"ANY RELIGION - OR NONE - IS GOOD ENOUGH" - THE FALLACY OF INDIFFERENCE

There is a self-given notion in our modern, secular time to say it doesn't matter what religion you have - or even better, that you have none - so long as you're a good person. "That's enough," people say, "I don't need more."
Unfortunately that is a deep hole many fall into, and in which they keep digging, one known as...

The Fallacy of Indifference

"Hey man...chill out with all that Catholic stuff. I am a Protestant who leads a good life. That is enough."

    That you lead a good life is commendable.
    But it would be better to do it in the way God wishes, rather than in your own way.
    Here's the thing - you leading a good life does not prove your religion true. If it did, then a Catholic living a good life proves that the Catholic Church is true... a notion over which nearly all Protestants would loudly howl.
    So you've only dug your hole deeper.
    Why? Because you cannot point to your own life as proof of anything. Instead, you must either reject God and do whatever you imagine is "good enough," OR, find out how Christ described His Church, His intent for that Church, and then look for that Church through which to live your life.

"Dude, that's harsh. We modern Protestants believe that living a good life, no matter what Church one accepts, is all it takes to save your soul."

    The truth is often deemed harsh, when you first meet it.
    But I assure you, some Protestants may believe that, but a great many do not.
    Good Protestants can be saved, but those are the kind of good faith, who have the desire to do God's will. The only reason they are not Catholics is that they do not realize their obligation from Christ to embrace His one, true Church.

"C'mon, man! The only thing wrong is to do wrong."

    And aren't you doing wrong when you self-decide and refuse to bother about doctrinal belief? Why did Christ say, "He that believes in me (and what I'm showing you)* shall be saved?"
Why did He send the Apostles to teach His doctrine, and SHOW IT TO THE WORLD?
    Not only is "doing good" required, but also the true faith and acts of faith that Christ instituted.
* emphasis mine

"Phooey! Being a Christian is not a thing to be proved; it is a life to be lived."

    Now you're trying to hide in credulity, which is nothing more than you believing your statements are true, just because you've said them. 
    However, every rational man, if he does a thing, should know why he does it. If he does not, and simply goes about willy-nilly, well, what does that make him?
    Moreover, Christianity is a set of truths to be believed as well as a life to be lived. It imposes obligations upon the understanding of intelligence, as well as upon the will and the passions.
    Jesus said, "Repent and believe the Gospel." But before a reasonable man believes, he must either prove the doctrine true in itself, or at least that God has revealed it. At that point he knows that it must be true, even though he himself might not fully comprehend it.
    To say that God is indifferent as to whether a man is a Protestant, a Catholic, or whatever, comes very close to blasphemy.
    For one, it ignores what, Jesus, our God-Made-Man clearly defined through His actions.
    Next, you want us to accept that God waited 1500 years, or more, to get the word out, because he wanted men, themselves, to re-define His doctrines through Protestantism.
That is ludicrous.
    One cannot, with any shred of intellect, think that He is pleased with His creation choosing to reject what He provided through Christ, Himself... that which is maintained to this day by Catholicism.

"Well, there is good and bad in all the churches"

    If you mean that there are good men and bad men in all religions, just as there are good and bad atheists, you are right.
    But if you mean that the teachings of all churches, including the Catholic Church, are partly true and partly false, you are mistaken.
    The teachings of all non-Catholic churches are partly true and partly false.
- Partly true, for they cannot be totally in error, or the religion would not exist.
- Partly false, because all non-Catholic churches are an arrogant denial that Christ failed to provide for the Church He established...so they had to wing it on their own.
    But not a single false doctrine of Christ is to be found in the official teaching of the Catholic Church, which is the work, not of man, but of God. If a man is obliged to accept the truth in its entirety, and not bits and pieces of the truth as it suits him, then he is obliged to accept the Catholic Church as his guide.

"Protestants are different. We know that we only need to be true to our own hearts. Nothing else is important."

    Few Protestants would thank you for such a dreadful description of their religion.
    Nothing more is important? Do what you like, as long as you are true to yourself?
    Also, if Christ had wanted the doctrine of, "...be true to yourself, as long as its from the heart," well, He went a very strange way about teaching it.

"Okay, whatever.... but you must admit that, spiritually, I am your brother."

    In so far as we share our humanity, and I love you in Christ, yes, we are brothers. And because you are sincere, Our Lord overlooks your mistaken notions and accepts whatever love for Him you might muster.
    But the fact remains that you serve Him in your way, by your own notions - or those modified by others - and not in His. As such, He does not obtain from you all that He desires. Also what He overlooks in you, He would not need to overlook in a Catholic who has known the truth.

