds) on his hands, and one particular healing which we have ample evidence for. Saint Padre Pio had wounds on his hands, similar to those of Christ, from 1918 to his death. This can be observed clearly on pictures of him.^[15] Multiple doctors have observed the wounds, and described them in odd manners, such as their good fragrance, their constant bleeding, and inability to scar.^[16]  It is impossible to explain how these wounds were made and how they stayed.^[17] Most surprisingly, they disappeared after the death of Padre Pio, leaving no mark whatsoever. Among his healings, we can mention that of Gemma di Giorgi, a blind girl who could see despite having no pupils.^[18]

Why should I become a Catholic specifically?

As we've already gone over the differences between Catholics and other Christians, we will jump immediately to make a case for the side of the Catholic Church in the disputes with Eastern Orthodox and Protestants. As this is only an introduction, it will only make basic positive arguments, and not get into the refutations. The reader desiring to inquire further into the matter can read the apologetic works provided. We will suppose here that the Bible relates events accurately and that the early Christians were correct in their practice of the faith. The first arguments proposed will be for the hierarchy of the Church as Catholics claim it to be, differentiating them both from the Orthodox and Protestants, before talking about the specific differences on justification which only concerns Protestants.

Using Scripture and early Church history, we will go over the founding of the Church by Christ and its early developments, outlining its hierarchical nature with the Pope as its head. The chief event by which the Church was founded is found in the Bible, in the Gospel of Matthew chapter 16 verses 13-19 :

Then Jesus came into the neighbourhood of Caesarea Philippi; and there he asked his disciples, What do men say of the Son of Man? Who do they think he is? Some say John the Baptist, they told him, others Elias, others again, Jeremy or one of the prophets. Jesus said to them, And what of you? Who do you say that I am? Then Simon Peter answered, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered him, Blessed art thou, Simon son of Jona; it is not flesh and blood, it is my Father in heaven that has revealed this to thee. And I tell thee this in my turn, that thou art Peter, and it is upon this rock that I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; and I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

In these verses, Jesus takes the disciples closest to Him, the Twelve Apostles, and asks them what the general people they preached to think of Him. After that, He asks what the Apostles think of Him, and Saint Peter, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, declares Him to be the Son of God, proclaiming His divinity. In answer, Christ says He will make Saint Peter the rock on which the Church is built, that He will give Him the power to bind and loose, and the keys of the kingdom of Heaven.

We will explain how this is an a promise of supreme power over the entire Church made directly to Peter :

• The power is promised immediately to Peter : Saint Peter's original name was Simon. When Christ calls him to be a disciple, He changes his name to Cephas (John 1:42) which means rock in Aramaric, the Hebrew dialect which was spoken in the region (translated as Petra in Greek which gives Peter). So it is clear from this the rock which the Church is built on is Peter himself.

• The power is over the entire Church, as the word which Christ uses "Ecclesia" always referred to, among the Jews of the time, to the entire people of God, and because Christ later calls it "my Church" i.e the Church of Christ, which can only refer to all the believers.

• The supreme nature of the power is underlined by the three metaphors used :

• Under the metaphor of the rock it means that Peter is related to the Church as the natural foundation is related to a house, that is, the first efficacious principle of its unity and durability. But the first efficacious principle of unity and durability in a society is its supreme authority. Therefore, under the metaphor of the Rock the supreme social power is signified.
• Under the metaphor of the keys, supreme power is meant. This is clear from secular use of the term, as someone handing the keys of his house to someone else hands him full authority over that house. It is also clear from biblical use, as in the Old Testament for example, in Isaiah 22:20, Eliakim is given full power over the Kingdom of Israel, and that full power is signified by the keys.
• Under the metaphor of binding and loosing, as that was a common expression among Semites to either mean forbidding and permitting. And the power to forbid or permit is supreme power.

And therefore Christ instituted His Church with Saint Peter as a supreme power. And to create an institution which has a high power is to create a hierarchy, so therefore the Church is meant as hierarchical. All Christians agree the Church was meant to last after Christ, and there is no reason to believe the structure of the Church was supposed to change. Therefore it flows logically that the Apostles will have successors, who will carry on the same authority and the same duty, and that rock on which the Church is founded on, Saint Peter, will also have his successors, who will carry on the special duty accorded to him. Saint Peter died as bishop of Rome, so his successors are the bishops of Rome, more commonly called Popes.

