Response to Ivereigh, Winters, etc. – Model of behavior for converts rooted in the Apostolic Tradition?

Peter and paul disputingAusten Ivereigh wrote a seriously imprudent piece about converts.  Ed Peters schooled Ivereigh about what converts means.  HERE

However, one of the comments under my post about that deserves special attention.

Saul of Tarsus was an (initially unwilling) convert.  So there.

So there, indeed.

I will add is this, from Galatians 2:11

“And when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face because he clearly was wrong.”

Hence, we have Paul’s modelling of appropriate behavior for converts rooted firmly in the Apostolic Tradition!

BTW… for all you converts and potential converts out there, here are all the different versions of the verse, from “Bible Gateway”:

KJ21 But when Peter came to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed.
ASV But when Cephas came to Antioch, I resisted him to the face, because he stood condemned.
AMP Now when Cephas (Peter) came to Antioch, I opposed him face to face [about his conduct there], because he stood condemned [by his own actions].
AMPC But when Cephas (Peter) came to Antioch, I protested and opposed him to his face [concerning his conduct there], for he was blameable and stood condemned.
BRG But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
CSB But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face because he stood condemned.
CEB But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was wrong.
CJB Furthermore, when Kefa came to Antioch, I opposed him publicly, because he was clearly in the wrong.
CEV When Peter came to Antioch, I told him face to face that he was wrong.
DARBY But when Peter came to Antioch, I withstood him to [the] face, because he was to be condemned:
DLNT And when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face— because he was condemned.
DRA But when Cephas was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
ERV When Peter came to Antioch, he did something that was not right. I stood against him, because he was wrong.
ESV But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
ESVUK But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
EXB [L?But] When ·Peter [L?Cephas; C?Peter’s name in Aramaic; 1:18] came to Antioch, I challenged him to his face, because he ·was wrong [L?stood condemned].
GNV ¶ And when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face: for he was to be condemned.
GW When Cephas came to Antioch, I had to openly oppose him because he was completely wrong.
GNT But when Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him in public, because he was clearly wrong.
HCSB But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face because he stood condemned.
ICB When Peter came to Antioch, I was against him because he was wrong.
ISV But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly wrong.
PHILLIPS Later, however, when Peter came to Antioch I had to oppose him publicly, for he was then plainly in the wrong. It happened like this. Until the arrival of some of James’ companions, he, Peter, was in the habit of eating his meals with the Gentiles. After they came, he withdrew and ate separately from the Gentiles—out of sheer fear of what the Jews might think. The other Jewish Christians carried out a similar piece of deception, and the force of their bad example was so great that even Barnabas was affected by it. But when I saw that this behaviour was a contradiction of the truth of the Gospel, I said to Peter so that everyone could hear, “If you, who are a Jew, do not live like a Jew but like a Gentile, why on earth do you try to make Gentiles live like Jews?”
JUB ¶ But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face because he was to be blamed.
KJV But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
AKJV But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
LEB But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was condemned.
TLB But when Peter came to Antioch I had to oppose him publicly, speaking strongly against what he was doing, for it was very wrong.
MSG Later, when Peter came to Antioch, I had a face-to-face confrontation with him because he was clearly out of line. Here’s the situation. Earlier, before certain persons had come from James, Peter regularly ate with the non-Jews. But when that conservative group came from Jerusalem, he cautiously pulled back and put as much distance as he could manage between himself and his non-Jewish friends. That’s how fearful he was of the conservative Jewish clique that’s been pushing the old system of circumcision. Unfortunately, the rest of the Jews in the Antioch church joined in that hypocrisy so that even Barnabas was swept along in the charade.
MEV But when Peter came to Antioch, I withstood him face to face, because he stood condemned.
MOUNCE But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
NOG When Cephas came to Antioch, I had to openly oppose him because he was completely wrong.
NABRE And when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face because he clearly was wrong.
NASB But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
NCV When Peter came to Antioch, I challenged him to his face, because he was wrong.
NET But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he had clearly done wrong.
NIRV When Peter came to Antioch, I told him to his face that I was against what he was doing. He was clearly wrong.
NIV When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
NIVUK When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
NKJV Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed;
NLV But when Peter came to Antioch, I had to stand up against him because he was guilty.
NLT But when Peter came to Antioch, I had to oppose him to his face, for what he did was very wrong.
NRSV But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood self-condemned;
NRSVA But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood self-condemned;
NRSVACE But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood self-condemned;
NRSVCE But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood self-condemned;
NTE But when Cephas came to Antioch, I stood up to him face to face. He was in the wrong.
OJB But when Kefa came to Antioch, I stood against him to his face, because there was found in him a dvar ashmah (a thing of guilt, condemnation).
RSV But when Cephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
RSVCE But when Cephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned.
TLV But when Peter came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong—
VOICE But when Cephas came to Antioch, there was a problem. I got in his face and exposed him in front of everyone. He was clearly wrong.
WEB But when Peter came to Antioch, I resisted him to his face, because he stood condemned.
WE One day Peter came to the city of Antioch. Then I had to tell him face to face that he had done wrong. He really was wrong!
WYC But when Peter was come to Antioch, I against-stood him in the face [I stood against him into the face], for he was worthy to be reproved.
YLT And when Peter came to Antioch, to the face I stood up against him, because he was blameworthy,

