The Tide Is Turning Toward Catholicism: The Converts

Catholic Exchange ^ | July 2, 2007 | David Hartline

[NYer]

It started with Scott Hahn and it is still going strong.  The number of prominent Protestant clergy and theologians coming to the Catholic Church has been nothing short of remarkable.  Priests like Father Dwight Longenecker and Father Alvin Kimel are new to the Church and they bring a lot of enthusiasm, scholarship and wit and humor with them.  Father Longenecker might be the only priest who is a graduate of the admittedly anti-Catholic institute of higher learning, Bob Jones University.  Deacon Alex Jones, a former pastor in a prominent African-American Pentacostalist Church in Detroit left behind a vibrant, growing congregation.  However, the pull of Catholicism's 2,000 year-old history and her ability to weather many storms was too much for Deacon Jones.  He now travels around the country telling his conversion story.  In addition, there have been prominent theologians and university scholars like Dr Francis Beckwith, who very recently was the head of the Evangelical Theological Society.  He came home to the Church in April.  The aftershocks from his reversion to Catholicism (he was born into the faith but later left the Church for Evangelicalism during his teenage years in the heyday of the "Jesus Movement,") still are being felt.  He followed Joshua Hochschild who surprised many in the theological world when he recently converted to Catholicism.

In my book The Tide Is Turning Toward Catholicism, I note that while 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.  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.  For some, like Scott Hahn and Father Dwight Longenecker, the Faith they once mocked is the Faith they have changed their lives and alienated family and friends to join, a decision not taken lightly. 

Often, it is an attempt to better understand Catholicism in order to disprove it that leads to conversion, when they simply could not come up with anything to dispute the key tenets of Catholicism: Scripture and Tradition, the Sacraments, Apostolic Tradition and the role of Mary.  They found themselves falling into the trap that the eminent Pharisee Gamaliel warned about in Acts 5:33-39. They might be fighting against God.

Many of the former converts, some of whom were admitted anti-Catholics, have now become prominent defenders of the faith.  Dr. Scott Hahn is a mainstay at Franciscan University and is often seen on EWTN.  As a matter of fact there are so many converts and reverts coming home to the Church that one of the most popular shows on EWTN is The Journey Home, hosted by Marcus Grodi.  Besides clergy and scholars there are hundreds of thousands who have entered the Church in recent years. This past Easter, it was announced that over 100,000 people came into the Church, just in the United States.  While bloggers and Catholic apologists Mark Shea and Jimmy Akin came into the Church some time ago, Aimee Milburn and Gerald Augustinus along with twin brothers David Bennett and Jonathan Bennett have chronicled their recent journeys into the Church via their blogs.  It is a truly remarkable story that often gets little media attention.  If the converts keep coming, the Tiber is going to get mighty crowded.  Indeed, the tide is turning!

[lawdave]

Keep up the good fight nanetteclaret!You are good example that we must always act with love and charity. It is usually the non-Catholics who start talking smack.

[P-Marlowe]

This is a lamentable post.

Then why did you post it?

[trisham]

Keep up the good fight nanetteclaret!You are good example that we must always act with love and charity.

**************

I second that.

[P-Marlowe]

And with that, I bid you good day, as you are determined to use this thread to insult those of us who disagree with you.

Well Excuuuuuussssseeeee Meeeeeeee.

Some of you people are just too overly sensitive to be posting on an open forum.

I'd suggest you find a nice closed Catholic forum to hang out where your ideas and beliefs will not be challenged.

[armydoc]

He is required to be consumed in order for us to enter into the New Covenant with God.

You also said: “I agree with you that taking the Catholic Eucharist is neither necessary nor sufficient for salvation.” I most assuredly did NOT say that and I don’t appreciate your attributing something to me that is entirely false! If you are going to post on what the Catholic Church believes, I would respectfully request that you read the “Catechism of the Catholic Church” so that you can post accurate facts. Please do not make up things about Catholic beliefs.

With all due respect, the Catholic Church does not teach that the Eucharist is necessary or sufficient for salvation. Do you believe otherwise?

[OLD REGGIE]

The influx of Protestants into the Catholic Church goes well beyond handful. The majority of them are highly educated theologians and pastors.

I have asked you the same question in the past and have yet to get a documented answer. I'll try again.

1. How many Protestants have converted to Catholicism?

2. How many Catholics have converted to Protestantism?

Since you make so many dogmatic statements concerning conversions it should be relatively easy for you to provide documentation.

[xzins]

To assume arrogance because someone provided a citation is itself unusual.

I’ve found that you do like to make it personal, though. I guess that way you can keep it at arm’s length.

You did not, however, deal with the point. Peter’s place in the founding of the Church is clearly spelled out in the first third of the book of Acts.

However, I do find it amusing that you had to cite a Protestant background to establish that you had some scriptural knowledge.

[xzins]

use this thread to insult

Pot, kettle, black.

You need to read through your posts to me on this thread.

[conservonator]

So if there is no deception, then there is an informed choice, right? It is the capacity to make a choice, for Christ and life or for death, that is prima facie evidence of God's love and sovereignty, only a perfectly loving and perfectly Omni³ could provide for his sovereignty and our free will. If we could understand how He managed to pull it off, we would be His equal, we're not.

