Scott Hahn

[SemperReformada]

Is it just that a Protestant here cannot accept how Dr. Hahn, a die hard Protestant himself became a Catholic? He is hardly “clueless” as you put it. A triple major in Theology, a Masters in Divinity and a PH.D in Scripture and Bibliology is hardly “clueless”. Could it rather be something you are missing?

This guy with his triple major, if I remember right, had never considered that the church is the pillar of truth? Remember that little gem from his conversion story? You proved my point…thank you.

I am sure he is sincere but his conversion story is a little fishy.

BTW, you too should actually read what I wrote. I didn’t say Hahn was clueless. I said he was clueless how to defend ss or sf…big difference.

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

This guy with his triple major, if I remember right, had never considered that the church is the pillar of truth? Remember that little gem from his conversion story? You proved my point…thank you.

I am sure he is sincere but his conversion story is a little fishy.

BTW, you too should actually read what I wrote. I didn’t say Hahn was clueless. I said he was clueless how to defend ss or sf…big difference.

But if he were Catholic converting to Protestanism, he’d be alright…it is what it is…

 

[SemperReformada]

I am posting a snip from Hahn’s book that I found online. I hope it’s accurate…from what I remember about Hahn’s conversion story it is as I read it.

“Can I first ask you a question, Professor Hahn? You know how Luther really had two slogans, not just sola fide, but the second slogan he used to revolt against Rome was sola Scriptura, the Bible alone. My question is, ‘Where does the Bible teach that?’”

I looked at him with a blank stare. I could feel sweat coming to my forehead. I used to take pride in asking my professors the most stumping questions, but I never heard this one before. And so I heard myself say words that I had sworn I’d never speak; I said, “John, what a dumb question.” He was not intimidated. He look at me and said, “Give me a dumb answer.” I said, “All right, I’ll try.” I just began to wing it.I said, “Well, Timothy 3:16 is the key: ‘All Scripture is inspired of God and profitable for correction, for training and righteousness, for reproof that the man of God may be completely equipped for every good work….’” He said, “Wait a second, that only says that Scripture is inspired and profitable; it doesn’t say ONLY Scripture is inspired or
even better, only Scripture’s profitable for those things. **We need other things like prayer,” and then he said, “What about 2 Thessalonians 2:15?” **I said, “What’s that again?” He said, “Well, there Paul tells the Thessalonians that they have to hold fast, they have to cling to the traditions that Paul has taught them either in writing or by word of mouth.” Whoa! I wasn’t ready. I said, “Well, let’s move on with the questions and answers; I’ll deal with this next week. Let’s go on.”

I don’t think they realized the panic I was in. When I drove home that night, I was just staring up to the heavens asking God, why have I never heard that question? Why have I never found an answer?

Am I really supposed to believe that Hahn was an anti-Catholic, a rabid anti-Catholic at that, who was heavily into reformed theology based on the above clip from his book? I think not.

a.) If he was an anti-Catholic and subscribed to reformed theology he would certainly have heard the question “Where is sola fide/sola scriptura taught in the bible?” Am I really to believe he had never head this question before?

b.) After hearing Mr. Hahn’s reply based on Tim 3:16 the student aksk don’t we need prayer too and then questions Hahn on 2Thess2:15 and the best Hahn could do is to put the student off until next week? Then Hahn supposedly drives home and agonizes over the fact that he hadn’t heard these questions before and why he hadn’t ever found an answer? Fishy indeed.

This rather poor performance is by a man who was supposed to be an anti-Catholic and well educated in reformed theology.

Things aren’t adding up here. Something is wrong with Hahn’s story as it is relayed in his book.

 

[SemperReformada]

But if he were Catholic converting to Protestanism, he’d be alright…it is what it is…

It is what it is…I agree and it smells fishy.

 

[SemperReformada]

But if he were Catholic converting to Protestanism, he’d be alright…

I do want to comment on this part of your post.

You may not be able to let reason restrain your passion for your church which apparently keeps you from seeing the obvious with regards to Hahn’s book but that doesn’t mean everyone shares the same lack of control.

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

I am posting a snip from Hahn’s book that I found online. I hope it’s accurate…from what I remember about Hahn’s conversion story it is as I read it.

