Newt Gingrich deserves all the scorn that can be heaped upon anyone who not only converts to Catholicism – though that is bad enough – but who falsely converts. Bottom line? The only reason Newt converted is because his third wife (Callista) is a life-long Catholic. She had an affair with Newt even though he was still married to wife #2 at the time, but I’m sure she managed to have that sin magically wiped out.
Newt Gingrich wrote a 555-word piece (linked below, from which I’ll quote liberally) with this title:
Why I Became Catholic [published on April 26, 2011]:
As you read his words, keep in mind that he has a Ph.D. That, you would think, should mean he’d manage a lot more than 555-words in the way of an explanation. And that his explanation wouldn’t be so superficial or badly written.
QUOTE/COMMENT
I’m going to quote from Newt’s essay and add my own comments.
QUOTE:
I am often asked when I chose to become Catholic. However, it is more truthful to say that over the course of several years I gradually became Catholic and then decided one day to accept the faith I had already come to embrace.
COMMENT:
Newt’s first sentence bothered me, though I couldn’t figure out why at first. Then it hit me: he put a barrier (specifically, a barrier of three words) between himself (“I”) and Catholicism (“Catholic”) by writing, “…I chose to become Catholic.” By way of contrast, consider this more direct version:
“I am often asked why I converted to the Catholic faith.” [NOTE: I’ll address “why” vs. “when” below, where I highlight in green.]
His second sentence is either dodgy or else just badly written. Immediately below, compare his version followed by my suggested rewrite:
However, it is more truthful to say that over the course of several years I gradually became Catholic and then decided one day to accept the faith I had already come to embrace.
Over the course of several years I became increasingly attracted to the Catholic faith and then decided to formally convert. [NOTE: It was entirely unnecessary to preface, as he did, with “However, it is more truthful to say…” Why did he feel a need to tell his readers he was going to be “more truthful” with them?
Notice my highlight above. After he “became Catholic,” he “then decided…to accept.” Seems to me, once he became Catholic, he’d already accepted that faith, unless he meant to write “formally accept.” However, once cannot become Catholic without formal acceptance by the Church. Note also the strangeness of “I…decided one day to accept the faith I had already come to embrace.” Question: If somebody had “already come to embrace,” why would it be necessary to decide “one day to accept?” Isn’t embracing the same as accepting?
Newt’s first paragraph could well be interpreted as coming from a man who thinks of marriage in terms of accepting a woman as a wife as being different from (merely) embracing a woman. This type of thinking could well explain why he’s on this third marriage.
“why” vs. “when”
After his first paragraph (assuming Newt was keen on cutting to the chase as to “when” he converted), he should have written this:
The moment that finally convinced me [to convert] was when Benedict XVI came here [to the United States] … As a spouse, I got to sit in the upper church and I very briefly saw [Benedict] and I was just struck with how happy he was and how fundamentally different he was from the news media's portrait of him. This guy's not a Rottweiler. He's a very loving, engaged, happy person.” - source 1*
Actually, Newt had spoken these words in the course of an interview. To get directly to the point, he should have immediately written as he had spoken above. However, he doesn’t allude to what “finally convinced me [to convert]” until 398 words later when he wrote:
“Catching a glimpse of Pope Benedict that day, I was struck by the happiness and peacefulness he exuded. The joyful and radiating presence of the Holy Father was a moment of confirmation about the many things I had been thinking and experiencing for several years.
“That evening I told Msgr. Rossi I wanted to be received into the Catholic Church…”
Obviously, the earlier version starting with “The moment that finally convinced me [to convert]…” is vastly superior to what he actually wrote in his essay. But when one considers that vastly superior version, one has to wonder at how easily moved (to convert!) Dr. Gingrich was. After all, he said, “I…very briefly saw [Benedict]…” That was enough to strike Newt with “how happy he was and how fundamentally different he was…”
Is Newt Gingrich so easily impressed, especially from a distance? He wasn’t even close to Benedict, since he was seated in the “upper church.”
QUOTE:
“Although I was Southern Baptist, I had attended Mass with Callista every Sunday at the basilica to watch her sing with the choir.”
COMMENT:
Nowhere in his essay does Newt say why he abandoned Southern Baptism. This is no small matter, since Newt not only abandoned the Southern Baptists, he divorced himself from the entire Protestant movement.
QUOTE:
While there, I had the opportunity to talk at length with Msgr. Walter Rossi, rector of the basilica in D.C., about faith, history and many of the cultural challenges, including secularism, facing our country. Our conversations were enlightening and intriguing.
