Customer Reviews

Return to Rome: Confessions of an Evangelical Catholic

5 star:		(11)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

When Dr. Francis Beckwith announced that he was stepping down as President of the Evangelical Theological Society and returning to the Catholic Church of his youth, it caused quite a stir. Catholic and Evangelical blogs alike parsed every word and action of Dr. Beckwith, either rejoicing at his move or trying to divine the "real reason" behind his conversion. Now we can hear the full story in his book, "Return to Rome: Confessions of an Evangelical Catholic."

As a former Evangelical who converted to Catholicism over 15 years ago, I was eagerly anticipating Dr. Beckwith's book. I was especially intrigued that he continues to consider himself both Evangelical and Catholic, designations I've retained as well. Then when I saw that two former professors of mine - Dr. Edwin Yamauchi, a prominent Evangelical, and Dr. Scott Hahn, a prominent Catholic convert - had both endorsed this book, I knew I had to read it as soon as possible.

I was not disappointed. It was difficult to put this book down: personal, humorous, and engaging, "Return to Rome" is a marvelous account of one man's journey back to the faith of his fathers. Nothing in the book is new when it comes to doctrinal debates, although Dr. Beckwith's erudite style admirably adds to the Protestant-Catholic discussion. The real value in this book comes from Dr. Beckwith's charitable attitude towards his non-Catholic brothers and sisters, and his continued admiration for (and attachment to) all that is true and right within Evangelicalism. The danger for the convert is that he rejects not only the errors of his past, but that he also rejects even those things that are good and beautiful about his former way of life. Dr. Beckwith does not fall into this trap. He recognizes that Evangelicalism's emphasis on an intimate relationship with Christ and its love of the Bible are the proper attitude of all Christians, and in becoming Catholic, he does not jettison these impulses but instead is able to more fully live them out.

I recommend this book as highly as possible for both Catholics and Protestants. Catholics will of course be encouraged that such a great mind has returned to the Church, but they also can learn a lot about the deep love their separated brethren have for the Lord Jesus Christ and the Scriptures. Protestants can discover, in a non-polemical way, why it is that many of their intellectuals have joined the Catholic Church over the years. Any sincere Christian, regardless of their tradition, will be edified by the deep love this man has for the Lord, and will be supported in their own walk to serve Christ in a deeper way.

In one sense, there's no need for a book like this to be written. The tale of a prominent Protestant ethicist and philosopher, former president of the Evangelical Theological Society, returning to the communion of his youth, the Roman Catholic Church, really isn't news; this kind of thing goes on quite regularly--Evangelical Christians becoming Catholic, and Catholic Christians becoming Evangelical.

What is unique about this story is that Francis Beckwith wants to continue to be considered as an Evangelical even as he returns to his Roman Catholic roots.

How does that work? Isn't there a great divide that separates Evangelicals from Catholics?

Not necessarily, says Beckwith, and, one might add, a growing number of ecumenically minded Christians, from both sides of the aisle, so to speak. For example, from the Protestant side, you have Brian McLaren, with A Generous Orthodoxy, in which he claims that, as a Protestant Christian, he is free to adopt the Catholic liturgy (or at least portions thereof) as his rightful patrimony, as well as Mark Noll's interesting book, Is the Reformation Over?, not to mention D. H. Williams's exercise in Evangelical Ressourcement, Evangelicals and Tradition. From the Catholic side you have books like Louis Bouyer's Spirit and Forms of Protestantism and Word, Church and Sacraments, as well as Jean Guitton's great and irenic book, The Church and the Gospel.

What does all this mean?

For one thing, it means that the divided Church is a scandal, per se. In a sense, it doesn't even matter who's to blame: the mere FACT of the divided Church brings scandal to Christianity. The question is, how to get it back together? The uniqueness of Beckwith's position is his idea that one can be a (Roman) Catholic and an Evangelical, but it's difficult if not impossible to be and Evangelical and a Catholic. Why? Because Catholicism is great enough (in the sense of its EXTENT) to embrace Evangelicalism, but that Evangelicalism isn't great enough to embrace Catholicism.

