Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Magazine: Growing Trend--Evangelicals ‘Crossing the Tiber’ to Catholicism
TheSacredPage.com ^ | August 6, 2010 | Michael Barber

Posted on 08/07/2010 3:38:50 PM PDT by Salvation

Friday, August 06, 2010

Magazine: Growing Trend--Evangelicals ‘Crossing the Tiber’ to Catholicism

The magazine Religion Dispatches has a new piece up by Jonathan Fitzgerald, entitled, "Evangelicals ‘Crossing the Tiber’ to Catholicism: Under the radar of most observers a trend is emerging of evangelicals converting to Catholicism."


As he points out, there are an increasing number Evangelicals coming into the Catholic Church. In fact, while my wife and I were at Fuller we witnessed this phenomenon firsthand. Indeed, students would come up and ask us if they could follow us to daily Mass (which was celebrated at a Catholic Church down the street). I went to Mass with many fellow students who had never experienced a Eucharistic liturgy. . . and, for many of them, once they started attending they couldn't stop.

Here's the story as Fitzgerald reports it:
In the fall of 1999, I was a freshman at Gordon College, an evangelical liberal arts school in Massachusetts. There, fifteen years earlier, a professor named Thomas Howard resigned from the English department when he felt his beliefs were no longer in line with the college’s statement of faith. Despite all those intervening years, during my time at Gordon the specter of Thomas Howard loomed large on campus. The story of his resignation captured my imagination; it came about, ultimately, because he converted to Roman Catholicism.

Though his reasons for converting were unclear and perhaps unimaginable to me at the time (they are actually well-documented in his book Evangelical is Not Enough which, back then, I had not yet read), his reasons seemed less important than the knowledge that it could happen. I had never heard of such a thing. . .

. . . [M]y parents never spoke ill of the Catholic Church; though the pastors and congregants of our non-denominational, charismatic church-that-met-in-a-warehouse, often did. Despite my firsthand experience with the Church, between the legend of my parents’ conversion (anything that happens in a child’s life before he is born is the stuff of legends) and the portrait of the Catholic Church as an oppressive institution that took all the fun out of being “saved,” I understood Catholicism as a religion that a person leaves when she becomes serious about her faith.

And yet, Thomas Howard is only the tip of the iceberg of a hastening trend of evangelicals converting to Catholicism. North Park University professor of religious studies Scot McKnight documented some of the reasons behind this trend in his important 2002 essay entitled “From Wheaton to Rome: Why Evangelicals become Roman Catholic.” The essay was originally published in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, and was later included in a collection of conversion stories he co-edited with Hauna Ondrey entitled Finding Faith, Losing Faith: Stories of Conversion and Apostasy.

Thomas Howard comes in at number five on McKnight’s list of significant conversions, behind former Presbyterian pastor and author of Rome Sweet Home, Scott Hahn, and Marcus Grodi founder of The Coming Home Network International, an organization that provides “fellowship, encouragement and support for Protestant pastors and laymen who are somewhere along the journey or have already been received into the Catholic Church,” according to their Web site. Other featured converts include singer-songwriter John Michael Talbot and Patrick Madrid, editor of the Surprised by Truth books, which showcase conversion stories.

Would Saint Augustine Go to a Southern Baptist Church in Houston?

McKnight first identified these converts eight years ago, and the trend has continued to grow in the intervening years. It shows up in a variety of places, in the musings of the late Michael Spencer (the “Internet Monk”) about his wife’s conversion and his decision not to follow, as well as at the Evangelical Theological Society where the former President and Baylor University professor Francis J. Beckwith made a well-documented “return to Rome.” Additionally, the conversion trend is once again picking up steam as the Millennial generation, the first to be born and raised in the contemporary brand of evangelicalism, comes of age. Though perhaps an unlikely setting, The King’s College, an evangelical Christian college in New York City, provides an excellent case study for the way this phenomenon is manifesting itself among young evangelicals.

The King’s College campus is comprised of two floors in the Empire State Building and some office space in a neighboring building on Fifth Avenue. The approximately 300 students who attend King’s are thoughtful, considerate and serious. They are also intellectually curious. This combination of traits, it turns out, makes the college a ripe breeding ground for interest in Roman Catholicism. Among the traits of the Catholic Church that attract TKC students—and indeed many young evangelicals at large—are its history, emphasis on liturgy, and tradition of intellectualism.

