Unsure how to wrap my head around this decision, I began asking him questions about why he was doing this. Somebody knowingly and willingly embracing Catholicism, in my mind, was akin to embracing Mormonism—or worse. It was just so obviously wrong. Even more confusing was that we had gone through the same undergraduate program together: Bible teaching. We had spent years learning to study, interpret, and teach the Bible, and if there  was one thing I thought I knew about Catholics, it was that they did not know the Bible. If they did know it, they would reject their beliefs and practices regarding the pope, Mary, the sacraments, purgatory, praying to the saints, a works-based salvation, and more. This had been the case with every person I knew who had been part of the Catholic Church at some point; when they began to learn the Bible, they walked away from the Catholic Church and its false teachings. My friend, however, already knew the Bible very well and was doing the exact opposite, and was convinced that in doing so, he was following Jesus. The more we talked, the more it became clear he had arrived at his decision through extensive study, and I would not be able to show him his errors in this one brief conversation.

Clarifying Misunderstandings

About a year later, my friend moved back to Jacksonville, and we began having more regular conversations about theology and Catholicism. Each time we talked, our conversation typically followed the same pattern. I would bring up a Catholic doctrine any good Protestant knew was false and ask him how he squared it with Scripture. He would then explain what the Catholic Church actually taught on the topic and how it did not contradict Scripture. In addition, he would usually direct me to the writings of the Church Fathers who backed up the Catholic teachings.

For example, I had always heard of purgatory as a “second chance” at heaven for those who die without being saved, or a way to finish paying for your sins in the next life. The selling of indulgences (which free souls from purgatory) during the early 16th century is largely what sparked the Reformation.

It seemed to me that purgatory and indulgences were clearly anti-biblical and an affront to the Gospel. However, my friend explained to me that this is not what purgatory is. The Catechism of the Catholic Church summarizes the meaning of purgatory when it states that “all who die in God’s grace, but still imperfectly purified, are indeed assured of their eternal salvation; but after death they undergo purification, so as to achieve the holiness necessary to enter the joy of heaven” (CCC 1030). Purgatory is not a second chance at heaven for unrepentant sinners, but a state of purification for those who die in a state of grace but still have some level of attachment to sin.

As Revelation 21:27 states regarding heaven, “Nothing unclean shall enter it.” How can a person enter heaven, the presence of the all-holy God, and still have impurity in their soul? Therefore, between death and entry into heaven, the forgiven but imperfect soul must somehow be purified. This purification is what the Catholic Church calls purgatory. Explained this way, I reluctantly acknowledged that it at least made sense and was built upon biblical principles. In addition, the writings of various Church Fathers show that, from early Christian history, this doctrine was believed. St. Augustine, for example, writes, “Temporal punishments are suffered by some in this life only, by some after death, by some both here and hereafter, but all of them before that last and strictest judgment. But not all who suffer temporal punishments after death will come to eternal punishments, which are to follow after that judgment” (The City of God 21:13).

I wasn’t ready to embrace the doctrine, but I had to admit it wasn’t as terrible as I thought. It made a lot of sense, and properly understood, it didn’t contradict the Bible. Furthermore, there was more historical weight for Christians believing that doctrine than not, which put me on the wrong side of history. I quickly moved on to the next topic.

These conversations continued for about two years as I worked at my church. During this time, I learned that Catholics don’t have a works-based salvation, they don’t worship Mary, they believe the Bible, and on and on. Over the course of these conversations and my own study, I learned some important things: first, what I knew of the Catholic Church and its teachings was incorrect. Most of what I had been taught about the dissent from Catholic doctrines was based on misunderstandings and misrepresentations of what the Catholic Church actually teaches. As I kept telling my friend after each of my misunderstandings was corrected, “While I don’t agree with what you believe, I can at least see where the Church is coming from.” I don’t know how many times I used those words. I also didn’t know how much trouble I was in by beginning to be “fair” to the Catholic Church, as G.K. Chesterton says.

The second thing I came to see in a new and deeper way during this time was that everyone reads the Bible through some kind of theological lens. The Bible is not a systematic theology book or a catechism explaining every point of doctrine, but the story of salvation history. It must be interpreted, and the truths it teaches about God and the world are not always as plain as one might think. The denomination one is part of generally determines how one interprets the Bible and provides the lens through which it is read. It slowly became clear that the Catholic/Protestant debate is not a matter of the Bible’s teachings versus the Catholic Church’s teachings, but who is interpreting the Bible the right way. How could we solve this problem?