Am I really supposed to believe that Hahn was an anti-Catholic, a rabid anti-Catholic at that, who was heavily into reformed theology based on the above clip from his book? I think not.

a.) If he was an anti-Catholic and subscribed to reformed theology he would certainly have heard the question “Where is sola fide/sola scriptura taught in the bible?” Am I really to believe he had never head this question before?

b.) After hearing Mr. Hahn’s reply based on Tim 3:16 the student aksk don’t we need prayer too and then questions Hahn on 2Thess2:15 and the best Hahn could do is to put the student off until next week? Then Hahn supposedly drives home and agonizes over the fact that he hadn’t heard these questions before and why he hadn’t ever found an answer? Fishy indeed.

This rather poor performance is by a man who was supposed to be an anti-Catholic and well educated in reformed theology.

Things aren’t adding up here. Something is wrong with Hahn’s story as it is relayed in his book.

Dr. Hahn was the worst of the anti-Catholics because he says so in his CD.

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

I do want to comment on this part of your post.

You may not be able to let reason restrain your passion for your church which apparently keeps you from seeing the obvious with regards to Hahn’s book but that doesn’t mean everyone shares the same lack of control.

So you admit your in lack of control?

 

[Peter_J]

Hi SR,

I’m reminded of another passage from Rome Sweet Home. It’s pages 62-63, where Scott is talking with a fellow Protestant and quotes a passage from Fr. Louis Boyer, but doesn’t want to tell his friend that the quote comes from a Catholic. When he finally does, the friend says “Scott, there must really be something wrong with my phone. I could have sworn you just said he’s a Catholic.”

The implication is pretty clear: Hahn and like-minded Protestants didn’t read what Catholics wrote. (A couple pages earlier there’s a paragraph that ends with “For the first time, I was hearing Catholicism from the horse’s mouth, so to speak.” For the first time? ) What good apologist doesn’t read his opponents’ writings? (I’m guessing Dr. Hahn also didn’t engage in public debates with Catholics.)

So getting back to what you said, no it actually doesn’t surprise me when Hahn says that he had never heard that question about Sola Scriptura, until a student asked it in class.

 

[Peter_J]

The implication is pretty clear: Hahn and like-minded Protestants didn’t read what Catholics wrote.

P.S. Also interesting to consider the end of page 60 and beginning of 61, which make it pretty clear that Hahn looked into Eastern Orthodoxy only after he discovered that the Catholic arguments are stronger than the Protestant arguments.

 

[Hesychios]

I’m reminded of another passage from Rome Sweet Home. It’s pages 62-63, where Scott is talking with a fellow Protestant and quotes a passage from Fr. Louis Boyer, but doesn’t want to tell his friend that the quote comes from a Catholic. When he finally does, the friend says “Scott, there must really be something wrong with my phone. I could have sworn you just said he’s a Catholic.”

As a side note I think it should be pointed out that great scholar Father Louis Bouyer (may his memory be eternal!) was also a convert.

 

[O.S.Luke]

As a side note I think it should be pointed out that great scholar Father Louis Bouyer (may his memory be eternal!) was also a convert.

Bouyer was Lutheran before his conversion to Catholicism. Bouyer was the preeminent sacramentral and liturgical scholar of the 20th century, and not far behind was Catholic scholar Edward Schillebeeckx and Anglican Dom Gregory Dix.

Bouyer’s book Eucharist is one of the best ever written in the field.

 

[kalt]

Hi SR,

I’m reminded of another passage from Rome Sweet Home. It’s pages 62-63, where Scott is talking with a fellow Protestant and quotes a passage from Fr. Louis Boyer, but doesn’t want to tell his friend that the quote comes from a Catholic. When he finally does, the friend says “Scott, there must really be something wrong with my phone. I could have sworn you just said he’s a Catholic.”

The implication is pretty clear: Hahn and like-minded Protestants didn’t read what Catholics wrote. (A couple pages earlier there’s a paragraph that ends with “For the first time, I was hearing Catholicism from the horse’s mouth, so to speak.” For the first time? ) What good apologist doesn’t read his opponents’ writings? (I’m guessing Dr. Hahn also didn’t engage in public debates with Catholics.)

So getting back to what you said, no it actually doesn’t surprise me when Hahn says that he had never heard that question about Sola Scriptura, until a student asked it in class.

Many Christians deny, out of hand, all things Catholic. This is why so many debates on this forum follow the same pattern. A non-Catholic Christian asserts that Catholics believe or do XYZ, which is followed by a correction by the Catholics on the forum. The non-Catholics are so sure that Catholicism is wrong, that they see no need to read anything “Catholic”. And this gives them the false confidence to come to a Catholic site and tell Catholics what Catholicism “really is”. And this is why, I think, that so many seem so surprised when Catholics on the forum vigorously defend the faith, and have the “stuff” (sources) to back their defense.

 

[kalt]

Hi SR,

I’m reminded of another passage from Rome Sweet Home. It’s pages 62-63, where Scott is talking with a fellow Protestant and quotes a passage from Fr. Louis Boyer, but doesn’t want to tell his friend that the quote comes from a Catholic. When he finally does, the friend says “Scott, there must really be something wrong with my phone. I could have sworn you just said he’s a Catholic.”

The implication is pretty clear: Hahn and like-minded Protestants didn’t read what Catholics wrote. (A couple pages earlier there’s a paragraph that ends with “For the first time, I was hearing Catholicism from the horse’s mouth, so to speak.” For the first time? ) What good apologist doesn’t read his opponents’ writings? (I’m guessing Dr. Hahn also didn’t engage in public debates with Catholics.)

So getting back to what you said, no it actually doesn’t surprise me when Hahn says that he had never heard that question about Sola Scriptura, until a student asked it in class.

It doesn’t surprise me, either. Isn’t Sola Scriptura accepted as a given?

Think of how many people come here and claim that Catholics are wrong because they follow Tradition, citing the appropriate verse, and then a stumped when asked to cite the verse that supports Sola Scriptura.

They have obviously never given that a thought–it was accepted as a given.

 

[kalt]

You are absolutely right, in my opinion, SemperReformada. The Catechism never calls Protestantism a different religion, or even implies that. Not to say that there are no differences, or that there is no reason to need/want to convert to Catholicism, but to call Protestants a different religion is simply incorrect. Isn’t it interesting how private interpretation can happen in both the Scriptures and the Catechism? But at least Catholics have to Pope to make the final call…

I think people use the word, religion, in two ways. In the first, they use it to mean the basic religion, like Christianity, Judaism, or Islam. But they also use it to mean the specific form of that religion. When asked what religion they are, they may respond, saying Roman Catholic, instead of just Catholic or Christian or Methodist, instead of Christian. Orthodox Jew instead of Jewish.

When someone asks what religion you are, most often they really would like to know what specific form of a “religion” you follow. If you answer Christian, they’ll most often ask what denomination.

 

[joshua1]

"Of those who leave first and then look for a new faith, the reasons for leaving are almost always personal, not theological: someone has hurt their feelings, or treated them badly; they have physically moved and the new place doesn’t have the right ‘feel’; they have done something so against the rules of their faith that they were either kicked out or feel so guilty (and resentful, perhaps) that they kick themselves out. When they find another faith to join, these folks tend to be bitter and attack their former faith; blaming it for something it was not responsible for."

Precisely the reason the RCIA process is as lengthy as it is. The Catholic Church as a whole does not go after people because they like a good number in church. I really think that the church wants its members to truly believe the teachings of the church. I remember when I came in, the priest made well and sure that I was not coming into the Church because of being disgruntled or unhappy. In fact I think that most new catholics who come into the church for that reason, dont really last, because they really dont believe in the first place… The catholic church for some is this novelty, the ultimate slap in the face for their former church. I mean whats worse than a protestant becoming catholic kind of thing. According to the book, “Rome Sweet Home”, the priest discouraged him at first to see if this was something novel or a true interest. For some the RCIA process is almost a year, plenty of time to see if this is personal or a real quest for the truth.

 

[kalt]

I am posting a snip from Hahn’s book that I found online. I hope it’s accurate…from what I remember about Hahn’s conversion story it is as I read it.

Am I really supposed to believe that Hahn was an anti-Catholic, a rabid anti-Catholic at that, who was heavily into reformed theology based on the above clip from his book? I think not.

a.) If he was an anti-Catholic and subscribed to reformed theology he would certainly have heard the question “Where is sola fide/sola scriptura taught in the bible?” Am I really to believe he had never head this question before?

b.) After hearing Mr. Hahn’s reply based on Tim 3:16 the student aksk don’t we need prayer too and then questions Hahn on 2Thess2:15 and the best Hahn could do is to put the student off until next week? Then Hahn supposedly drives home and agonizes over the fact that he hadn’t heard these questions before and why he hadn’t ever found an answer? Fishy indeed.

This rather poor performance is by a man who was supposed to be an anti-Catholic and well educated in reformed theology.

Things aren’t adding up here. Something is wrong with Hahn’s story as it is relayed in his book.

If the story is true -

Maybe he had lots of degrees, but not a lot of insight. These degrees aren’t from Catholic universities, so there’s no reason to think that he had a whole lot of insight into Catholic theology.

I had professors that were easily stumped, too, by easy questions, and who had downright stupid ideas (in their subject), and time proved those ideas stupid (and wrong). Is it hard to believe that Hahn wasn’t the best professor ever? That someone could stump him with an easy question?

I teach CCD, and the littlest kids ask the toughest questions. To answer them fully, a theologian could write a book.

The again -

I think we have to consider the reason Hahn wrote this book. Wasn’t part of his target audience the non-Catholics who might consider becoming Catholic? Was this “cute” story about the inquisitive kid who asked simple questions his way illustrating the point that SS is not biblical?

Either way, though, the truth about SS is told.

I don’t like autobiographies for this reason - it’s the truth about the person, but is it the literal truth?

Has the student come forward and identified himself?

 

[Peter_J]

And this gives them the false confidence to come to a Catholic site and tell Catholics what Catholicism “really is”

… often on the basis of having heard one lone Catholic say “the Church teaches such-and-such”.

Think of how many people come here and claim that Catholics are wrong because they follow Tradition, citing the appropriate verse, and then a stumped when asked to cite the verse that supports Sola Scriptura.

Also true.

 

[Peter_J]

I had professors that were easily stumped, too, by easy questions, and who had downright stupid ideas (in their subject), and time proved those ideas stupid (and wrong). Is it hard to believe that Hahn wasn’t the best professor ever? That someone could stump him with an easy question?

Stephen Hawking: Don’t feel bad, Lisa. Sometimes, the smartest of us can be the most childish.
Lisa: Even you?
Hawking: No. Not me. Never.

• Simpsons episode, “They Saved Lisa’s Brain”

 

[empacae]

I’m a cradle Catholic, and have for many years taken a lot of things for granted in the Church and the world at large. Scott Hahn came to his conclusion about the CC using reason and logic and the good intelligence that God blessed im with. It was thanks to Hahn’ articulate testimony of his conversion that opened my eyes all the more, and I know if he did that for me thousands of others had the same experience.

God bless Scott Hahn.

mpc

 

[graceandglory]

I think most Catholics think that those who leave the CC, leave because more because they’re disgruntled over something that happened to them while being a Catholic than because of something another Christian church, religion, or agnosticism/atheism has to offer. Do you feel the same way about Hahn? Do you think that he ran from something more than he ran to something?

I left the Catholic Church in 1994 because I was disgruntled over Cafeteria Catholicism, and wanted to “worship God in spirit and truth.” At least that’s what I said when I was a teenager.

In my twenty yr sojourn through evangelical protestantism, I finally got down to the heart of it, and was studying the protestant “reformation.” I was listening to Reformed Presbyterians (Scott Hahn’s former denomination)on the radio and in Bible Study Fellowship, and started reading Church history.

In 2004, I came back to the Catholic Church all by myself (meaning I didn’t have the benefit of reading any Catholic apologetics). After my reconversion, I found writers like Scott Hahn, Tim Staples, and Jeff Cavins who basically told my conversion story. They definitely ran toward the Catholic Church. I think of my own reconversion as a “Running Home” of sorts.