Lucas Croslow was one such student to whom these and other attributes of Catholicism appealed. This past spring, graduating from The King’s College was not the only major change in Croslow’s life, he was also confirmed into the Catholic Church.

Croslow’s interest in Catholicism began over six years ago when he was a sophomore in high school. At the time, Croslow’s Midwestern evangelical church experienced a crisis that is all too common among evangelical churches: what he describes as “a crisis of spiritual authority.” As a result of experiencing disappointment in his pastor, Croslow began to question everything he had learned from him. This questioning led him to study the historical origins of scripture and then of the Christian church itself. Eventually he concluded that Catholicism in its current form is the closest iteration of the early church fathers’ intentions. He asks, “If Saint Augustine showed up today, could we seriously think that he’d attend a Southern Baptist church in Houston?” The answer, to Croslow, is a resounding “No.”
 
. . .

You can read the rest here.



TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholic; catholiclist; converts; evangelical; freformed
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 981-1,0001,001-1,0201,021-1,040 ... 2,881-2,887 next last
To: smvoice
INDEED. WELL PUT.
.
.
.

BECAUSE HE LIVES
GAITHER VOCAL BAND

1,001 posted on 08/09/2010 9:21:40 PM PDT by Quix (THE PLAN of the Bosses: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2519352/posts?page=2#2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 947 | View Replies]

To: metmom

I hope not, too.

Supposedly WWIII is not supposed to be scheduled until the first half of Nov 2010

Sure hope they don’t rush it. That’s soon enough!


1,002 posted on 08/09/2010 9:22:34 PM PDT by Quix (THE PLAN of the Bosses: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2519352/posts?page=2#2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 948 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg

You’ll notice the non-Catholics had nothing to say about the ten Protestant theologians who agreed with the Catholic view that Peter was the Rock.

The silence was deafening.


1,003 posted on 08/09/2010 9:23:03 PM PDT by Deo volente (God willing, America will survive this Obamination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 983 | View Replies]

To: smvoice
POST 917?

Will go back and check it out.

.
.
.

THERE’S JUST SOMETHING ABOUT THAT NAME
GLORIA GAITHER ET AL

1,004 posted on 08/09/2010 9:27:22 PM PDT by Quix (THE PLAN of the Bosses: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2519352/posts?page=2#2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 973 | View Replies]

To: Quix; metmom

I agree. That’s soon enough!


1,005 posted on 08/09/2010 9:28:30 PM PDT by smvoice (smvoice- formally known as small voice in the wilderness. Easier on the typing!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1002 | View Replies]

To: smvoice

That was a kind affirmation alright.

Praise God.


1,006 posted on 08/09/2010 9:28:53 PM PDT by Quix (THE PLAN of the Bosses: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2519352/posts?page=2#2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 973 | View Replies]

To: Legatus; Amityschild; Brad's Gramma; Captain Beyond; Cvengr; DvdMom; firebrand; ...
Quix posted a link to a youtube video of the monks at Fontgombault chanting the Agnus Dei while (I think) calling the Catholic Church the “Alice in wonderland school of theology and reality mangling”.

Someone please explain to him why that’s weird. I’m not sure I can without coming completely unglued. I’m too flummoxed to even ping anyone.

You must be of the opinion
that I think that
everything about
the Vatican edifice
is evil.

I DON'T! LOL.
There's just too much evil
idolatry, blasphemy and gross, outrageous hypocrisy
to avoid warning the unsuspecting, unthoughtful, immature, uninformed etc.

I am a bit surprised that any RC--so used to traveling all the convoluted trailes in Alice's rabbit hole . . . would have the least bit of a challenge with my fairly straightforward stuff! LOL.

.
.
.

WORTHY IS THE LAMB
HILLSONG

1,007 posted on 08/09/2010 9:33:58 PM PDT by Quix (THE PLAN of the Bosses: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2519352/posts?page=2#2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 977 | View Replies]

To: smvoice; Dr. Eckleburg

Evidently!

The Grapes of Wrath Indeed!

Dr E and I are quite familiar with the RC version of THOSE!

LOL.


