What's Wrong With Scott Hahn?

[gtrenewed]

From my perspective as a cradle catholic who went non-religious, then went protestant, came back, left and now really coming back, Scott Hahn reads and sounds like the protestant authors I have read where knowledge defines your spirituality and pecking order.

Another thing that bothers me is that four years after becoming catholic he is in a position of authority. Contrast that with most priests who take many more years of formation, including growing up catholic.

I get what nathan wager is saying. While Scott has been accepted, he has not been adequately formed. To the ordinary cradle catholics I grew up around, only a priest is qualified to tell me about my faith. Back then only a priest could give the homily. While a lay person could teach in school or ccd, we viewed their teaching more as reciting what is already known and not discovering new truths.

Priests have paid their dues in first taking the journey as a lay person and then to becoming a priest which means taking on disciplines like celibacy. Then studying at various universities, and finally being directly under a bishop. I think that is why Bishop Fulton Sheen was so watched and respected.

I would have preferred to learn that Scott studied in Rome for many years after converting and then was approved as a catholic theologian by bishops in the vatican. It took Moses forty years in the desert to be formed from pharoahs son into God’s prophet. Even though Jesus taught St. Paul directly, it still took time in the desert to form him as Jesus’ apostle.

It is not only about being knowledgeable, the apostle’s were not chosen by Jesus because they were knowledgeable, but being spiritual in a catholic way. To many this starts with the mass and the sacraments, grows into increasingly more spiritual private devotions but is always seen as a journey that forms our character.

I used to agree with excubitor about cradle catholics but see it different now since I have taken a round about journey. I used to blame the ritual for causing a lack of spirituality and indifference. However, it was those very rituals that kept God in our conscience. Remember, it is a journey and not to judge before the time who are wheat and who are tares.

I don’t judge Scott’s conversion and I have read his writings but I am just not comfortable with the path by which he came to prominence; although, he continues to receive validation by catholic organizations and institutions so I won’t dismiss him entirely, for it is a journey.

 

[CatholicFireman]

Sounds to me like your RCIA instructor is jealous. Plain and simple.

 

[grannymh]

This book is like an adventure to Catholicism.

Rome Sweet Home by Scott & Kimberly Hahn
Ignatius Press ISBN 978-0-89870-478-5

This book is like an adventure seen from two different pairs of eyes. Each chapter includes Scott’s perspective and Kimberly’s perspective. Fans of Scott Hahn will enjoy his and Kimberly’s 1993 picture taken when the book was published.

 

[excubitor]

Excubitor, I think you ripped some of my statements about folk Catholicism out of context of the ethnic/cultural background. I’m Irish. I know exactly what I’m talking about here, and there are many under 60 that live in this manner. All my cousins wear scapulars and light candles and are borderline superstitious about Mary. I can wipe the floor with them in the Bible, and that’s okay. My wife is mexican, and you can’t go two feet without tripping over some odd vestige of mexican folk Catholicism. Her family has, yes, a prayer altar, and candles. She wears a scapular and always has. They have rosaries everywhere. I lost a rosary before mass and they literally reached into a random drawer and pulled one out.

I’m really happy to hear this. Obviously your family does not have this cultural identity crisis that I am observing in my neck of the woods and which I read about constantly on forums and the Internet.

I also think you are neglecting the fact that *American *Catholicism is being torn apart by giving into protestant tenants, because America has always been protestant.

Neglecting? Please go back over my posts. Not only have I admitted as much I have expressly lamented the fact. I attributed this condition you might remember to the cultural cringe of cradle Catholics.

I enjoy Catholic Answers, but assuming that the knowledgeable ones are almost all on board with Catholic Answers is a gross mistatement. Here’s a question you may want to chew on: If there is such an epidemic of uncatechized Catholics as opposed to the wise protestant converts, then why did the protestants convert at all? Did they wade through the layers of uneducated yokels to find “the Church” in a glass Pandora’s box, pristine and waiting to be released by said converts? Or is it a bit more realistic to assume that they met knowledgeable Catholics that challenged their views, forced them to study, and then convert? Statistics don’t lie, and protestants really don’t know the Bible any better than many Catholics. Yes. I said it, and I stand by it. Quoting chapter and verse means nothing when it comes to knowing the Bible. And in fact, that’s exactly my point. Catholics know the Bible through everyday life, Protestants tend to know it in their head.

