Skip to comments.Why a Protestant Pastor Became Catholic - Dr. Scott Hahn
Posted on 01/31/2013 7:01:05 PM PST by Heart-Rest
Dr. Scott Hahn has a number of different recorded talks where he discusses his conversion from being an Evangelical Protestant Pastor to becoming an ordinary Catholic layman. Some of those talks tend to focus more precisely on that specific period from when he was already a Protestant Pastor through his actual conversion to the Catholic faith, but this audio recording has a broader focus, and includes a longer period in his life, including some of the foibles of his youth.
(This was originally just an audio recording, to which the "youtube" poster added some unusual slides for their "youtube video", but I'm just trying to draw attention here to the audio portion, not the visual slides from this youtube poster. Ignore the slides, and just focus on the audio.)
Thought you folks might want to listen to this talk, and possibly share it with others.
Looks like Hahn’s conversion has been good for business, his speaking and writing business. Just sayin.....
Scott Hahn is also a professor at Stubenville.
Protestants don’t write books?
Eucharist, Holy Meal
Scott Hahn on Our Lady
The found soul of Scott Hahn
The Lost Soul of Scott Hahn
Eucharist in the Pontificate of Benedict XVI (Commentary by Scott Hahn)
Do the Fathers Support Scott Hahns Theory?
Do the Fathers Support Scott Hahn's "Dragon" Theory?
The Scott Hahn Conversion Story
Our Father - In Heaven (Dr. Scott Hahn)
An Urgent Note >From Scott Hahn
Well, if you want to get a free CD of another Scott Hahn talk about his conversion, you can go here:
I have too, and I totally agree with you.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Thanks for those “Scott Hahn” links, Salvation! There’s a wealth of material to read there.
You missed the point...he turned his whole conversion thing into a cottage industry.
You mean he was blessed for his newfound faith and obedience? I thought many Christians of many denominations aren’t opposed to that. I’ve heard several talk about the blessings (financial among them) that they receive when they walk by faith. You seem opposed to that, at least for Hahn. I sincerely apologize if I am misunderstanding your point.
Well, to be truly accurate, most of Hahn's books and talks are NOT about his conversion.
We are all free (as Americans) to give talks and write books and make videos as part of our working income strategies, but whether people actually want to acquire them and make use of them is entirely up to the buyers.
(For an interesting comparison, sometime just do a quick search on Amazon for "Billy Graham" books and audios/videos.)
The same could be said about CS Lewis...
What about Protestant authors??
Or other authors of secular literature?
Was Henry Wadsworth Longfellow sinning because he had the talent to write poetry?
What about Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg address? Was that a sin because he was able to write and give it?
Do you see that you are either Catholic bashing or that your logic might be flawed?
....and we are free to give opinions on message boards too, in case you haven't notice. I am quite sure I never said anything about rights.....
Uh, no Joe, CS wrote nothing that I am aware of transitioning from one denomination to another. I believe his works were what we call “apologetics” as in the transition from atheist to Christian. Totally flawed 100 per cent bad analogy.
Sin? Did I mention sin? Why are you obsessed with sin? If you want to chat, stay on the subject.
No, that’s not what I meant at all.
Read Surprised By Joy some time. Then you will be aware.
Let’s see what the word of God has to say about his departure.
1 John 2:19
“They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.”
He was never truly “born-again” according to the word of God.
Well I’ve not read that work by CSL, but I’ve read a number of others, and the description of Surprised by Joy also talk of a journey from atheism to Christianity. Again, I’m missing the focus on a certain church or denomination in any description of this book that I can find.
My own faith has nothing to do with any church or denomination, and I never found faith until I left the Presbyterian church in fact. To me, the “church” Jesus refers to is the universe of true believers, and frankly, I think only a few of them reside in mainstream churches.
Where do you find in Sacred Scripture that Scott Hahn "was never truly born-again"?
It’s a subtle message in your postings that Catholics are wrong and you are right.
Why do you judge?
Then please explain to me what you meant by your statements:
“Looks like Hahns conversion has been good for business, his speaking and writing business. Just sayin.....”
“You missed the point...he turned his whole conversion thing into a cottage industry.”
Catholics are born again when they are baptized by water and the spirit.
Where are you getting the misinformation that he was never “born-again?”
“Unless you eat my body and drink my blood you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven.” from the book of John.
Actually, my suspicion of Hahn is on the Presbyterian half for the most part, since that is part of my background. I do have a suspicion of anyone making a big deal about a particular sect, denomination, church, etc, in general.
And let me try and explain a subtlety that has escaped you. This is a message board, meaning by defintiion it is about opinions. Not every post is a “judgement” and not every comment is reflective of sin. Sometimes its just about casual opinions and comments.
You have been the only judgmental one in our conversation, and I have been the only accurate one.
It's obvious you've not read it; that's why I recommended you do so. Your post to which I first responded said nothing about denominations; it simply accused Hahn of making a cottage industry of his conversion, to which I stated, quite accurately that the very same could be said of Lewis.
Lewis, in the very first paragraph of his preface to the book discusses, "my conversion," and he continues to refer to it as such throughout the book...indeed, the book is his spiritual autobiography. Which only reinforces my point: While Lewis is best and most widely known for his apologetics, had he remained unconverted, he would most likely have been remembered as an obscure academic, hence my contention that you could say his conversion became his "cottage industry," or at least the foundation upon which it was built.
And no, he did not jump from atheism to Christianity. He dabbled with various sorts of paganism and a general theism in between. They may not be "denominations" in a rigid sense, but they are (to include atheism) systems of faith and Lewis very positively saw his shifting views as "conversions" in much the same way Hahn regards his.
Just take yourself, and my post, about 25 times less seriously than you did initially, and you’ll be on the right track.
and my point is that a switch from Presbyterian to Catholic IS NOT A CONVERSION in any way shape or form that Lewis’s conversion was. If you don’t see the difference, and I mean a VAST difference, we are done here.
OK. I’ll take you at your word. I am curious, though. In an earlier post (#29) you mention being suspicious of Hahn. Why the suspicion? Did you know of him before his conversion? (You mentioned being Presbyterian, of which denomination he was a pastor before.) Have you ever read any of his works after his conversion?
I suppose that by posting this you assume that the “conversion” of Hahn (did he go from a believer in something other than the Christ to a believer in the Christ - I think not!) from Protestant to Catholic (categories I do not think will hold up on Judgment Day) is somehow significant. Listening to Hahn, I fail to see where there is any significance. He wouldn’t be the first person to hold a doctorate and be less than believable or trustworthy. That list is very, very long.
I remember debating with Gerry Matatics some years ago (but he has, sadly for lock-step Catholics, identified himself with the sedevacantist faction in Catholicism, and so probably lacks credibility in the minds of many Catholics, even though he was all the rage a few years ago) and found him less than convincing. He even alluded at the time to have been very familiar with, and approving of, Hahn. Both were Presbyterian, something in the Catholic mind to be lumped together with “Protestantism” as if all who they arbitrarily place in that category are the same as all others. (Protestant is, after all, a Catholic accounting category.) All of which overlooks the most basic of things. To be a disciple of Jesus Christ, the Son of God and Son of Man (that is, born of the Virgin Mary) is something that had validity and definition long before either trademarked Catholicism or Protestantism existed. Man’s imposition of his own standards of validity and veracity after the time of Christ is just that, imposition, if, that is, it does not find itself to be in harmony with the Holy Scriptures, the authority from which even the Christ never varied. (How could He?)
Hahn, in my estimation, is just a fellow - to be sure, a very smart fellow - who has exchanged one set of preconceptions for another. He may even be a true believer in Christ - and I hope he is! - but he has been caught up to a certain extant into the verities of his own age rather than the verities that are ageless.
So, I guess, Heart-Rest, thank you for reminding me of Scott Hahn. But he has not the significance for me as he, apparently, has for you.
A few posts back you were saying Lewis underwent a "transition", not a "conversion." The fact is whether one makes a lengthy journey from atheist to Anglican, or from Presbyterian to Roman Catholic, one is making a fundamental dogmatic shift. The more serious one is about their beliefs, the more profound those shifts are, even if it's from one denomination to another with what appear to be superficial differences. Let's face it, those seemingly insignificant differences were substantive enough to cause a splintering in the first place, so certainly, to the rigid dogmatist they are "VAST" differences.
Sectarian wars have erupted over the "tiniest iota" of differences, so to say that one who is serious about their faith making a leap from one Christian denomination to another is not embracing a "VAST" change is merely silly.
Dr. Hahn’s tapes really helped me and my wife in our journey back to Rome in the mid-90’s.
Thanks for this post.
- - - - - - -
I don't think John was talking about Dr. Hahn there. It seems like it could be applied much more aptly to those disciples who rejected Jesus direct teaching that they should eat His body and drink His blood. (John 6:53-58)
Then it (Gospel of John) says:
Many therefore of His disciples, when they had heard this, said, "This is a hard saying; who can hear it?" (John 6:60)
From that time, many of His disciples went back, and walked no more with Him. (John 6:66)
Dr. Hahn has helped me so much also, and I still watch his series when they come on EWTN, even the reruns.
What is protestant anyway? Jack Hayford in Van Nuys, Calif., the chief editor of the New King James version of the bible wrote lots of books. Is Jack Hayford protestant? I guess not, neither he’s catholic. Is Rick Warren protestant? I know he is christian but neither a protestant.
Scott Hahn is brilliant. Catholic converts are the best. They have a great appreciation for the gifts that God has given us, things we take for granted like spoiled children. They also understand the mindset of Catholic bashers, because we don’t know what they are even talking about to defend ourselves.
No, I knew you were being snarky. Billy Graham set up a “cottage industry” selling books, doing revivals etc. should we impugn his beliefs? The 700 Club isn’t just a “cottage industry” it’s a media giant, should we snark all over Pat Roberts?
Thank you, Heart-Rest, for the post and ping.
You’re obviously defensive and overly sensitive about your Catholicism. Might I suggest a focus on Jesus and not on your membership card. This is probably why you are bringing in other ministries as a diversion, a focus on groups and clubs and denominations made by man. Besides, there are other absurdities about those anaologies but I won’t bother with.
Which is the point, a focus on man’s creations. Any Presbyterian pastor who has a dramatic “conversion” to Catholicism, or any other part of Christendom for that matter, is problematic because as a Pres Pastor he should have already been a Christian, making a jump to somewhere else merely a transfer and not some life changing issue.
Now if he only found Christ in the Catholic church, and was indeed a poseur as a Presbyterian Pastor (quite possible), then this dramatic life changing experience should be about Christ and not about Rome. This defensiveness about the big C has just never ever really comported with my knowledge of the big J.
In fact, with regard to that, might I suggest the Book of Revelation, the 7 letters to the 7 Churches.
Actually, the splinters you are talking about have absolutely nothing to do with real faith and a real relationship with Jesus, and all to do with interchurch and intrachurch spats. And this is my entire point, none of those splinters deserves equality with the miracle of being born again. No transition does. And if these details are what you remember from Lewis' work, then you sadly missed the main goal of Lewis' life work.
I have to work now, but will take the time this evening to explain why you’re wrong.
I’ll look forward to it, but you’re talking to a home school dad and CS Lewis was a major force in our three kids’ education. I am also a born again Christian who had to come out of organized religion to find faith. I cannot possibly see where you are going with this, but I’ll keep an eye out....
Because we are told to.
Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment. John 7:24
The Greek word for judge is krino and it means to call into question. This is what Jesus means when He says judge with righteous judgment. We are to call into question the unbiblical actions of individuals and discern for ourselves whether or not to follow such a person.
I Corinthians 2:15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
"Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?" (I Cor. 6:1-5)
LOL!!! My thought's exactly. How many years have we seen these posts?
It's enought to make you want to become a Catholic just to cash in. :O)
Bear, I agree we are called to judge at times - however - in this case, I was just commenting rather flippantly. That flippant observation is that if a Presbyterian Pastor underwent something this dramatic involving another denomination, church, etc, then something is askew with his faith at some point.
And wow, did it strike a nerve, which in and of itself is instructive.
Matthew 24:24 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect--if that were possible.