Posted on 07/29/2008 4:39:52 PM PDT by annalex
Evangelicals have been going through a major change of heart in their view of Catholicism over the past 15 years or so. In the 80’s when I was in college I lived in the Biblebelt and had plenty of experience with Evangelicals–much of it bad experience. The 80’s was the height of the “Are you saved?” question. In Virginia, the question often popped up in the first 10 minutes of getting to know someone. As I look back, Isurmise that this was coached from the pulpit or Sunday school as it was so well coordinated and almost universally applied. It was a good tactic for putting Catholics on the defensive even before it was known that they were Catholic—”ummmm, uhhh, well no, I’m not sure, I’m Catholic.” Then a conversation about works righteousness or saint statues would ensue. Yeah, nice to meet you, too.
Thankfully, those days are pretty much over. We now have formerly rabid anti-Catholics apologizing and even praising the pope. Catholics and Evangelicals have both learned that we have much in common and need each other to face the secular culture with a solid front. But, where did this detente come from? I think there is a real history to be told here and a book should be written. Let me give my perceptions of 7 major developments since 1993, which I regard as the the watershed year for the renewal of the Catholic Church in the United States.
1. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1993. When this document came out, it was uncertain that even Catholics would read it. We should have known that something was up when the French version hit the top of the bestsellers charts in France and stayed there for months. The English version did the same in the US. Catholics were reading the Catechism, forming study groups and challenging errant professors in the classroom.
2. World Youth Day, Denver 1993. Catholic youth and youth ministers woke up. Suddenly, Catholic youth ministers realized that the youth loved the pope. And they loved him all the more because he did not talk down to them or water down the faith. He challenged them. Gone now were the pizza and a video parish youth nights. Furthermore, youth and young adults took up the challenge to evangelize. One of those youth heard the message and started a website, New Advent. Catholic youth were now becoming zealous for the Catholic faith in its fullness and were not going to be swayed by an awkward conversation that began with “Are you saved?”
3. Scott Hahn. While the Catechism is great for expounding the Catholic faith, it is not a work of apologetics itself. It is not written to expose the flaws of Evangelical theology. It is not written to defend the Church against the attacks of Evangelicals per se. It just would not let them get away with misrepresenting the Catholic faith. But Scott Hahn hit the scene at about the same time with Rome Sweet Home: Our Journey to Catholicism (Ignatius Press: San Francisco, 1993). I first heard his testimony on cassette tape in 1996. It blew my mind. Suddenly, Catholic apologetics, which is as old as the Catholic Church itself, got a leg up and there was an explosion of books, magazines and websites that effectively undercut the arguments of the 5 Solas. For the first time, there was a cadre of Catholics well enough informed to defend their faith.
4. The Internet. The Net started exploding from 1993 to 1996. I had my first account in ‘94. Compuserve was horribly basic, but by ‘96 I had AOL and the religion debates raged instantly. Catholics who had just been given the most powerful weapon in the arsenal in the war against misinterpretation of their teaching were learning to type on a forum while balancing their catechisms on their laps. Of course, online versions came out, as well. But, no Evangelical bent on getting Catholics out of the arms of the Whore of Babylon could expect to do so without himself have a copy of the Catechism, knowing it inside out and pouring over it for the errors and horrors he would surely find. Evangelical apologists were confronted with a coherent and beautiful presentation of the Catholic faith that they were ill equipped to argue against. They learned that Catholics, too, loved Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. The Catechism had arrived providentially just before the internet and had turned the tables in just a few short years. With the apologetic movement hitting at the same time, Evangelicals were also confronted with Catholics who could argue from the Bible defending their faith and demonstrating the weaknesses of Evangelical interpretations of scripture.
5. Early Church Fathers. One fruit of the Apologetics movement has been a flowering anew of Catholic interest in Patristics. This is happening at every level from armchair apologists to doctoral studies. It is suddenly all about Patristics, whereas in the 70’s-90’s the academic focus had been on Karl Rahner and Liberation Theology.
6. Evangelical Third World Experience. Evangelicals have had a field day in Latin America among the poor who are not part of the internet conversation and are distant from the study of apologetics. But, Evangelicals have learned from their experiences abroad an essential aspect of the Gospel they were missing: the Works of Mercy. Once haughty with their criticism of “works righteousness,” they have learned one cannot attend to the spiritual needs of the poor without attending to their bodily needs. Catholic have always understood this. Now, the Evangelicals are coming around. I haven’t heard an Evangelical Televangelist speak on works righteousness in many years.
7. Secularism. With the collapse of the Mainline churches as the backbone of American religion over the past thirty years (since about 1975), Catholics and Evangelicals are the only ones left standing in this country to present the Gospel. Secularism is on the rise and is ruthless. Evangelicals are now learning that only Catholicism has the intellectual resources to combat the present secular age. And, with the pope, we have a pretty effective means for communicating the faith and representing it to the world. There is nothing an Evangelical can do that will match the power of one World Youth Day.
With such an array of Providential developments, Evangelicals as well as Catholics have come to appreciate the depth and the breadth of the Catholic faith. It is far more difficult for them to honestly dismiss Catholicism as the work of Satan as once they did without qualm. There have been apologies and there have been calls for a new partnership. Let us hope these developments will bring about a new moment of understanding for the Glory of the Lord.