These later points are more easily demonstrated with accounts from the early Church^[19]:

• From Saint Ignatius : "Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 8 [A.D. 110])
• Also from Saint Ignatius of Antioch : “Ignatius . . . to the church also which holds the presidency, in the location of the country of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of blessing, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy of sanctification, and, because you hold the presidency in love, named after Christ and named after the Father” (Letter to the Romans 1:1 [A.D. 110]).
• From Saint Cyprian of Carthage : “If someone [today] does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?” (The Unity of the Catholic Church 4; first edition [A.D. 251]).
• From Pope Saint Clement I : “Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop. For this reason, therefore, having received perfect foreknowledge, they appointed those who have already been mentioned and afterwards added the further provision that, if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry” (Letter to the Corinthians 42:4–5, 44:1–3 [A.D. 80]).

From all of these early accounts, it is quite clear that the Church had a similar structure wherever it spread, with a bishop as leader of the Church in all places. And it is plain that the Church of Rome was supreme over all of those churches, and that the Bishop of Rome was understood as the successor of Saint Peter. Any reader who wants to inquire further can read some of these books :

• Truth of Papal Claims by Cardinal Rafael Merry Del Val
• On The Apostolic and Infallible Authority of the Pope by Fr. Francis X. Weninger
• The Early Papacy To the Synod of Chalcedon in 451 by Adrian Fortescue
• Alternatively, https://archive.is/NyXdB

We will now talk about the differences between Catholics and Protestants on the subject of justification.^[20] Since this difference is slightly more complicated than a simple denial, we will first expose the two doctrines, and explain why the Catholic doctrine is the true one. Catholics believe that justification, on top of forgiving sins, effects a true internal renewal of the soul, in other words, that we receive a grace in our souls, which we call sanctifying grace. Protestants believe that the justification is purely external, that no change is effected in us, and that we are saved not by being transformed into new men, but by God declaring us righteous at the final judgement, though we would still be sinful.^[21]

But Scripture and Church Fathers are clear on sins being truly remitted and man truly being born anew :

On remission of sins :

• Sins are taken away, removed from man (John 1:29)
• Men are cleansed, washed, whitewashed from their sins (First letter to the Corinthians 6:11).
• Sins are blotted out like words written on a tablet coated with wax (Acts 3:19).
• From Saint Justin Martyr (died A.D. 165) : “Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputes no sin; that is, having repented of his sins, that he may receive remission of them from God; and not as you deceive yourselves, and some others who resemble you in this, who say, that even though there be sinners, but know God, the Lord will not impute sin to them” (Enchiridion Patristicum^[22] 146)
• From Saint Ambrose (died A.D. 397) : “[God] takes away iniquity... for he takes them away altogether, and what he remembers not are as though they did not exist”(Enchiridion Patristicum 1256)
• From Saint Augustine (died A.D. 430) : "I say that baptism gives remission of all sins, and takes away guilt, and does not shave them off; and that the roots of all sins are not retained in the evil flesh, as if of shaved hair on the head, whence the sins may grow to be cut down again” (Against Two Letters of the Pelagians, book I, chapter 13)

On the internal renewal of man :

• Baptismal justification is described as regeneration and renewal (Letter to Titus 3:4-7)
• By Baptism the old man is put away, the new man is pot on (Letter to the Ephesians 4:17-24)
• The new man who is put on is Christ (Letter to the Galatians 3:7), so that the baptized person is now vivified by the life of Christ (Letter to the Ephesians 2:5), and is the workmanship of God (Letter to the Ephesians 2:10) and a new creature
• From Saint Cyprian of Carthage (died A.D. 251) : “A second birth restored me into a new man” (Enchiridion Patristicum 548)
• From Saint John Chrysostom (died A.D. 407) : “Because it not only remits our sins, and not only purges our offenses, but it does it in such a way that finally we are generated anew. For it creates and forms us anew.”
• From Saint Augustine (died A.D. 430) : “The righteousness of God is manifested: he does not say the righteousness of man... but the righteousness of God—not that whereby he is himself righteous, but that with which he endows man when he justifies the ungodly.”

And so from the evidence of Scripture and Church writers it is evident that the Catholic doctrine is correct.

We recommend this video on the topic : https://youtu.be/L14UNjaZJm8

I heard about X thing in the Catholic Church. What is the story here ?

