Posted on 09/17/2011 5:52:41 AM PDT by marshmallow
Are believers-by-birth less motivated witnesses?
Do converts to the faith make better evangelists than "cradle Catholics"? Pope Benedict XVI seems to think so. Christians since childhood should "ask forgiveness," the pope told a group of his former theological students recently, "because we bring so little of the light of [Christ's] face to others, and emanate so feebly the certainty that he is, he is present and he is the great and complete reality that we are all awaiting."
But are Catholics "by birth"—or any believers raised in a religious tradition—indeed less-convincing witnesses, or less motivated, than are converts? Do they have a greater responsibility to live up to the tenets of the faith since they have known Christ from their earliest years? And are they a bigger disappointment to the Mother Church—and the world—when they come up short?
Benedict himself would certainly qualify as a "cradle Catholic." Joseph Ratzinger was born at home, early on the morning of Holy Saturday in April 1927, into the all-encompassing Catholic culture of small-town Bavaria. Within a few hours of his birth, the infant's mother bundled him up and trudged through an early spring snow to have him baptized at the village parish—the first step on a long but in some ways commonplace life of faith, at least in that day and age.
"I am a perfectly ordinary Christian," he once said of himself, with characteristic modesty. Yet it's hard to argue that Joseph Ratzinger, now the pope, has been anything less than enthusiastic in preaching the gospel. He entered the seminary while still an adolescent and rose from priest to cardinal to pope.
But is that enough? Over the past 2,000 years, two narratives have competed in the Christian imagination: the ideal of the child raised in a Christian home, growing steadily in faith...........
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
What about REVERTS?
;-)))
Those who went away and came back are making a conscious effort TO come back.
Just like the convert chooses to join, they choose to come back.
I think it’s all in the research. I’ve known converts who do it for marriage. They can be just as lukewarm. But when one comes to the church with researched rational thought, one is ready to rumble!
The Bible has some choice words to say about people who stir up disputes for their own amusement (or in the author’s case, for money). Every Christian, whether baptized at birth or converted in old age, has the same obligation to holiness of life and evangelization of the world ... and each one has the array of opportunities God provides him.
And anyone who thinks, “Oh, marvelous me! I’m better than (those other folks) because I (fill in self-praise) ...” is missing the boat.
They probably do; adult converts to any faith think about the tenets of that faith than those born in it. “Fish aren’t aware of water.” That holds for those who convert to Protestantism from Catholicism as well.
I am a cradle Catholic and I agree with the pope on this. I believe in the history and that Rome has the right grasp on it and I believe in the divinity of Jesus, but I struggle with the hocus pocus part of Catholicism... or any religion for that matter. Jesus was a once in a planet individual, but I don’t buy that modern man with “reverend” in front of their name talks to God and performs magic. The converts and born agains are definitely more faithful in those regards.
"Sudden conversion might be good for morale and motivation, but the emotional instability and lack of knowledge of the sudden convert endangers the continuity of a group," Alan F. Segal wrote in his study, "Paul the Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee." "Building a stable community necessarily involves a strong educational program. Even persons who themselves were sudden converts often attempt to socialize their children via gradual conversion processes."
That is the biggest issue I have with newly converted people. The enthusiasm and desire to learn is tremendous...and very infectious. But sometimes I find that the depth of understanding is lacking. Fortunately, the majority are humble enough to listen. Also, fortunately, the problem is usually self-correcting.
So, it sounds like you need both for a fuller understanding and expression of faith.
I’m a cradle Catholic.
When I got to college, I asked myself “Were you just lucky enough to have been born into the right faith?”
After looking into the Baptists, the answer was “Yes”
Most “cradle Catholics” were taught “what” not “why”.
Converts and “reverts” are more likely to have studied and learned the history and the Biblical basis for the teachings.
They are more aware that the Council of Trent resolved the majority of Luther’s concerns, only 45 years later.
They are also aware that Luther didn’t share many of the beliefs and assertions of today’s Protestants.
Not a “fuller understanding”... I understand completely, just don’t buy all of it. I am certainly no atheist and I attend mass and try to use Christs guidance to lead my moral and ethical actions, I just don’t fall into the fully faithful category.
I liked your “nuanced” answer. Perhaps a maturer understanding means that we do give up on some of the “magic thinking” and become more responsible Christians. I thought you said it well.
Of course Dean illustrated that later by the zeal he showed defaming Republicans such as George W. Bush and in defending Democrats such as Bill Clinton. That may have been in part because he had been lionized by Democrats during the Watergate investigation, once he changed sides.
