Skip to comments.
Magazine: Growing Trend--Evangelicals ‘Crossing the Tiber’ to Catholicism
TheSacredPage.com ^
| August 6, 2010
| Michael Barber
Posted on 08/07/2010 3:38:50 PM PDT by Salvation
![](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_NLydHsxn-mw/TFw-AnYOMVI/AAAAAAAABQ0/LfHW7UTRsYs/s400/st.+peter+basilica.jpg)
The magazine Religion Dispatches has a new piece up by Jonathan Fitzgerald, entitled, "Evangelicals Crossing the Tiber to Catholicism: Under the radar of most observers a trend is emerging of evangelicals converting to Catholicism."
As he points out, there are an increasing number Evangelicals coming into the Catholic Church. In fact, while my wife and I were at Fuller we witnessed this phenomenon firsthand. Indeed, students would come up and ask us if they could follow us to daily Mass (which was celebrated at a Catholic Church down the street). I went to Mass with many fellow students who had never experienced a Eucharistic liturgy. . . and, for many of them, once they started attending they couldn't stop.
Here's the story as Fitzgerald
reports it:
In the fall of 1999, I was a freshman at Gordon College, an evangelical liberal arts school in Massachusetts. There, fifteen years earlier, a professor named Thomas Howard resigned from the English department when he felt his beliefs were no longer in line with the colleges statement of faith. Despite all those intervening years, during my time at Gordon the specter of Thomas Howard loomed large on campus. The story of his resignation captured my imagination; it came about, ultimately, because he converted to Roman Catholicism. Though his reasons for converting were unclear and perhaps unimaginable to me at the time (they are actually well-documented in his book Evangelical is Not Enough which, back then, I had not yet read), his reasons seemed less important than the knowledge that it could happen. I had never heard of such a thing. . .
. . . [M]y parents never spoke ill of the Catholic Church; though the pastors and congregants of our non-denominational, charismatic church-that-met-in-a-warehouse, often did. Despite my firsthand experience with the Church, between the legend of my parents conversion (anything that happens in a childs life before he is born is the stuff of legends) and the portrait of the Catholic Church as an oppressive institution that took all the fun out of being saved, I understood Catholicism as a religion that a person leaves when she becomes serious about her faith.
And yet, Thomas Howard is only the tip of the iceberg of a hastening trend of evangelicals converting to Catholicism. North Park University professor of religious studies Scot McKnight documented some of the reasons behind this trend in his important 2002 essay entitled From Wheaton to Rome: Why Evangelicals become Roman Catholic. The essay was originally published in the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, and was later included in a collection of conversion stories he co-edited with Hauna Ondrey entitled Finding Faith, Losing Faith: Stories of Conversion and Apostasy.
Thomas Howard comes in at number five on McKnights list of significant conversions, behind former Presbyterian pastor and author of Rome Sweet Home, Scott Hahn, and Marcus Grodi founder of The Coming Home Network International, an organization that provides fellowship, encouragement and support for Protestant pastors and laymen who are somewhere along the journey or have already been received into the Catholic Church, according to their Web site. Other featured converts include singer-songwriter John Michael Talbot and Patrick Madrid, editor of the Surprised by Truth books, which showcase conversion stories.
Would Saint Augustine Go to a Southern Baptist Church in Houston?
McKnight first identified these converts eight years ago, and the trend has continued to grow in the intervening years. It shows up in a variety of places, in the musings of the late Michael Spencer (the Internet Monk) about his wifes conversion and his decision not to follow, as well as at the Evangelical Theological Society where the former President and Baylor University professor Francis J. Beckwith made a well-documented return to Rome. Additionally, the conversion trend is once again picking up steam as the Millennial generation, the first to be born and raised in the contemporary brand of evangelicalism, comes of age. Though perhaps an unlikely setting, The Kings College, an evangelical Christian college in New York City, provides an excellent case study for the way this phenomenon is manifesting itself among young evangelicals.
The Kings College campus is comprised of two floors in the Empire State Building and some office space in a neighboring building on Fifth Avenue. The approximately 300 students who attend Kings are thoughtful, considerate and serious. They are also intellectually curious. This combination of traits, it turns out, makes the college a ripe breeding ground for interest in Roman Catholicism. Among the traits of the Catholic Church that attract TKC studentsand indeed many young evangelicals at largeare its history, emphasis on liturgy, and tradition of intellectualism.