The Crusades

It goes without saying that our goal here is not to give a full story of the Crusades, but simply to address the most common myths about them. The broad narrative on the Crusades was that they were aggressive wars on peaceful Muslim states, and were accompanied with useless violence and bloodshed from Christians on Muslim. The reality is simply the exact opposite. A very simple look at the timeline of events shows that Crusades only started after 450 years of Muslim aggression on Christians. Islam rose about the early 600s A.D., and by 732, had conquered two thirds of the Christian world. In comparison, Crusades started in 1096, after the Arab Muslims who conquered those lands had themselves been ousted by Turkish Muslims from the Middle East, the main goal of the crusades. The violence was also mostly on the part of Muslims, who expelled all Christians from the Arabian Peninsula^[23] in 633, who massacred the Armenian Christians in 1064,^[24] and who most of all for the context of the crusades, forbade the Christians to make pilgrimages to Jerusalem and destroyed the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.^[25] This is not mentioning the absurd violence and sexual slavery the Muslims were subjected to in Iberia, which reconquest was also part of the Crusades.^[26] In response, when Christians arrived in Jerusalem and took it, they did not respond in kind. Although of course there may have been violence from Christians, they never expelled Muslims from the lands they took, except for Jerusalem itself, and never effected useless massacres on them.

The Inquisition

Similarly to section III-1, it would be impossible here to give a full history of the Inquisition, which extends beyond what is usually designated by the term, which is the Spanish Inquisition. Let us first define what the Inquisition was. The Inquisition was an ecclesiastical institution for combating or suppressing heresy. It didn't carry out executions (although it clearly didn't oppose them), but was distinct from the state's courts. The idea of fighting heresy was seen as perfectly normal, as heresies as we have seen in I-2), are contrary to the faith and dangerous to salvation. A Catholic king, wary of the eternal welfare of his population, saw it as a perfectly normal thing to stop heresies from spreading, and for that he asked for the Church's help, as obviously the Church is more apt to detect heresy. This was the context in which the Inquisition was most active during the Middle Ages, before and after the Spanish Inquisition.

The Spanish Inquisition rose in a specific context where the burgeoning Kingdoms of Castile and Leon were joined together, spanning a territory much closer to what is now known as Spain, under Queen Isabella. Alongside this territorial expansion, the Iberians had finally succeeded in kicking out the Muslim invaders from their lands, inheriting a troubled territory full of Jews and Muslims. By force or by apologetic, many of those Jews converted, or at the very least claimed conversion. So, to differentiate between the real and fake converts, and avoid the population to attack Jews indiscriminately, the King called for an Inquisition.

There are three popular myths on the Inquisition which we will dispel, first among them being that the inquisition persecuted Jews. But that is complete fiction, as the Inquisition, being an ecclesiastical institution, could only put Catholics, or people claiming to be Catholics, on trial. The second is that the Inquisition was brutal in its condemnations and torture. But neither of those are true, as not only torture was used in a minority of cases, the death sentence was very rarely given. The number of executions carried out after a condemnation by the inquisition is about 3000 to 5000, in the 350 years of its activity. And thirdly, the Inquisition was very methodical and thorough in its work, examining evidence before making decisions.^[27]

For more on this topic, we recommend the articles :

"Inquisition" in the 1910 Catholic Encyclopedia; "Common Misconceptions: Inquisition" by James Hitchcock on Catholic Education; "The Truth About the Spanish Inquisition" by Thomas F. Madden on Catholic Encyclopedia

and the following video series : https://youtu.be/uy9IxIeMLnY; https://youtu.be/MjQOAsYkGw0; https://youtu.be/WfQZ1J5sBWE

The Indulgences

Let us explain what an indulgence is. When a sin is committed, an eternal and temporal punishment are incurred. The eternal punishment is forgiven through confession, but not the temporal one. This is similar to how if a person breaks an object which belongs to another, and if the latter forgives him, this wipes the guilt of breaking the object, but the object remains broken. Similarly, after confession, we must still repair the damage caused by sins. This is why the priest who receives a Catholic in confession imposes him to do a "penance", a small work, usually a prayer or fasting, to remit some of the temporal punishment. And the Church, who possesses the Keys of the kingdom of heaven, and the ultimate power to bind and loose, may also remit the temporal punishment, by attaching a certain indulgence to a certain action, such as certain prayers or giving alms. The Church has never approved of selling indulgences, and indulgences aren't a way to get into heaven, but remit temporal punishment incurred from sin, which is paid in purgatory^[28] after death. There have in fact been Catholic bishops, acting against Church regulations, who sold indulgences, but in doing so they sinned against God and the Church tried to stop them.

The Second Vatican Council

The Second Vatican Council is the 21st Ecumenical Council^[29] of the Catholic Church. The history of the council is long and complicated, and it has produced lengthy documents, so we will focus on the main points. The issues of the documents of the Council are twofold: there are errors attributed to them which are nowhere to be found in the documents, and there's legitimate problems one may have with it. It is nowhere to be found in it that it declares all non Catholics to be saved, for example. But it is not to deny there may be problems with the documents. To quote the Institute of the Good Shepherd's^[30] official website : "We recognize it for what it is: an ecumenical council falling under the authentic Magisterium^[31], but not infallible^[32] in every respect and that, because of its novelties, faces certain difficulties in its continuity with the Gospel and Tradition.". This position is accepted by the Roman Curia, i.e the administration in Rome which rules over the Church, and Mgr. Gherardini, the most respected theologian in the Vatican, so it is not a fringe position. So whichever problems the documents of the Second Vatican Council may pose, the infallibility of the Church is not questioned, as its novelties have not been infallibly taught.

