# Evangelical Conversions to Roman Catholicism



## matt01 (Jul 28, 2004)

Has anyone read anything about the somewhat recent epidemic of evangelicals converting to Rome? I admit that it is not a huge issue, but it is definitely interesting.


----------



## FrozenChosen (Jul 28, 2004)

It certainly is disconcerting.


----------



## Scott (Jul 28, 2004)

Who and how many have been converting? I have read a number of things by Catholic converts. The doctrinal converts (as opposed to those who convert for marriage or similar reasons) tend to focus on one or more of the following: (1) the historicity of the church (the claim that the Protestant church is novel and not rooted in the apostolic church), (2) the validity of ordination of church officials (apostolic succession is absolutely necessary, according to Catholics), (3) worship (liturgical vs. preacher / sermon oriented), or (4) the unity of the church (32,000 Protestant denominations according to UN stats). There are other things, but these come up very often. 

I would say that these are all important issues that need better answers than typically provided by evangelicals. For example, the great Reformer Francis Turretin's treatment of the ordination of clerical officials is very different than modern evangelicals, which tend to be pretty low church. Turretin argued that in ordinary circumstances ordination should always be done through the existing, institutional church. he also defended Reformed ordinations on two ground: (1) they were properly ordained in the Catholic church (which he held as valid orders), or (2) extreme emergency - where the people did not have such a pastor and the care of their souls necessitated extraordinary measures. Anyway, such a view naturallu tends toward a limited form of apostolic succession. In contrast, baptists and others often just get together and start a church somewhere, without a proper understanding of the lawfulness of ordination.

Anyway, that is just one example.

Scott


----------



## cupotea (Jul 29, 2004)

I think we may be seeing the fruit of the low church/church growth movement...especially the latter. Churches who have given themselves over to the 'seeker-sensitive' movement tend to be like the river Platte, a mile wide and an inch deep in liturgy, doctrine and in tradition.

Christians are introduced to Jesus in these churches and then...well, not much else happens. They might be given a survey to ascertain their 'spiritual gift' or temperament and they will be given ample opportunity to develope 'life-skills' but beyond 'upbeat music' and a 'relevant message' on Sunday, they don't get much in the way of doctrinal, propositional truth, a sense of being historically tied to the Church Catholic or a sense that 'church' is something more than a social club.

The Roman Church presents itslef as a monolithic entity that 'hasn't changed in 2000 years' claims direct institution by Christ Himself, has a complicated (if ultimately incoherent) theological system and a rich body of traditions. For a new Christian coming from a shallow church where they've perhaps bever been grounded in the whole counsel of God, the 5 Solae or confessional Doctrine such a church can look very inviting...

Frankly, it's the fault of these weak, Ichabod churches.

That's my 2 cents.


----------



## FrozenChosen (Jul 30, 2004)

That is what is so frusterating, Steadfast. But I think you hit the nail on the head.


----------



## openairboy (Aug 2, 2004)

*Conversion to Rome*

I have to admit, I am pleasantly surprised by the responses of this thread. I saw the title, read the first quote and thought for sure that one of the first responses would be, "You see, people love works righteousness". I am glad that the problem has been put on protestantism, because, I believe, that is where the problem lies. I grew up in the Episcopal Church, converted to "evangelicalicism", but I am now squarely in the Reformed (catholic) tradition for many of the aforementioned reasons, especially the preacher centered vs. the liturgical and sacramental view of worship. The evangelical view that "church" isn't necessary for salvation is all tied into why I changed my mind. When "church" is simply me singing some songs and listening to some man teach (and maybe meeting for fellowship), than it simply isn't necessary, because I can find both of these through my radio, t.v. or local IHOP. However, when the liturgy is central, especially the Lord's Supper, than participation in Kingdom via liturgy is essential.

If you follow American Protestantism for the last few decades just look how many different "movements" you have: Jesus Movement, Campus Crusade, Navs, Mega-Church, worship wars, contemporary music, charismatic, Willowcreek, Emerging Church, and the list could be multiplied ad nauseum. When you look to Constantinople and Rome they seem to possess an internal consistency that Protestantism lacks, especially the Eastern Church. No, I can't end up on their shores, but my original departure from Canterbury doesn't seem too far away.

openairboy


----------



## Scott (Aug 2, 2004)

Keith:

I hear you. I note that after Vatican II, Roman Catholic worship, at least in the West, has descended into some of the same anarchy. You are likely to see many of the problems that many modern Protestant churches adopt. You are right that Orthodoxy has not succumbed to that.

I know so many evangelicals who don't go to church for a variety of reasons. One reason is that they have a wrong view of worship. Protestant worship is often so sermon-focused that worship comes to be seen as mainly a religious lecture with the primary focus as learning. The goal of worship is seen as religious education. When people rate Protestant churches, ratings are often according to how good a speaker the preacher is. With such views in today's world, people can easily find substitutes. You can get tapes of the best preachers for free or at little cost. It is easier to listen to a sermon in a car than to get up early Sunday morning. If education is the primary goal, substitutes are easy to find.

In contrast, if public worship is seen primarily as a meeting with the Triune God, then it is a different matter. You can't get this from the radio. The liturgical structure should be set up as the people coming before God. 

A proper understanding of the sacraments is crucial to this. People must understand that only lawfully ordained ministers can properly serve communion and that communion actually conveys grace. In that case, people receive something they can receive nowehere else, radio, tape, or otherwise. 

Scott


----------



## RickyReformed (Sep 12, 2004)

*post*

I know this topic has been cold for a while but I was wondering what you guys thought of this:

http://www.puritans.net/news/shepherd120803.htm

It seems from this article that Norman Shepherd was instrumental in sending some Protestant pastors on their journey to Rome.

I, for one, don't know of any evangelicals that have left for Rome from the 'seeker-sensitive', low-church movement. Perhaps some members of this board may know of some, but the Romish converts that I've heard of seem to have come out of Reformed, Episcopalian, and Lutheran churches i.e. 'high church/high liturgy'. (Check out the background of the men mentioned in this article titled "Protestant Pastors on the Road to Rome"

http://www.trinityfoundation.org/journal.php?id=135

Is there some common denominator that least [u:455bcbafc4]some[/u:455bcbafc4] of these men share? I used to think it was theonomy/post-millenialism/presuppositionalism (and to be fair, I know of at least one convert to Popery that credits his conversion to presuppositionalism); but the RCUS denomination - a theonomic, post-millenial, presuppositional denomination - was to first to condemn the Auburn Avenue/'Federal Vision' proponents, many of which advocate that Roman Catholics are our brothers (never mind that little incident we had with Rome called the "Reformation".)

What say you?


----------



## Craig (Sep 12, 2004)

I have seen people go back to Rome that weren't Reformed...they were Baptists.

I would agree, though, that many of the "converts" to Rome seem to be Reformed folk. I do think that unregenerates that are generally interested in religion tend to go for high church liberalism or Catholicism...that's the new trend now that the seeker sensitive movement is waning. They're done feeling good for a while and want to look good.


----------



## Learner (Sep 12, 2004)

Craig , do you care to qualify your comment ? You said : " I have seen people go back to Rome that weren't Reformed... they were Baptists . " There are more varieties of Baptists out there than you can shake a stick at . But a number of them are not Arminian , they are biblical Calvinists , i.e. Reformed . Hopefully none of them have trod on the road to Rome . I can see mainstream Baptists possibly going in that direction though .


----------



## Craig (Sep 12, 2004)

I meant non Calvinistic baptist...not sure what exactly, but not reformed, definitely arminian, though.


----------



## Scott (Sep 13, 2004)

One challenge is that there is no united Protestantism. Protestant denominations and independent congregations (denominations of one, really), often have little in common other than opposition to Rome. Protestant denominations are like individual countries in varying states of disagreement with one another. One thing you can count on, though, is a common opposition to Rome's claim, of monopoly, as this is necessary to justify each country's existence.

The article strangely refers to Hahn as an "impressionable Protestant," suggesting that he had some weakness. Hahn did graduate number 1 in his class from Fuller Seminary, the main evangelical (not Reformed) seminary in the country. Matatics was likewise a very smart guy. These are not patsies or easy marks.

Scott


----------



## Scott (Sep 13, 2004)

I have not seen the numbers, but I think it is helpful to note thew number of Catholics that become Protestant. At a personal level, I know many.

My general observation (and this is largely my experience, not something scientific) is that Protestants that convert to Catholicism tend to do so for intellectual reasons. They encounter arguments about apostolic succession, come to see the Protestant views of the Bible and ecclesiology are often ad hoc, etc. This sustains them even though modern Catholicism is a mess and rife with liberalism, even by their own admission. Hahn, for example, has allot of criticism for 90 percent of the American Catholic church.

In contrast, people who convert to Protestantism often do so because they experience the power of God. They see the effects of faith in the life of some particular Protestants they know. Some come for intellectual reasons. I know one, for example, who converted by listening to Sproul's radio show. 

Scott


----------



## matt01 (Sep 13, 2004)

Scott wrote:
" Hahn did graduate number 1 in his class from Fuller Seminary, the main evangelical (not Reformed) seminary in the country. Scott"

Close but not quite. Hahn graduated from Gordon-Conwell, a school which has unfortunately seen a number of her graduates head down the long road to Rome. 

Here is part of his bio:

Dr. Hahn received his BA in 1979 from Grove City College in Pennsylvania with a triple major of theology, philosophy, and economics (magna cum laude). He obtained his MDiv (summa cum laude) from Gordon-Conwell Seminary in 1982. In May 1995, he was awarded a PhD in systematic theology from Marquette University (Phi Beta Kappa).

Though the Trinity article is somewhat interesting, there is a better one in the September 2002 issue of the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. It doesn't go as far into depth as possible, but does give some interesting highlights of the backgrounds of a few of the high profile converts.

The best way to learn about this, or see it in action is to watch The Journey Home. It is a talk-type show with former protestant Marcus Grodi and recent converts. I watch a few months back as he talked with a Ph.D who had moved from mainstream Protestantism to Episcopalian, and finally to Rome. It was for the most part depressing


----------



## Scott (Sep 16, 2004)

The Journey Home, a Catholic television program concerning converts to Catholicism, will have Gerald Tritle as a guest on Sept. 27. 

http://www.ewtn.com/journeyhome/journeyhome_guests.htm

You may have heard of Tritle. He was a Reformed and recently converted. There was a buzz about this in certain internet circles. He was part of either a small Reformed denomination or just an independent Reformed church. As I recall, he had been excommunicated from the OPC prior to that.

Anyway, this may interest some.

Scott


----------



## Irishcat922 (Sep 16, 2004)

Didn't Packer write an article about this very subject awhile back, I distinctly remember reading something on this by him. I'll see if I can find it and post it if it is not to long.


----------



## fredtgreco (Sep 17, 2004)

[quote:f59209fc33="Scott"]The Journey Home, a Catholic television program concerning converts to Catholicism, will have Gerald Tritle as a guest on Sept. 27. 

http://www.ewtn.com/journeyhome/journeyhome_guests.htm

You may have heard of Tritle. He was a Reformed and recently converted. There was a buzz about this in certain internet circles. He was part of either a small Reformed denomination or just an independent Reformed church. As I recall, he had been excommunicated from the OPC prior to that.

Anyway, this may interest some.

Scott[/quote:f59209fc33]

Tritle was a "pastor" of a church in Ohio that was part of a two church denomination. The other church was in Texas. I will be very interested to see this program. Tritle credits Shepherd with his return to Rome. The last thing he preached on for several months before leaving was Shepherd's thesis in his Call of Grace.

He was indeed disciplined by the OPC and was refused membership in the PCA.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Sep 17, 2004)

I'm not sure I agree that the Reformed camp is the "side" from which Protestants are flooding (trickling?) into the RCC. We are enmeshed in the Reformed milleu, and it would not be strange for us to notice first the departures that were close at hand. Especially if it seemed like a "rash" of them. The Reformed faith (I would say) is also the camp from which you are likely to get "noticable," "high-profile" defections [a Cold War analogy]--because the intellectual rigor that acquaintance with and mastery of the Bible's coherent message tends to produce the opposite reaction to Rome (provided the H.S. is at work).

Sometimes a line diagram helps us understand non-linear concepts. Or a graph. Or a circle. Maybe that one is best here. Picture Rome as side A of the circle, Protestantism as side B. Rome can be approached from either direction. From the Reformed position directly opposite orthodox Roman dogma, one can either march back to Rome liturgically, intellectually, and historically; or contra-liturgically, anti-intellectually, and a-historically. 

[this kind of explanation would also work to describe how free societies can move toward totalitarianism--either by a controlled and managed arc, or by an anarchical trajectory that sees (in the end) the imposition of despotic order upon chaos]

We Reformed Puritan types (on this board anyway) tend to be found somewhere on the liturgic/intellect/historic arc of Protestantism. We are frankly unfamiliar with the other end of Protestantism unless we came out of that segment and moved into this territory, or have studied it, have friends or family there, etc. If all a certain church has to describe it's theology of ministry is, "We're not (Roman) Catholic"--if that peg fails--it's not a long trip, but an exceedingly short one into the arms of Rome.

God's grace plants us where we are. We could have stayed where we were; or if we had a mind to rove, we might have ended up going another direction--toward Rome. Or maybe we came around [i:8587d4b60c]right through[/i:8587d4b60c] Rome, and safely out the other side. Or we might have gone right through Reformed thought and carried on right through to "Rome Sweet Home" (the title of S. Hahn's book). 

"Let him that thinketh he stands take heed lest he fall."


----------



## Scott (Sep 17, 2004)

Contra:

It would be interesting to see statistics. (Sadly) I would for the most part lump the Reformed camp in with general low-church evangelicalism, as in our day it seems to have the character of an evangelical church with the addition infant baptism and predestination. So, I would be interested to see how many people come out of the evangelical camp.

The last I heard is that 150,000 Protestants converted to RCC last year. I have to think that most of these are through marriage (not conviction) and involve mainline Prots.

Scott


----------



## Scott (Sep 21, 2004)

From Scott Hahn's (Presbyterian convert to Rome) Rome Sweet Home (he really likes stupid puns - they are all over his books):

[quote:f2bd310dfa]We got a call from a small church in Fairfax, Virginia, that was looking for a minister. When I candidated for the position at Trinity Presbyterian Church, I shared my views and concerns regarding justification - that I took Dr. Shepherd's position. They understood and said they did, too. So, shortly before graduation, I accepted the pastorate at Trinity, as well as a teaching position in their high school, Fairfax Christian School. [/quote:f2bd310dfa]

It is interesting how an interest in Shepherd preceded the conversions of Hahn and Tritle.


----------



## cupotea (Sep 21, 2004)

It's also interesting that Hahn says that he couldn't find a single professor at Gordon-Conwell who could explain or defend [i:8e911d6c0a]Sola Scriptura[/i:8e911d6c0a].

I understand that G-C isn't what it once was, but really now, Scott (Hahn)...NOBODY?


----------



## RamistThomist (Sep 21, 2004)

Dr. Gerstner demolished that claim in [i:a4f3058553]Justification by Faith ALONE: The Doctrine by Which the Church Stands of Falls[/i:a4f3058553]. It is in the appendix, "Rome Not Home." Basically what Hahn is saying is that Roger Nicole and others could not articulate Reformed Theology.


----------

