Posted on 05/24/2004 9:17:25 PM PDT by churchillbuff
MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) -- As president of the Christian Coalition of Alabama, John Giles is no stranger to a pew. Yet he remembers well the time he got lost in a Roman Catholic church.
"I couldn't even follow the order of service, it was so foreign to me," Giles says of that day some six years ago.
Since then he's found his way and a new home in the Roman Catholic church — a home that might seem foreign to the overwhelmingly Protestant church population of Alabama.
"I have to admit to you that the whole time that I was in that church service, I was reduced to tears, and I couldn't explain it," Giles said Monday in an interview with The Associated Press.
"In fact," he jokes, "you would have thought I had been spending the whole weekend down at the House of the Rising Sun down in New Orleans, that I had all this sin in my life that I had to get out."
In any case, Giles and his wife, Deborah, were received into the Catholic Church at St. Peter's Parish in Montgomery on Easter Sunday.
Such a decision normally wouldn't be a matter of public interest, but Giles says he anticipated the questions that have followed his conversion from the Protestant faith.
"It would be nice if my private, Christian walk could be my private, Christian walk, but it's very difficult in my job for that to be the case," he says.
Giles says he knew the questions would come because as a Protestant he, too, had mistaken notions about Catholics. And the most frequent question he gets from his friends is "why?"
With that in mind he wrote an eight-page letter explaining his reasoning. In it, he explains that he had attended a variety of Protestant churches in Montgomery, including Christian Life Church and River of Life Church.
But once he visited the Roman Catholic church, he found himself in awe of its history and ritual, particularly its use of sight, sound, smell, taste and touch in each service.
Trips to Israel and Rome spurred his curiosity. And the deeper he looked into the faith — which is the largest in the United States but lags behind Southern Baptists and other Protestant denominations in the South — the more he says he realized that many of his beliefs about Catholicism had been wrong.
"There is a perception among Protestants — you kind of have this perception that if you're Episcopal or Catholic, you're not even saved, you're not born again, which is totally a myth," he says.
He recalls one example from the New Year's holiday, which he spent in Florida with the chairman of his board. He had told the chairman of his and Deborah's plans to convert, and he says they were well-received.
"But we went to some other friends of theirs' house on one of the nights we were down there," Giles remembers. "And so we're sitting around visiting and this one lady was teaching a Sunday School class on cults. And she began to name off all the cults that she'd be teaching and named Catholic in there."
He acknowledges that the reaction by his Protestant constituents may be mixed.
"We didn't make this change to win friends and influence people and do it from a popularity standpoint, because we knew that in the state of Alabama, this is probably not a popular position to take in the Christian movement," he says. "So it remains to be seen."
But he hopes they, like he and his wife, will keep an open mind.
"We hope that we could have a small contribution to building bridges where there weren't bridges," he says. "Because Christians are Christians. There's no such thing as Christians and Catholics."
First, I know the things you say about the ancient eastern and oriental churches (having worshipped at both an Armenian Catholic church and an Armenian "orthodox" church in the past). I am aware of uniatism, monophytism, nestorianism (and even of the various forms of the Syriac alphabet), etc. Let's just say that you're not telling me anything I don't already know. You seem to be saying that the former Protestant denominationalist who converts to Catholicism should be satisfied and not pay any attention to the claims of these other churches, and therefore the siutation with the various ancient churches is not analogous to the various Protestant denominations. I beg to differ. Why should the convert to Catholicism, who has rejected what he once considered absolute and unquestionable and accepted something he once regarded as absolutely beyond the pale of belief, suddenly draw the line at Chalcaedonian chr*stianity? Why investigate the claims of Catholicism but not those of monophysitism or nestorianism? I myself could only become a Noachide after becoming a Catholic. In a sense, converting to one's first "new belief" opens a door to an infinite number of possible conversions in the future. Why Catholics do not seem to understand this, why they think someone can just waltz into the Catholic Church and suddenly stop searching, is beyond me, since the claims of Catholicism are no more reasonable to the inquiring Protestant than those of the "heretics" is to a Catholic.
Huh?? Christianity: spread by the Apostles. St. Paul wrote a lot of the New Testament. how do you make that statement?
As you no doubt have learned by now, I don't accept chr*stianity, the authority of the apostles, or the "new testament."
Me: that now the belief is that evolution is almost required to illustrate that the Bible doesn't mean what it seems to say.
You: Quite untrue.
No, you are very wrong. Kindly allow me to quote an orthodox and creationist (if such thing is really possible!) Catholic web site:
We can trace back this process to the Reformation, when a certain suspicion of the Bible entered into Catholic circles because of the way men such as Luther and Calvin interpreted it. The cleavage between Catholics and Protestants developed into a huge chasm as the centuries passed and was still a major factor at the time of Darwin. Christendom had become a house divided in which, broadly speaking, Catholics base their faith on the teaching of the Church rather than the Bible. From a Catholic perspective this was not a question of seeing "the Church" or "the Bible" as opposing authorities, but of regarding the twin principles of Scripture and Tradition as normative in the life of the Church. But one result of this emphasis was that some Catholics were inclined to accept the idea of Evolution. Like the thin end of the proverbial wedge, this acceptance of the principle of Evolution has gradually entered into the practical life of the Church, and to speak frankly, "corrupted" it.As far as the teachings of the Magisterium are concerned, and the documents of Vatican II, the emphasis on the Bible as the inspired Word of God is still there. What has happened is that evolutionary ideas have undermined the general faith of the Church, and so this Biblical emphasis has been overshadowed.
Perhaps you wish to retract your statement?
You seem to have been driven out by one person who was not a member of a religious teaching order. You don't seem to have been driven out by the church's teachings, but by someone's attitude.
This is a most simplistic understanding. The person I mentioned merely drove me from the Latin rite church to the Armenian rite Catholic Church (where I later discovered a "conservative" seminarian who worshipped there because he didn't like liberalism, but who nevertheless did not know for certain that Noah ever actually lived, since the Bible's assertion was not enough for him). It was this latter that was the very final straw, though a great deal of straws had been building up for six years.
You're obviously a good, kind, and compassionate person, but why is it that you and other good people like you persist in seeing a stable and conservative Catholic Church with a few liberals here and there? The straws that had built up for over six years came from Catholics (including priests) in my home parish as well as those I encountered far from home at a liberal university. They came from Catholic Digest, Liguorian (home of Jim Auer, who tells kids that the stories in the Bible didn't actually happen), US Catholic, Our Sunday Visitor, This Rock, Catholic Answers, and every tract and pamphlet that defended Catholicism from Protestantism, each of which insisted that evolution and the purely parabolic nature of the Bible must be accepted at least in theory by the Catholic as opposed to the Protestant.
I can only shake my head at good people like you who cannot see that your dead fish is rotting from the top, and not from a few "malcontents" here and there.
I wish you were able, for just a few minutes, to place yourself mentally in the shoes of a rural Fundamentalist converting to an urban, educated, and over-intellectual Catholic Church. Why can't you understand the culture shock? Why don't you understand the scandal? Why can't you see?
I wish you good luck in fighting the good fight, but unfortunately an "infallible" Church that never acts infallibly and whose "unchanged" doctrines grow dustier and most obscure by the day is simply not satisfactory. I'm sorry.
I love your tag line lol. Nice to meet you. Actually it's always nice to meet someone who is feerless in standing up for a bit of truth. It's kinda rare. Paul was particularly keen to note that the Oracles of God were entrusted to the house of Israel. Had some honored that, many of the debates over what is or is not scripture would be elementary.
If Catholicism had spent less time persecuting Israel and more time learning their roots and understanding them, it might be possible for them to grasp much more of what Christ was about and what the chosen people were and are about. Many, and I'll include "protestants" in this, don't have the first clue about jewish meals of remembrance, holy days, and the like. I don't know all I'd like to know; but, I have learned enough to know there are some really clueless people out there.
However, the fact of belief in Evolution amongst a majority of at least western Catholics has to be accepted, and must lie in part with the cleavage which occurred at the Reformation. This division has allowed the terrible situation to arise in which, especially in recent years, the literal truth of the first chapters of Genesis has been disregarded by many in the Church.
Thanks for the kind words!
For the star-spangled, saffron-gillionth time on this forum, I'm not Jewish. I'm a Noachide. But the shul I go to twice a year most certainly seems to believe that the world was created in six days, as the Torah states in many places (and not just in the opening chapter). Last Simchat Torah, I was a guest at a home where at dinner that night one of the men spoke about how 'Adam HaRi'shon prayed for rain to fall, and how this rain enabled the vegetation (which was under the soil) to actually sprout forth. As a matter of fact, the next morning the men in the shul were discussing how Adam was created last (on the Sixth Day) in part to teach him humility.
Do you know anything about Orthodox Judaism at all? Other than "moderdox," that is, or people who make a big deal of accepting evolution while insisting that after the "sixth day" arrived everything in the Torah happened literally just as it was written. Is it perhaps that type of silly and inconsistent thinking that you are invoking?
Have you ever read RaSH"I's commentary? Have you ever read the commentaries made available in the ArtScroll TaNa"KH series? Have you ever looked at the Stone TaNa"KH or the earlier CHuMa"SH edition? Have you ever even read the commentary in a standard Orthodox prayerbook? Are you aware that invoking a mythical event in prayer would be a birkat shav? (vain blessing)? Have you ever read Rabbis 'Avigdor Miller, Menachem Schneerson, 'Avi Shafran, Mosheh Feinstein, Shelomoh Rotenberg, or any of the great Sages and Nesi'im of recent generations? Have you?
Do you even know what an "hour" is?
You are a sad case. You name a handful of people and condemn all of Catholicismm...How would YOU like the Jewish people to be all codemned because of a few bad ones? Ridculous.
Considering that the 'Church' has worked for centuries to deny the truth to the masses ...
Here's something fun you might like: http://www.vendyljones.org.il/index.htm
We weren't ever taught this in our Churches, at least I wasn't. I have sense made it my business to find out and sometimes join with a local Messianic Jewish congregation for their celebrations. I find this has opened up the scriptures in a very real way for me, understanding the Jewish culture and Holy days! I love it!
It might be of note to you for future consideration that groups sometimes get a bad name, not because of a "few bad apples" but because of the few AND the vast majority of followers who not only let their leaders get by with attrotiousness; but, participate in it - such as with the inquisitions. I'm not saying that to be flip. Catholicism has a long history and many beliefs stemming from that history that are everpresent to this day. You can't stand in the midst of that, be ignorant of it and hope to understand the people that really do dismiss all catholics for whatever reason.
I've attempted to get that point across countless times in my time here and elsewhere. And you might be a part of your own problem. I don't know. I can give you a nice test that perplexes Catholics - for good reason.
1 question:
Is it against the Holy spirit to kill someone your church deems to be a heretic?
Very useful test.
Thanks. I've heard of Dr. Jones and received some of his newsletters, though I regard him as a little out of the mainstream.
OK, I'll bite....who has the Church named as a heretic...then I'll answer YOUR question AFTER you answere this one.
Good for you. And that's something I would encourage any good Christian to do. You don't have to keep their observances; but, understanding them helps us understand many of our NT scriptures. If I hadn't noted it earlier, I doubt many here would have known that not observing the week of unleavened bread was next to a capital offense in the OT times. Being cut off from the house of Israel is no small matter. Yet, christ institutes a similar feast of remembrance and we're to
make assumptions about goofy arguments because a warning is attached to the feast. The only assumption to be made is that this is a feast of the Lord no different than that of the unleavened bread and that God means business when he tells us not to toy with His instituted observances.
The Jews know and have always known that the speach of God - what HE says is Life. It isn't derived from any physical thing. And many sects claiming christianity are clueless about such things..
Ok, I'm getting on a soapbox.. lol.
LOL. He is a bit out of the mainstream; but, I do enjoy his work as an archeologist. He's actually the first place I learned of noachides. I try to keep up with his digs because I'm pretty in to archeology. That and reading what he has to go through in order to dig many times is a real eye opener.
Nobody in particular in mind. Why?
Madam (I assume), you are obviously a very good person and I thank G-d for you, but if you cannot see that the Catholic Church has been solidly and adamantly opposed to the literal restoration of the Jews for two thousand years then you know absolutely nothing about your faith or its history. There are today a very few pro-Israel Catholics who seem to come in two varieties: the radical lefties who love to use the Jewish people as a hammer to smash the very concept of religious orthodoxy (people like Rosemary Radfor Reuther and her kin), and American Catholics who have come under Fundamentalist Protestant influence (eg, Oliver North and Alan Keys). I'm sorry. I wish it weren't so but it is, and I did not make it so. Please don't complain to me about the anti-Zionism of the Catholic Church. (You do know, I hope, that the Catholic Church is officially opposed to the literal messianic reign of J*sus from Jerusalem? It's one of the few things they actually take a stand against, and if you subscribe to millenialism you are a heretic--unless your "millenium" means a period when the "Church triumphant" rules the world through the Pope and clergy, as "predicted" at Fatima).
As for judging Jews, it is well known that Orthodox Jews are quietistic, insular, and withdrawn while radical Jews constantly yammer at and attack the rest of the world precisely in the name of Judaism, so the answer is obvious. However, the Catholic Church is Catholicism, while it is not the Jewish People but the Torah that is Judaism. I hope this answer makes some sense to you.
Again, thank you for taking the stands that you do.
I mean no disrespect to you or anyone, but this comment really struck me. It all depends on which Church one thinks goes back to the Apostles. I know many different denominations, sects, etc. who claim that distinction, not just the Catholic Church. I suppose then if we are to answer your question, it would have to be with, "whom divided whom?" Or is it "who divided who?" (never can get that straight! ;-) )
Or vice versa, or that they all stemmed from some common ancestor liturgical church that later shattered (kinda like so many Catholics believe life evolved on earth).
There were two altars in the Jewish temple - one for animal sacrifice and one for incense. There is only one in Revelation, and it is used for incense, clearly from the text -
Revelation 8:3, "And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne."
Also, Hebrews tells us very clearly that Jesus did NOT go to heaven to sacrifice Himself over and over again.
Hebrews 9:24-28, "For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another-- He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.
And again in the next chapter, to clarify -
Heb 10:10-14, "By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified."
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.