Lucas Croslow was one such student to whom these and other attributes of Catholicism appealed. This past spring, graduating from The Kings College was not the only major change in Croslows life, he was also confirmed into the Catholic Church.
Croslows interest in Catholicism began over six years ago when he was a sophomore in high school. At the time, Croslows Midwestern evangelical church experienced a crisis that is all too common among evangelical churches: what he describes as a crisis of spiritual authority. As a result of experiencing disappointment in his pastor, Croslow began to question everything he had learned from him. This questioning led him to study the historical origins of scripture and then of the Christian church itself. Eventually he concluded that Catholicism in its current form is the closest iteration of the early church fathers intentions. He asks, If Saint Augustine showed up today, could we seriously think that hed attend a Southern Baptist church in Houston? The answer, to Croslow, is a resounding No.
. . .
You can read the rest
here.
TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; History; Theology
KEYWORDS: catholic; catholiclist; converts; evangelical; freformed
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260, 261-280, 281-300 ... 2,881-2,887 next last
To: ansel12
“Just about any Evangelical..” —> that’s the catch — can you name all the groups that you consider Evangelical? Would you consider JWs or Seventh Day Adventists as Evangelical. And there are quite a few way-out-there groups like the Oneness Pentecostals — do you consider them Evangelical, please?
261
posted on
08/08/2010 1:30:37 AM PDT
by
Cronos
(Omnia mutantur, nihil interit. "Allah": Satan's current status)
To: fish hawk
Thank God these guys have seen the light. They finally will have a chance to go to Heaven. God Bless everyone of them and welcome to the One Holy Apostolic Church!!!! The reason I know that these folks will get to Heaven is because they must attend Mass EVERY week and not when they feel like it with other religions. Plus you comment was not needed.
To: Cronos
Even some Catholics are considered Evangelical, you are the one that made the mistake in posting that the Catholic church wanted to re baptise Evangelicals, you were wrong, but perhaps you can make your own explanation of why you claimed that , don’t ask me to.
Jehovah’s Witnesses are not even Christians, of course they don’t fall under that title, I noticed that you used David Koresh as your example of an Evangelical preacher in another post, you have some very unusual ideas.
263
posted on
08/08/2010 1:39:46 AM PDT
by
ansel12
(Mitt: "I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush")
To: fish hawk
Oops sorry about my post. I really really really wish we had an edit button on this site.
To: napscoordinator
God Bless everyone of them and welcome to the One Holy Apostolic Church!!!! And Catholic. Amen!
To: hinckley buzzard
The ignorance of your post is so baffeling that I don’t know where to start. First of all Catholics hear the Bible read every three years!!!!! Yes I said it...EVERY THREE YEARS! That is just during Mass. Not to mention our own self Bible Reading. There is no way that anybody who turns 30 in other religions hear read the Bible 10 times. Ok more fair turning 60, you will have heard the Bible read 20 times!!! That is incredible. I am sure other religions wish they could be half as good at reading/hearing the word.
To: ansel12
You are so disgusting. What anti-Catholic bigotry. Knock it off!!!!
To: napscoordinator
well, no, the primary decision is the acceptance of Christ as your saviour.
268
posted on
08/08/2010 1:52:39 AM PDT
by
Cronos
(Omnia mutantur, nihil interit. "Allah": Satan's current status)
To: Cronos
You really should let people know that you lifted that post from an article, I have read it before and they are wrong about the 1956 election and they don't mention the 2000 election, nor the 1976 election.
They make a deal of GW winning 52% of Catholics as an incumbent in 2004 but that was an election when 56% of HISPANIC Protestants voted for GW.
The article makes excuses for an almost perfect liberal voting record of 170 years by Catholics. It was Catholics keeping FDR in office in 1940 and 1944 when the Protestants were voting against him.
269
posted on
08/08/2010 1:53:13 AM PDT
by
ansel12
(Mitt: "I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush")
To: napscoordinator
No, you knock off the personal attacks.
270
posted on
08/08/2010 1:54:27 AM PDT
by
ansel12
(Mitt: "I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush")
To: vladimir998; ansel12
45% of Protestants voted for Obama. That means MORE PROTESTANTS VOTED FOR OBAMA THAN DID CATHOLICS BECAUSE THERE ARE ONLY 60 MILLION CATHOLICS BUT ALMOST 300 MILLION PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY.
You told that snot nose creep. Good for you Vladimir998!!!!
