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!

[NYer]

Jesus truly is present, however, the notion that the bread is flesh is belied by the fact that our pre-crucifixion Jesus was holding the bread that He had broken when He said, "This is my body broken for you." The "presence" must be interpreted as spiritual and not as transsubstantial.

In Matt. 26:26-28; Mark. 14:22,24; Luke 22;19-20; 1 Cor. 11:24-25 - Jesus says, this IS my body and blood. Jesus does not say, this is a symbol of my body and blood. And, in Matt. 26:26; Mark. 14:22; Luke 22:19-20 - the Greek phrase is "Touto estin to soma mou." This phraseology means "this is actually" or "this is really" my body and blood. In 1 Cor. 11:24 - the same translation is used by Paul - "touto mou estin to soma." The statement is "this is really" my body and blood. Nowhere in Scripture does God ever declare something without making it so.

Matt. 26:29; Mark 14:25 - Jesus is celebrating the Passover seder meal with the apostles which requires them to drink four cups of wine. But Jesus only presents the first three cups. He stops at the Third Cup (called “Cup of Blessing” - that is why Paul in 1 Cor. 10:16 uses the phrase “Cup of Blessing” to refer to the Eucharist – he ties the seder meal to the Eucharistic sacrifice). But Jesus conspicuously tells his apostles that He is omitting the Fourth Cup called the “Cup of Consummation.” The Gospel writers point this critical omission of the seder meal out to us to demonstrate that the Eucharistic sacrifice and the sacrifice on the cross are one and the same sacrifice, and the sacrifice would not be completed until Jesus drank the Fourth Cup on the cross.

[nanetteclaret]

It’s amazing, isn’t it, how when one becomes Catholic all those “troublesome” Scripture verses which never made sense, or contradicted each other, all fall into place. John 6 is one example. The whole chapter never made sense, and no one in the Presbyterian church, where I was raised, ever explained it, taught about it, or preached on it. It was very carefully avoided.

I was taught that Communion was symbolic only. Some people think that when Jesus said in vs. 63, “It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life,” it negates everything He said earlier in the chapter about His flesh being the Bread that comes down from Heaven (8 times: verses 30-31, 35, 48, 53,54,55,56, 57-58). If Jesus had been speaking only spiritually, then why did the Jews get offended at Him (vs. 41), and why did some of the disciples turn back and follow Him no more (vs. 66)? Verses 41 and 66 make no sense unless one understands that Jesus really was talking about His flesh being the living bread (vs. 51: “I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” vs. 53-54: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood ye have no life in you. Whoso eatheth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”) Jesus also said, “But there are some of you that believe not” (vs. 64).

[jjm2111]

"...thought I could reconcile my new faith in Christ as my Savior with Catholicism."

I made the same journey and then back again. For me it WAS about the theology; sola fide, etc. didn't, once you scratch the surface, make much sense.

[nanetteclaret]

I believe I read or heard somewhere that the Fourth Cup was symbolized by the vinegar which was offered to Him. (John 19:28-30 “After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst. Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.” Also Matthew 27:34 and Mark 15:36) Am I remembering correctly?

[highlander_UW]

It's good to have your eyes on Jesus; it is better, however, to have Him on your tongue. He said: "Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you cannot have life within you".

Indeed. I am in the process of applying to for a missions position to a "closed" nation. Does that qualify?

[trisham]

Bump!

[franky1]

I have been a Catholic for 75 years and prior to Vatican 2 one never heard of Catholics leaving the Church to enter an Evangelical Church or the Evangelical World. I am sure you will find those who left the Church are/were all post Vatican 2. Why, because that era until the last 10 years lacked any catechetics. The Church failed on teaching its ways and certain religious started the Church in the wrong direction.

Every person, in most part, I knew in those years who “fell” away from the Church were caught up in poor marriage situations. They were not strong in catechetics nor in beliefs of the Church. They therefore felt no qualms about leaving. These and other people, if they practised their faith, also got tired of confessing about their contraception so they also left.

These people still wanted a Church affiliation so they looked for a church that condoned divorce and remarriage and contraception. So they found another Church that overlooked remarriage. I don’t think these people are born again if they have committed unrepented adultery.

<<<”I do seem to encounter more non-contracepting, large, natural families in the Evangelical world than I do among Catholics... why is that?”>>>

That is a perception that no one can answer. I was born before the great contraception age as was my cousins. I was an only child, my aunt had 2 boys and my other aunt had 1. It was also before any form of natural planning was instituted. Having 1, 2 or 10 children does not mean much. My mother and aunts and the whole family were staunch Catholics. We also lived among Hasidic Jews who had 10 plus children. Even today, one can live among Muslims and only have 1 or 2 children where the Muslims have 7 or 9

Whether one group has more children than the other does not affect the cause for leaving the church.