1,008 posted on 08/09/2010 9:36:16 PM PDT by Quix (THE PLAN of the Bosses: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2519352/posts?page=2#2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 994 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente; Amityschild; Brad's Gramma; Captain Beyond; Cvengr; DvdMom; firebrand; ...

Wouldn’t matter if it was 100 Proddy theologians.

Proddys are fully capable of being wrong!

A Proddy who’s wrong . . . is just wrong! Evidently being a Proddy didn’t help in those cases.

Every large group has plenty of idiots to go around.

We just don’t enshrine them; dress them in gold threads and teach them to prance about.

. . . least-wise not NEAR as much!


1,009 posted on 08/09/2010 9:38:56 PM PDT by Quix (THE PLAN of the Bosses: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2519352/posts?page=2#2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1003 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente; metmom; Mad Dawg; Quix
It should be noted that Abraham - who was also a first called - was also called Rock.

Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek the LORD: look unto the rock [whence] ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit [whence] ye are digged. Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah [that] bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him. – Isaiah 51:1-2

And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. – Matt 16:17-18

More importantly, "The Rock" is a specially announced Name of God in the Song of Moses (Deut 32):

Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth. My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass: Because I will publish the name of the LORD: ascribe ye greatness unto our God. [He is] the Rock, his work [is] perfect: for all his ways [are] judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right [is] he. – Deu 32:1-4

And "Rock" is also a Name of Christ Who IS God.

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 Cor 10:1-4

Both the Song of Moses and the Song of the Lamb will be sung in heaven.

And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, [and] over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God. And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous [are] thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true [are] thy ways, thou King of saints. Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name? for [thou] only [art] holy: for all nations shall come and worship before thee; for thy judgments are made manifest. – Rev 15:2-4

In sum, we should remember that Rock is a Name of God and hallow His Name. That Peter and Abraham were also called Rock should not diminish that Name of God.

To God be the glory, not man, never man.

1,010 posted on 08/09/2010 9:42:38 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1003 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente

...”Christ the living Stone, thus assures...” What is wrong with you, brother?


1,011 posted on 08/09/2010 9:46:35 PM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 990 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789; Quix

So, how is Sister Aimee McPherson’s cult coming along?


1,012 posted on 08/09/2010 9:48:28 PM PDT by Cronos (Omnia mutantur, nihil interit. "Allah": Satan's current status)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 646 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl

BLESSED BE THE ONLY ROCK

I WANT TO PLACE THE LEAST BIT OF CONFIDENCE IN—

THE ROCK CHRIST JESUS.

THX DEAR HEART SISTER IN THE LORD.

WELL DONE AS USUAL.


1,013 posted on 08/09/2010 9:50:15 PM PDT by Quix (THE PLAN of the Bosses: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2519352/posts?page=2#2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1010 | View Replies]

To: Quix
Thank you for your encouragements, dear brother in Christ!
1,014 posted on 08/09/2010 9:53:22 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1013 | View Replies]

To: smvoice
I'm guessing they would refer to him as "Simon" or "Kephas."

I don't know about you, but I feel like after 35 years of being married, I am just beginning to get a clue about marriage.

The Ol' Mizris goes out on the porch and reads her "Magnificat." A monthly magazine with scriptures and reflections for every day, and other cool stuff. I borrow it from her a lot.

I am under vows, so I read the Breviary, the Office of Readings and then Morning Prayer. (Lauds and Matins as they used to be called.) Then I have what I call my "optional devotions". You know about the Litany of Humility, and I have other commitments of prayer, which feed me more than I can say.

35 years ago we had no idea that this would be what marriage was like. But sub-fertility, a VERY sick child, an abandonment of a career path (as I left the Episcopal Church for the Catholic Church), and a lot of other stuff -- all this has confirmed for us that being married is mainly about evangelizing one another and the offspring whom we refer to as "the 'Orrible Brat Child" even though she is almost 27.

While I simply HATE being in my 60's, I have to concede that I receive immense blessings every day. And a big part of those blessings is learning that I am clueless -- and always was.

Consequently, I am not at all astonished or confounded that we are still learning what Peter's role is. I am still learning what MY role is! Hundreds of thousands, millions, have been Christian husbands, and yet I have so much to learn!

In terms of numbers, we have had far fewer popes to help us figure out what the heck Jesus was talking about.

