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 ... 1,121-1,1401,141-1,1601,161-1,180 ... 2,881-2,887 next last
To: presently no screen name
but Jesus has given us the sacraments to impart the graces necessary to obtain eternal salvation.

Unbelievable!! Now sacraments are needed for salvation.

I can quite understand that leaning unto one's own reason might not appeal, but it would be nice if SOME leaning toward SOME reason were taking place.

"Necessary" modifies "graces", not "sacraments." The statement says the graces are necessary. It does not say the sacraments are absolutely necessary.

Did you note Dfendr's tag line?
"Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur."

Care to venture a guess as to what it means?

1,141 posted on 08/10/2010 1:35:56 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1135 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente; metmom
Because of the faith he confessed Peter will remain the unshakable rock of the Church. His mission will be to keep this faith from every lapse and to strengthen his brothers in it.[6]

Peter is dead... and he was dead when we see him suddenly mentioned as "pope" about 300 years after Christ.. so poor peter.. the simple fisherman never knew he was pope..he missed the whole thing .. :)

That is perhaps the most important point.. he is dead rock... there is no apostolic succession in scripture , no pope , no priesthood, no mass, no holy water no relics, no indulgences, no purgatory ...no Roman Catholic church

We will praise the real rock of our salvation who lives in us !

1,142 posted on 08/10/2010 1:40:03 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 959 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
I think that means she does not have an answer :)

I think so to.

I hope and pray that they pick up their Bibles and search for the answers.

1,143 posted on 08/10/2010 1:41:06 PM PDT by wmfights (If you want change support SenateConservatives.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1120 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente
I hate to inform you but it is ludicrous to argue with this group. Their comprehension is either limited or they are duplistic or both. The comments made to you are the same made by the same people to the same arguments for many years. Don't engage them in serious debate.
I stopped taking them seriously years ago. You should follow.
1,144 posted on 08/10/2010 1:49:43 PM PDT by bronx2 (while Jesus is the Alpha /Omega He has given us rituals which you reject to obtain the graces as to)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1119 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg; smvoice
Ephesians 2:20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21 In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord.

No special mention of Peter?

If Peter is the rock, why is he not also Satan? Matthew 16:23 He turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do."

The story of Peter's confession is told in three of the Gospels (see Mark 8, Luke 9). Only one telling mentioned the rock and keys. So is the important thing to remember the confession or the keys?

In Matthew 7 (before Peter's confession), Jesus has already explained the concept of the rock to the Apostles. They would have remembered the lesson of building on the rock and they would not have assumed the rock was Peter.

We can see this is true because in Mark 9:34 (after Peter's confession) "they had argued with one another about who was the greatest." This was after the keys and rock comment. The Apostles understood the concept of the rock and it was not Peter.

Using rationalizations for earthly power is a perversion of the Gospel. Reading the creeds, not one mentions Peter or the office of Pope. No where is the Bible does it mention a Successor, or even the possibility of a successor. Human rationalizations for why there has to be a successor mean nothing.

1,145 posted on 08/10/2010 1:51:14 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1015 | View Replies]

To: count-your-change
You offered:
"Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith except everyone do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly
He therefore that will be saved is must think thus of the Trinity.
This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.”
You are the victim of a lie. You have taken the first couple of sentences, skipped a VERY long middle, and tacked on the last sentence. To do that with quotation marks and without an ellipsis is, well, scandalous. Whoever gave you that quote in that form was not interested in the truth.

Whoever wrote the so-called Athanasian creed sums up the faith in terms of the Trinity and the Hypostatic union and kind of tacks on a little "apostolic creed" in there. Such manipulation of texts is really inexcusable and I am very sorry to see you so deceived by the scoundrel who would show so little regard for honesty.

To adduce this text to argue that you have to be a Catholic too be saved won't work. Heck, Lewis and Sayers both studied this and wrote on it and while both endorsed the creed neither became Catholic.

There are other, more suitable, texts you could use for your point. This is not one of them. I'd go with Unam Sanctam.

1,146 posted on 08/10/2010 1:51:41 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1140 | View Replies]

To: John Leland 1789

Good post


1,147 posted on 08/10/2010 1:52:02 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1016 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
"Doesn’t the Foursquare put it’s faith in Sister Aimee (thrice married, twice divorced)’s teachings?" I will let my Brother, Quix, answer for himself, but my faith is in the Lord Jesus Christ, Whom I have known personally since about 7:00 pm, Tuesday, December 6, 1977. That was when the Holy Spirit regenerated me; saved me, by God's marvelous grace.
1,148 posted on 08/10/2010 1:52:27 PM PDT by John Leland 1789 (Grateful)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1084 | View Replies]

To: metmom
“And no Catholic has yet answered the question of just when the Eucharist becomes the body and blood of Christ and why it’s a white wafer and not a chunk of raw, bloody flesh, if it’s literally turned into His flesh and blood.”

The answer to that is the wine and bread retain all the physical characteristics, taste, color, chemical, of wine and bread but really deep, deep down are blood and flesh.

A is B but A still is A in all ways except A really is B.
right.

1,149 posted on 08/10/2010 1:53:24 PM PDT by count-your-change (You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1137 | View Replies]

To: Deo volente; metmom; RnMomof7
You don’t understand the use of metaphor in the Bible. You take a “surface literalist” approach to everything, and decide arbitrarily that if Peter’s faith is compared to a “rock”, that excludes him from also being the “rock” on which the Church was built.

I find this a bit humorous coming from a church that takes John 6 and the last supper texts "literally" but then defines other I am texts as metaphors ...

1,150 posted on 08/10/2010 1:56:22 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1111 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Foursquare? Of What are you inquiring, please? Mathematics?


1,151 posted on 08/10/2010 1:56:27 PM PDT by John Leland 1789 (Grateful)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1079 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
This is a prime example of your duplicity. You omit those parts of the bible which contradict your point. Read Jn 6 53:59 . Notice how you start at Jn 61 because to do differently would expose your inane position. Your own comments are to absurd to warrant commentary.

May God have mercy on your soul on the day of judgment.

1,152 posted on 08/10/2010 1:58:28 PM PDT by bronx2 (while Jesus is the Alpha /Omega He has given us rituals which you reject to obtain the graces as to)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1116 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
.Using rationalizations for earthly power is a perversion of the Gospel.

Oh no. Human rationalizations for earthly power are just FINE!

Give me a break. Anybody who thinks John the XXIII through BenXVI are interested in earthly power is delusional.

So is Jesus really a cornerstone? Is He granite or gneiss or what?

How can we say it more explicitly? It's a metaphor, a figure of speech. When Peter is called the Rock on which the Church is built, Jesus presents himself as the builder. Who is the builder in the Ephesians metaphor? -- it's a different analogy.

There is no intellectual problem in saying "In THIS way, Peter is a rock; in THAT he isn't, but his faith is, or Jesus is." And that's essentially what the CCC does. The Ephesians text doesn't vitiate the Matthew text (or require a strained parsing thereof), it just shows that both are analogies.

1,153 posted on 08/10/2010 1:59:34 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1145 | View Replies]

To: Mad Dawg
Word challenge? Is that the best you got?

but Jesus has given us the sacraments to impart the graces necessary to obtain eternal salvation.

The statement says the graces are necessary. It does not say the sacraments are absolutely necessary.

So what Jesus gave you - the sacraments - to impart the graces necessary to obtain eternal salvation are NOT ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY.

but Jesus has given us the sacraments; although they are NOT ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY, to impart the graces necessary to obtain eternal salvation.

Is that better - I'm trying to help you guys stay on the same page, deceptive as it is.
1,154 posted on 08/10/2010 1:59:49 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1141 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; AnotherUnixGeek
“There is but one universal Church of the faithful, outside which no one at all is saved.” (Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215.)

“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, the Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302.)

“The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church.” (Pope Eugene IV, the Bull Cantate Domino, 1441.)

1,155 posted on 08/10/2010 2:02:23 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1112 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

Great minds :) or saved souls


1,156 posted on 08/10/2010 2:03:29 PM PDT by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1115 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
Wrong .Wrong ,Wrong!!!. Jam 2 17:18 must be taken literally . It says what it means that is why Luther called it the epistle of straw and tried to excise it from the bible. By not believing in the literal meaning of the bible are we to believe you only believe in the literal meaning when it comports to your theological comfort zone?.

For the sake of your sanity I trust you can't really believe the nonsense that you post or else you are a science fiction writer who dreams up this garbage to vomit on the faithful and satisfy the need of your father, the father of all lies.

1,157 posted on 08/10/2010 2:09:16 PM PDT by bronx2 (while Jesus is the Alpha /Omega He has given us rituals which you reject to obtain the graces as to)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1139 | View Replies]

To: metmom; Religion Moderator; count-your-change
And no Catholic has yet answered the question of just when the Eucharist becomes the body and blood of Christ and why it’s a white wafer and not a chunk of raw, bloody flesh, if it’s literally turned into His flesh and blood.

That is a falsehood, a plain and simple falsehood.

You may remember that not only did I answer it, but when I answered it I said if you repeated that charge again, I would call you a liar.

Well, to do that would be to violate RF rules, and I don't want this post deleted. So I will say this. Evidently some on this forum not only omit the careful inquiry into the truth but deliberately and with malice present falsehoods with what might seem to be the intent of winning the conversation at any cost.

Some have told me that they consider that some on your side are demon possessed. Up until now I did not entertain that thought seriously.

Now I entertain it.

Seriously. count-your-change just posted a manipulated quote from the Athanasian Creed to make a point he could have made better without (inadvertently no doubt) being party to a falsehood. Νοw here is the repeated and baseless charge that your questions about transubstantiation have not been addressed.

We are all ignorant. We all make mistakes. We all sin. But the perversion of discourse to score cheap and phony victories is a grave and troubling thing.

1,158 posted on 08/10/2010 2:10:33 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1137 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Salvation:

I think the thread needs to be closed. There are serious lies being told here, both about easily checked documents and about the actions of posters.

I will not be coming back to this thread in any event.


1,159 posted on 08/10/2010 2:13:43 PM PDT by Mad Dawg (Oh Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

The sacraments are a gift from God , a gift instituted by God to shed the graces of salvation on us who receive them. Unbelievable that you you ignore these freely given graces. There will be accountability on the terrible day of judgment.


1,160 posted on 08/10/2010 2:15:48 PM PDT by bronx2 (while Jesus is the Alpha /Omega He has given us rituals which you reject to obtain the graces as to)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1135 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,121-1,1401,141-1,1601,161-1,180 ... 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