Having recently stumbled across a book called, The Apostacy that Wasn’t, by Catholic theologian, Rod Bennett; and having also watched a couple of YouTube videos in which Bennett goes into detail about this book, I think the timing of discovering this couldn’t have been much better.
That is, over the past couple of months, some of my videos have focused on engaging with skeptics of Catholicism and pointing out its clear facts: Whether that be showing that the Catholic Church is the ultimate definition of unified Christianity – that it is truly the One, Holy, Apostolic Church; or that modern Biblical scholarship is rather flawed and has created a confused, musical chairs type game of “Which theologian should I believe?; or that the Church fathers were quite clearly consistent about the beliefs that the Catholic Church still holds today; or that the “faiths versus works” debate has already been so thoroughly refuted, it’s mind-blowing that we are still having the debate – these topics all aggregate up to a glaring problem we humans have faced throughout history: conspiracy theories.
As Bennett points out in his book and lectures, all of which are linked below, conspiracy theories about Catholicism are nothing new. And like atheist arguments against God, religion, etc., many of the conspiracy theories about the Catholic Church are old hat. Most, if not all, of the theories are just as tired and pointless as the “faith versus works” debate: We Catholics do not believe that works without grace/faith replace Christ dying and resurrecting for our sins and eternal salvation. The End. We Catholics do not worship Mary. The End. We Catholics are the O.C. (the Original Church): 2000 years of Church History, starting from the time of Jesus, which has not wavered from its core tenets. The End. And though, yes, we have had our struggles and left turns along the way – but the one constant is the Catholic Church is still the Catholic Church. It has not been reformed, reinvented, rediscovered, nor rebranded – ever. The End.
What’s more, in a world of human social evolution that’s endured massively bloody wars, starvation, most people working as serfs or slaves until the late 19th century, diseases wiping out thousands or millions of people, the occasionally tyrannical rulers who leveled entire societies, and a lack of widely available medicine and healthcare until the 20th century — *anything* that has been consistently a force for having morals and values has been nothing short of a miracle in social evolution.
Even if Catholicism were not true, a big part of its legacy is that here we are now, 2000 years later – yes, 2000 years – still talking about it. The Church still has about 1.3 billion adherents, even despite those Catholics who have fallen away or may have a nominal or not-well-catechized belief. The Church is still infused in societies throughout the world, even in places that have devolved into secularism. And the Church – and Christian-based values overall — whether some university professors like it or not, is still the bedrock of how Western civilization was formed into a free, more democratic society.
Yet there is no denying that thousands – yes, thousands — of other Christian churches out there refuse to align within the Catholic Church and keep to its original meaning: to be “universal” to all Christians. And while this could open the door to exploring all the reasons why there is so much division today among Christian churches, that topic is also now a bit washed up. Most active Christians understand the key differences between the Catholic Church and all the other Christian Churches – therefore, I am not going into an exhaustive look at that.
Really, here is the crux of the matter: Throughout this past 2000 years – and particularly within the past 500 – every single movement against the Catholic Church has been founded on a conspiracy theory. Now, when we think of the term “conspiracy theory”, it’s easy today to point out all the fringe conspiracy theories that have plagued the better part of the 20 century, and now into the 21st century: The moon landing was fake; the Earth is flat; 9/11 was an inside, government job; Elvis is still alive; so is Jim Morrison; and 5G will destroy all society as we know it. The examples go on and on.
But conspiracy theories are not limited to looney tunes ideas in the secular world. Christianity overall has dealt with a wide array of conspiracy theories, from trivial to utterly insane, to everything in-between. And that’s not just going after the easy targets, such as LDS, Jehovah Witness, and Seventh Day Adventists. All it takes is just one, seemingly articulate, well-coercive person to put forth a claim and then manipulate the masses into accepting it.
Which leads to a point that Bennet makes about absolutes in life: “There is no absolute proof of anything.” For example, Bennet shows that even talking about something as simple as “Well, I know the sun exists because I can see it” – does not equal absolute proof for it. There are numerous possibilities for how the sun came into being. I am not talking about the established science regarding the sun’s physical properties: I mean that aside from the Big Bang / cosmic event that spawned matter throughout the universe – stars, comets, planets, asteroids, etc. – there could be some truth about the sun that we have not yet discovered and cannot necessarily rule out. (Bennet jokingly mentions aliens, but the point is still valid: We just don’t absolutely know “why” the sun does what it does, or what is absolutely behind it).
This makes me think of the cat-and-mouse game I used to let myself play when dialoguing with skeptics: The conversations almost always turned into a stalemate about whether I could prove my beliefs are absolutely true. And if I couldn’t prove absolute truth, that I am just another believer suffering from cognitive dissonance, or that I am taking the easy way out of critical thinking.
However, never ending, tit for tat, conversations about any topic – including Catholicism – should not be based on forcing absolute truths. Otherwise, and as I have mentioned in prior blogs, it turns into a contest of how mind-bending we can possibly make a conversation, and that mind bending thoughts could somehow disprove an absolute truth that we can absolutely prove in the first place. (Example: What if we are a brain in a vat? Then what?)
The good news is that false claims can often be well refuted and shown as pure nonsense. That includes the already too many conspiracy theories and the brick-wall-solid reasons why they are not true. Also, it is important to distinguish objective truth from absolute truth: Objective truth is something that stands true, even if not everyone believes it or is not aware of it. Absolute truth, conversely, means there can be no other explanation other than the one provided, and that explanation must be true: there is no room at all for discrepancy, or even a possible variation of that.
Bennet’s main point here is that people who demand absolute truth are usually resisting or biased against the claim – that probably no matter what, no amount of compelling reasons may convince skeptics who just want to be right for one reason or another. (Which is now of the key reasons I don’t engage with atheists who turn conversations into cat-and-mouse).
But this not only applies to atheists, agnostics, and what I call “what’s in it for me?” spiritual seekers: It sadly also applies to all Christians who attack Catholicism or fight among each other about the laundry list of differences between various Protestant denominations and other types of reformers.
For instance, and which is a primary topic in “The Apostacy that Wasn’t”: The idea that the Roman emperor, Constantine invented Christianity, or that the Church Fathers before the time of Constantine did not share the beliefs that we Catholics hold today, or that Constantine was on the fence about Christ’s divinity, or that he became Christian for political gain, and so on. This is just flat-out nonsense. Except that many Christian denominations today still think there is some truth behind the nonsense. But there isn’t any truth behind it.
It’s as Bennet explains: Most of the claims against the Catholic Church are based on misunderstandings about Church history, or mixed fallacious understanding about the Church Fathers. Hence why I wish every non-Catholic Christian in the world would read The Apostacy that Wasn’t and also Jimmy Akin’s book, The Fathers Know Best. These books more than settle the debates. And though that may smell of confirmation bias, I reached the same conclusions even when I was atheist. Correct history is correct history, even if you choose not to accept it. Further, it begs the question I have asked before and will keep asking: Is it that skeptics of Catholicism just want to win the argument – or what is their agenda at the end of the day?
Whatever the reason, “The Apostacy that Wasn’t” gives plenty of reason to challenge skeptics and show the Catholic Church, hands-down, has been consistent throughout the ages, and that it has never been a faith of apostacy or reinventing Christian theology.
The Apostasy That Wasn’t: The Extraordinary Story of the Unbreakable Early Church: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015I3J4VO/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
Early Church History Versus Conspiracy Theories: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvHYSbSyDv8
EWTN interview with Rob Bennett: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pGlGAGffu8