In other words, Catholicism contains within itself the possibility of an Evangelical understanding as part of its legitimate heritage, but Evangelicalism doesn't contain within itself the possibility of a Catholic self-understanding as part of its legitimate heritage.

The key issue is probably Evangelicalism's understanding of church. For Evangelicals, church can't help but be an epiphenomenon, a contingency, something that comes about as a consequence of one's decision to trust Jesus as one's savior. Thus, if church isn't essential, something that has an essence apart from one's personal decision for Jesus as savior, it HAS no essence, and, consequently, is not an historical, visible presence. It truly is an effect. But that can't be the basis for true ecumenism. After all, if the church has no historical existence, how can one know what is and isn't the true church? One can't, and, therefore, there can be no basis for unity.

Thus the beauty of this book is its simple testimony to the idea that you can be an Evangelical Catholic, but that it's very difficult if not impossible to be a Catholic Evangelical--to which there are a growing number of Evangelical Catholics that bear witness.

A couple of years ago Francis Beckwith created a small sensation in Christian circles when he decided to return to the Catholic Church while still the president of the Evangelical Theological Society. This book is his account of the events and deliberations that prompted him to make such a move. Even though the book focuses on this particular move, it is filled with theological and personal reflections that can be of interest to many who are interested in the role that Christian life plays in America in the past fifty years. Like most conversion stories, this book narrates both the personal experiences and theological reflections. This is not a triumphalist book that will try to pound a particular doctrinal message, but a frank and honest reflection of someone who tries to live his Christian vocation with integrity and sincerity. Rather than stressing the discontinuities between his two lives as a Catholic and one as an Evangelical protestant, Beckwith portrays all of these transitions as part of his spiritual and intellectual growth. He is very charitable and respectful of all of his erstwhile Evangelical Protestant colleagues, and tries to maintain good relations with them. He also makes a powerful case that there is nothing intrinsically contradictory in being an Evangelical and being a Catholic, and a chapter in this book is dedicated to making an argument for inclusion of Catholics in Evangelical Theological Society. He maintains also that there are many things that faithful Catholics can learn from Evangelicals, and hopefully this book can serve the purpose of bridging the gap between those two sometimes-estranged communities.

As I wrote this review it became clear to me that I was actually writing about many books, and had to work hard to stay focused on this one. Perhaps this review is a "tale of two books:" Beckwith's volume, and the book of apologetics written by Norman Geissler in response. Beckwith's book is not a book of apologetics in the strict sense. Nor is it completely a memoir. It may be a mix of both genres, but to the mind of this reviewer, it transcends most books of either sort.

This book reads very much like an explanation. Not designed to be a thorough apologetic nor a complete rejection of another Christian tradition (like Geissler's uncharitable, bigoted, and failed attempt at a "rebuttal": Is Rome the True Church?: A Consideration of the Roman Catholic Claim) it is rather a compelling narrative that seeks to explain why the president of a prominent evangelical theological organization (the ETS) would return home to the Church of his youth.

The typical biblical proof-texts are not hammered home to excess and exegesis on them is not shared in great length, which is a good thing. As compelling as the old arguments are, protestants have proof-texts of their own, and one can only hear the same old Bible verses screamed at the top of one's lungs uncharitably so many times before one becomes convinced that Christian charity is absent on the part of the players in the argument. This book on the other hand is a level headed, clear, compelling story and pretty thorough explanation for the reasons for Beckwith's conversion, and it is told without acrimony and without a meanness of spirit. That says something about the quality of Dr. Beckwith as a man. Beckwith knew that there are Eastern Orthodox in the group he was essentially forced to leave, and one can hear the hurt that Geissler's (and probably others') bigotry caused. After all, if people who believe in a Catholic view of ordination and the sacraments were allowed to stay in the ETS, why wasn't Geissler? The answer is simple: plain bigotry on the part of some in the evangelical establishment.

I read this book during an interesting time in my life. I had witnessed a small scandal on the part of a priest up-close (nothing sexual, just an abuse of power), and was considering the priesthood question very closely. When one spends years studying the issues that divide protestants and Catholics, one discovers something. There is really only one issue that divides these two Christian traditions: the nature of the priesthood.

It is not too great an oversimplification to admit that every protestant doctrine, from sola fide to sola scriptura, was developed by the reformers in response to abuses of power on the part of Catholic clerics. The reasons for the protestant doctrines are historical and rational. The reformers had the Bible as a source of doctrine (in that sense they were still Catholics) but they perceived in the priesthood a threat to independence, and an authority that was far too often abused. A theology and an exegetical system had to be developed that removed the traditional role of the priest as a vehicle for Christ's grace and allowed the believer to be saved without the interference of sacraments that far too often seemed to come with strings attached. It is again not too great an oversimplification to say that Luther provided the exegesis in support of this attack on the priesthood, and Calvin provided the first clear systematic theology doing the same.

Does one need sacramental confession in order to have sins forgiven? The protestant response must be "no," for to say yes would require the priesthood. Does one need the Eucharist in order to be saved? The protestant response must either be a highly nuanced "yes" or an outright "no" because to admit the Eucharist is to open the door for the priesthood. Can the Magesterium be an authoritative teacher? The protestant response must be "no" for to say yes would admit that the Holy Spirit leads clerics in a way that is different from the lay Christian believer.

Now, there are middle ground approaches to all these questions (see Anglicanism as one example) but essentially this admittedly simplified analysis holds water. Our differences are ultimately about the priesthood, and any reasonable and scholarly protestant or Catholic should admit this. If the traditional Church taught that ordination was a sacrament that was an efficacious sign of God's grace that left a permanent mark on the soul of the ordained in a way transforming him into something else: a person capable of acting "in persona Christi," then the protestants had to develop a exegetical system that attacked this understanding.

And I was sorely tempted to agree with them. I had reason to go look. One of the books I read was "Is Rome the True Church" by Geissler and, for balance, I also read this volume.

Fortunately (or unfortunately?) for me, the two volumes are worlds apart. Beckwith's story is humane and told with heart and charity. Geissler's foray into apologetics is amateurish and (given his scholarly background) unforgivably tendentious and simple minded.

In the end, after much soul searching over the course of a year, and a tremendous amount of reading, from these two volumes, to Michael Davies on the priesthood, to the Institutes by Calvin, to reading in the Summa, I came to the conclusion that I had to remain a Catholic, if an uncomfortable one. And I can relate to Dr. Beckwith's journey very well as a result; I am grateful for this compelling and charitable little book.

I strongly recommend this book to anyone, protestant or Catholic, interested in discovering why someone would travel to the Catholic faith from another Christian tradition. It is charitable, kind, an in no way a rejection of all things protestant. One thing that kept me away from becoming a protestant myself was the "witness" of some evangelicals, especially fundamentalists, who seem to have their whole identity wrapped up proclaiming a vicious anti-Catholic polemic. Perhaps it is just because I spent too much time online while searching, but it seems to me that for every Billy Graham there are five Jack Chicks... and that is a scary proposition.

I followed a path similar to Frank Beckwith's returning to the Catholic Church in 1998. I, too, spent most of my time away from the Catholic Church within evangelical Protestant circles. I even crossed paths with Frank Beckwith from time to time, most often because of a common interest in philosophy and worldview questions. Consequently, I had a very personal interest in the story of his reversion to Catholicism.
It was no surprise that the questions and issues that prompted Beckwith's reversion were the same as those of most other thoughtful Protestant converts and reverts. If that were all there was to this book, it would make a good read, but it would be just one more in a long line of conversion stories.
What makes Beckwith's story somewhat unique is that reading his story, you sense his love and appreciation for his evangelical friends and colleagues. Rather than emphasizing divisions between evangelicals and Catholics, he seems to be urging his Protestant friends to open their thinking to realize that Catholics, too, might be considered to be evangelicals. He urges Protestants to reconsider barriers they have erected against Catholics.
Of course, he argues for the correctness of Catholic theological conclusions, but he does so in a gracious manner that invites discussion. Because of that gracious tone, this is a book that I recommend to both Catholic and Protestant readers.