Child abuse in the Catholic Church

Let's preface by saying child abuse is an appalling and tragic thing, and that priests who commit such a thing are awful people who deserve punishment. But this doesn't mean there can't be more to the story. Let's take the numbers directly : in the USA, 0.3% of the clergy has been found to be pedophiles^[33]. Such a low number reveals the problem has been vastly overblown. This doesn't discount the other side of the problem, which is the mismanagement and poor response on the part of the bishops, which is a true mistake the Church must admit. But we are far from a massive pedophilia scandal and closer to a severe mismanagement of a minority of cases.

For more on the child abuse scandal : https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/qa-understanding-the-priest-scandal

Pope Francis

Pope Francis is the 266th Pope of the Catholic Church. He has made headlines by taking very progressive stances on multiple issues, causing scandal among many Catholics, or any conservative minded person. Just like with the Second Vatican Council, a distinction must be made between what he has said and what is reported. Every claim of the Pope must be usually put in context, as they are often distorted to mean very different things. This doesn't mean Pope Francis hasn't made erroneous claims on the faith, such as his position on civil unions of homosexuals, which he wants to allow for, or taken political positions which can be very hard to accept, like his support for immigration for vaccines. On this topic, two things must be made clear. First that while Catholics do believe the Pope can be infallible, this doesn't mean each and every one of his statements is. For a statement from the Pope to be infallible, it has to be clearly expressed, as explained in note (13)^[34]. This obviously doesn't apply to Pope Francis answering random interview questions in an airplane. Additionally, the Church only claims infallibility on issues of faith and morals, and therefore the Pope's opinion on political issues are his personal opinions, which can be pretty much completely discarded.

Where do I go for more?

While this guide is full of interesting info, it has not touched on the most important point of all, the love of Jesus Christ for us and how to cultivate that love. This does not come by learning, although that helps or may even be necessary, but through prayer and meditation. For this reason we advise, alongside reading the catechism, reading one of the three synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) to learn more about the person of Christ as He walked on Earth, and the Gospel of John once the catechism has been read. We also advise reading the Imitation of Christ by Thomas Kempis, a wonderful introduction into Catholic spirituality, and will post here the three most important Catholic prayers, two of them being explained in the Saint Pius X catechism (sections The Lord's Prayer and the Hail Mary) :

The Lord's Prayer

Our Father, Who art in heaven,

Hallowed be Thy Name.

Thy Kingdom come.

Thy Will be done,

on earth as it is in Heaven.

Give us this day our daily bread.

And forgive us our trespasses,

as we forgive those who trespass against us.

And lead us not into temptation,

but deliver us from evil. Amen.

The Hail Mary

Hail, Mary, full of grace,

the Lord is with thee.

Blessed art thou amongst women

and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.

Holy Mary, Mother of God,

pray for us sinners,

now and at the hour of our death.

Amen.

The Glory Be

Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen

For more, we give this small bibliography :

THEOLOGY

• Denzinger’s Sources of Catholic Dogma
• Documenta Catholica Omnia; a catalog of Latin-language theological texts
• Sensus Fidelium YouTube channel (Sermons, Lectures..)
• 10 Year Old Girl Productions YouTube channel (lectures, audiobooks, Father Hesse conferences..)
• FishEaters, a Catholic website with various resources

HOLY SCRIPTURES

• The Douay-Rheims Bible, a translation of the Latin Vulgate
• The Haydock Douay-Rheims Bible, including commentary & exegesis from Fr. George Leo Haydock

• Commentary from the Haydock Bible

• Catena Aurea by St. Thomas Aquinas; commentary on the Gospels by the Angelic Doctor
• The Catena Bible; includes commentary from church fathers and others
• Commentaries of various church fathers & patristics

• To find said commentaries, press Ctrl+F and type “homily” or “homilies”.

• St. Thomas Aquinas’s commentary on the Bible & various other works

BOOKS :

• To find other available books: LibGen; Z-Lib; Internet Archive
• Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina & Series Graeca
• Catholic Encyclopedia
• Catechism of St. Pius X
• Catechism of Baltimore
• Catechism of Trent

COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF CATHOLIC BOOKS

APOLOGETICS