"Don't the sincere followers of Jesus, even outside the Catholic Church, have power and authority from the Holy Spirit?"

    Unfortunately, there's no assurance.
    All the sincerity in the world is not a substitute for authentic credentials in this matter. An immense power and authority over the souls of men requires solid proof that it is really possessed.
    Christ proved that He had it; He passed it to the Apostles and they proved they had it from Him. They became the Catholic Church, which thereby proves He entrusted that power to Her.
    Founders of other churches have nothing more than their own personal conviction that they possess such authority—a persuasion as insufficient as would be my own personal belief that I had the authority of the Chief Justice in the land.

"But I'm sure I am right. I have the witness in myself."

    Witness in oneself is a purely subjective persuasion, and is no sure test of truth. Men all over the map, with totally divergent views, claim to have this same witness within themselves, too.
    Yet, obviously, they cannot all have the exact truth revealed by Christ... if they did, they would not be divergent. Thank God, such intellectual mistakes do not always mean evil dispositions. 
    But remember, Christ allowed the Jews to go because they knowingly refused to accept His teaching on the Eucharist — a teaching most all Protestants also reject.
    If you knew what you were doing, He would reject you, too. Fortunately, you don't know at this moment - but you are about to. Keep reading.

"No, the Kingdom of God is within you."

    The Kingdom of God as established by Christ is two things:
- A visible Church in this world
- An invisible spiritual Kingdom of grace within the soul.             External adherence to the visible Kingdom demands also that Christ reigns by grace within the soul.

    But this interior grace does not relieve a man from accepting the will of Christ once he is aware of it, nor from the obligation to join the visible Kingdom established by Him in this world.
    Christ distinctly said, "I will build my* Church"; and again, "If a man will not hear the Church (I build)*, let him be as the heathen."
* emphasis mine
    There is no doubt that He was obviously referring to the authority of a visible Church which HE created... not one that came from men, a millennia and half - or longer - after him.
    He also likened HIS Church to a net holding good and bad fish. This cannot refer to a Kingdom of spiritual and invisible grace only, for bad fish are not in a state of grace.

Christ died for all, not for members of any particular Church. He does not mention either Catholicism or Protestantism.

    We are also told quite clearly in Scripture that not everything there is to know is in Scripture. And there was no Christian church of any kind when Christ walked and talked. So, no he didn't mention either.
    Nevertheless, the teaching of Christ clearly condemns Protestant principles, and insists upon the acceptance of what are the same Catholic principles that come from Christ and His Apostles.
    He did die for all who would accept Him, but those who knowingly reject the definite and particular religion He gave to the world do not fully embrace Him.
    He predicted that HIS religion would be characterized by unity of doctrine, holiness of moral precepts, catholicity, aka, universality, and in continuous succession from the Apostles.
You certainly CANNOT say all these apply to Protestant sects.

"The denominations are necessary to save us from the domination of priests."

    That's actually a fairly clear thought, thank you.
    The authority of the priesthood will be the subject of our consideration in due time,... but what of the dictatorship of, "preachers?" For example, you've heard of Jim Jones, surely.
    Meantime, the notion that one, "denomination," or sect, is just as good as another is a fallacy. Why?
    Because they were totally unnecessary according to the mind of Christ. He prayed that all might be one, as He and His Father are one. He did NOT pray that many would eventually stray off into their own way, into whatever beliefs they might talk themselves into.
    St. Paul said that even though an Angel from heaven were to preach a gospel differing from that already given, he should be regarded as accursed.
    No one had any right to establish their own sects, the  "denominations," with all their varying doctrines, and then persuade others that each is either the best...or as good as anything else.

"I admit that it is a pity that there is so much conflict."

    It is ten thousand times a pity, especially when we are informed of the mind of Christ.
    But be reminded that the Catholic Church did not start the conflict. She cannot be blamed for the domestic troubles of Protestantism. All Catholics at least are in doctrinal unity.

"But why keep insisting that the Catholic Church is the only Church?"

    It is not the only church - that is obvious.
    But, it is the only Church that Christ Himself established. Christ said, "If a man will not hear the Church (that he initiated)*, let him be as the heathen...." and He meant the Church that He established, at that point in time when He established it.
* emphasis mine
    He did not mean say, "If a man will not hear only portions of the Gospel in man-made, substitute churches which come much later..."

"You cannot deny that you are bigoted in your exclusive claims."

    Bigotry is blind zeal, without concern for the truth.
    However, it is not bigotry to say that a thing is wrong when its opposite is shown to be correct. Truth must exclude error, and what I am doing is showing you the truth you may have never been exposed to.