To: ansel12
Ok, rephrasing it for you
Finally, do note that this article is specifically about Pentecostals/Baptists/Fundamentalists getting confirmed and if necessary baptised into Church, not about Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists etc.
272
posted on
08/08/2010 1:55:38 AM PDT
by
Cronos
(Omnia mutantur, nihil interit. "Allah": Satan's current status)
To: ansel12
What about James and Tami Faye Baker, Ted Haggard? They are clearly not someone you would want representing the Protestant Religon but they certainly represent the Protestant Religon regardless.
To: Halgr; All
Impossible
Evangelicals are not Presbyterians, methodists or unitarians.
274
posted on
08/08/2010 2:00:27 AM PDT
by
Halgr
(Once a Marine, always a Marine - Semper Fi)
To: napscoordinator; hinckley buzzard
I'm sure you mean to say that:
1. During mass, we read the Gospels, the OT and the epistles / Revelation each week.
2. This is read through, such that even if one does not read of their own accord, one still hears the ENTIRE Word of God read over the course of 3 years.
3. Then, this is repeated the next 3 years and onwards
4. In addition, many Catholics DO read the Bible on their own at home -- more should read it more, yes, but many do already read the Bible daily.
5. Finally, many who read do actually go out and LIVE the Word (ex. Mother's Teresa's Roses where they offer a hot bath and a hot meal to the poor living in the slums in Bombay and there are many laity run organisations as well)
6. The Church encourages us to read, hear and live The Word of God.
275
posted on
08/08/2010 2:01:24 AM PDT
by
Cronos
(Omnia mutantur, nihil interit. "Allah": Satan's current status)
To: napscoordinator
I see you continuing the personal attacks, you do realize that while a MINORITY of non Catholic Christians voted for Obama, a MAJORITY of Catholic Christians voted for Obama.
Why is it like that? Why have non Catholic Christians always been voting majority Republican except in 1932, 1936 and 1964 to look at modern history?
276
posted on
08/08/2010 2:03:45 AM PDT
by
ansel12
(Mitt: "I was an independent during the time of Reagan-Bush. I'm not trying to return to Reagan-Bush")
To: Salvation; ansel12
Then why is it that only Catholics are out praying in front of abortion clinics?
Actions speak louder than words!
Salvation that is brilliant!!!! Ansel12 is speechless....I love it.
To: ansel12
Of course, I make a deal of 52% of Catholics voting for George W Bush in 2004. You made a big deal about the same number voting otherwise.
Secondly, as a religious minority that was the target of a political movement (the know-nothings), Catholics naturally in the 1800s voted for the party that said it was against that (note: I said "said", not "was").
This was true and held true right through to FDR.
The numbers for FDR dropped but I would rate that as distorted due to anti-incumbency coupled with a war.
Of critical importance is that Catholics voted for Republicans who had Catholic social issues at heart like Eisenhower and George W Bush.
George W Bush made significant inroads among Catholic voters because he used languageand chosen issuesthat appeal to Catholics. Compassionate conservative, after all, is a term that could describe many Catholics, who are conservative on social issues yet favor government programs for the poor.
Why did 48% not vote Democrat at the last election? I think they were the church-going ones and were the ones who actually THOUGHT and didn't get caught up in the entire "CHANGE" chants.
The thing is that in most elections there are multiple variables -- as a good Catholic, I cannot vote for anyone who supports abortion, but then that limits the pool and I may have to choose someone who supports other things that I find intolerable -- this is more the case in Europe than America, I agree, but I'm just giving an example.
Secondly, I would like to see the numbers of below 30 and above 30s who voted for Ohbummer and the number of those who attended service/mass at least once a week versus those who didn't
I feel sure that the majority of those who went for a Protestant service or a Catholic/Orthodox mass at least once a week did NOT vote for ohbummer. I also feel sure (and I think I read it somewhere after the Pres election) that the majority of the +30 (or was it +40) year olds did NOT vote for Ohbummer.
278
posted on
08/08/2010 2:10:14 AM PDT
by
Cronos
(Omnia mutantur, nihil interit. "Allah": Satan's current status)
To: ansel12
I don’t care. You are posting crap and I am calling you out on it. You were so degrading with that crack about chants that I am completely disgusted with you right now. It was unnecessary to even post.
To: Cronos; hinckley buzzard
Yes! If only I could be so articulate. That is what I call an intelligent post.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260, 261-280, 281-300 ... 2,881-2,887 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson