You don’t know how many times that I have tried to push doing some evangelistic type work, only the get the following responses: “It’s not a Catholic word”, “We don’t want to offend anybody (generally followed by a example of truely offensive evangelism)”

Pam, I went through that when I was in the process of poping. I, too, would have rather been Orthodox, but it was pointed out to me (I think in a quote from Thomas Howard) that as a westerner, I come under the authority of the Patriarch of Rome either way. I suspect God prefers obedience to either doctrinal or ecclesiological correctness. The disputes between Rome and Byzantium are beyond me to resolve, even in my own mind; better for me to submit to the patriarch God placed me under than to cavil at things I don’t fully understand.

The RCC convert’s Big Four.

I’ve been suspicious about number one being in a convert’s bag for a long time. My thoughts are, if that’s what’s truly important in the search for meaning, and if the searcher is honest and critical, then the conversion won’t stick. The same goes for so-called confessionalists. Best to jump ship for some other reason, and numbers 2–4 are a start (even if # 4 nudges up against # 1).

Personally speaking, were I hold a belief that God created a One True Church Hierarchy that he wanted all Christians to belong to, I’d be Orthodox not RCC. I don’t see how anyone can justify the Roman Schism, but that’s just me.

I could point out the relevant blogs, but there’s no reason. It’s obvious from my ever growing mail file that many RC converts were semi-tormented by the possibility they might not be in the one true church or that they might not have authority for what they taught or that their disagreement might mean they had abandoned the faith.

Meanwhile, discussions on assurance, evangelism of actual unbelievers, preaching, church planting and Biblical interpretation and application are major concerns for evangelicals, but are non-starters for many Catholics. If you are on the right ship, then what’s to get worked up about?

Though honestly, before the Holy Spirit yanked me out of my comfortable Protestant life, those four were not concerns for me. I felt that certainty came from faith in the leading of the Holy Spirit (which was a problem when it started leading me towards the Church); that Baptists had a claim to antiquity as strong as anyone, even if there was little recorded reason to believe that (hooray Landmarkism!); that the apparent disunity of Protestantism led to a stronger Christian society as competing ideas competed, Darwin-style (got this one from the writings of John Milton, actually); and that the Scriptures alone were a valid authority over the Christian life.

I was not overly concerned with any of these matters, though I felt a yearning for something more. Oddly enough, it wasn’t even the ceremony and pomp of the Catholic Church that initially intrigued me, as the parish I first attended is not terribly opulent, being run by the Paulist Fathers. Rather, it was the prompting of the still, small voice that cried to me, and I had no choice but to listen. I was not overly worried with the Protestant world, and the Catholic Church has it’s serious problems, so I really don’t see conversion as being *necessarily* tied to resolving anxieties on the part of the convert.

Pax et bonum,
Sam Urfer

1. Certainty
2. Antiquity
3. Unity
4. Authority

The RCC convert’s Big Four.

1. The authority of Scripture: Sola scriptura (Scripture alone)
2. The basis of salvation: Sola Gratia (Grace alone)
3. The means of salvation: Sola Fide (Faith alone)
4. The merit of salvation: Solus Christus (Christ alone)

But then again, he might have been talking about Bill Bright’s Four Spiritual Laws. Or even something else, maybe, like the four most prominent Southern Baptist seminaries.

iMonk, please clarify ASAP!