I was talking to my uncle today (who was baptized Catholic, but is now Buddhist), and he said he feels the Church is “arrogant” to say that she holds the fullness of the truth when so many other religions have “similar myths and legends” (virgins giving birth, a god impregnating a human, etc.). He said that he didn’t understand why the Church couldn’t just admit that she was one among many and that he didn’t see any difference between Catholicism and the other religions.
I did talk about how, if all of creation was awaiting the coming of Jesus since the beginning, it makes perfect sense that there should be “echoes” of this in all of man’s searching for god (thus the similar myths and things), but as far as how Catholicism is different from these…I just had no idea what to say or where to start. I know there are huge differences, but…any ideas on how I should have responded?
Personally, I find your uncle’s attitude more arrogant than the Catholic claim. Taking his mindset (that Catholics are arrogant to claim the fullness of the truth) to it’s logical conclusion is to say that no one will ever know anything that is correct–or at least it will be arrogant to think so. Just because I think I’m correct in knowing that 2+2=4 doesn’t mean I’m arrogant, it just means I’m right, and I know it. If I were to flaunt my knowledge of addition and make those who believe otherwise into lesser persons, then I would be arrogant. Merely to state that I have the truth and to propose it for you to accept, however, is not arrogance. That’s what the Church does. She proposes the Truth to others; She never imposes it. The Catholic Church doesn’t force anyone to accept the Truth; She only makes it public so that others may freely accept it. To me, your uncle’s attitude seems to incorrectly (and slightly arrogantly) elevate tolerance and diversity over Truth.