Contemplating Catholicism

[GenX]

"Before I explain my current predicament, I should share that my grandparents left the Catholic Church before I was born. I was raised Protestant, but am now beginning to question some of the fundamental tenets of Protestantism. But first I must make clear that my family taught me that Jesus is not only real, but loves me. As a result of understanding his love for me, I fell in love with him in return. The winds of life have carried me to places good and bad, but my family, especially my grandfather, has been my anchor. Each member has taught me something invaluable. My grandmother, or my nanny, as I like to call her, has shown me how to love the poorest and weakest among us and how to stand up for what I believe even when no one else stands with me. My mom shows me how to be totally selfless and how to love your children utterly. My grandfather has taught me how to be prudent and wise and how to stay rooted in the Lord and the scriptures even though the world constantly does its best to tear me from that grounding.

As is clear from the title of this piece, I am considering Catholicism. I first should say that I do not view the Protestant faith as altogether bad; nothing could be further from the truth. Protestants have a great understanding of the power of the Lord's grace and mercy, without which I am hopeless. I have my Protestant ministers to thank for this deep understanding. I know that without his blood I cannot be saved, and I can thank Protestantism for this insight as well. I have learned what it means to have a personal relationship with Jesus and that Jesus alone can save me. I have learned what it means to walk with him and to talk with him, and I can thank Protestants for this experience. I've read the scriptures backwards and forwards. I've learned the power of reading God's word, and for this too, I can thank my Protestant teachers.



So, you may wonder why I'm feeling called to the Catholic church. In fact, when the thought first crossed my mind, I shrugged it off. After all, my family had been there, done that and still chose to leave. For a long while, that was all that I needed as proof that the Catholic Church definitely was the wrong place to be. But my heart and mind were continually being brought back to the Catholic Church. I began trying to learn more. My work in the pro-life movement has led me to befriend many Catholics, and my political work has led me to the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, through which I've been introduced to such great Catholic authors as G.K. Chesterton, Russell Kirk and John Paul II. I just can't shake the feeling that there's something in the Catholic Church that I am missing out on. When I look at the Catholic Church, I see beauty and a reverence for the Lord and all of his mystery that I do not see in Protestant churches. I see a unity and a deep connection that I do not see in Protestant churches. I see order and continuity in the Catholic Church, whereas Protestants often quarrel and are divided about what they truly believe. In the Catholic Church, I see tradition and history. I used to believe, as a Protestant, that I knew something that Catholics didn't. I believed that I was free of all the legalistic rituals and sacraments, and I arrogantly pitied Catholics for being bound by such things, and I would say to myself, "Oh, if only they could be free to really know and love the Lord the way I do, they would be so much happier."

I no longer think or feel that way, and I am grateful. I now find myself at a crossroads, and I'm not confident about which road to take. I know that I have several disagreements with Protestant doctrine, and I know I am still leery of much Catholic doctrine. However, I know that the Lord is commanding me to continue searching. After all, Paul, in 1 Thessalonians, told us to "examine all things." "

LINK (http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080107/OPINION04/801070312)

[Soundbear]

"I know that I have several disagreements with Protestant doctrine, and I know I am still leery of much Catholic doctrine."

Agreement reached. Discussion over.

[Soundbear]

BTW, what was wrong with the other thread you started???

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"I know that I have several disagreements with Protestant doctrine, and I know I am still leery of much Catholic doctrine."

Agreement reached. Discussion over. </div></div>

Agreement reached?

She is obviously slowly moving away from her Protestant roots, and accepting much of Catholicism, while still not comfortable with all of it yet.

That is a perfectly natural progression for someone in the midst of such fundamental change. If she totally accepted all of Catholicism right away, then either she or Catholicism would have to be considered severely unsound.

The beauty and Truth of Catholicism is constantly unfolding, and cannot be accepted and understood in one, fell swoop. That is exactly what this young woman is going through.

The Truth of Catholicism has found her, and she cannot escape its fundamental beauty.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BTW, what was wrong with the other thread you started??? </div></div>

Errr...what other thread?

Who is this person?

[GenX]

Speedy, I'm an arrogant parrot.

Who are you?

Nah.. I'm talking about the article author, not you Speedy. I know who YOU are.

