From Operation Rescue to Operation Convert [Randall Terry now Catholic]

National Catholic registar ^ | 5/17/06 | TIM DRAKE

[Full Court]

font face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif" size="4" color="#990000">From Operation Rescue to Operation Convert

May 21-27, 2006

by TIM DRAKE

Also in the Register:

Randal Terry, CatholicRandall Terry has become Catholic.
Between 1987 and 1994, Randall Terry led Operation Rescue, the country’s largest peaceful civil disobedience movement. He now serves as president of the Society for Truth and Justice, and is running for a Florida Senate seat. One of the leading evangelical pro-life leaders in the country, Terry quietly entered the Catholic Church on Holy Thursday with his wife Andrea and three sons. Register senior writer Tim Drake spoke with Terry about his conversion at his home in Florida.

 Where are you from originally?
I grew up in upstate New York, in West Henrietta. We grew up in the country.

 Tell me about your family.
I was conceived out of wedlock in 1958. Within three months my parents were married, and I was born six months later. I’ve always had an affinity with babies born out of wedlock who are in danger of perishing. Had Roe v. Wade been the law of the land in 1958, I might not have been here, although I’m certain that my mother would have chosen life.
I have one brother who is four years younger. My parents were both career school teachers.

 What was your faith background?
I was baptized in the United Church of Christ in New York, but grew up in a nominal Christian home. We were barely Christmas and Easter Christians. From the time I was a little boy until I was 17, I was anything but devout. At times, I was a verifiable agnostic.

 How did you come to know Christ?
As a teenager, I had lived a life immersed in the rock ’n’ roll culture, away from the paths of God, but I had a real yearning in my heart to know ultimate truth and ultimate reality. That set my heart seeking after God in prayer and reading Scriptures and talking to people who were devout in their faith. On Sept. 6, 1976, I made an evangelical commitment to Christ as a 17-year-old.
In conjunction with my teenage rebellion, I was seeking to know if God existed, if heaven and hell and demons and angels existed. My prayer, journey, discussions and reading brought me to the point where I asked Christ to come into my life and be my Lord and savior. That brought an immediate change in my lifestyle, my speech, my relationships and my church attendance. I went from rarely going to church to going three times a week. I began to evangelize all of my former rock ’n’ roll buddies, many of whom became devout Christians. Some of them went into ministry as missionaries and pastors. Once I was convinced that Jesus was the Son of God and that he suffered and died for us, I was thrilled with the Good News and wanted to tell everyone that I knew — family, friends and foes.
It defined my life from that moment on. Two years later I enrolled in a Bible College in New York.

 How did you first get started in pro-life work?
While at a prayer meeting in the fall of 1983, a woman came into the meeting weeping. She said she had just seen a special on Christian television on abortion. She said, “We’ve got to pray that God ends this killing.”
Whenever I thought about abortion, I got a sick feeling in my stomach, yet my evangelical sociology did not allow me to be in the political and social battles of the day. I had very little historical and theological framework from which one could launch and sustain a socio-political movement.
I would think about abortion and pray, “Oh, God, please do something,” but wouldn’t know what to do.
Eventually, on May 1, 1984, I took a position in front of a Binghamton, N.Y., abortion business. I had no literature. I just stood there committed to talking to women who were entering, to beg for the life of their babies. From that grew Project Life — a crisis pregnancy center, and Operation Rescue.

 What led to the founding of Operation Rescue?
I met John Ryan, who was doing sit-ins in St. Louis, and my heart was stirred to participate in direct action. While sitting in jail in 1986, I had another epiphany about how to recruit masses of people. We recruited tens of thousands of people. Between 1987 and 1994, 75,000 arrests were made. That is 10 times the size of the arrests made during the years of protest for civil rights.

 How many times were you arrested?
More than 40 times, always for peaceful protest, like praying in front of an abortion business.

 When did you first take an interest in the Catholic Church?
It was during my work in Operation Rescue that I first became interested in the Roman Catholic Church. My training and experience were in evangelical Christianity with an evangelical framework theologically, but the Roman Catholic communion had a much better sociology and better stability, coupled with a phenomenal theology of suffering.
I would look at my evangelical friends, who would come and go from the pro-life movement. They would proclaim undying devotion for pro-life activism and then later disappear. Then I would look at my Roman Catholic friends who would never swerve. That had a tremendous magnetism for me.
I also found myself defending Catholics against ignorance and bigotry, and defending evangelicals against ignorance and bigotry.
What took me so long was that I was a cultural Protestant, trained in Protestant theology. I had to look at the parts of my training that were inaccurate or deficient. For the past six years, I have been in the Charismatic Episcopal Church. My conversion began with my friendships with clergy in this Church. They told me that the farther you go in Reformation theology, the more you end up in Catholicism and liturgy.