In all these centuries of the unfathomable mystery of the Church, is it so surprising that we are still learning what Peter's role was? It's no surprise to me that in the early days they had SOME idea, but a vague one, and that as the centuries rolled they, little by little, developed a more defined idea.

The Catholic Church is just like life. Nobody has a clue, but we bumble along and somehow we don't crash and burn all the time. And I can go to Mass and receive Christ again into my heart, while I worship with the lady who thinks I'm a very bad man because I carry a gun, and the family whose father is dying of a many brain tumors, and the girl who got engaged yesterday and just glows, and Father Joe who is a lousy theologian but a very holy man and FULL of Fun. Together we don't know much and our lives 'have become unmanageable' but by the grace of Christ we all see the dance in which every one is servant to every other one and love is the tempo, the rhythm, and the melody.

Sometimes in all these arguments I want to say, "Be quiet! The Saints are singing, and the song they sing is Jesus."

1,015 posted on 08/09/2010 9:59:00 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 999 | View Replies]

To: Quix; smvoice; Amityschild; Brad's Gramma; Cvengr; DvdMom; firebrand; roamer_1; ...
Lookie here. Here’s the link to the Catechism of the Catholic church posted at vatican.va, the only FRoman Catholics approved website for matters concerning the Cathlic church.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p1s2c2.htm

424 Moved by the grace of the Holy Spirit and drawn by the Father, we believe in Jesus and confess: ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’8 On the rock of this faith confessed by St. Peter, Christ built his Church. 9*

*9 Cf. Mt 16:18; St. Leo the Great, Sermo 4 3: PL 54,150 - 152; 51,1: PL 54, 309B; 62, 2: PL 54, 350-351; 83, 3: PL 54, 431-432.

Regardless which "church" anyone deems the "church" of Matthew 16 to be, we know from vv. 21-23 that Peter did not have any understanding yet of the necessity of the Cross or the Resurrection.

FROM THIS TIME (Jesus had not taught it to them before), our Lord began to reveal His coming mission in Jerusalem, and they did not understand it!

Nor did they understand the Cross-work and Resurrection upon a subsequent mention of it in Luke 18:31-34! They understood NONE of these things, and it was HID from them!

So for about 1,500 years (NOT 2,000), a religious institution begun by metropolitan bishops wanting control over local congregations and their ministers has been teaching us that Simon Peter (no more and no less of a saint than any other child of God) was made the first "Holy Father" of "the Church," when he rebuked Christ against the Gospel that is the foundation for the safety of every soul who ever sees God's Heaven.

Further, let it be seen that God does HIDE doctrine from those nearest to Him for His own purposes to carry out His own objectives progressively, and this is what was happening in the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John). God HID the Gospel of the Grace of God through the Cross from His own disciples during His earthly ministry, if you believe Luke 18:31-34.

So, we are supposed to believe that God was revealing the New Testament Body of Christ in Matthew chapter 16 when He had HIDDEN the New Testament Gospel of 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 at the same time?

The context of Matthew 16 includes the Kingdom of Heaven and its Keys (v. 19), which the Twelve could indeed understand as being what was promised from the Old Testament prophets as belonging to Israel. The Kingdom of Heaven is NOT the New Testament Church, nor is it Salvation, nor is it Heaven. It is a Kingdom on Earth ruled by the Messiah (the Christ, the Son of the Living God) whom Peter confessed.

This Kingdom was the center of their expectations; they had no anticipation of a "Church Age" in any form under any circumstances---especially not of a "church" headed by an earthly kingly-robed individual called a pope.

The Twelve had already been preaching a "Gospel" (Matthew chapter 10; Luke chapters 9 and 10) ---- the Good News that the KINGDOM was at hand; NOT that the Body of Christ was at hand; the Body of Christ not being revealed until the calling of the Apostle Paul.

To promote an earthly kingdom-church with the elections of earthly kingly-robed, kingly-like, bishop-pope individuals claiming to have some descendency from Peter (no more and no less of a saint than any child of God), Vaticanism must blend and puree the Davidic Kingdom and the Body of Christ (mush-mush; strain-strain). And many Protestant schools do the same thing in support of earthly rule over their denominations.

No, it can not be proved that the New Testament Body of Christ is anywhere in the context of Matthew ch. 16, the presence of the word "church" there notwithstanding.