"We are as entitled to our opinions as you are to yours."

    Indeed you are. Which is exactly what you operate from - opinion.
    Now, in my experience, Protestants are as able to think out opinions just as we do our conclusions from the understanding of Christs purpose.
    But here it is not a question of human opinion.
    It is a question of God's own teaching through Christ Jesus, the same God-Made-Man. So opinions have no currency if they contradict that. Which leads us to the fact that Catholic doctrine is not our opinion, but His doctrine who sent the Church to teach in His name.

"But are you not obliged by the law of charity? Christ said, 'Do unto others as you would have them do to you.'"

    We are indeed obliged by the law of charity. But you mean, Why won't we cut you some slack because you say you believe in Jesus, and wave your hands in the air?
    Remember, the demons and satan, himself, also believe in God, and that Christ is the Son of God.
    But charity does not forbid one to tell the truth... in fact, it is charity to do just that. It is also charitable to not blame people who, through no fault of their own, do not know the truth. Nor would the Catholic Church want Protestants to admit that she is right, if she wasn't.
    And since she can prove that they are not right, she is only doing what is charitable by showing them the truth and denying the correctness of their religion...although, admittedly, it may be uncomfortable for them.

"All the same, your claims are insulting to Protestants. They are human beings just as Catholics."

    And we love them all the same.
    The Catholic Church has to condemn Protestantism as a system, however, even as she desires to insult no single Protestant.
    But the fact that Protestants are human beings does not prove their religion true. Otherwise, the fact that Catholics are human beings would also prove their religion true.
The same for atheists and their, "religion."
    As a matter of fact, in so far as Protestants are human beings, we Catholics love them, and it is our very interest in them which makes us want to give them the best religion in the world—Catholicism.
    Frankly, Protestantism is not good enough for them.

"Your Church is doing more to prevent reunion than any other Church."

    Thank you; that is a great compliment to the Catholic Church, when we look at the conditions others insist upon for a "reunion."
    For it means that she is doing more than any other church to keep intact the religion entrusted to her by Christ. She steadily refuses to let her heart run away with her head by agreeing to that which sincere, but mistaken men, would like to be true and "good enough," or, that what Christ taught, exactly, does not really matter.

"Anyway, only one in a hundred thousand ever changes from the religion of his parents."

    Again, that does not prove the correctness of the religion.
But one example is enough to refute that statement.
    Today, the population of England is about 57 million, and in England alone the average number of converts to the Catholic Church is between 17 and 20 thousand yearly.
    That number is even greater in America, and a steady stream of converts is the experience of most other countries of the world also.
    However, the one instance of England is a sufficient reply to your extravagant assertion.

"At least Protestantism is more tolerant than Catholicism. I am an Anglican, but I do not say that I am right. I believe in everyone believing as he thinks best, and not criticizing others?"

    You take up a most extraordinary, even ridiculous, argument. If you do not say that you are right, then you cannot have definite grounds for your belief, and such belief is then only, once again, credulity.
    And do you really believe there is benefit in having everyone run about with his own muddled belief on their lips? Look where that has already gotten us.
    I mean, that sounds "nice" in the modern, worldly sense of secular humanism, and its a good way to avoid having people upset with you.
    But we as Christians are to be firm in our beliefs, and not slaves to the worlds notion that, "anything goes."
    And suppose their belief is, in point of fact, wrong - or worse? If so, your "tolerance" is at least supporting error, and very possibly supporting evil.
    But Christ came precisely to stop people from believing in error, or from whatever they decided to believe on their whims.
    Far from allowing people to run amok with their own, often half-baked beliefs, He literally commanded them to give up their previous beliefs, their previous lives, and believe in what He taught, exactly, and with resolve..., if they wish to save their souls.
    There were no ifs, and's, or but's about it.
    I am with you in not criticizing others, and I give you and them credit for sincerity and goodness. We are fortunate that the Natural Law of Man endows the majority with such goodness. But it is quite lawful, and even in their best interests, to criticize their theories....especially if, in their error, they endanger their salvation.

"But in the end, is not religion a matter of opinion?"

    If you take the Catholic Church out of the equation, I'm afraid it is.
    That other churches think so is shown by the amazing number of various and differing sects, and their attendees. 
    The last time I counted, I identified 56 "mainstream" Christian sects, each with its own set of doctrines and the conviction that they know what God wants, and, that THEY got it right. And this does not account for the tens of thousands of independent groups that have made the same claim over the years.
    But the Catholic Church is a different thing altogether.
    
    Consider this: Would you agree that, until we prove a thing, it is a matter of opinion?
    For example, before Australia was discovered, it was a matter of opinion as to whether a southern continent existed or not. But once discovered, it was no longer opinion.
    So, too, if God never gave a revelation about religion, it might actually be a matter of opinion.
    But God does not leave matters to chance; once God speaks in a definite way, it ceases to be a matter of opinion. Thus, when the Creator speaks, the creature (you and I) must accept.
    And God sent Himself, in the second person of the Trinity, Jesus Christ, to establish one definite Church, to which He gave His teaching authority.
    Seen that way, this does not look like religion being a matter of opinion, does it? Here we have God's decision, and His teacher with His instruction..., and we must accept it.
    Therefore, if our human opinions suggest anything against the teaching of Christ, or against the teaching of His Church which He established, we are to renounce our own fallible ideas as being the foolish notions of untaught children.
    Yet the Protestant, of which you are an example, clings to his own opinions, whether they are in harmony with God's explicit teachings or not. Nor does he make much effort to find out what those teachings are, especially if he has to go to the Catholic Church to learn them.
    But God would no more admit that the religion revealed by Him is a mere matter of opinion than your banker would admit that the amount you owe him is just an opinion.

"Maybe it is better that we say religion is a matter of conscience?"

    Oh, no, not that.
    That's another of those soundbites that appeals to the modern ear. But if individual conscience were to be our guide, there will be as many religions as consciences.
    In fact, that is pretty much were we are, already.
    But there is the fact that both right consciences, and wrong consciences, exist.
    Conscience is right if it squares with all the laws of God.
    It is warped if it be at variance with the will of God.
    However, if conscience is what matters, why didn't Christ just abandon us all to our consciences, instead of carefully teaching His Apostles a definite set of doctrines to be preached to the world, and which were to be followed and believed?
    Conscience must accept the teachings of Christ, who could neither be deceived, nor deceive us.

"Why try to convert people to the Catholic Church?"

    Because our sole mission is the salvation of souls.
    We may as well also ask: "Why did Christ try to convert people to His special doctrines?"
    And, "Why did He send His Church to teach His doctrines to all nations?"
    If God gives the Truth to man by sending His Son, is it not better to have that truth to guide one's conduct?
    Or would you prefer to be in partial or total ignorance, omitting much that ought to be done, and (hopefully) being forgiven by God only because you don't know any better? 
    To know the truth and live exactly as God intends is much better than asking to be excused from it on the plea of ignorance.
    And now that you are this far along, you can not claim ignorance of the truth much longer....

"I know that Protestants are ignorant of Catholicism, but are not Catholics ignorant of Protestantism?"

    Often yes, although that is fast changing with technology; many Catholics today take a keen interest in their separated, Protestant brothers.
    But there is this difference:
    The Catholic who does not understand Protestantism does not know wrong things. By contrast, the Protestant who does not know Catholicism is ignorant of the RIGHT things.
    I personally know much about both, having been brought up in Protestantism, which I renounced in favor of Catholicism.

"Have Catholics any advantages not possessed by good Protestants?"

    All things else being equal, and strictly from the viewpoint of the religions, Catholics have numerous, crucial advantages.
    They have the full truth contained in Sacred Scripture which they sourced, developed and made available, and in the unified, teaching Church that helps them understand it.
    The Protestant accepts only part of Scripture, or some iteration far-removed from the source. He also has no God-appointed guide to interpret what is there. He takes off on his own and tries to figure it out, often going astray, as we've seen here in abundance. To justify himself, he presumes that the Holy Spirit "guides" him, but if that were so, why does everyone have different, "truths," and which are not what Christ initiated?
    Imagine you were taking a road trip tomorrow. Wouldn't you be better off having full information about the road to your destination, than having incomplete or faulty information?
    Catholics also have access to more means of grace than non-Catholics.
    They have the sacrifice of the Mass, and seven Sacraments. You may say that Christ gives grace at times, independently of the Sacraments instituted by Him for this purpose. But, again that is self-talking persuasion.
    Because we know that He instituted seven definite, firm Sacraments for that very purpose...and which most Protestants reject either in part, or in all.
    And even granting that He does give certain graces to those in good faith, those graces are not so plentiful, nor of the same divine nature, as the special graces deeply undertaken through the Sacraments.

"You insist, then, that not any form of Christianity will do, but that we ought to join the Catholic Church?"

    You have finally arrived. Yes.
    As a matter of fact, a close comparison of other forms will suggest reasons for abandoning them, whilst an equally close study of Catholicism intensifies the conviction that in the Catholic Church, and in her alone, can be found the full truth that God wanted us to understand and embrace.

    So now that you know, what is your next step?

Thanks to Radio Replies, and Our Lord, Jesus Christ.