Posted on 11/18/2002 8:34:02 AM PST by pseudo-justin
Church Is Still Attracting Converts
By PAUL LIKOUDIS
A personal note: The phone rang the other day and the gentleman on the other end identified himself as Jim Anderson from the Coming Home Network. He said he had a message from an old high school friend. Who might that be, I asked, and he gave the name: Dion Berlowitz.
Anderson told me the Coming Home Network, with which I was not familiar, helped Protestants come into the Church, and that Dion was on his way in.
I hadn’t heard from Dion in more than a decade, even though we were best friends at Williamsville South High School, outside Buffalo, sharing several interests, including cartooning and comic books. Raised Jewish, Dion became a born-again Christian in his junior year of high school as his parents’ marriage broke up, and spent hours, days, weeks, and months trying to convert me into a Bible-believing Christian.
In 1971, Dion went on to the University of Buffalo to study literature and I went on to Eisenhower College to study history, and our paths never crossed again until a call out of the blue came from him around 1990, when he told me he was a Presbyterian. We have had no further contact since, though I suspect and hope that will change.
In this initial conversation, Anderson told me that so far, this year, the Coming Home Network has helped 94 Protestant ministers of various denominations, along with many other Protestants, come into the Church. Some, like Dion, are on their way in. This is the largest annual crop since the CHNetwork was founded nine years ago.
Here, in a year in which the Catholic Church in the United States and around the world has been wracked by scandals, we do have good news indeed.
+ + +
What would prompt a Protestant, especially a minister with a wife and family, to leave his tradition and often his livelihood to come into the Catholic Church, especially when there are so many broken-hearted Catholics embarrassed by the past ten months of sordid revelations involving clerical sexual abuse, bishops’ resignations, episcopal cover-ups and pay-outs? Not to mention the ongoing abuse of authority by bishops to hammer the lay faithful who object to dissidents and heretics speaking in parishes and education conferences.
"For Protestants," says Jim Anderson, "the scandals are a non-issue. Among the hundreds of people I have talked to who are thinking of coming into the Church, the scandals just aren’t an issue. Of all the people who have contacted me, only three or four have mentioned them, and that was only at my prompting.
"To a man, these men are intellectually convinced that the Church is a divine institution established by Christ, and bishops are only human — and, besides, they say, ‘These things are going on in our own denominations — only in our denomination they are not being addressed.’
"They see this as the Holy Spirit cleaning house. The judgment of the Lord begins with the family of God. They view the present scandals as a terrible tragedy; they want justice like everybody else. But as far as the truth of the Catholic faith is concerned, it is a non-issue. It’s sin; it needs to be addressed. And that’s it.
"These men," he continued, "are educated people. Most have master of divinity degrees and doctorates. They are aware of the problems, but once their hearts are converted and they see the Church as Jesus Christ’s, they know Christ will keep His promise. They have experienced troubles in their own denominations, but they know that when they are in the Church, God will prevail."
On average — based on the first ten months of this year — Anderson hears from a Protestant minister every three days who has made the decision to become Catholic.
Most, he says, are drawn to the Church for two reasons. Either they have come to understand the dead end to which the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura leads, and they want to settle, in their own minds, the issue of authority in the Church; or they have been led to the Church by its doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and they want to receive Jesus.
What many Protestants are coming to understand, even at a time when many Catholics and non-Catholics lament the apparent breakdown of authority in the Church, Anderson explained, is that the Church’s authority "is set by God."
"Those who take their faith and Scripture and God seriously," he said, "see the Catholic Church as being the answer to the chaos of the Protestant condition: Sola scriptura is a dead end, is unhistorical and unworkable. They understand this and so they have a crisis of faith and they enter the Catholic Church. And this is occurring across the Protestant spectrum. A lot of people contacting the Coming Home Network are ‘higher church’ Episcopalians or Lutherans, but we do get calls also from ‘low-end’ Baptists, Seventh-day Adventists, and Assembly of God ministers.
"To speak, as some Catholics do, about a ‘crisis of authority’ in the Church doesn’t make a lot of sense," Anderson said. "There is a ‘crisis of obedience to authority,’ but that has always been the case, just as there has always been a ‘crisis of obedience to the authority of God’ on the part of many men and women. The authority is there, and it is working; it is just not obeyed."
