For the same kind of thing but closer to home. Here is something I found by accident from a formerly Reformed guy from Pukekohe on his reconversion to catholicism.
Crickey, he is one lucid writer. Very interesting to read about the J B Jordan (who I am fond of) and Mark Shea (who I respect) connections. Haven’t finished it yet, but was struck by this paragraph:
And [the people at the Saturday-evening Mass] were so diverse! Our Reformed church was basically a middle-class, literate, mostly Dutch or Dutch-descended society. Islanders, mentally deficient persons, poor people, rich people, none would easily have fitted with us. In my experience some had tried, and failed. Here was every sort of person and economic class. I saw Mercedes cheek-by-jowl with clapped-out ’vans. The full range of skin pigmentation was represented.
I wasn’t meaning to encourage you to become a catholic sympathiser (which is always the problem with testimonial type writings). Rather I would encourage thought as to how to minister to such people and rerereform them.
Yeah that’s what I thought. I wouldn’t describe myself as a ‘symphathiser’. There’s lots of stuff about Catholicism that seems pretty unhelpful. But the Catholics I have come across personally have been very helpful, particularly Fr Neil Vaney. But it has been good to read these to — for one thing — get a glimmer of an idea of why my Nana is a Catholic.
John, despite your intentions otherwise, people will be confused by your posting of that link and you will be responsible for any move to catholicism from anyone who has ever read Matt’s blog.
Uncle Jonathan’s corn-cob pipe! Surely my antecedent clarification post and my well-known support of the “old” wording of our confessions which was very anti-catholic should be sufficient to displace any presumption of leading a little one astray?
No, I am afraid not. Any evidence you may present reveals not a basic position seeking nuance, but rather an unstable mind. One that vaccilates like a reed, in fact.
And I might as well warn you now: further denials, particularly with words, will lead you to be accounted a “wrangler with words”, so watch it. VERY carefully.
[later] joking aside. I have read John Jensen’s piece. I’m somewhat surprised that the 5 points he lists as critical to him (baptism, weekly Lord’s Supper, etc) are also ones I’m committed to. Perhaps I’m on my way to Rome. A-har-har-har.
I like the idea of a reunitied church, even under a Pope.
Hi Wendy – it is from The Iceberg Hermit – a marvelous ‘young adults’ book lent to me by my friend Richie S. It’s me being aloof and alone contemplating all I see. Or something.
You know I think I met a Wendy up in Auckland three-quarters of the way through last year, in a class at Law School with Richie F. If you’re her, hullo! If not, hullo anyway!
For the same kind of thing but closer to home. Here is something I found by accident from a formerly Reformed guy from Pukekohe on his reconversion to catholicism.
http://staff.business.auckland.ac.nz/staffpages/j.jensen/Newman_article.htm
Crickey, he is one lucid writer. Very interesting to read about the J B Jordan (who I am fond of) and Mark Shea (who I respect) connections. Haven’t finished it yet, but was struck by this paragraph:
I wasn’t meaning to encourage you to become a catholic sympathiser (which is always the problem with testimonial type writings). Rather I would encourage thought as to how to minister to such people and rerereform them.
Yeah that’s what I thought. I wouldn’t describe myself as a ‘symphathiser’. There’s lots of stuff about Catholicism that seems pretty unhelpful. But the Catholics I have come across personally have been very helpful, particularly Fr Neil Vaney. But it has been good to read these to — for one thing — get a glimmer of an idea of why my Nana is a Catholic.
John, despite your intentions otherwise, people will be confused by your posting of that link and you will be responsible for any move to catholicism from anyone who has ever read Matt’s blog.
that’s what I heard, anyway.
Uncle Jonathan’s corn-cob pipe! Surely my antecedent clarification post and my well-known support of the “old” wording of our confessions which was very anti-catholic should be sufficient to displace any presumption of leading a little one astray?
No, I am afraid not. Any evidence you may present reveals not a basic position seeking nuance, but rather an unstable mind. One that vaccilates like a reed, in fact.
And I might as well warn you now: further denials, particularly with words, will lead you to be accounted a “wrangler with words”, so watch it. VERY carefully.
and by the way, I say this for your own good.
[later] joking aside. I have read John Jensen’s piece. I’m somewhat surprised that the 5 points he lists as critical to him (baptism, weekly Lord’s Supper, etc) are also ones I’m committed to. Perhaps I’m on my way to Rome. A-har-har-har.
I like the idea of a reunitied church, even under a Pope.
I can be your pope Aaron.
Put that in your pope and smoke it
nothing like a bit of ‘popery’ to freshen the air/spice things up…
this post has shown it self to be far from unPOPEular…
Richie, don’t be rePOPEulous
i like your polar bear. is that you with a beard?
Hi Wendy – it is from The Iceberg Hermit – a marvelous ‘young adults’ book lent to me by my friend Richie S. It’s me being aloof and alone contemplating all I see. Or something.
You know I think I met a Wendy up in Auckland three-quarters of the way through last year, in a class at Law School with Richie F. If you’re her, hullo! If not, hullo anyway!
hullo!
ps. yes same wendy
richie is procrastinating from land law study, and he is a korean housewife
procrastinating, yeah, coz i’m the one going on blogs of people i hardly know and leaving tangental comments.
Ha rad, you’re both cool (I have proof).
cooler than you, fagnuts
Classic. ‘Humour’