In 2007, Francis Beckwith, the president of the Evangelical Theological Society, announced that he was stepping down from his post after having converted back to the Catholic Church of his childhood. Beckwith's announcement sent shock waves through the evangelical world. Even some of Beckwith's closest friends did not see his conversion coming.

Why did Frank Beckwith, a well-respected evangelical scholar and author, return to the church of his childhood? Return to Rome: Confessions of an Evangelical Catholic (2008, Brazos Press) is a personal memoir that tells the story of Beckwith's decision to rejoin the Roman Catholic Church.

Return to Rome is primarily a narrative, although it is laced with Catholic apologetics, evangelical appreciation and criticism, as well as theological reflection. Speaking of his book, Beckwith states:

"It is not meant to be an apologetic for Catholicism or an autobiography in the strict sense." (16)

Despite Beckwith's stated intentions in writing this memoir, it is hard to see this book as something less than a Catholic apologetic, since he devotes a considerable amount of space to delineating the theological reasons for his movement back toward the Roman Catholic Church.

Beckwith begins his story with his departure from Roman Catholicism. Raised in the atmosphere of post-Vatican II Catholicism, Beckwith received little conservative and traditional teaching.

"My religion teachers often spoke of Catholicism as `our tradition' rather than as a cluster of beliefs that were true. This relativizing of the faith did not engender confidence in the young students under their tutelage. Moreover, basic Catholic doctrine was often presented inadequately." (36)

He writes honestly about the weaknesses of the Catholic environment of his childhood:

"I believe that the Catholic Church's weakness was presenting the renewal movements like the charismatic movement as something new and not part of the Church's theological traditions. For someone like me, interested in both the spiritual and intellectual grounding of the Christian faith, I didn't need the `folk Mass' with cute nuns and hip priests playing `Kumbaya' with guitars, tambourines, and harmonicas." (38)

Reading over the reasons for Beckwith's departure from the Roman Catholic Church, I could not help but wonder if perhaps evangelicals are making the same mistakes he observed in the post-Vatican II era. What if evangelicals are watering down biblical truth in an effort to be "cool" and appeal to certain segments of our society? What if evangelicals are repeating the mistakes the Roman Catholics were making 30 years ago? Might such a development lead more people to Rome?

Beckwith recognizes that the Catholic Church's intellectual tradition was also very attractive. He writes:

"My experience has been that most very intelligent Christians who had come to a deeper walk with Christ in independent Evangelical and/or non-liturgical churches often gravitate toward a theological and/or ecclesiastical tradition that has strong historical roots, such as Calvinism, Lutheranism, Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy." (44)

Beckwith does not sugarcoat his experience as a young child in Catholicism. He asks tough questions of Catholicism:

"...The American Catholic Church has to ask itself a serious and painful question: is there anything that we did that helped facilitate the departure of these talented and devoted people from our communion?" (45)

Beckwith recounts the passion of his early years as an evangelical. He speaks fondly of Francis Schaeffer. He relates his enthusaism upon becoming convinced that certain creeds are authoritative renderings of Christian doctrine. He outlines the major steps in his education and his rise to prominence in evangelical scholarship.

Readers might be surprised to discover some charismatic tendencies in Beckwith's memoir. He describes a vision of Jesus that his wife had. He interprets events in his life as signs of God's approval of his departure from the evangelical faith back to Roman Catholicism.

Beckwith devotes considerable space to the doctrine of justification by faith, which is, of course, the defining difference between Protestants and Catholics. I found his exposition of the Protestant view to be somewhat reductionistic. For example, he writes:

"The grace one receives is legal or forensic. This means that grace is not real stuff that changes nature, but merely the name given to God's graciousness by legally accounting to us Christ's righteousness." (85)

I do not know of any Protestant who argues that God's grace is not transformative. Protestants take care to note that the basis of our justification is faith alone in Jesus Christ. But that does not exclude the transforming power of God's grace. We simply do not call the moral transformation "justification." Protestants are careful to avoid making our own righteousness the basis for our salvation.

The end of the book forcefully argues for inclusion of Catholics in the Evangelical Theological Society.

"I still believe that the ETS doctrinal statement is broad enough to allow Catholic members." (119)

I actually agree with Beckwith on this issue. I do not classify Catholics as evangelicals in the classic sense, but if Beckwith is making a case for Catholic membership in ETS based solely upon the society's doctrinal statement, then he is correct. There is nothing in this document that would explicitly exclude Catholic members.

Beckwith bolsters his case by bringing good evidence:

"Pastors and theologians like Boyd, Pinnock, and Sanders are constrained only by `inerrancy' and `the Trinity,' which means (at least theoretically) that they could embrace any one of a variety of heresies condemned by the ancient Church and yet still remain an ETS member in good standing: Nestorianism, Monophysitism, Pelagianism, semi-Pelagianism, or the denial of Christ's eternal sonship. Yet oddly, Catholics who embrace the Church that claimed to have the ecclesiastical authority to condemn these heresies, and which provided to its separated progeny, including Evangelicals, the resources and creeds that provide the grounds for excluding these heresies, apparently have no place in ETS." (126)

I find Beckwith's case to be very persuasive. He goes on to write:

"Put in terms of specific traditions, if the term `Evangelical' is broad enough to include high-church Anglicans, low-church anti-creedal Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, the Evangelical Free Church, Arminians, Calvinists, Disciples of Christ, Pentecostals, Seventh-Day Adventist, open theists, atemporal theists, social Trinitarians, substantial Trinitarians, nominalists, realists, eternal security supporters and opponents, temporal theists, dispensationalists, theonnmists, church-state separationists, church-state accomodationists, cessationists, non-cessationists, kenotic theorists, covenant theologians, paedo-Baptists, Anabaptists, and Dooyeweerdians, then there should be room for an Evangelical Catholic." (128)

I agree with Beckwith that ETS should allow Catholics in its membership as long as it stands by its current doctrinal formulation. If ETS decides that Catholics should be excluded, then the official doctrinal statement needs to be adjusted in order to reflect what the society agrees is "true evangelical identity." It might be time for a more robust confession of faith, and not the minimalist document that guides ETS today.

At the end of the book, Beckwith admits:

"...My return to the Catholic Church has as much to do with a yearning for a deeper spiritual life as it did with theological reasoning." (128)

In the end, Beckwith confesses that a deep spiritual yearning ultimately led him back to Rome, not theological reasoning. Return to Rome would have been better had Beckwith given us more insight into Rome's satisfaction of his spiritual yearnings instead of the doctrinal issues that he admits were not the primary factor in his decision to return to Rome.

As someone who is considering converting to the Catholic church, I've been reading any number of books on Catholocism and become a regular watcher of EWTN's The Journey Home. Earlier this week I watched the Journey Home show with Francis Beckwith and listened with great interest as he detailed his journey back to the church of his boyhood. I was so intrigued and captivated by his ability to so clearly articulate his reasoning that I immediately went to Amazon and ordered his book. I was not disappointed.

Beckwith not only provides the story of spiritual journey from boyhoode to the pinnacle of his Protestant career as President of the Evangelical Theological Society but also provides the logical progression of his thought as he finally undertook a careful examinmation of his Protestant beliefs against Catholic teachings. In the end he realized that returning to the Catholic church was his only choice and he did it with grace, humility, and love. Beckwith clearly is in debt to his Protestant years and the spiritual knowledge he gained and it is only with love and respect that he explains how he finally had no other choice but to fully embrace the Catholic teachings. For him it was not an either/or position. Rather it was a matter of coming into a an even greater understanding of what it means to be a Christian and what it means to be able to fully receive the sacraments provided by the Catholic church.

I'll admit I found the first 75 or 80 pages a bit slow but once Beckwith gets to the really important stages where he examines the differences and the likenesses of the Evangical teachings to the Catholic Church that the book really takes off. From then on my pencil worked as fast as my eyes swept down the pages taking in all he had to say. If you're considering the Catholic church or if you're just curious about the process one man underwent on his journey to becoming Catholic, you're bound to enjoy this book. Another interesting tidbit about Beckwith is that he is still part of the faculty at Baylor University. Catholic or Protestant, Beckwith will give you something to think about.

This short book is the conversion story of former president of the Evangelical Theological Seminary and writer of the current best book defending the pro-life position (Defending Life) Frank Beckwith. It is meant not only for Catholics, but also for Evangelicals and other non-Catholics. Beckwith still has many friends who are Evangelical and we writes well of them and makes it clear that he appreciates what he has learned and how he has developed in his days as an Evangelical.

But make no mistake about it. Beckwith explains using history, the bible, the Church Fathers, and philosophy (hey, he HAS to) why he became intellectually convinced that it is the Catholic Church which is the Church founded by Jesus Christ. Beckwith discusses his main "hang-ups" and the evidence that lead him to think otherwise. Two of the big ones are the authority of the Church/the Pope and the issue of justification. Even though it's a conversion story, some very good points are made in favor of the Catholic view of justification, as well as pointing out that many non-Catholics often do not quite understand the Catholic view of justification. For example, he gives a quote from his good friend Greg Koukl discussing the Catholic view of justification, and then Beckwith proceeds to explain where Koukl gets things wrong and has an overall misunderstanding of justification (as Catholics see it). This is important to take note of not only because it is coming from someone who just recently held a position similar to that of Koukls, but also because as mentioned earlier Beckwith is not hostile or vengeful towards his former religious affiliation. He has nothing but love for those who are members of it, and wishes deeply to help them see what he believes to be their errors.

This book by the former President of the ETS is an excellent, logical flowing reasoned explanation of why Dr. Beckwith returned to his roots of the Catholic Church. His explanations, though some can be quite cerebral in parts, but if you go over it a few times, it sinks in and his reasoning is flawless.
He has quite a bit of humor in it as well to keep it moving. I could not put it down.
The greatest part is how he has kept his friends in the Evangelical world. Many are still close with him, as it should be. Today there are too many on both sides ripping each other apart. Dr. Beckwith is not one of them. He is a true Christian man, filled with the Holy Spirit, who found the fullness of the Gospel and is truly happy within. I recommend anyone read this who wants to see a fully reasoned explanation on why someone would want to enter the Catholic Church.

Dr. Beckwith tells a compelling story of leaving the all-too-often flaccid Catholic Church of the late 1960s and 1970s for the energetic Evangelic region of American Christianity. Still to come is - as implied by the title - his return to full communion with the Catholic Church in 2007. That this occurred at the height of a credible academic career, even as he served as president of the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) is remarkable; that it occurred at all is a testimony to the irresistible nature of the God who loves us.

Should you not be an academic theologian and harbor fears of a turgid, difficult to follow tome, all I can say is that this is a very approachable story of personal conversion, which easily mixes the broad outlines of theological issues - while not diving too deeply - with, dare I say, a nearly breezy and comfortable story-telling style that is both easily consumable, and ultimately satisfying.

For any non-Catholic who may find it anywhere from mildly odd to deplorably indefensible for an otherwise-rational person to become Catholic, or simply for a more sympathetic person who just is curious as to what would encourage a well known Evangelical figure to become Catholic, at great apparent risk to his professional and personal lives ... in either case or yet another, this book is well worth the time.

Bravo, Dr. Beckwith, and welcome home!