[GenX]

/ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/blush.gif

Sorry.

She is some author of some newspaper, a "Jane Doe", I guess you could say.

Her name is Morgan Wilkins.

[GenX]

Another interesting thing about her journey: it almost perfectly mirrors that of former Protestants now in the RCC.

Be it the many stories related in former Protestant Patrick Madrid's collection of conversion stories in his "Surprised by Truth" books, or the numerous accounts as related on "The Journey Home" program, all share some incredibly common threads.

One of the most common themes is the utmost respect and thanks these people give to their Protestant past. Simply put, most believe they would not be where they are now (in the RCC), or who they are now, if it weren't for the wonderful and strong foundation provided by their Protestant past. Far from being something to be discarded, their past was something to cherish and give thanks for, as it was immensely helpful to get them where they needed to go...

But there was something missing.

Something.

Wow. That's the first time you've said something positive about Prots.

What do you think that missing element is? Do you see a common element in that missing something?

[Soundbear]

One of the main things I find "missing" is a real evangelical, bible believeing background to ANY of these converts.

Let's wait to see if she makes it all the way....down.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wow. That's the first time you've said something positive about Prots.

What do you think that missing element is? Do you see a common element in that missing something?

</div></div>

Well, it's not really me saying those things, as much as it is me paraphrasing the many stories I've watched or read.

But I've always maintained Protestantism is good, as far as it goes. In other words, it's a great stepping stone to a full embracing of Jesus' Church, the RCC.

I've always accepted Protestantism as a pathway to Truth. Where I find it disturbing is when it is seen as a final stop, an end. And those who fit into that camp (admittedly a majority) are the ones most virulent and militant in their rejection of the RCC.

From what I've read and seen, the "missing thing" isn't so much a tangible reality as it is a spiritual awakening of some sort. People are driven to this desire by something bigger than themselves; something that transcends human desire, and seems to come from the very depths of the soul.

It is only after they have experienced the RCC in its fullness that that missing 'something' becomes more concrete, and can be named.

I wouldn't know personally, I backed into my Catholicism, half aware of what I was doing. The people I am referring to are the ones I read about or watched on T.V.; wonderful Christians, and people dearly in love with God, but who in the depths of their soul knew 'something' was missing.

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">One of the main things I find "missing" is a real evangelical, bible believeing background to ANY of these converts.

Let's wait to see if she makes it all the way....down. </div></div>

What a ridiculous, unsubstantiated, and childish claim. You know nothing of this woman, yet you are the first to condemn her on here.

How Christian of you.

Will you make the same condemnation of Scott Hahn? He was THE rising star in Protestant circles in the 1980's.

How about Francis Beckwith? He was the leader of the 4,100-member Evangelical Theological Society until last spring. Surely to hold such an esteemed and important position in Protestant circles he must have fit the criteria you mentioned.

Your excuse is extremely lacking, Barry.

[Soundbear]

"...(admittedly a majority) are the ones most virulent and militant in their rejection of the RCC."

Don't know more than about one, so your "majority" is a crock.

Hahn and Beckwith are people YOU brought to our attention, people I never heard of before that. Not particularly influential, I'd say, in spite of your trumpeting.

Condemn her?? I'll leave that job to you. I'll pray she gets straightened out.

umm, I brought Beckwith to Speedy's attention, I'll have you know.

But, what isn't being said is that for every single Protestant that converts to RC'sm, 3 RC's are becoming Protestants. I have that from a reliable source, but cannot give a website or a book for that. I heard that from Dr. Don Carson just yesterday. Barry, you'd know of Don Carson no doubt.

[Soundbear]

Yup, awesome speaker, was at convention a few years ago.

Waiting, waiting...

[Soundbear]

Catholics are turning to Protestantism, particularly Latinos to Pentecostalism.

This will drive Speedy nuts, as it is also said that catholic Latinos are more likely to vote Democrat, whereas latinos CONVERTED to Protestantism are most likely to vote Republican.

Driving Speedy nuts is not my goal.

I'd like to get past the [censored] for tat, and discuss real issues, but they keep getting sidetracked.

And I have time for no more than a quick sit down here and a snippet there off the top of my head. So my online life is a bit of a frustration.

Oh my goodness.. the program censored the word t-t.