 Which theological hurdles were the most difficult for you to jump?
They boiled down to papal infallibility, Marian dogma, and purgatory. For years I have craved to be in the Catholic Church, but couldn’t figure a way to get around these hurdles. They became resolved this Lent.
On Ash Wednesday, I started a 40-day fast. I have been in conversation with a priest, Father John Mikalajunas, in Binghamton for over 20 years. To my amazement, during Lent, I sensed that it was the plan of the Holy Spirit to bring us into the Catholic Church. After some further conversations with Father Mikalajunas as well as with other evangelicals who had come into the Church, those theological issues evaporated. Once I realized the Truth, I had to go in. I couldn’t wait.

 I understand that you are awaiting word on the annulment of your first marriage. Can you tell me why you chose to be received into the Church (without being able to receive the Eucharist), before the resolution of your annulment?
This has been a journey for 18 years. I knew when I came in that I would have to deal with my annulment. I couldn’t bear not being in Rome any longer. So, I decided I would rather come in and wait to receive the Eucharist, rather than not be in the Church. I felt that I needed to come in, and that it was something I needed to do during Lent. Thus far it has been wonderful — I’m glad I didn’t wait.

 Tell me how your reception into the Church came about.
In my conversations with Father Mikalajunas, he would tell me that I belonged in Rome, and I would jokingly tell him that he would make a great Baptist preacher. I knew I was being pulled into Rome. At the beginning of Lent, he told me something that made a lightbulb go on. He said that he would receive me into the Church. He knew what I knew — he knew that I knew the dogmas of the Church. He was offering to receive us in the event that I could say, “Yes, I believe.”
I thought, “Oh my goodness,” and felt like the Holy Spirit was showing us a plan for our lives. Father Mikalajunas concurred.
Over Holy Thursday we were received and confirmed at St. John the Evangelist Catholic Church in Binghamton. Father Mikalajunas brought in two witnesses.
When I was confirmed, I had this overwhelming sense that I had just walked into a cathedral that was packed with people — namely, the heroes and martyrs and saints who had gone before us. I felt they were rejoicing and calling us on in our journey. I felt as if I was with these people.
There was a tremendous sense of joy realizing that it was the end of my ongoing struggles.

 What was your greatest fear?
That I would wake up and say there was no change in me. That has not been the case. Being in the Church has brought a wonderful sense of belonging. I am part of 2,000 years of Christian history that is glorious, that has warts, and heroes and villains, but that is nonetheless the Church founded by Jesus upon Peter.

 How do you expect your evangelical colleagues will react to news of your conversion?
My journey is so personal, and yet so public. An important part of my journey is that as a pro-life leader I have had the honor of leading tens of thousands of evangelicals and Catholics in pro-life activism. I pray that I am able to continue that leadership in both communities. We have a unity of purpose. We unite around the Apostles’ Creed and our common love of life and justice.
My mission as a man is to unite as many in the Christian community as possible to stand for the Christian ethic of life and justice as defined by our historical and common Christian faith.

 Do you anticipate that your conversion could hurt you in your Senate race in a predominantly Protestant state?
I hope it won’t. I believe that the unity of purpose that has helped me as an evangelical to work with Catholics will help me as a Catholic to work with evangelicals. My wife says that I am bilingual — I can speak both languages. What I would bring to the table as a state senator is standing up for the underdog for justice and freedom. Whether you’re Baptist or Episcopalian or Catholic, you can appreciate that.
We see that kind of working together in the example of a Presbyterian president [Ronald Reagan] working with a Polish priest [Pope John Paul II] to free Poland from communism. I am convinced that the two can work together in our common missions. If we don’t work together, we cannot win.

 

[Full Court]

That is just too funny! Some geek with a webpage tries to condemn a well received history book!

[tenn2005]

I appreciate your post. Would you please provede me with its historical source and documentation. Thank You.

[Diego1618]

Again, how is an 8 day old boy a believer in Judaism?

The covenant God established with Abraham (Abram at the time) had nothing to do with whether anyone believed or not. [Genesis 17:10] "This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised." Circumcision was not a "Jewish" thing....they did not appear in scripture until the tribe of Judah came into existence. All the other eleven tribes of Israel circumcised their eight year old sons also. Jacob, later named Israel and the father of Judah and the other "Israelites", was the grandson of Abraham. Verse 11 says it will be a sign of the covenant between God and his people.

Jesus was baptized as an adult and there are no biblical examples of infant baptism. [Proverbs 22:6] Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it. Baptism, as by Christ's example, should be a voluntary endeavor by each of us.

[Diego1618]

All the other eleven tribes of Israel circumcised their eight year old sons also.

Should of course say....eight "DAY" old sons.

[Salvation]

Thanks for that information.

[HarleyD]

Then why follow the Romanist example of unbiblical infant baptism and not the Biblical example of believers baptism?

There is evidence throughout scripture that both were practice. Quite frankly, I'm not yet convinced in infant baptism which keeps me on the Reformed Baptist side. However, Dr. E should not lose hope as I promise to research this a bit more when I have the opportunity.

What, Dr. E??? In so short of time do you think to make me a Presbyterian? :O)

[Dr. Eckleburg]

In so short of time do you think to make me a Presbyterian?

LOL.

If it was good enough for Calvin, it's good enough for me. 8~)

[Dr. Eckleburg]

...the idea of baptizing babies and Baptismal regeneration

The Reformed do not believe in "baptismal regeneration," whether it's in infants or adults.

You're arguing something we don't believe.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

You're defending Calvinism? :::snicker:::

Snickers rot your teeth, and then your criticism will really be toothless.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Then why do it and rob the child of a true Biblical baptism if he later becomes a Believer?

So are you saying baptism regenerates? Does baptism confer salvation?

[WKB]

I thought we were through with this conversation.
It does matter to me what you Catholics believe or practice.

Baptize Babies, Pray to Mary, Pay your way out of Purgatory,
Confess your sins to a sinful man........go for it...
have at it.
Now please end this conversation.

[WKB]

And before you say anything
does= Doesn't.

And I did not bother to read your LONG
post because I really don't care what
your sacred traditions say about Baptizing
babies.

[fortheDeclaration]

That's why you all need to find a good independent Baptist church to call home!!

And those are getting very hard to find!

[fortheDeclaration]

No, but God made sure that the spirit filled translators got it right.(Ps.12:6-7) So all translators/translations are valid?

No, we can tell by the fruit a Bible bears if God has blessed it or not.

Luther's Bible was blessed of God.

Tyndales was blessed by God.

The Geneva was blessed by God.

The King James (God's final English translation) was blessed by God.

All other English translation since 1611 are either from a corrupt dead text (Alexandrian) or made by those who wanted to corrupt the correct readings of the King James by pretending to be a King James (NKJ)

None of these has borne any fruit.

[Wonder Warthog]

"Just because you believe that doesn't make it true nor does it mean I have to believe it."

John 21:25 " Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down....".

Sort of implies that everything wasn't written down, doesn't it.

2 Tim 2:2 "And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses, entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others."

Seems like once again, things are dependent on the spoken word, doesn't it.

2 Thess. 2:15 "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter."

How much more plainly could it possibly be stated that both the written Word (Bible) AND the spoken Word (Sacred Tradition) are both necessary.

"As I said I will stick with the Bible you can stay with man's traditions if you like.

Ah, but these are not MAN's traditions--they are those established by God.

And unfortunately, as shown above, you are the one not "sticking with the Bible".

"I would prefer not discuss this subject with you any further."

My, what an open-minded attitude. I guess you aren't interested in finding out what God's truth actually is.

[vladimir998]

Nice try, but it's not enough.

Circumcision was a "Jewish" thing since it was required of Jews. Fussing over whether or not it should be called a Jewish thing because the term did not yet exist is silly.

Also, Jesus was baptized by the Baptist. He couldn't be baptized until the Baptist began his ministry. That was when He and the Baptist were both well into adulthood. Do not assume that because Jesus was baptized as an adult that He was indicating everyone must be the same age as He was to be properly baptized. That would be a logical fallacy to say the least.

Also, if you are going to train up a child as a Christian then start with what opens his soul to grace. That's baptism.

[vladimir998]

So you read only the 1611 KJV?

I ask because almost no one does. Most people who read the KJV actually read a version of it from the second half of the 18th century and it is significantly different than the 1611 edition.

Wouldn't that later edition be one of these as you describe it: "All other English translation since 1611 are either from a corrupt dead text (Alexandrian) or made by those who wanted to corrupt the correct readings of the King James by pretending to be a King James (NKJ)"?

[vladimir998]

You wrote:

"And before you say anything
does= Doesn't."

Only in your world it does.

"And I did not bother to read your LONG
post because I really don't care what
your sacred traditions say about Baptizing
babies."

Except there were Bible verses in there too. I guess you're throwing out the baby with the baptismal water so to speak?

Look, I realize that you're a Protestant and therefore not really interested in learning about Christianity. You make your own choices and live with them too.

[HarleyD]

The Reformed do not believe in "baptismal regeneration," whether it's in infants or adults.

I agree with Dr. E. One is not regenerated by baptism.

[WKB]

My, what an open-minded attitude. I guess you aren't interested in finding out what God's truth actually is.



I think it's you that is not interested in
finding out what God's Truth actually is.
BUT I have "discussed" these things with enough
Catholics here and in real life to know
this is an effort in futility.
You are not going to convert me
and I am not going to convert you.
So have a good day.