The Baptism Dilemma

While working at the Presbyterian church, I also began working toward a Master of Divinity degree through Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, with hopes of continuing a career in ministry and Bible teaching of some kind. At this time, my interest in the Catholic Church was still primarily one of curiosity and fairness—I wanted to be sure that, as a teacher, I was accurately representing those with whom I disagreed.

Additionally, I found that I was in a perfect position to learn more about the Catholic Church through my classes and personal study. One topic I kept encountering that gave me trouble was baptism.

I had grown up in Non-denominational and Reformed Baptist churches, so working at a Presbyterian church was the first time in my life that I was part of a church that baptized babies. I wrestled with the extremely broad range of beliefs and practices surrounding baptism within Protestantism. Because baptism is viewed by most Protestants as a secondary theological issue, these differences are significant enough to cause Christians to worship in separate churches while not considering each other as heretics. This approach is often summarized with the phrase, “In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity.” The more I studied baptism, though, the more I questioned if it could really be considered a “non-essential” tenet of Christianity. In Matthew 28:19, Jesus gives the Great Commission to the apostles: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations.” How are they to accomplish this mission? By baptizing and teaching. If baptism is what Jesus clearly commanded his followers to do in the making of disciples, isn’t it important that we get the questions of who, what, when, where, why, and how regarding it right? How could there be so many vastly different opinions on the most important outward sign of being a Christian?

My problems only deepened when, through my studies, I was faced with the reality that, before the Reformation, the consensus view of baptism held by Christians through all Church history was the Catholic position—baptismal regeneration. Two examples from St. Justin Martyr and St. Augustine illustrate this reality:

“Then they are led by us to a place where there is water, and they are reborn in the same kind of rebirth in which we ourselves were reborn: In the name of God, the Lord and Father of all, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they receive the washing of water. For Christ said, ‘Unless you be reborn, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven.’…The reason for doing this, we have learned from the Apostles.” (St. Justin Martyr, The First Apology, 61:14–17)

“This is the witness of Scripture too… If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this… The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration.” (St. Augustine, On Merit and the Forgiveness of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants, 2:27:43)

The testimony was overwhelming that this was what the early Church believed about baptism. I re-examined the New Testament teaching and found that nowhere does it describe baptism as a symbol of human action, but God’s. In addition, it is never defined as being merely symbolic. On the contrary, each text (see Romans 6:3; Galatians 3:27; John 3:5; Acts 2:38; 1 Peter 3:21; Colossians 2:12) describes something taking place in baptism, namely God’s action of regenerating, forgiving, adopting, uniting with Christ, and incorporating the baptized into the Church.

If baptismal regeneration was the correct interpretation of the scriptural passages on baptism, then it could not be a secondary issue, for through it we become God’s children and are forgiven of our sins. And for the first 1500 years of Church history, there was agreement about the nature of baptism. Again, I found myself on the wrong side of Church history with little ground to stand on. Ulrich Zwingli, one of the Reformers, recognized this but still said the following: “In this matter of baptism—if I may be pardoned for saying it—I can only conclude that all the doctors have been in error from the time of the apostles.” (Zwingli, On Baptism). I could not bring myself to make the same claim.

Foundations Shaking

Convinced of baptismal regeneration by the biblical and historical data, I thought my main theological dilemma had been solved. But this theological shift surprised me, because I now agreed with the Catholic Church on an issue I previously believed the total opposite. It didn’t cause me to consider becoming Catholic myself, since there were Protestant denomina- tions that held this view of baptism. However, the underlying questions about authority and the interpretation of Scripture had begun to shake the foundations of many of my other long-held beliefs, as well. My change of mind on baptism was simultaneously exciting and unsettling. The excitement stemmed from the result of discovering something new and being deeply convicted of its truth after studying it for so long. As time went on, however, it unsettled me because it caused me to wonder: if I had been wrong about baptism, could I be similarly wrong about other doctrines, especially Catholic ones? And how does the Church determine which doctrines and practices are the essential ones? Who decides that?

I had done enough basic study of Catholicism up to this point to have moved past the common misconceptions of it, but I still had the “I-don’t-agree-with-where-you-are-but-I- see-how-you-got-there” attitude toward it. Nevertheless, discoveries up to this point led me to share some of my findings with my parents and older brother. In talking about what I had learned about Catholicism, I expressed frustration that so  many Protestants didn’t understand Catholic theology. I explained to them various Catholic beliefs such as why they have priests, what they really believe about Mary, and where they find their basis for the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist in Scripture. Hesitantly, they listened to me.

My parents raised my siblings and me with a commitment to teach us to know and love God. I owe my faith to them more than anyone in my life. The Second Vatican Council states in Lumen Gentium that, “The family is, so to speak, the domestic church. In it parents should, by their word and example, be the first preachers of the faith to their children” (LG, 11). My parents exemplified this in both aspects described: word and example. We had family devotions together every night, memorized Scripture, sang hymns, and faithfully attended church.

There wasn’t anything explicitly hostile towards the Catholic Church in the practice of our faith, but we were informed and convinced of our Protestantism, so there was a natural bias and negative outlook towards Catholicism. After several months of conversations, I realized that I was scaring them when they sent me a concerned, loving email, expressing caution about a few Catholic beliefs. They told me that it would be easier for them if I became Anglican. I reassured them that I had zero intention of becoming Catholic and that I was primarily concerned with fair and honest conversations between the two sides.

My older brother and I have always loved discussing theology, so when I told him that I believed in baptismal regeneration, he created a group chat with some other friends who also liked debating theology to discuss the topic. We went back and forth for a couple of weeks, and after the discussion had run its course, one of them jokingly asked what topic we could discuss next where everyone could gang up on me. I responded, “Well, I’m okay with relics, icons, and prayer to the saints.” As you can imagine, the conversation quickly moved there.

I had been only half serious, still firmly in the “under- standing but not embracing” stage regarding these practices. I had not yet prayed a Hail Mary or venerated an icon myself, but I was starting to wonder why I shouldn’t. So once again, I found myself defending the Catholic Church, even though I reassured others (and now, myself as well) that I was not, and would not, become Catholic. I simply wanted the Catholic claims to be taken seriously, because then I could accurately and fully evaluate them, and then, once and for all, reject them.

As I tried to find Protestant engagement with Catholic beliefs, however, I repeatedly ran into the same basic anti-Catholic argument: where is that in the Bible? The problem with this question is that it completely misses the point of the Catholic/Protestant divide. As mentioned before, doctrinal disagreements cannot simply be solved by asking, “What does the Bible say?” because, as St. Vincent of Lerins says, there are as many interpretations of Scripture as there are interpreters (The Commonitory of St. Vincent, II, 5). So how are we supposed to solve interpretive disagreements?

The breakdown of the principle of sola Scriptura was complete for me when two realities became obvious. The first was that Scripture itself doesn’t teach sola Scriptura. The second was that before one can determine how to interpret the Word of God, they must know what the Word of God is. Which books belong in the Bible? On this question, like so many others, Christians disagree. The Bible itself does not give us a list of books which are inspired by God. This means that one must go outside the Bible to determine the canon. However, if only the Bible is an infallible authority, then any outside group determining the canon by definition is fallible, and therefore they could have gotten the list of books wrong.

This twofold crisis of the dismantling of the Protestant structure of authority and the problem of the canon promptly moved me from “fair, but contentedly removed from the Catholic Church,” to seriously wondering and worrying if it was right. Its threefold authority structure of Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium seemed to provide the only reasonable solution to these problems. With this structure, questions like that of the biblical canon can be answered. This is because the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit through its divinely instituted teaching authority, the Magisterium. I was now acutely aware of the impact the answer to these questions would have on my current job, career, school, and life.

Not knowing how much longer I’d be able to continue working at my church while questioning so many fundamental tenets of Protestantism, I knew I needed to figure out if Catholicism’s claim to be the authoritative interpreter of Scripture was true. However, with a full-time job and taking seminary classes, I wasn’t sure how much time I’d have to dedicate to this level of study. Then, COVID hit, and everything shut down.