[Soundbear]

The program is pretty funny like that sometimes.

Driving Speedy nuts is not my goal either. It would be nice to engage in the banter that men often use with each other, the kind of friendly insults we would never think to use with a stranger. Too bad he's so adversarial.

Besides, it's wouldn't be a drive. It would be a putt!!!

[almabear]

friendly insults? isn't that an oxymoron?

[Soundbear]

Ever hear a guy comment on another's receding hairline?? Large gut?? /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

[Return of Too Many Daves]

Are you saying Speedy is balding and fat? Bit harsh BM.

no no.. that's me.

[Batman]

Me too! :-)

[almabear]

I guess it's a guy thing... but it still sounds like an oxymoron to me. But at least guys do it to each other openly whereas women may tend to do it behind each others back OOps way off topic now.

[Soundbear]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Return of Too Many Daves</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are you saying Speedy is balding and fat? Bit harsh BM. </div></div>

Heck no, Dave!!!

One guy knows, but he hasn't been around for a while.

[Soundbear]

Thanks for the help, A!!

It is a guy thing for sure, Miss R!! /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif /ubbthreads/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

But, what isn't being said is that for every single Protestant that converts to RC'sm, 3 RC's are becoming Protestants.

</div></div>


Umm, you think a claim like that should have a source to back it up?

[GenX]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Barry Morris</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Catholics are turning to Protestantism, particularly Latinos to Pentecostalism.

This will drive Speedy nuts, as it is also said that catholic Latinos are more likely to vote Democrat, whereas latinos CONVERTED to Protestantism are most likely to vote Republican. </div></div>

Okay, gents, even middle school kids know they need to have sources for claims.

I await...

[GenX]

"April 14 Easter Vigil, Jones, his wife, Donna, and 62 other former members of Detroit's Maranatha Church, was received into the Catholic Church at St. Suzanne's Parish. For Jones, becoming a Catholic will mark the end of a journey that began with the planting of a seed by Catholic apologist and Register columnist Karl Keating."

LINK (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0077.html)

And the last time an entire Catholic Church and its priest converted to Protestantism was...err...was...umm..


Converts (http://jerome2007.tripod.com/remarkable_conversions.htm)


"Every year, about 100 clergy from dozens of denominations make a step toward the Catholic Church by contacting the Coming Home Network International.

The network, which has 800-some clergy members who have converted or are still discerning their conversion"

Former Protestant Minister Speaks (http://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=397)

[GenX]

"...many in the media, even some Catholics, are focused on those who have left the Church, few have noticed the significance of so many prominent members of other faiths who have come home to Rome. It should be noted that many who left the Catholic Faith, usually for a non-denominational mega church, often can't give a theological reason. They can only say that they enjoy the liveliness and entertainment that a mega church often provides. It is most encouraging that Catholicism is getting the crème of the crop from other churches."

LINK (http://www.catholicexchange.com/en/node/62662)

That's exactly what I've been saying.

It isn't the number of converts, its the type of converts.

[GenX]

This is a very interesting article [above] (hat tip Tiber Jumber) talking about the recent surge in Protestants converting to the Catholic Church.

It reminds me of a conversation my friend was telling me about recently. His brother is PCA and the two are engaged in a perpetual theological argument over email. When the fact of the tremendous growth in the Church due to conversion was brought up, his brother pointed out that many Catholics have converted to various Protestant faiths as well. I pointed out, 'yea but look at who converts from the Catholic Church - without any exception that I know of, those who left the Church are those who knew their faith the least'. Almost no-one leaves the Church for theological reasons but rather, for the living room liturgy the typical Protestant church. On the contrary, those converting to the Catholic Church (not all but a great many) are typically extremely knowledgeable about their former Protestant beliefs and are converting precisely because they realized that Protestant theology doesn't work (for examples, see my side bar - many if not most of those links are blogs of fellow converts from Protestantism and you'll find plenty more if you just look). From the article above:

It is most encouraging that Catholicism is getting the crème of the crop from other churches. Entry into the Church for these converts is usually made after a long, difficult journey to come to terms with something that they never thought possible.

The other interesting thing is the criticism and rebuke often felt by former Protestants. I was both amazed and disappointed at the hateful rhetoric hurled by respected Protestant scholars and theologians on Dr. Beckwith's recent conversion. The same could hardly be said for Catholics who leave the Church. Theirs is usually a very easy road.

My family was unusually supportive of my conversion from the beginning but I have a number of friends who were all but disowned and from what I read on convert blogs, their story isn't too abnormal.

A PCA minister emailed me quite some time ago.. he was toying with the idea of conversion but had some theological issues with the Church. We only had a brief dialogue then but I decided to dig up his email and give him a curiosity checkup. He emailed me back from Rome - literally! He had just converted.

I was having dinner with a friend of mine last weekend - a PCA elder and if you find anyone who knows Presbyterian doctrine or Calvinism or the Westminster Confession of Faith more than him, I'll give you a dollar. I told him about this incident with the other PCA minister and I said "No wonder the PCA is so small, they're all joining the Catholic Church!" He too, is considering conversion.

He made the remark that "I don't think its a big secret that the Catholic Church had some big problems in Luther's day... but the Catholic Church then - doctrinally was a far better Church than mainstream Protestantism today." I of course agreed. I have another good friend - an elder in the OPC. He is fond of quoting the founder of his denomination "We have more in common with the Catholic Church than with the mainstream liberal Protestant denominations".

Luther and Calvin must have seemed reasonable at the time - after all, they deceived no small number of the faithful...if I had been alive at the time, I'm sure I would have bought into it as well. But 500 years and 33,000 denominations later... it's no mystery why so many are returning to Rome.

LINK (http://godfearin.blogspot.com/2007/07/new-exodus-protestants-crossing-tiber.html)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Speedy the Arrogant Parrot</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Aydeloof</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

But, what isn't being said is that for every single Protestant that converts to RC'sm, 3 RC's are becoming Protestants.

</div></div>


Umm, you think a claim like that should have a source to back it up? </div></div>

I gave my source. Prof, Ph D and Research Prof, at TEDS in Deerfield, Illinois, author and editor of 45 books, this guy doesn't make things up, believe me.

http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/bio/dacarson.html

[Soundbear]

Speedy should trust Carson, he quoted him last year.

He did? In what context?

[Soundbear]

He quoted Carson addressing this issue:

“And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” (Mt 16:18 AV)

http://www.speroforum.com/site/wiki.asp?id=PetrosOrPetra
Although it is true that petros and petra can mean "stone" and "rock" respectively in earlier Greek, the distinction is largely confined to poetry. Moreover the underlying Aramaic is in this case unquestionable; and most probably kepha was used in both clauses (“you are kepha” and "on this kepha"), since the word was used both for a name and for a "rock." The Pe****ta (written in Syriac, a language cognate with Aramaic) makes no distinction between the words in the two clauses. The Greek makes the distinction between petros and petra simply because it is trying to preserve the pun, and in Greek the feminine petra could not very well serve as a masculine name. . . Had Matthew wanted to say no more than that Peter was a stone in contrast with Jesus the Rock, the more common word would have been lithos ("stone" of almost any size). (D.A. Carson, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Volume 8 (Matthew, Mark, Luke), ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1984), 368.)

OK, I see. Hmm, if only Speedy could believe Carson's commentary on the REST of that context. Here is what that same comment says immediately following that quote:

None of this requires that conservative Roman Catholic views be endorsed (for examples of such views, cf. Lagrange, Sabourin). The text says nothing about Peter's successors, infallibility, or exclusive authority. These late interpretations entail insuperable exegetical and historical problems--e.g., after Peter's death, his "successor" would have authority over a surviving apostle, John. What the NT does show is that Peter is the first to make this formal confession and that his prominence continues in the earliest years of the church (Acts 1-12). But he, along with John, can be sent by other apostles (Acts 8:14); and he is held accountable for his actions by the Jerusalem church (Acts 11:1-18) and rebuked by Paul (Gal 2:11-14). He is, in short, primus inter pares ("first among equals"); and on the foundation of such men (Eph 2:20), Jesus built his church. That is precisely why Jesus, toward the close of his earthly ministry spent so much time with them. The honor was not earned but stemmed from divine revelation (v. 17) and Jesus' building work (v. 18).
Expositors Bible Commentary, Matthew, Don Carson.

[Soundbear]

Thanks for that, A. Good stuff.