The word "church" cannot stand on its own as self-applying. The particular church in discussion must be determined from the context itself. In the context of Matthew 16, the church is a called out assembly to meet the Messiah for the establishment of the Davidic Kingdom, built on Peter's confession of the Lord Jesus as THE CHRIST (MESSIAH), THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD. After Jechoniah, the only rightful King to sit on David's throne is THE SON OF GOD, Himself.

1,016 posted on 08/09/2010 10:09:32 PM PDT by John Leland 1789 (Grateful)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 988 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg
While I simply HATE being in my 60's, I have to concede that I receive immense blessings every day. And a big part of those blessings is learning that I am clueless -- and always was.

Well so much for my plans. From 15 to 30 I thought I knew everything. From 30 to 40 I realized I didn't know everything and wasn't quite as smart as I thought I was. Since 40 I've learned I don't know anything and I'm not half as smart as I think I am.

I was holding out hope for 50. Thanks so much for killing the dream.

1,017 posted on 08/09/2010 10:12:37 PM PDT by Legatus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1015 | View Replies]

To: metmom
When we state that Christ is the Rock on which His church is built, we are told that we are wrong.

This is the sad result of our coming together as adversaries instead of as family.

Look, a man I respect and even love respects and even loves the current pope. He had him as a teacher before he was the Pope.

So I am inclined to cut PapaBenXVI every possible break. But I can read as well as you can, and I know that Peter, left to himself, is a buffoon and a coward.

But with the Spirit this guy suddenly finds himself standing up to the Sanhedrin and converting hundreds.

I have read, but do not know it to be true, that the Talmud teaches that God chose to reveal the Torah on Sinai because it was an utterly unremarkable mountain. Not as high as Everest, not as beautiful as the Matterhorn, on Sinai there was no fear that the intrinsic qualities of the mountain would lead anyone to think of anything other than the glory of the Torah.

So, we think, with Peter and with most popes. It's just not about them any more than it is about Sinai. We will always remember and revere Sinai because of God's election of this trashy little mountain.

And so we revere Peter and his successors, not because of their qualities but because of what we think is their election and because of what we think God did in and through them.

But that is obscured here on FR because Christians meet as though they were enemies instead of brothers. In our obsession with changing one another we fail to demonstrate to the Gentiles the redeeming love of Christ.

1,018 posted on 08/09/2010 10:20:38 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1000 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; narses; NYer; Natural Law; bronx2; don-o; Mad Dawg
Nice post!

I've always felt the most significant thing Christ did, besides re-naming Simon and calling him the “rock”, was to give him the keys of the kingdom of heaven and the power of binding and loosing. There's also the later verses in the Gospel of John when Jesus tells Peter, “Feed My lambs...feed my sheep”.

When the linguistic argument over “petros” and “petra” was refuted, they resorted to quoting one snippet from the Catechism and some words from a couple of Church fathers (and the early fathers are not, in and of themselves, binding) to “prove” that the Church only considered Peter's faith to be the “rock”, and not Peter himself. They “conveniently” ignored that important part of the Catechism, and the many other Church fathers who called Peter personally the “rock” on which the Church was built.

Unfortunately, on these threads the game is “GOTCHA!” and verses, words, and concepts fly every which way, mostly removed from the historical/linguistic/theological contexts they are embedded in, in an attempt to score cheap debating points, and somehow “invalidate” the entire corpus of Catholic teaching and tradition.

What a lot of anti-Catholics don't realize is they often have their own “traditions” that come to them from whatever preacher they listen to on a regular basis.
I spoke to a young lady one time from the local Calvary Chapel who accused me of believing that Mary “forgives” my sins. She told me she had heard that from her preacher. I told her that only God forgives sins, and calmly explained the Catholic teaching.
Thankfully, and by the grace of God, she went away a little wiser, having learned what Catholics really believe.

1,019 posted on 08/09/2010 10:24:26 PM PDT by Deo volente (God willing, America will survive this Obamination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1010 | View Replies]

To: Legatus

Thank You for the LOL.

IMHO God is always teaching that HE is all we need, and all we have.


1,020 posted on 08/09/2010 10:25:29 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1017 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 981-1,0001,001-1,0201,021-1,040 ... 2,881-2,887 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson