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."
You know, sometimes I feel as if I may as well give up. None of you people are processing a single word I have typed if you think I don't know the claims of chr*stianity. Do I have to keep stating these things over and over?
I grew up a convinced chr*stian of the Fundamentalist Protestant variety. I converted to Catholicism as an adult. I understand both of these positions (though it took me a very long time to do so). There is not a single claim that any of you can make about J*sus "fulfilling the prophecies" that I not only have not heard, but which I also have not once subscribed to. I used to believe all this stuff myself. I grew up believing it. I believed it till I was 33 years old. Are you beginning to understand now?
So you can quote verses all you want (just as Protestants quote Genesis and Paul to prove Protestantism is true over Catholicism). When I converted to Catholicism I learned that none of the verses that I thought taught Protestantism actually taught it, but that I had been imposing a Protestant message onto them from the outside.
Now please pay very careful attention to what I am about to say, pgyanke, because though this seems simple to me you may not catch it.
If Catholicism could teach me that I was interpreting Paul "out of context" and "imposing" alien notions onto it, Judaism could very easily teach me the same things about Isaiah. Do you understand? Why is it so hard for you to understand that a person can be converted from the "Protestant Paul" but not from the "chr*stian Isaiah?"
As I said before, you know absolutely nothing about Torah. One of the most elementary concepts is yeridat hador, that the highest revelation was given first and that all succeeding revelations have continued to recede in holiness (in other words, where do you get off with your assumption that "everyone understood" that the Torah was temporary, that Isaiah's prophecy was "higher," or that any prophet ever foretold a future "revelation" that would supercede the Holy Torah, the absolute Wisdom of G-d through which the world was created?)? This concept of yeridat hador is the exact opposite of your chr*stian concept of "progressive revelation," which is nothing more than a very early and primitive form of "progressivism"/dialecticalism. True, orthodox chr*stianity stopped the progress at a certain point (which was hypcritical), but this idea of a very low, basic Torah after which revelation grew higher and more explicit contained within it the seeds of Teilhard de Chardin.
Now, do you understand where I'm coming from? Am I making any sense? Is your mind processing these letters?
And incidentally, it is the vast majority of Catholics who attack Fundamentalist Protestants for interpreting the Bible literally even while they defend post-Biblical miracles and other things which Fundamentalists find hard to accept. Catholics have always "baptized" pagan beliefs and practices with ease; the Bible has always been more problematic. Otherwise why would Dave Armstrong attack Fundamentalist converts to Catholicism for being "insufficiently converted" (in this link here)? Why do Catholics who can "baptize" Irish paganism and totem poles evince such hostility to "rednecks" whose "totem pole" consists of simply accepting the literal truth of the Bible? Would you care to answer that for me?
The whole point of my participation in this thread is that I once walked in the path that Mr. Giles now walks. I experienced it in my own person. And I fear that he will be forced to eventually choose between continuing to believe in Biblical inerrancy and the simple literal truth of the Biblical events and the historical "infallible" church. I had to make that choice. Because this thread hits so close to home I chose to post to it.
At least Protestants who hate Catholics don't pretend to be anything other than simple "uneducated" people. Catholic anti-Fundamentalism always and only comes from the left and insists on presenting itself as hyper-intellectual and sophisticated and "too good" to even breathe the same air as an unwashed hillbilly. That has always disgusted me.
If you can't understand this post, then good bye.
PS: Perhaps one day you or someone will explain to me why the American church goes to such lengths to "understand" and incorporate the loud, exuberant worship and simple theology of Blacks but looks down its European nose at poor whites who have the exact same things??? Perhaps they can stomach Blacks worshipping and believing in that way but feel it is "unbecoming" for whites to do so?
I have read, understood and processed the words of your posts. As I stated earlier, you make some good points, you make some weird points and then you take my words and expound on them for me.
I put the passages in Isaiah there for you to show a New Testament ideology reflected in the Old Testament. I didn't think you would suddenly "see the light."
I respect your right to your opinion... just sharing some perspective with you. God bless.
I've rarely seen a longer rant with less substance and accuracy than this.
I apparently hit a nerve but I truly don't know what set you off like this.
After you've quieted down, perhaps you'd be so good as to re-read my post.
Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa!
I confess, I just glanced at your link and thought the individual was SUPPORTING Darwin's dubious theory.
I apologize and now hope you'll re-read my post now that you are aware of my previously confused perspective.
"You mean the glorification of CHRIST's HUMAN and DIVINE sides? You think the Church, the Catholic, universal church should not glorify Christ?"
I'm talking about that "wonderful" humanist doctrine of free-will and how it's used to give glorify to man by stealing if from God. But, I don't think you can possibly understand that given your humanistic thought process.
"In fact, it's one of my favorite sites! (When are they going to update! They haven't updated in almost six months!)"