The Coming Home Support Network
The Coming Home Network was founded in 1993 out of the experiences of several Protestant clergy and their spouses. Upon leaving their pastorates to enter the Catholic Church, these clergy and their families discovered they were not alone. To help others come into the Church — and to deal with some of the tremendous personal and professional obstacles they faced — they began the organization as a support network.
Catholics, Anderson suggested, should understand some of the challenges these ministers face once they have made the intellectual decision to "cross over" to Rome.
"They go through tremendous struggles. They think, ‘I’m losing my friends, my family, my community, my church, and people think I’m crazy and I’m apostatizing from Christianity.’ Often the most serious conflict is with spouses, who not only have to deal with the change of religion, but have practical problems as well, such as, ‘What about me and the children?’ ‘How are we going to survive?’ ‘What will our friends think?’ ‘Have I been following the wrong religion all my life?’
"Most of these people have M.Div. and Ph.D. degrees, and so they are not employable in the world. It’s a difficult decision for these men to give up their work, their careers, and their livelihoods. Nevertheless, 94 this year have entered, or are on their way into, the Church."
One former minister, Anderson recalled, gave up his role as a prominent, prestigious minister for his community to work as a greeter at WalMart. For him, the blessing of being able to receive the Eucharist more than compensated for what he had to give up.
Anderson is well-prepared for his work helping Protestants come into the Church. Reared as a Methodist, the 47-year-old Anderson became a Lutheran at 19. As a history major specializing in medieval Europe at Ohio University in Athens, he knew he was on his way into the Church.
Three years after graduating, he entered evangelical Ashland Seminary in 1980, interested in pursuing studies in ecumenical dialog. In his freshman year, he made the decision to join the Catholic Church, and on July 25, 1981, the Feast of St. James, he was confirmed. His wife, Lynn, who entered the Church in 1983, now teaches in a Catholic school.
Contrary to popular stereotypes, he said, the biggest roadblocks would-be converts confront are not such "hot-button" issues as contraception, papal infallibility, or women’s rights, but the Church’s doctrines concerning Mary.
But another obstacle, he said, is "liturgical craziness."
Many Protestants, he said, "are scandalized by the liturgical craziness. They try to get around it by seeking out a Byzantine rite, or seeking out orthodox parishes. And usually, if they come into the Church, having been good Protestants, they have church-hopped enough to have found a parish where they don’t have to deal with abuses."
But, he added, many look beyond the abuses, because "they are attracted to Christ in the liturgy. For a lot of the converts, there are many who have intellectually convinced themselves already that they must join the Church before they ever attended Mass. And when they finally start going to Mass, often there is a culture shock, especially if they come from a small, intimate, loving Baptist church, and go into a parish of 2,000 people who aren’t particularly friendly. So there is this bit of culture shock — and that doesn’t include the shock of liturgy."
Asked to name the leading intellectual sources Protestants are reading to find their way into the Church, Anderson named familiar names.
"The intellectual sources are, certainly, Cardinal Newman, G.K. Chesterton, Bishop Fulton Sheen, Scott Hahn, and Catholic Answers.
"But most often, it is the fathers of the Church. When Protestant ministers encounter the fathers, they realize they were lied to and betrayed, because they were taught the Protestant Reformation cleansed Christianity of the barnacles on the Barque of Peter and the Reformers recovered ancient Christianity. Then they go back and read the apostolic fathers, especially Ignatius of Antioch who is preaching the Real Presence, the authority of bishops, and all these many Catholic things, and the conclusion is the words of Jesus, who says: ‘I will be with you always.’
"Either Jesus kept His promise, or the Church went to Hell in a hand basket after the death of St. John.
"When they start studying the early Church fathers, they are blown out of the water."
Solid Apologetics
The Coming Home Network’s executive director is former Presbyterian minister Marcus Grodi, who, captured the feeling and beliefs of many fellow Protestants who came into the Church in his book, Journeys Home (Queenship Publishing 1997).
"[T]he biggest thing that opened my heart to the truth of the Catholic faith was not all the apologetic arguments that convinced me of the trustworthiness of Catholic truth, but the realization that the Catholic Church, with all of her saints and sinners, was exactly what Christ had promised.