The Final Stage

Suddenly, like everyone else, I found myself stuck at home with a lot of extra time on my hands. I focused my study on the question of authority and the canon of Scripture. I saw that the Catholic Church’s claims to authority affected not only its uniquely Catholic dogmas, but also Christianity as a whole. If sola Scriptura is true, then foundational beliefs like the Trinity and the deity of Christ could be called into question because the orthodox formulations of such doctrines required Ecumenical Councils to formulate them. Furthermore, how could I trust the Bible itself unless the Church is guided by the Holy  Spirit to get the books contained in it correct? As St. Augustine said, “I would not believe in the Gospels were it not for the authority of the Catholic Church” (Against the Letter of Mani Called “The Foundations,” 5:6).

G.K. Chesterton powerfully describes this discrepancy with an analogy of an ornate priestly procession going down the street, laden with their canopies, headdresses, staffs, scrolls, images, candles, relics, and more. He writes:

“I can understand the spectator saying, ‘This is all hocus-pocus’… I can even understand him, in moments of irritation, breaking up the procession, throwing down the images, tearing up the scrolls, dancing on the priests and anything else that might express that general view… But in what conceivable frame of mind does he rush in to select one particular scroll of the scriptures of this one particular group (a scroll which had always belonged to them and been a part of their hocus-pocus, if it was hocus-pocus); why in the world should the man in the street say that one particular scroll was not bosh, but was the one and only truth by which all the other things were to be condemned?” (The Catholic Church and Conversion, Ignatius Press: 1926. 39-40)

I realized that, as a Protestant, I was inconsistently relying on the Catholic Church for the Bible itself, for fundamental formulations of doctrine like the Trinity and the nature of Christ, but was throwing out other beliefs simply because they were Catholic. It was apparent that the Catholic Church’s threefold structure of authority—Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium—was necessary to have confidence in the sources and truths of our faith. Through this means, Christ’s promise to lead His Church into all truth through the Holy Spirit is ensured, and protection from error is guaranteed. I also found, through the New Testament and onwards through the writings of the Church Fathers, that the early Church was centralized, hierarchical, and universal, not individually governed or congregational. The Catholic Church was the only Church that still could claim continuity with the early Church in both form and doctrine and the only Church that had ongoing means by which it could be protected from error through its Magisterium and Apostolic Succession. The biblical, historical, and epistemological weight of the Catholic Church’s position was overwhelming.

When COVID restrictions began to lift, I attended Mass when possible, but I wasn’t yet ready to swim the Tiber. I didn’t have any more doctrinal hang ups, but I still had a fear that I might have missed something or not studied enough. And, if I did take the plunge, what if something down the road changed my mind again?

Amid this uncertainty and fear, however, the knowledge that God is a God of truth and promises to lead us into the truth if we are honest and obedient, gave me the comfort and courage I needed to step out in faith. In addition, I had begun praying the Rosary, and I’m convinced that the intercession of Mary, who always points us to her Son (John 2:5), helped calm my fears and strengthen my trust in God’s guidance.

Thus, at the end of summer 2020, I stopped protesting the Catholic Church. I began telling my family, friends, and church of my decision to convert. These were some of the most difficult conversations I’ve ever had, and joining the Catholic Church led to the loss of some relationships. Becoming Catholic, of course, does involve the denial of some Protestant distinctives and the acceptance of one’s incompatibility with it, but I see my entrance into Catholicism as an embracing of the fullness of Christianity, not a conversion to a different religion.

I learned to love Jesus, the Bible, truth, and what it means to follow Him from the countless Protestants in my life, and because of them I had the courage to continue to do so into His Church.

Once I had decided, I did not want to wait to be confirmed and receive the Eucharist, but thought it would be wise to go through RCIA first. I enrolled in the RCIA class at the local parish, had my first confession after a few months, and was joyfully confirmed at the Easter Vigil in April 2021. My confirmation saint was St. Ignatius of Antioch, an Apostolic Father whose writings were instrumental in my journey.

The most common question I’ve received, of course, is why I converted. I always have trouble answering this question, though. How can I pick one thing? Over the course of my journey, I became convinced of the truth of the Catholic faith one piece at a time. To be sure, the question of authority and interpretation is foundational and the most important, and ultimately what it came down to for me. The truth of the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist is itself a singularly great reason to convert. The beauty of the liturgy, the grace of the sacraments, the deep historical roots, the communion of saints…

I could go on. But in my moment of decision, it was because I knew it was true, and I knew that, no matter the cost, I had to surrender to the Truth.