... counters secularism insofar as introduction of sexual promiscuity to the youth is an important secularist tactic.
And the secular world says that the celibate clergy have no understanding of the non-celibate world. Again, there is no way that the celibate lifestyle is a model for them...and they will disregard it.
Having said that, the Bible clearly speaks to this subject, and a "celibate" teacher is not required to speak to the biblical standard. Again, your argument that this is the exclusive property of the Roman Catholic just doesn't follow.
Every Protestant denomination that supports abortion "rights"
You have confused Protestant denominations with evangelicals. There is not a single evangelical denomination that I know of that is pro-abortion. And don't look now, but there are American Catholics who are pro-choice (read, pro-death of the unborn). And once again, the pro-life position is not the exclusive property of Catholicism. You have staked out exclusive territory that is just not yours alone.
I would disagree. On the whole the RCC is a very tightly run ship. Having a few weak persons in the US Army does not make it a loosely run military organization. The command structure is tight. The outputs are regular and according to standards. The same with the RCC. Organizationally, it is in every nation on the planet, and nearly in every county-sized unit. It has an administrative hierarchy that goes to the lowest level. It communicates extremely well up and down the line. It has a clear idea of the outputs it desires, and it is very successful at implementing those to standard.
I’m not talking about theology here, quix. I’ve addressed that in an earlier post.
When I was baptized after getting saved, I was baptized by my younger brother and a good friend of mine and they used the formula.
So in the Didache the instruction about baptism wasn't specifically given to priests, was it? It was given to all Christians.
The issue is “influence on the secular world,” and the assertion that the Roman Catholic Church is the only antidote, to the exclusion of the Protestant/Evangelical church. The uniqueness of John the Baptist cannot be taken as a model for the monastic life...and has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion.
You are excused!
The subject would take a book. I don't have time for that at the moment, but here's one example of priestly duty "then" and "now":
Here's my original question as found in post #127:
Is the Roman Catholic priesthood the same today as it was from the founding of the church "from Acts onward"?
You cited the Didache as an example of a priestly duty "then" and "now", and I read it and made the assertion that there isn't contextual evidence that the Didache's intended audience is all Christians, not just priests.
Yes, we can know.
We can read the document and use our minds and intellect look at the context.
Telling, eh?
Among Christians, "apologetics" is about Christ, the Gospel, and God's Word.
Here, it's Rome, Rome, Rome.
Ha.
I'm a non-denominational Christian and I find that genuinely funny.
“Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth. “ - Jesus, John 17:17
In that case, I want you to understand that this has become a sore point for me (as you probably have ascertained). Your reply to me, giving the impression that "most of what they say is all lies" is what set me off, and for that I apologize.
I also want you to understand that it is the history that I am concerned with. I am "old school" in that I will happily take the word of the scholars closest to the events in question over those seeking to revise their work- It must be so, by the nature of the discipline, and the evidence must be overwhelmingly to the contrary to overturn their good works. With that in mind, I invite you to look at Plaisted's work. If you can get past the anti-Catholic tone to look at the numbers and the references he cites (which is why I posted it in the first place), and would care to offer an argument of substance, I would be happy to hear your reply.
I was going specifically by your comments in the post to which I responded; namely that you'd said your earlier observations had come from admittedly anti-Catholic sources and bards and troubadors! A rather rickety stool indeed.
This offers me some consternation, as Catholics seem to put such faith in oral tradition... The songs of the bards and troubadours are exactly that, and much can be learned of everyday life, history, and every sort of thing, even if they are a bit whimsical or irreverent at times. Especially when dealing with the Occish peoples and the Celts, where no other record exists. If one wishes to learn of them first hand there are few other sources.
As to the sources being anti-Catholic, one would be hard pressed to find anything in medieval Europe that would be a neutral source- either one is with Rome, or one is crushed.
My study was to consider ancient trade routes as established by the Phoenicians, supposing their good friends the Hebrews would have partnered with them quite a bit, and to look for evidences of Hebrew colonies along those routes. That evidence is there, and easy to establish. But then I thought one might suspect that the fruits of the Pentecost (why was every one in Jerusalem again? Remember speaking in [up to 12] tongues?) might just turn up along those same routes... And they do. In the Iberian Peninsula of Spain, at Gibraltar, the South of France, in Brittany, in the British Isles, in the Benelux region, and so on. The world was a whole lot bigger than we have been lead to believe, I'd guess.
It is odd, though, that all of these places are also the generators of supposed heresies against the RCC, isn't it?
At any rate, with the little that Rome has left us in the way of evidence, all that is left is the tales of troubadours and bards, the rest is buried in the ground, waiting to come back into the light.
As an aside, your moniker has always intrigued me... did you drop your waffle at the beach? :P
What an amazing and repulsive display. Luckily for the recipient (unlike most), he was already dead before the RCC authorities assailed him for his alleged offenses.
Nothing but crickets from our Catholic FRiends.
Funny how that works out.
I would still like an RCC answer explaining how 1200 (nearly) continuous years of crusades, inquisitions, genocides, religious persecutions, torture, rape, pillage, sword, and blood do not represent an errant Church.
I really would like an answer.
The answer, if one is provided, will go something like this: What you need to realize is that The Catholic Church is inerrant, in so far as it is inerrant. The Pope is infallible, but only in so far as he is infallible. You Proddies just don't understand because you are Proddies.
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.