I did not know a single Catholic when I decided to convert. I learned all about the Catholic faith on the Internet on sites like this, John Salza’s scripturecatholic.com and the vatican.va site and the new advent encylopedia as an example.

 

[excubitor]

And your comments about the Church are reaching to my grand, over-arching point: Converts often see the Church as what they want it to be. Not as it is. Catholics are abysmally catechized? News Flash. They always were. The Church has been in crisis since A.D 30.

You seem to be contradicting your previous point here. It was OK when the majority of the world was illiterate for Catholics to understand their faith at a rudimentary level. But since Vatican 2 it has been understood that many Catholics do not have a solid understanding of their faith and are falling prey to persuasive and excellent arguments from protestants. Therefore for Catholics to defend their faith they must lift their game. Catholics can operate their x-boxes and computers which are highly complex and technical devices and yet they can’t master their scriptures and catechisms. We are living in a highly educated world, and so Catholics must be highly educated about their faith if they are to resist the persuasive onslaughts of highly educated protestants which they meet in their families and day to day life. You seem to be suggesting that because Catholics have been traditionally poorly educated about their faith that that’s OK. No its not.

The difference is, converts read the writings of the ones that the Church saw fit to make doctors and saints. The abysmally catechized made do with learning from stained glass windows. They didn’t write stuff, and converts didn’t read it. So it’s true that the Church is a vast treasure chest of riches, but it’s also a condensation; not the whole picture. It’s sort of like ordering the “Faith Database” and saying “this is the Church.” The true Catholic Church is a warts and all family, and while converts do well to re-energize the Church, they also need to see their place in the grand scheme of things, and make sure they are not trying to “restore” the Church to something she never was.

I agree. But if converting protestants come into a cultural wasteland and come into contact with cradle catholics who think that protestantism is something to aspire to, then don’t blame the protestant convert for trying to bring a little piece of England with them.
You seem to want to blame protestant converts for the woes of the church.

The fact is, we get the smart protestants. Smart people in any group are the minority. Converts need get comfortable with the fact that they moved from one minority to another, and stop looking down on the cradle Catholics. If protestants were doing so hot, then there wouldn’t be as many uneducated in their own circle prior to their converting.

Huh? I’ve already stated that it is the educated protestants who are converting.

The fact that they want to ignore their own uneducated, move to the Church based on the Church’s educated, then hypocritically talk down about the Church’s uneducated as if the educated are the model citizens and the cradle Catholics are somehow lesser and “bringing the Church down”, smacks of arrogance, and rightly annoys the cradle Catholics.

Are you suggesting that I am a hypocrite? Careful. I never denied that there are educated people in the Catholic church. But the vast majority of them are on the Internet and I learned from them on the Internet. I have belonged to many protestant fellowships and now I compare them with my new brothers and sisters at the local parish and am utterly appalled at the standard of knowledge of the faith that is exhibited by the leaders of the church. I’m not just comparing minorities with minorities. Also I am not driven by arrogance. These are honest and fair observations. You seem to want to whitewash the church and excuse terrible catechesis.

 

[Barbkw]

I have a few of Hahn’s books and I’ve watched and taped all the available EWTN programming with him and Scott Aquilina.

Besides all of his own books, he wrote the Catholic Dictionary:

amazon.com/gp/product/B001NLL3VU/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=0385512295&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0BX16VQNBR4EK2Y8EFH7

Sorry you’re running into so much flap at RCIA over him.

Hahn teaches at Steubenville University, one college (of only a few U.S. colleges) on the Newman Guide of authentic Catholic colleges.

I understand your pain, at my parish EWTN programming is never publicly acknowledged as an available source to increase adult faith formation.

I don’t let it bother me. I keep in mind that Pope Benedict awarded EWTN with the Cross of Honor, the highest award that popes can give laity and religious.

 

[excubitor]

Wow, you two are debating such an interesting point, and both of you have valid arguments that you present clearly and convincingly!

Maybe you could start a thread up with that in mind, so others (like myself) could join in without fearing we were derailing a thread.

The point is, Converts vs. Cradle Catholics, whose Church?

I don’t think this is derailing the thread. I believe it is this tension between cradle catholics and converting protestants which is behind this RCIA instructors lashing of Scott Hahn.

I have to admit I find Excubitor’s difficulties with Cradle Catholics very much my own feeling, and I’M a cradle Catholic! However, I understand and sympathize with Nathan’s points, especially as an Irish Catholic with a Mexican Spouse!