Christ spoke in parables to call us our of our slumber, see in Matthew 13 how the hearts, ears and eyes have become unable to bear the word of God plainly, as we do a news report, the parables are not hard to understand ( sometimes with a little help) for those with ears to hear but for the deaf and blind and awaking of faith, an acceptance of the gift of grace is needed, saying "yes" to grace takes many forms. If the parables are perfectly understandable to the chosen, why do they need pastors, bible studies, commentaries, concordances etc? It's because He is giving us a chance to say "yes" at the most basic level, I want to understand, help me understand Lord! This is another reason He gave us a Church before He gave us the canon of Scripture. The heirs of the apostles help any today who want to hear and see.

[P-Marlowe]

Invincible ignorance at its finest.

Oh my, I'm so offended!!! How can you be so insensitive!!! I'm going to cry to the religion moderator and ping a whole bunch of people to your post to show how offended I am!!!! ... /sarc

Scott Hahn was a rabid anti-Catholic who was also a scholar. He knew more about Scripture studies and the protestant point of view than most average folks.

You mean most Catholics.

Yet, he let his heart be open to the truth and convinced himself through his studies that the Catholic Church is the church founded by Christ. It is worth a look if you aren't afraid to test your own certainty.

I've seen enough of his trite ramblings here on Free Republic. He doesn't impress me.

Have I offended you?

[P-Marlowe]

So if there is no deception, then there is an informed choice, right?

Where in the bible does it say that all men are given an "informed" choice?

If Christ had chosen to fully inform everyone, then he would not have spoken in parables. He specifically stated that his purpose in speaking in parables was so that some people would be left in the dark, "lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them."

Christ spoke in parables to call us our of our slumber...

That is not what Christ said. That is YOPIOS.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

founded by Jesus Christ on St. Peter (the Rock)

But if the RCC can get something this basic so wrong, why should we expect correct doctrine elsewhere in that institution?

GOD IS THE ROCK

And even more specifically, Christ is the rock...

"Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

And did all eat the same spiritual meat;

And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual rock that followed them: and that rock was Christ." -- 1 Corinthians 10:1-4

When David says...

"From the end of the earth will I cry unto thee, when my heart is overwhelmed: lead me to the rock that is higher than I." -- Psalm 61:2

...he's not speaking of Peter, but of Christ alone.

When and if the RCC divides the word of God correctly, then and only then will it give some evidence of God's blessing.

[conservonator]

Ahh no, Christ is not the demi-god created by by Calvin. He knows that alone, they are unable to be saved, that they are unable to, on their own, open their eyes and ears, but He has a plan, and it involves the 12 and their disciples and descendent's. Remember in john 21 what Christ instructed Peter to do? Christ spoke in parables, but the apostles and disciples were given full understanding so that after Christs glorious death and resurrection, they could "finish that what was lacking" and participate in Gods plan of salvation.

Scripture makes so much more sense if you first believe that there was a real purpose in Christs establishment of the Church before he gave us the fullness of Scripture.

[xzins]

In my opinion, Jesus was making a play on words regarding Cephas (Peter) when he said he’d found his church on Peter’s determination.

He did.

We read about it in the first third of Acts. After that, Peter’s founding role had been completed. Day of Pentecost, mission outside Jerusalem, and the vision about Gentiles.

Mission complete.

In short, just because Peter was specially used in the founding of the church doesn’t mean that an entire hierarchical position is initiated. That’s just a silly, and unbilical, addition to the text that simply isn’t there.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Amen.

[xzins]

At least with the petrine lineage argument, the RC’s have a verse in the bible they can use.

Not so with the Assumption, Immaculate Conception, and coredemption of Mary.

That’s out of thin air, biblically speaking.

[P-Marlowe]

Ahh no, Christ is not the demi-god created by by Calvin.

Calvin was an Augustinian. Augustine was a Paulist. Paul was an Apostle.

You have effectively ignored the scripture I posted. Christ said he spoke in parables in order that certain people would NOT understand his words and be converted. If that is true (and it is) then who are you to complain.

He's God.

You're not.

[conservonator]

Calvin was a heretic who used a distorted interpretation of St. Augustine's understanding of predestination and a tortured reading g of scripture to create a new religion in his image.

The only thing I ignored was your misguided interpretation of the verses you posted. I tried to help by explaining the broader context of their meaning, but you chose to reject rather than embrace.

I'm not complaining, I'm trying to help you understand that that which Calvin created was not of God, but of himself. You haven't addressed the thesis of my posts, only noted my rejection of your misunderstanding.

[NYer]

How many Protestants have converted to Catholicism?

I don't believe the Church keeps track of these numbers. You've read enough of my conversion posts to grasp the fact that these numbers are large. It is not uncommon for entire congregations to convert with their Protestant pastor as happened with Alex Jones.

Please stop asking me this question.

[P-Marlowe]

Calvin was a heretic who used a distorted interpretation of St. Augustine's understanding of predestination and a tortured reading g of scripture to create a new religion in his image.

Saying it doesn't make it true.

Calvin was a brilliant biblical expositor. He did not create a new religion, he was just one of many dedicated servants of God to point out some of the errors that had crept into the Church over the years. He led us from the bondage that had become the Catholic tradition to the liberty which we all were meant to have in Christ. He was persecuted for his efforts, but he was steadfast in his committment to the truth of God's word. He was, like many men of God, a flawed man, but God uses flawed men to accomplish his purpose. It was God's purpose and plan to bring about the Reformation. We are all blessed because of it. Hallelujah.