Mine too! One of my greatest frustrations with them is that they don't update often enough!!!
"The problem is that they are a tiny minority fighting a losing battle."
I agree that we are a tiny minority, but it is not a losing battle - it is the Lord's battle and His truth will always win out no matter how many apostatise in the process.
"The fact that they grant their stamps of approval to such bibles is scandalous."
Yup - they are culpably ignorant.
"Let me ask you something: do you have any idea what it's like to come from a Fundamentalist background to the Catholic Church only to be hit on every side by theories that one has heretofore only heard from atheists???"
Yup - that's what happened to me 17 years ago - funny how different things look from the inside than they did from the outside isn't it? It can really suck!
"If the Catholic Church is truly what it claims to be then it should act like it. Is that asking too much?"
No its not asking too much, but the human element of the Church every so often rebels and attempts to swamp out the divine. It has been ever thus - remember that in the fourth century nearly every bishop (perhaps bar 2?) was an Arian heretic, and yet God still came through on His promises.
One of the problems of the modern-day Church is that it is afraid to engage in conflict with science. So many theologians and bishops are afraid of the Galileo syndrome recurring if they should dare to question accepted "scientific norm", that they simply relinquish any responsibility for engaging in the quest for truth in fields that they consider lie beyond their competence.
The Church is largely dominated by bishops of the intellectual pygmy and moral coward types at the present time, but that will change. They will be spewed out in due time.
"PS: As for Scott Hahn, I have corresponded with him and even spoken to him on the phone. While he originally retained his Biblical literalism (even believing in seven days and the facticity of the Book of Jonah) he has now gone over to the other side and attacks "literalism" (along with "Fundamentalist Zionism")."
I certainly dispute his stance on the 6 days of creation - he simply skirts round the "evolution/creation" debate by saying that it was not the purpose of Genesis to provide a scientific textbook answer regarding origins.
From my point of view I had found enough scientific grounds to bugger evolutionary theory before I had even become a Christian, so I maintain a more fundamentalist slant than he does. Nevertheless, while I hold to the 6 days of creation, I don't think it is necessary to assume that a "day" was 24 hours prior to the creation of the sun and moon.
As for "Fundamentalist Zionism" I am not sure what you mean by that, but if he means that the Catholic Church is the new Israel and the new Zion, then he is right.
"What will Mr. Giles do when he must make a decision?"
I hope he will fight for the Truth, just as St. Athanasius did when the whole world was against him.
Nor is the "Trinity". Need I say more?
In other words, you'd rather not answer. Name or no makes zero difference. I've no idea what bearing it has in your mind; but, methinks you see the problem with answering that question as much as I did in asking it LOL. You're stuck no matter how you answer.
I'm sure you will. Will that be before or after the Roman church tells you what you have to do?
Isn't that the statue that used to be a pagan idle but was reused to represent Peter? A bit tired here, may be confusing them lol
I believe I asked YOU to name a heetic and THEN I will be GLAd to ANSWER!! I am secure in my faith...too bad you are not.
Christianity is essentially Judaism without the need for blood sacrifice removed and Physical penalty of the law no longer hanging over our heads. Faith in God is believing him and believing in him. There's that issue again - believing what God has said. Faith is believing what God has said. The work of God is believing on him whome God has sent because he SPEAKS what GOD gave him to say. IE, believing Him is believing God because it's God's words, not his own. Both of those come from John.
John 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
[50] And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.
John 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
Luther for all his failings got at least one thing right without question - it's all about faith. But to say that nullifies all need for a hierarchic clergy. To note that the position of priest was removed from a select few and placed in all of us shatters the entire basis of your system at ground level. Christ made us a spiritual kingdom of priests. Gee, where'd all the mystery go all of a sudden..
So, you might check your truth in advertising section and re-examin what you thought you were buying into if you wanted Christianity, cause you didn't get it. If you wanted an imposing, burdensome and legalistic hierarchical religion that would make you feel good about yourself, then perhaps you got what you were looking for. Perhaps it was something else you sought. Who knows. But don't try to tell me you're Christian becaus a Roman Emperor thought someone did something silly and misinterpreted it on it's face once upon a time. If Simon Magus hadn't been documented as having tried to buy the Holy spirit and being rebuked for it, I'm sure Catholicism would be selling the Holy spirit for a donation just as they did indulgeances. I feel a running theme coming on so I'll quit and let you ponder.. or look for something to get mad about - whichever suits you.
Ok, if you want to play games, fine. You give no criteria, rhyme or reason, so I'll just be arbitrary. Sam Kinnisen.
Howsat. Now, how bout answering mine.
Correction: Christianity is essentially Judaism *with* the need for blood sacrifice removed and Physical penalty of the law no longer hanging over our heads.
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.