However I will also say that I know of many ignorant Protestants, who question nothing that is laid before them, if it comes from a fellow Protestant. Protestants who never scratch the surface of the most implausible, and most UN-Biblical teachings.

Protestants are on the whole far more educated in their faith than are Catholic’s in theirs. Protestants are also pretty well versed in how to argue against the teachings of the Catholic church. But the vast majority of Catholics, if they encountered an argument against their faith directed at them by a protestant, would not know how to respond, and might even start to doubt their faith. That is not good enough. Every literate Catholic should be an apologist, and a defender of the faith.

 

[CatholicFireman]

Barbkw,

You can always sneak an EWTN pamphlet/schedule in the Narthex.

Peace.

 

[Bookcat]

What I want to know is if Scott Hahn is a mainstream Catholic or is he some kind of controversial teacher who espouses wild ideas as she infers? I really enjoyed The Lamb’s Supper so I bought a few more books by the man. Are they trash?

Dr. Hahn is a very fine theologian and is very faithful to the Church as well as very versed on in Catholic Theology. Of course as with other good Theologians …some things are theological opinion etc…such is their vocation…

By the way you can listen to him for yourself…he was on Catholic Answers just his week>>>

catholic.com/audio/2010/mp3/ca110124b.mp3

Having been his student… I can also add my personal experience that he is well…what I said above…and a fine man

oh and PS he is not some “new convert” …he has been Catholic for many years now…

 

[mcrow]

IMO, Scott Hahn is one of the great new Theologians of our time.

I don’t get the hate some people have for him. It’s pretty clear his writings are orthadox and has an Imprimatur, which confirms that the doctorine is OK with the Church.

I can see how people may not like the writing style or how it’s present, but the overall info is among the best you’ll find.

As for the “discoveries”, I think you all are taking it the wrong way. When I read his books and this comes up, I think he’s speaking of a personal discovery. Meaning that he found something he didn’t know was there, not that nobody else knew about it.

Also, I should mention that you can read and get a lot out of non-catholic christian author’s books as well. Obviously, at times, you are going disagree with parts of a book written by a protestan but a lot of good things can be learned from them as well.

 

[excubitor]

From my perspective as a cradle catholic who went non-religious, then went protestant, came back, left and now really coming back, Scott Hahn reads and sounds like the protestant authors I have read where knowledge defines your spirituality and pecking order.

And this is wrong why? Priests go into seminary for 6 years to receive a higher level of learning. The scripture teaches that we must grow in Grace and knowledge. 2 Peter 3:18. Pecking order is a disparaging phrase. But the scripture says that the Holy Ghost appoints teachers.
*Ephesians 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
*
So pastor and elder is a different office to teacher.

Another thing that bothers me is that four years after becoming catholic he is in a position of authority. Contrast that with most priests who take many more years of formation, including growing up catholic.
I get what nathan wager is saying. While Scott has been accepted, he has not been adequately formed. To the ordinary cradle catholics I grew up around, only a priest is qualified to tell me about my faith. Back then only a priest could give the homily. While a lay person could teach in school or ccd, we viewed their teaching more as reciting what is already known and not discovering new truths.

Priests have paid their dues in first taking the journey as a lay person and then to becoming a priest which means taking on disciplines like celibacy. Then studying at various universities, and finally being directly under a bishop. I think that is why Bishop Fulton Sheen was so watched and respected.

And yet it is these very priests and bishops who have appointed Scott Hahn to have authority as a teacher and given his books imprimatur. Are you suggesting that these well formed priests and bishops have erred in appointing Scott Hahn to a position of authority?

I would have preferred to learn that Scott studied in Rome for many years after converting and then was approved as a catholic theologian by bishops in the vatican. It took Moses forty years in the desert to be formed from pharoahs son into God’s prophet. Even though Jesus taught St. Paul directly, it still took time in the desert to form him as Jesus’ apostle.

Timothy was a very young man who the apostle Paul appointed as a bishop because he showed excellent skill with the scriptures.
*2 Timothy 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
*
Why are you shocked because protestants by their diligence of the scriptures have been found to be wise, whereas your own children have been found wanting.

It is not only about being knowledgeable, the apostle’s were not chosen by Jesus because they were knowledgeable, but being spiritual in a catholic way. To many this starts with the mass and the sacraments, grows into increasingly more spiritual private devotions but is always seen as a journey that forms our character.

The apostles grew in knowledge far beyond their capacity and background. This is what astonished those who heard them preach
*Acts 4:13 Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.
*
This is what Catholics have been called to do since Vatican 2 and their failure has been almost completely total. Any wonder then that protestant converts are stepping into the breach and filling the vaccuum.

I used to agree with excubitor about cradle catholics but see it different now since I have taken a round about journey. I used to blame the ritual for causing a lack of spirituality and indifference. However, it was those very rituals that kept God in our conscience. Remember, it is a journey and not to judge before the time who are wheat and who are tares.

So are you agreeing that cradle catholics are spiritually indifferent and largely ignorant of their faith?

You are right that it is a journey, but this is my complaint. Catholics are NOT progressing on that journey.

This is the very same lament that Paul had when in the first century he said this,
*Hebrews 5: 11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing. 12For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. 13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. 14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, [3] even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
*

So Paul makes it clear that maturing in the faith means growing in the skillful use of the Word of God to be able to discern good and evil teachings.

My bible appropriately heads this passage with the heading “The Danger of Slothfulness and Apostasy” . And this is utterly correct. This failure to progress in knowledge to the point of being mature teachers is nothing less than laziness. It is the seed of apostasy. When we see the great falling away, the great apostasy in the last days, you can be utterly sure that those falling away are believing a lie which they should have easily detected if they had not been so lazy at mastering the principles of the oracles of God.

 

[Barbkw]

Barbkw,

You can always sneak an EWTN pamphlet/schedule in the Narthex.

Peace.

I have and they’ve removed them :bighanky:

I have pretty tough skin, but that cut got through.

 

[Elizabeth502]

When I read his books and this comes up, I think he’s speaking of a personal discovery. Meaning that he found something he didn’t know was there, not that nobody else knew about it.

Then I think, respectfully to him, that his communication style could be improved, because even for someone like myself, who is acquainted with reading between the lines and forgiving a lot of generalities when people speak (about their own books, for example), it does appear, often, that he believes his own insights are new. The fact that they are not is clear when he appears on Franciscan University Presents, and both the priest and the professor don’t comment, because it’s nothing new to them. (Or to me.)

Perhaps RCIA leaders believe that his books are one of the better introductions to Catholic biblical thought, being more digestible (because not complex) to those converting from a different or no tradition. In that, I cannot fault him, or them.

 

[catholic1seeks]

Let me settle this…

SCOTT HAHN
IS AMAZING.

There.
He’s such a gift to the Church; I don’t see how any Catholic could dislike his work-- seriously. To me, he’s an apologist with a fresh approach.

 

[Bookcat]

He quite often notes that many things are things that “he discovers” personally… but which are not “new”…

I think communicates this well.

I

 

[mcrow]

Then I think, respectfully to him, that his communication style could be improved, because even for someone like myself, who is acquainted with reading between the lines and forgiving a lot of generalities when people speak (about their own books, for example), it does appear, often, that he believes his own insights are new. The fact that they are not is clear when he appears on Franciscan University Presents, and both the priest and the professor don’t comment, because it’s nothing new to them. (Or to me.)

Perhaps RCIA leaders believe that his books are one of the better introductions to Catholic biblical thought, being more digestible (because not complex) to those converting from a different or no tradition. In that, I cannot fault him, or them.

I agree, they are better for RCIA/New Converts as they mostly are about some of the more basic Catholic beliefs. I think perhaps the style clash comes from long standing Catholics reading a book that seems to be written more for curious, non-Catholic people or Catholics who maybe haven’t really studied the faith much. If you’ve been a Catholic and studied up and read other Catholic Theology books, then this will be similar to what you’ve already read but in a different style and maybe format.

Personally, I like the writing style from the perspective I was reading them from (Currently in RCIA) because it was almost like discovering something along with Dr. Hahn. It was more exciting and interesting than just reading your typical blandly written book on the same subject.

I may be in the minority, but I just took “discoveries” to mean the same thing when I say, “you know what I discovered while reading the bible today?”. More or less I just mean that I uncovered something I’ve never seen or heard, not that nobody has seen or heard it before. I really don’t think Dr. Hahn is so dumb to think he’s the first one to discover anything about the bible or within the faith.

Overall, I would say it’s great info, it has an imprimatur, and he has great enthusiasm in his writing that I like. I would discribe his writings on faith to have the same enthusiasm as a kid opening a present that they didn’t know they were getting. For someone knew to the Faith, this is a very appealing aspect to his writings because most of us new converts have that same buzz going on like “Woot, look what I found, lets dust this thing off and do something good with it.”.

Not to say that cradle Catholics or longstanding ones don’t or can’t have the same enthusiasm. I’ve met several that do, but it’s not quite the “new shiny” type of enthusiasm.

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

I’m really happy to hear this. Obviously your family does not have this cultural identity crisis that I am observing in my neck of the woods and which I read about constantly on forums and the Internet.

I would say this is because you don’t have an integral understanding of folk Catholicism. This feeds in well with my point of converts having a great deal of head knowledge experience of aspects of the faith without having lived around folk Catholicism all of one’s life.

Neglecting? Please go back over my posts. Not only have I admitted as much I have expressly lamented the fact. I attributed this condition you might remember to the cultural cringe of cradle Catholics.

That thought was incomplete, and I apologize. Part of the American phenomenon is individualism and a gradual loss of cultural and ethnic ties. When your entire culture is Catholic, and you lose that culture, you absorb the religion of the culture you are embracing. Irish, Mexican, Italian, and Filipino Catholics are Catholics because that’s how they are raised. They never lost their faith because there was no outside pressure to do so. Catholics have always had Catechetical issues, as I have pointed out, and possibly the only reason they didn’t lose their faith then is that everyone was Catholic. The only difference between uncatechized Catholics then and now is that now, they have protestantism to accept for societal reasons, and so are leaving the Church. This seems to accentuate the problem of poor Catechesis, when poor Catechesis is only part of this modern issue. My point is that the situation is more complex than you make it out to be. It isn’t “Catholics don’t know anything and are giving up their treasures for protestantism,” because Catholics never knew anything. There are ethnic and societal issues that drive the phenomenon as well.

I did not know a single Catholic when I decided to convert. I learned all about the Catholic faith on the Internet on sites like this, John Salza’s scripturecatholic.com and the vatican.va site and the new advent encylopedia as an example.

Thank you for confirming my point. John Salza is a cradle Catholic. Karl Keating is a cradle Catholic. I am comfortable in stating people from the Vatican are probably cradle Catholics. This, makes my point about the solid minority that serve as the educational core of the faithful. Before all the protestant converts were converting everybody to be Catholics, who converted the protestants? Knowledgeable Cradle Catholics. The medium of how they reached you is actually irrelevant, particularly in a time when we have “friends” on facebook. You didn’t search them out. God brought you to them, regardless of how. This also makes my point about how converts come to see Catholicism as something to “know.” This is how you came to the faith, and as I have explained before, it will be a process of dropping the convert goggles and honestly being able to say you are “living” and “experiencing” Catholicism with the same innate, intiuitive sense of the faith that one raised in it has. See my earlier posts on differing worldview, and the convert focus on “gnosis.”

You seem to be contradicting your previous point here. It was OK when the majority of the world was illiterate for Catholics to understand their faith at a rudimentary level. But since Vatican 2 it has been understood that many Catholics do not have a solid understanding of their faith and are falling prey to persuasive and excellent arguments from protestants. Therefore for Catholics to defend their faith they must lift their game. Catholics can operate their x-boxes and computers which are highly complex and technical devices and yet they can’t master their scriptures and catechisms. We are living in a highly educated world, and so Catholics must be highly educated about their faith if they are to resist the persuasive onslaughts of highly educated protestants which they meet in their families and day to day life. You seem to be suggesting that because Catholics have been traditionally poorly educated about their faith that that’s OK. No its not.

That’s not what I’m saying at all. First off you seem to fail to make a distinction between the availability of knowledge and the actual people who make use of its availability. People are repeatedly shown to be less educated than before (simply look at a high school teacher exam in the 1800’s). The fact is, a minority are educated, maing use of the resources available to them, as it has always been. There should always be a desire to properly Catechize Catholics. As stated above however, the problem is not any different than it always was. The problem has *always *been how to catechize the faithful. This is not a new problem. Protestants join because of smart Catholics, then turn around and go “My God look at all the dummies! Man the Bible Studies!” Meanwhile, it’s the human reality that smart people are the minority; this is true of any group, or Church. Most people have no interest in being Catechized to a certain level. Rather than focusing on Catechesis, which is extremely important, I think we would do well to focus on helping Catholics reestablish their cultural and ethnic Catholicsm and sense of community. The reason for this is, some people will never get it. They will never be “educated” about that faith. And like it or not, these people are the majority. These people won’t leave, however, if they have a sense of belonging. They aren’t leaving the Church for catechetical reasons, because they don’t know anything about the protestant faith they join either. They leave because the protestants make them feel like they belong. They make them feel “American.” They have “fellowship.” I am merely pointing out that extreme uber-Hahn catechesis is not going to reach everybody, and so it is only part of the solution.