COMMENT:
Dr. Gingrich, however, doesn’t bother to tell us – at all – in what ways these conversations were enlightening and intriguing.
QUOTE:
During that trip, I experienced my first visit to St. Peter’s Basilica, and I recall marveling at being in the presence of the historic truth of the Church that day.
COMMENT:
I can understand how someone could be impressed by St. Peter’s Basilica. I can’t understand how that translates to being “in the presence of the historic truth of the Church.” The Church has a lot of historic truths swirling about it, though obviously Newt chose to ignore some of those uglier truths.
QUOTE:
At the same time, I was being influenced by several books I was reading, including George Weigel’s The Cube and the Cathedral, about the crisis of secularism in Europe, and his book The Final Revolution, about the role of Christianity in freeing Eastern Europe from an atheistic dictatorship.
COMMENT:
I suspect Newt was overly impressed with how Eastern Europe was freed from Communism, choosing to allow that to blind him to the Dark Side of Christian History (the title, by the way, of a marvelous book by Helen Ellerbe). Newt would also benefit from an introduction to Buddhism, which his White Supremacist’s view of the world totally disallows.
QUOTE:
I was also moved by Pope Benedict’s reflection in his book Jesus of Nazareth that, “God is the issue: Is he real, reality itself, or isn’t he? Is he good, or do we have to invent the good ourselves?”
COMMENT:
Dr. Gingrich fails to expand on why he was moved by Benedict’s reflection. I can’t see how anyone could be moved by what Gingrich quoted. As for Benedict’s claim, God most certainly is not the issue. This is the issue: What constitutes an ideal life for people?
I can, however, answer the Pope’s questions:
· God is real, alright. But He’s only one god among untold trillions. And he, like all gods (and those humans who are awake) is working on becoming a fully-enlightened Buddha. And that is a far superior state than any godhood.
· God is not reality itself, nor did He create reality. He Himself is a product of karma which is the guiding law of a universe which was never created and which will never die. It has always been – which (interestingly enough) is a descriptor of God Himself.
· Is God good? Sometimes He isn’t. “I am a jealous God,” “I am an angry God.”
· We don’t have to “invent the good ourselves.” We simply have to be good which, briefly, means being compassionate and following the six paramitas of Bodhisattva practice.
QUOTE:
…worshipping with believers across the world opened my eyes to the diversity and richness of the Catholic Church.
COMMENT:
The world has many sources of “diversity and richness.” The Catholic Church cannot lay sole claim to those distinctions.
QUOTE:
Over the course of a decade, the depth of faith and history contained in the life of the Catholic Church were increasingly apparent to me…
COMMENT:
Unfortunately, Gingrich hasn’t got a clue about the “depth of faith and history” of Buddhism. That’s pretty amazing since he has a Ph.D. in history. Or maybe not, since his Ph.D. is in White history.
QUOTE:
…the centrality of the Eucharist in the Catholic Mass became more and more clear.
COMMENT:
How can anyone possibly believe that receiving what a friend of mine calls Christ crispies and a cup of wine has anything to do with receiving Christ? Further, why is it so important to receive Christ? He was just a man who died for his own sins (that is, as a result of his own karma). Same as for untold millions over the ages who died for their sins. Jesus has no special power to “save” anyone. Saving only happens as a result of personal effort.
I’ve often said, “Anyone who thinks someone else can die for his sins must also believe the man who says, ‘Let me make love to your wife for you; that will be the same as if you made love to her.’”
Nobody can make love for you; nobody can take upon themselves the sins you’ve committed.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
After thought
Since Dr. Gingrich has a Ph.D. in modern European history, I’m amazed he doesn’t more fully appreciate the importance of Protestantism. My curiosity was further stoked by the title of Newt’s doctoral dissertation: “Belgian Education Policy in the Congo: 1945-1960.” That topic seems so far-removed from anything that would mark Newt as a serious scholar of modern European history – not to mention, as even a nominal scholar of religion. I’m starting to wonder, “How is Newt Gingrich relevant at all?”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
Founder of The Independent Contractor’s Party
“I just hope the Evangelical Christians don’t become so disgusted by Newt Gingrich’s faux conversion that they start taking Rick Santorum seriously. OMG!”
Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com
Newt Gingrich, Callista Gingrich, 2012 elections, Gingrich Catholic, GOP debates 2011
No comments:
Post a Comment