RIBERA Paul Peter Galatians 2

UPDATE:

At CRUX, Ivereigh issued an apology… sort of.  HERE

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Liberals, Lighter fare and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Response to Ivereigh, Winters, etc. – Model of behavior for converts rooted in the Apostolic Tradition?

  1. ResMiranda says:

    On that note, weren’t the Apostles and all the first Christians converts? Historically and traditionally speaking converts know whats up!

  2. Um, errrrr , weren’t every single one of the Apostles a convert??? I believe they became true and FULL converts on Pentecost … THIS IS JUST NONSENSE & typical for this bunch: The pretentious Ivereigh , Faggioli (full of beans) and Ms Winters … I’m just going to embrace the suck as the Marines say and pray for these characters that THEY BECOME REAL CONVERTS !!!

    More serious news: Yeah … THE Brew Crew lost to the Twinnies AGAIN , grrrrrrrr!

  3. donato2 says:

    St. Augustine was a convert too, and was the original combatant against Pelagianism.

  4. Grant M says:

    More serious news: Yeah … THE Brew Crew lost to the Twinnies AGAIN , grrrrrrrr!

    I’ve no idea what that means, but I sympathize.

  5. Grant M says:

    Cum autem venisset Cephas Antiochiam, in faciem ei restiti, quia reprehensibilis erat.

    It’s the Deplorables versus the Reprehensibles.

  6. jfk03 says:

    A convert myself in 1961, and having witnessed the madness of the 60’s, the current situation is deja vu all over again.

  7. frmgcmma says:

    Ed Peters argues as a canonist about the strictest meaning of the term “convert”. Well, most of us use the term more broadly, in fact, with all due respect to canonical precision. As we learned in philosophy, any respectable word is equivocal by reason. Many Christians who enter full communion with Christ as Catholics often speak of themselves as “converts” in the broad sense.

    Nevertheless, Ivereigh seems to express what one might call a cradle Catholic neurosis of “triumphalism” — converts can’t possibly offer anything to us, or if they can, they should speak seldom and softly. (Remember Card. Kasper’s triumphalist remarks about Africans during the infamous synod? It’s the same “knee jerk” reaction of “triumphalists”).

    Often those who have been apart (in whatever degree) from Christ and the Church have obstacles to overcome, errors to untie, ignorance to be relieved — and their witness to and embrace of the truth can entail personal loss and pain (think of Bl. J.H. Newman). That’s why cradle Catholics (like me) are so edified by the example of such “converts” who, very often, are more informed than cradle Catholics about what the Church is or isn’t because they had to expend effort learning and doing.

    Certainly, we don’t expect the converted harlot to lead the choir on the first Sunday after her confession … but Ivereigh ought to think before he opens his mouth.

  8. Michael_Thoma says:

    May all Catholics have the fervor and spirit of a “convert”, and zeal for the Apostolic Faith.

  9. Ben Kenobi says:

    Wow! Thanks, Fr. Z. Convert myself. I have to say that the preservation of the faith through the generations of Catholic families is a great blessing. Your diligence and persistence is something we all can use in our lives.

  10. LuxPerpetua says:

    My only issue with converts (yes, gasp, I do have some legitimate critiques) is that once some of them join the Church they think they own the place, bringing with them all the baggage of their old religion and then trying to force it (Anglican, Lutheran, Evangelical, etc) on all of the other Catholics out there. Oh that, and just a snide disregard for those who grew up in the faith and never chose to leave for whatever readon (as if the faith requires apostasy and conversion in order to be true).

Leave a Reply