 

[Nathan_Wagar]

I agree. But if converting protestants come into a cultural wasteland and come into contact with cradle catholics who think that protestantism is something to aspire to, then don’t blame the protestant convert for trying to bring a little piece of England with them.
You seem to want to blame protestant converts for the woes of the church.

Then you are merely reading what I am writing with a reactionary mindset. I am a convert. I was the lone duck in a Catholic sea. And I do blame the protestant for wanting to bring a bit of England with them. You embrace the Church AS SHE IS. That’s it. Or don’t come. Protestants aren’t bringing anything the Church didn’t have first anyway, they just put undue emphasis on a given aspect of the faith. As always, balance is the key. Protestant converts display a remarkable tendency to join the Church because of intelligent Catholics, then look at the vast majority of Catholics (who make up the Church), and say that they are wrong, that they have let the Church fall into ruin. I have already explained my cultural argument about this, but the fact is protestant converts haven’t been in the Church long enough to know what the Church was like before, so how do they know this hasn’t always been a problem? Protestants see the Church with fuzzy teenage-lover eyes; they see her as a pristine white sheet that has been made dirty by *ignorance *(notice always the focus on head knowledge as the answer). Ignorance is a human condition however. The truth is, the sheet has always been spotted on the human end, it is only made white by Christ. Rather than seeing the sheet as always having been spotted, and wanting to continue washing the dirt off with the Church throughout the ages, they see it as having originally been white, and see themselves as the “restorers” of a whiteness that never was. There’s a difference between the reality of always striving to *better *the Church, vs. the convert viewpoint of *restoring *the Church.

Are you suggesting that I am a hypocrite? Careful. I never denied that there are educated people in the Catholic church. But the vast majority of them are on the Internet and I learned from them on the Internet. I have belonged to many protestant fellowships and now I compare them with my new brothers and sisters at the local parish and am utterly appalled at the standard of knowledge of the faith that is exhibited by the leaders of the church. I’m not just comparing minorities with minorities. Also I am not driven by arrogance. These are honest and fair observations. You seem to want to whitewash the church and excuse terrible catechesis.

No, I am making generalized statements that apparently you are fitting yourself into of your own volition. This is bigger than you or I. Your other points in this remark seem reactionary rather than faithful to what I have actually posted. And another question. How can you be appalled by Catholic leadership in comparison to protestant leadership, when protestants are wrong? A Catholic leader with a fuzzy understanding of the truth is better than a protestant with a firm understanding of falsehood. Your points about Catechesis and the “whitewashing” of the Church are off the mark and hopefully have been addressed earlier in this post to your satisfaction. God Bless.

 

[JeffersonD]

I find it disturbing that so many take offense of Dr. Hahn and the way they do. I find him a wonderful writer and speaker who by the guidance of the Holy Spirit has guided many into the faith. We should praise his zeal for the faith rather than putting him down for being a convert. In fact I think we should be happy he is home, I know he is.

If you ever listen to his talks you will see, or rather hear, that when he was a Protestant he believe that he, himself, was making breakthroughs in Theology but he was soon humbled when he entered the Catholic Church and found the Church teaching his breakthrough long before he ever made the “discovery”. In fact I think his “discoveries” are what we need to remember.

God bless

Jeff

 

[grannymh]

. I never denied that there are educated people in the Catholic church. But the vast majority of them are on the Internet and I learned from them on the Internet. I have belonged to many protestant fellowships and now I compare them with my new brothers and sisters at the local parish and am utterly appalled at the standard of knowledge of the faith that is exhibited by the leaders of the church. I’m not just comparing minorities with minorities. Also I am not driven by arrogance. These are honest and fair observations.

Just want you to know that I am worried about some of the “educated” Catholics on the internet. I have noticed glitches in their thinking. I don’t want to go off topic on that end. I just want to comment that none of us should stop learning about our faith.