I wonder if you have been to a Catholic Mass? A Catholic Mass is served every day of the year. There are two scripture readings and teaching per weekday and 3 readings
and teaching on Sunday. That is 15 scripture teachings per week. I believe other denominations might have as many as 3 to 6 per week.

[ichabod1]

I see far more ‘large natural families’ at every Catholic church I attend than I ever saw at the prot churches I used to frequent.

[x_plus_one]

As a convert I am continually amazed how little by friends know about non-Roman Catholic christianity. In fact, they don’t want to know about it or talk about it - as if it were a taboo subject - like badbreath...

[bethelgrad]

“Thats odd.
At our military chapel, the Catholic parish is thriving, despite a lackluster (but kind and orthodox) pastor.
We have many people converting, too.
And the Protestant services keep getting smaller.
Same when I was deployed - protestant services were almost empty - but Catholic Mass was always packed.”

Well, we can only report our experiences. I hope I didn’t imply that catholicism was declining in the military, because it certainly isn’t. However, I’m currently on my third deployment and have never seen a trend toward “almost empty” Protestant services.

[bethelgrad]

Well, I can’t say that about all Catholics, because I’ve never met them all :) No denomination owns the “fail to read the bible” label, because many of us fall short in that category. That being said, I usually encounter surprise by the Catholics I’ve interacted with when I show them from scripture what I believe and why I believe it, namely justification by faith as Paul taught it in Romans. What role do the sacraments play in our justification? I’m confident that Paul would say nothing.

[AnAmericanMother]

1st Corinthians 11:23-30:

23For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me." 25In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me." 26For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.

27Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. 29For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep.

[lawdave]

Jesus truly is present, however, the notion that the bread is flesh is belied by the fact that our pre-crucifixion Jesus was holding the bread that He had broken when He said, "This is my body broken for you."

What, you think God could not do that if he wanted to? God is in all things. Whay can't he be in both the form of bread and in his human form at the same time? You clearly do not get the point of the feeding of the 5000 in John Chapter 6. BTW, after the feeding incident Jesus told the jews with him that they must eat his flesh in order to have life.

[xzins]

You completely ignored the John passage in which Jesus says: "These words are spirit..."

He said those in reference to his statement that they must eat His flesh and drink His blood.

Is Spirit REAL in your way of thinking? nanetteclaret says there is such a thing as "only spiritual." I guess we could say that God is "only" spiritual.

Catholics must think that God is not real, since the bible says "God is Spirit," and nothing serious is "only" spiritual.

[IrishBrigade]

I hope I didn’t imply that catholicism was declining in the military, because it certainly isn’t. However, I’m currently on my third deployment and have never seen a trend toward “almost empty” Protestant services...

...actually, what you did that nettled me was to set up the ‘we’ against ‘them’ paradigm that festers in much religious dialogue, and then equated the concept of humanity’s theological passion and perception outside of Holy Writ with a sneering allusion to ‘barnacles’...to each his own, I guess...

[armydoc]

I realize that if the proddies' eyes aren't opened by the Holy Spirit, they will never understand the truth. Far better to pray for them than to waste time arguing with them.

As far as salvation goes, it really doesn't matter if we understand, does it? From V2's UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO:

For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect.


Us prots are "undercover Catholics"! Yea!

[armydoc]

Great, let’s take the John passages literally. I have taken Catholic communion. I’m saved then, right?

[lawdave]

You completely ignored the John passage in which Jesus says: "These words are spirit..."

Nope. Just waiting for you to bring it up. If you will note, the phrase you cite is at John 6:63. But after that passage it says,"As a result of this, many of his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him." John 6:66.

Obviously, the statement you cited did not convince some of Jesus' followers that he was speaking only figuratively. Since after he said it they still left. So your interpretation must be incorrect.

He had "shifted gears" a little when he said that "the spirit gives life, while the flesh is of no avail." In fact, he goes on to say that "the words I have spoken to you(his lesson that we must eat his flesh)are spirit and life. So, his reference is now to their need to believe the lesson he has taught them and not rely on their own wordly understandings. They could not shake the Jewish prohibition against drinking blood or eating human flesh.

It is clear that Paul understood that the bread and wine was actually Jesus' flesh and blood since he says: The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 1 Cor. 10:16-17. Paul shuts the door on your interpretation at 1 Cor. 11:27 - 30

Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are infirm and a considerable number are dying."

Clearly, Paul believes that the bread and wine are more than a symbol. So much so that he points out that falure to "discern"(i.e. understand the nature of the body and blood) is causing people to sicken and die.

[xzins]

Is God a symbol?

Or is God real?

[markomalley]

For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect.

Us prots are "undercover Catholics"! Yea!

I've been saying that for years. The word "Catholic" simply means "universal." 1 Cor 12. There is one body, not a multitude of bodies. The fact that there are some parts that are in schism doesn't erase the fact that there is one body.

And yes, proddies (used in the most generic sense) are part of that one body and their eyes are illuminated, to one degree or another, by the Light of Christ.