"The majority of complaints against the Catholic Church over the centuries have been aimed at the decisions and actions of bad Popes, or immoral clergy, or ignorant laity, or corrupt Catholic nobility, and the correct answer to this is, ‘But, of course! The Church is made up of wheat and tares, from the bottom to the top, sinners in need of grace! This is no reason to leave and form a new church, for any church made up of human beings is made up of sinners.’
"All true conversions to the Catholic faith from any other starting point carry with them complications, primarily because this conversion must be rooted in and thereby an extension of one’s conversion and surrender to Christ. If becoming a Catholic does not involve this, I don’t believe it is a true conversion. It might be a change of convenience or even possibly for some sort of personal gain or aggrandizement.
"But only when one recognizes or painfully discovers that to be fully a follower of Jesus Christ, and thereby have the full potential of growing in union with Him, one must also be in union with the Church He established in and through His Apostles, can one be truly converted.
"These conversions by definition must involve some extent of leaving behind and rejecting part of what a person once held very dear. Some things can be joyfully brought along, others can be cautiously tolerated, but yet there are ideas, practices, and sometimes even relationships which must be severed.
"It of course never means that we cease to love those we may need to leave behind, or who choose to turn their backs on us. In fact, we are called all the more to shower our now confused or indignant friends and family with the all-forgiving, all-accepting love of Christ. However, we must not let the emotional trajectories of our loving glances turn our attention off of the fullness of truth found only in union with the Catholic Church."
For more information about the Coming Home Network, go to its web site, www.chnetwork.org, or call 740-450-1175.
Two points.
Peter refered to Paul's writing as "Scripture". If Peter didn't wait for Romes stamp of approval we can assume others didn't either. A silly argument that no one knew what was scripture for more than 300 years.
The whole salvation message is in the Old Testament. You can find it on every page.
"More importantly, nowhere does that statement, which is true and accepted by Catholics, state solascriptura. The sola concept just isn't there"
The verse says that Scripture perfectly,completly furnishes a person with all he needs to teach. I see no mention of anything else. Perhaps you can tell me what Paul forgot to tell Timothy?
I suppose my point is that Christ is united to His Church. She is the instrument through which He continues to spread His saving Gospel to the world. As per His promise to the Apostles to remain with Her to the end of time, and as per His promise to send the Holy Spirit to Her, She alone can authoritatively speak in His Name ("He who hears you, hears me") - the Name above all other names. Whatever conclusions I, or you, come up with individually are meaningless if they are separated and/or contradict His teachings through His Church. My existence as a Christian has no meaning except as being united to Christ's Church.
Hence the authority of the Holy Scriptures is known to be the Word of God, but only through His Church. Once we know which Books are in the Bible (and even here, there are slight differences between Catholics and some Protestants), who has the authority to correctly interpret them? Therein lies the problem.
I suppose that this is what the ministers in the posted article have discovered. Their whole view of the Church, which St. Paul calls the "Pillar and ground of Truth", has changed to the point that they recognize it as being more than merely groupings of people in different localities.
Our Lord meant for all His followers to be united in One Faith, One Baptism, One Church - because He is One. He did not establish "denominations". Hopefully, one day this will be realized.
Whether I understand it or not has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether that is what the text of the bible teaches over and over again at various places and in various ways.
Are you saying that the trinity is incomprehensible to you, but you believe it anyway because that is what (your interpretation of) the Bible teaches?
I respect your beliefs, but I need something more logical to support mine.
Please do so.
To me, it's a "which came first, chicken or egg" thing....the apostles' proclamation or the church.
Then please answer the question I asked, which Church?
Me -- I think people responded to the proclamation. (How can they hear without a preacher?)
Yes they did respond. So where did they hear the word proclaimed and what were they required to do when they believed?
And then it's a matter of who should be in charge: the apostles' proclamation or the people who interpret the apostles' proclamation. I choose the scripture.
You’re getting closer here xzins. The proper interpretation of the scripture would be the Truth. So where does the Bible say the Truth is to be found?
You are free to believe what you want. I'm just not convinced of your case.
Jesus instructs all of us to seek the Truth. I urge you to keep seeking.
"A lie from the pit of hell and it smells like smoke." ~ Dr. Steve Brown
"... vs a more compassionate God (Catholicism). The latter allows for a more generous place for Mary."
An opinion which proves that Arminianism (the man-centered religion) is the religion that appeals most to the feelings and the needs of the emotion-driven (feminized males and the females that feminize them).
The doctrine of the trinity was made official by the Council of Nicea (A.D. 325) and was given its definitive statement by the Council of Constantinople (A.D. 381). As you know, these were Catholic Councils. The fact that there were no Protestants around then doesn’t concern you?
Maybe this is where we're hung up, Pegleg. You've been more than attentive and fair, and I appreciate that.
So, I'm going to intentionally overstate something, and I truly want you to notice this NEXT line before I overstate it.
I believe the book itself IS the Word of God and, therefore, the book is God. The words on the page ARE the presence of God, the substance of the mind of God....Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Therefore, whether you or I or anyone else interprets it correctly, or incorrectly, or middle correctly, is NOT even an issue at the most basic level. The words themselves are God's words.
Despite what they do with it, the book remains GOD'S VERY WORDS. In our world, in this day and age, there is nothing that begins to approach it in terms of authentic presence of God. (Jesus said, "These WORDS I speak to you, THEY are SPIRIT AND THEY ARE LIFE!")
Now do you understand why I say the WORD has priority OVER ANY human interpreters of the WORD? (Not asking if you agree....just if you understand. Think of Icons....you say they "contain" a "window" to the holy. The WORDS are the PRESENCE of the Holy.)
I'm a Christian. There were plenty of those around who believed the doctrine of the Trinity before any council met to make a statement.
If no one had the trinitarian opinion, then why did the council meet? The doctrine preceded the meeting, and the meeting had nothing to do with CREATING the doctrine.
...the fullness of truth found only IN UNION WITH the Catholic Church."
What a PROFANE statement! But not out of the ordinary for members of one of the Arminian (man-centered) churches.
Yes I understand where you are coming from. I am trying to get you to understand where I am coming from but you keep avoiding my questions.
1. What Church?
2. Where does the Bible tell us the Truth is found?
I am not not a "protestant." I'm not protesting anything. "Protestant" is an old issue from hundreds of years ago.
If you don’t believe the Pope is the Vicar of Christ then you are a Protestant. But I do understand if you don’t want to identify with them.
I am a Christian. There were plenty of those around who believed the doctrine of the Trinity before any council met to make a statement.
Who were they and where can I read about them.
If no one had the trinitarian opinion, then why did the council meet?
To combat the Arian heresy. What did your Church do to fight this heresy?
This is clearly extra-biblical opinion, PL. The bible does not contain the word "Pope" or the expression "Vicar of Christ." It's simply not there.
That automatically renders it a matter of personal opinion.
You realize, of course, that your church claims to be in fellowship with other communions that do NOT recognize the "primacy" of your leader?
THE CHURCH is the mystical body of Christ; that is, ALL who believe in Him, past, present, and future. It is and always has been bigger than what "denominational" sign you hang in the front lawn.
Jesus HIMSELF is the Way, THE TRUTH, and the life. He is THE WORD. The Bible contains HIS WORD. Truth is found IN THE BIBLE.
These terms are consistent with the authority of having the keys.
You realize, of course, that your church claims to be in fellowship with other communions that do NOT recognize the "primacy" of your leader?
Who would they be?
THE CHURCH is the mystical body of Christ; that is, ALL who believe in Him, past, present, and future. It is and always has been bigger than what "denominational" sign you hang in the front lawn.
Ok. However this Church has a name that you don’t want to acknowledge.
Jesus HIMSELF is the Way, THE TRUTH, and the life. He is THE WORD. The Bible contains HIS WORD. Truth is found IN THE BIBLE.
Yes Jesus is the way, the truth and the life and I agree the Truth is found in the Bible. That’s why I believe 1 Tim 3:15 that clearly states the Church is pillar/foundation of truth.
So if your Church has been around since the time of the Apostles you should be able to answer my previous questions.
I am a Christian. There were plenty of those around who believed the doctrine of the Trinity before any council met to make a statement.
Who were they and where can I read about them.
If no one had the trinitarian opinion, then why did the council meet?
To combat the Arian heresy. What did your Church do to fight this heresy?
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.