But are Catholics "by birth"—or any believers raised in a religious tradition—indeed less-convincing witnesses, or less motivated, than are converts? Do they have a greater responsibility to live up to the tenets of the faith since they have known Christ from their earliest years? And are they a bigger disappointment to the Mother Church—and the world—when they come up short?...
....Yet conversion is a double-edged sword. The zeal of newfound faith can be little more than a superficial emotionalism that makes for great theater—especially in today's reality-television culture—but does not endure. Or zeal can tip into fanaticism, as we have seen all too often, undermining a faith (and its public image) by overreaching....
....Whether converts do that better than "cradle Catholics"—or whether, as is often the case, that is a distinction without a difference—both categories of believers are bound by the same vocation. Both are as responsible for the success or failure of the church's witness.
"Having read [Francis Beckwith]’s book, I am appalled at the blatant misrepresentation of both the Reformed teaching as well the teaching of Roman Catholicism. His lack of knowledge on historical issues is forgivable, given his ignorance, but to misrepresent and caricature the Reformed faith and to misrepresent the salvation teachings of Rome is simply irresponsible and dishonest..."There are many, many "former-Protestant-turns-Catholic" conversion stories posted on FR that bear these same marks. The majority focus on converts with a poor command of their former faith, who swam the Tiber in their early to mid twenties. Some bear witness to converts already being swayed by "every wind of doctrine" before they converted. Most of these conversion stories fall into a common theme - "fringe member (or non-member) starts out illiterate and ignorant of his/her own confession, then gains publicity and fame on EWTN by making a loud, trumpeted conversion to Catholicism."
-- from the internet article Why Scripture and the Facts of History Compel Me, a Former Roman Catholic, to Remain a Committed Evangelical Protestant
Take, for example, the story of James Akin. A convert in his mid-twenties, he was actually a whole lot of things before he became Catholic in his mid-twenties, but one Catholic FReeper hawked James as being a "former Presbyterian".
Another favorite is the story of Rodney Beason, supposedly a former Calvinist, and re-solicited as "a powerful conversion story". A first year college student, he claimed to have "a library full of Calvin, Luther, Warfield, Hodge, Murray, Owen, Machen, etc" and to have "helped plant a local Orthodox Presbyterian Church". A little digging on Google, however, and his conversion story was called into question. In the end, Rodney Beason himself signed up to FR just to provide all with the rest of his "powerful conversion story". Having abandoned the Catholic Church within two years of his 2002 conversion, he wishes Catholics would stop (re)publishing his story.
And then there's the tale of Rob Evans. I know what you're thinking - "who is Rob Evans?" Evans' previous claim to fame was a direct-to-VHS children's series titled The Donut Repair Club, marketed to children in Evangelical households in the early 1990s. When he wasn't entertaining children, Rob was a Presbyterian Pentecostal Baptist multiple-church-splitting spiritual wanderer, who was kicked out of at least one congregation before his conversion to Catholicism. His conversion nicely coincided with EWTN acquiring broadcasting rights to his out-of-production Donut Repair Club.
Finally, there's Fr. Erik J. Richtsteig, billed as a "former Mormon" The problem is, Fr. Richtsteig stopped being Mormon by the time he was just eight years old, meaning he had never held office, never been on a mission, never been through a Temple ceremony. His "Mormon" experience was limited to Sunday attendance (without his mother) "sporadically".
I wonder how many of these Catholic converts actually attended churches that proclaimed the whole council of God? A question I would ask is how many Catholic converts previously went to churches with strong systematic confessions of faith, like the Westminster Confession, and how often were they taught the confession, like in a Sunday School class, and how well did their minister cover all the doctrines in the confession of faith? I would expect some rather weak answers.
-- from the thread Systematic Theology and Catholic Converts
“I understand completely”
If you think it’s any part of the Catholic faith that priests do magic, you don’t.
If you think it’s any part of the Catholic faith that priests have two-way conversations with God as a benefit of their ordination, you don’t.
If you don’t believe in the Real Presence, that’s a real problem.
“Talking to God”? I sincerely ope we all do that, and not just the “reverends”. And as for “performing magic,” you’ve got the wrong outfit in mind altogether: that’s for Hogwarts, Harry Potter and Halloween.
(Looks at fingers.)
Mrs. Dope!
Don’t be so hard on yourself, we’ve all done it.
All true converts regret their past errors, wish they had been raised Catholic, and seek to provide a Catholic upbringing to their children.
As a revert, I have learned much from converts about things most cradle Catholics take for granted.
But, from cradle Catholics I have learned about steadfastness and simple holiness.
I am grateful to know both.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.