The second most common question I’ve received, due to the nature of my conversion primarily involving theological study, is whether my conversion has been beneficial for my spiritual life and relationship with the Lord, and not just an intellectual conversion. This question is also difficult to answer because it drives an unnecessary wedge between the mind and heart in one’s walk with the Lord. Ask any married man and he will probably tell you that the more he gets to know his wife, the more he loves her. It has been no different for me upon en- tering the Church. To know God is to love Him, and to grow in my knowledge of Him and His love for me, more fully and deeply than ever before, within the Catholic Church has been transformative.

The post When Fairness to the Church Leads You Home appeared first on The Coming Home Network.

The post Letters from Home – A Former Anglican Priest Shares appeared first on The Coming Home Network.

Read a written version of Becky’s story here: My Protestant Husband Led Me Back to the Catholic Church

The post Becky Carter – Revert and former Non-Denominational Christian appeared first on The Coming Home Network.

Read Charlie’s written testimony, The U.S. Supreme Court Helped to Lead Me Home

The post Charlie Johnston – Former Presbyterian and Non-Denominational Christian appeared first on The Coming Home Network.

A Faith of My Own

Born in 1951 and growing up in Seattle, Washington, I had been a Christian all of my life. Our family was Lutheran, so I was baptized as a baby, attended Sunday school, vacation Bible school, and church camp. I was confirmed when I was 14 and active in Luther League in high school. I had faith in God, but it was more my parents’ religion than my own. There was a short period in college when I walked away from my faith and turned my back on God. When I returned to faith in 1971, it was during the Jesus People movement, and I became a charismatic. Suddenly, God was no longer just someone I believed in. It wasn’t just about going to church on Sunday to give Him that slice of my life. Instead, He became integral my whole life, and I had a living, daily relationship with Him.

In the early years of the charismatic movement, the late 1960s and early 1970s, charismatic worship was new and fresh. We sang scriptural songs accompanied by guitars. We learned a lot about the Holy Spirit, His workings, and His gifts. After college I spent a couple of years in California at a Christian organization called Youth With A Mission, a worldwide organization that trains people to become missionaries and work around the world. These missionaries emphasize the need to cultivate a deeper relationship with God. As I had no money for the training, I volunteered in their office in California and learned much through exposure to visiting speakers, listening to teaching recordings, and having conversations with many students and leaders who were there.

On February 8, 1976, I flew from Los Angeles to Anchorage, Alaska, to be a bridesmaid in my college roommate’s wedding. I went from temperatures in the 70s to 30 degrees below zero! This was a pivotal point in my life. I liked Alaska and was looking for an adventure, and my friend’s parents invited me to stay with them for a while. I found a job and never left Alaska. I met my husband, Willy, there. We were married in 1977 and now have three grown children and four grandchildren.

During the time we were raising our children, our family attended a local Assemblies of God church, where our children flourished in their faith through the many ministries the church offered. Despite the busyness of raising three children, I always felt that God had a purpose for my life beyond that, but I didn’t know what it was. From 1989 to 1999, I was involved with the music in our church, singing in the choir and playing piano for the worship services. This did not become the lifelong purpose it may have seemed to be during those ten years.

He Leadeth Me… Through Pain and Confusion

In the late 1980s, I became involved with an interdenominational charismatic group for women called Aglow, where my faith flourished and I grew spiritually. Aglow was a large part of my life for many years, and I started by serving on a local board and continued until I was the State Prayer Coordinator, then the State Leader.

During my time with Aglow, we went to many Alaskan Native villages, where we had vacation Bible school for the children during the day and ministry services for the adults in the evening. Through the local and state gatherings, national conferences and the village trips, I made many friends in Aglow in my state and across the nation.

In 1999, the door to music ministry closed for me, and it was a difficult and painful time coming to grips with the circumstances that led to a change in how and where I served God.

It was at this time that I went to the Aglow Conference for the first time in Orlando, Florida. Women came from all over the world! We had wonderful speakers, we enjoyed worship that brought us into the presence of God, and my experience there brought me into a new intimacy and closeness with God that I had never known before.

My husband retired in 2011, but in 2014 he took a “retirement job,” where he worked Saturdays, Sundays, and Mondays; so he was unable to attend church. Things changed again. I started going to a church in Anchorage, but after about three years, I grew weary of making the 35-minute drive alone, then sitting alone through the services. Because of the distance, I didn’t get involved in the church or make friends. I also had grown weary of the style of worship in the charismatic churches I was attending. Many of them reminded me of rock concerts with darkened rooms, flashing lights, the worship team front and center, and very loud music. There were also things happening in Aglow in our state that were difficult for me, and I found it very hard to move forward as a leader. November of 2017 was marked by snowfalls, especially on the weekends. I stopped going to the church in Anchorage because of the weather.

About this time, a good friend of mine, and one of the very few Catholic friends that I had, moved to my area. It was November, and I was thinking about Advent and Christmas. Growing up in the Lutheran Church, we always had an Advent wreath and candles, and I always loved the anticipation of Christmas and of celebrating the birth of Jesus. Most of the churches I had gone to all my adult life had not had an Advent wreath. Out of the blue, one day I said to my friend, “I just want to go to a church where they have an Advent wreath and watch them light the candle.” She said that she needed to connect with the local Catholic church, and the following Sunday would be the start of Advent, and there would definitely be a wreath and candles, so why not go with her?

My heart sank. I was thinking, “WHY go with her — to a dead, ritualistic boring church service?” Nevertheless, I said yes. What else could I say? I couldn’t tell her how I really felt about the Catholic Church. Up until this point, my only experience with the Catholic Church was a wedding and two funerals, besides the things I had learned from other Protestants.

The Father Ran to Meet Me

This was the beginning of God’s great set-up for me. I was not looking forward to going to Mass, but I went. As we walked through the door to the nave (what we Protestants called the sanctuary), I was immediately taken aback. While I have always loved the Trinity, I have always had a special relationship with God the Father. In the churches I attended over the years, they would do just about anything to get the Holy Spirit to move. I was used to that, but encountering the presence of God the Father was a rarity. I always recognized the presence of the Father by the fact that — how can I describe it — His presence is heavy, weighty. I recognized it in that church by how I felt when I visited Jewish synagogues. As we walked through the doors of St. Andrew’s, I was hit with the heavy, weighty presence of God the Father, and I was stunned by it.

Then the priests came in, and suddenly, I did not see what happened next as a “ritual.” Instead, I saw how they revered the holiness of God so much that they approached Him with… protocol. That was something I would never see in my churches — a love and reverence for the holiness of God — and I loved it. When we started singing the liturgy, I almost melted! I was so touched by the beauty of the music and the words we were singing that I was moved to tears and kept on crying. The music sounded like something one might expect to hear in heaven.

A Brush With the Son

When it came time to receive the Eucharist, not knowing anything, I jumped up and followed my friend to the front. The woman gave me the host, but then she knew I shouldn’t have received it, and let me know it. Busted!

When we left the church, I was in shock. I knew something profound had happened to me, but I didn’t know what to do because I was NOT going to become a Catholic! But I decided I would attend there during the Advent season. This far I would go, but no farther.

The next part of God’s master plan was the third time my friend and I went to Mass together. In the church foyer, they had set up a book fair. After Mass, my friend was talking to people, and since I didn’t know anyone, I amused myself by walking around, looking at the books. I had never seen books like those. They were alien to me, with strange words and pictures. Then suddenly, I saw a book that stopped me dead in my tracks. Its title was Rapture: The End Times Error that Leaves the Bible Behind, by David Currie. I had spent my whole adult life in churches that espoused the Rapture teaching; still, I had had serious issues with it for years. The few times I heard someone teaching about the Rapture, I ended up with more questions and confusion than anything else. Unfortunately, there was no one to whom I could ask my questions about the Rapture, because everybody in attendance all agreed with it, whether they understood it or not. Here, for the first time, I was staring at a book that might have some answers! I didn’t have any cash, so I went home and immediately downloaded it onto my tablet and started reading. David Currie’s book was a turning point for me. He was knowledgeable and thorough and went through all the Bible prophecies, explaining how most of them have already been fulfilled.

Christmas came, and I still didn’t know what to do. I didn’t want to become a Catholic, but I was so drawn to the Catholic Church that I couldn’t stay away. Then there was another step in God’s set-up. Back in 2001, one of my friends, who is a Bible teacher, was invited to speak for two weeks at a Bible school in Magadan, Russia, and she invited me to come with her. Before I left, an Aglow friend who is Catholic told me about Father Michael, a priest from Alaska who was pastoring a church in Magadan. She told me what a wonderful priest he is, and I thought, “Wouldn’t it be great to meet him!”

We were in a foreign country, I speak no Russian, and I had no idea where the Catholic parish might be. But we would see!

The Holy Spirit Makes a Move

One day in Russia, we were walking through a building to go to a meeting, when the person leading us pointed to a door in the hallway and said that that was the Catholic church. I immediately thought of Father Michael — and just then, the door opened and out walked a man in a long brown robe. I asked him if he was Father Michael. He said yes, and we had a short conversation. The Sunday following Christmas, who should come to celebrate the Mass and preach the homily, but Father Michael! I couldn’t wait to go, and I was not disappointed.

Father Michael shared about a little five-year-old girl who would come to Mass in Magadan by herself, because her parents were not church attenders. Being so young, he didn’t give her the Eucharist. One Sunday after Mass, she came to him and said, “Father Michael, why won’t you give me Jesus? I just want Jesus!” Father Michael gave her Jesus.

What About Me? What Do I Want?

I thought about that incident, and I realized that I wanted Jesus, too! I had loved Jesus all my life, but I wanted Him more fully in the Eucharist. Then he talked about the Gospel passage of John 6:53–68, where Jesus told his followers that they must eat His body and drink His blood, and everybody but the Twelve left. Then He said to the Twelve, “Are you going to leave too?” Peter said, “Lord, where else can we go? You have the words of eternal life.” Suddenly, those words sank deep into my heart, and it was at this point that I knew there was nowhere else I wanted to go — that this is where I belong, where God — Father Son, and Holy Spirit — was calling me and where I would find the Truth.

I was still reading David Currie’s book, and one day I started reading about him and was surprised to learn that he had converted from the Presbyterian Church. He was the son of a Presbyterian pastor; his parents were teachers at Moody Bible Institute. I also discovered that he had written another book, Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic. I couldn’t wait to get that book, too. I immediately downloaded it and started reading. It was the perfect book for me to read at that time, since I still knew nothing about the Catholic faith and had many questions.

Currie wrote this book to explain to his Protestant friends and family why he became a Catholic. His reasons were presented clearly and systematically in a way a Protestant would understand — the perfect book for me to read at that time. He addressed subjects that separate Catholic and Protestant beliefs, including the Pope, the Eucharist, and the Virgin Mary. As I read his book, I slowly came to understand what Catholics believe, and for the first time, it made sense to me. There were still many things I didn’t understand. I started reading other books as well, because I craved learning about Catholicism. I read Scott Hahn’s conversion story and loved it. I read The 7 Secrets of the Eucharist and The 7 Secrets of Confession by Vinny Flynn. I picked up CDs about Catholicism in the church foyer and listened to them.

One of the things that I didn’t understand was the relationship Catholics have with the Virgin Mary. In the churches I went to, we talked about Mary once a year at Christmas, and that was about it. I had an experience that changed all that.

In Alaska we get earthquakes. Once or twice a year, the house shakes a little for a few seconds, our hearts skip a beat, and then we go about our business. On November 30, 2018, we had an earthquake around 8:30 in the morning, when it was still dark in our far northern latitude. That earthquake registered 7.2 on the Richter scale — a big one! For a full minute, our house pounded up and down, the lights went out, things fell off shelves and crashed to the floor, and I had to hold onto the counter to keep from falling. When the earthquake stopped, the aftershocks started. Already traumatized, every 20 to 40 minutes, we would hear a deep rumble, the house would shake again, and fear close to panic would return. That night, I was lying in bed, exhausted. Every time I would start to relax a little, another rumble would come, the house would shake, and my heart would pound. I thought of all the people in south-central Alaska who, like me, were lying in bed with their clothes on, in case they had to leave the house suddenly, thinking, “We are all in this together!”

First the Blessed Trinity, Then the Blessed Mother

I tried to pray, but could not. I didn’t know how to pray the Rosary, but I could say a Hail Mary. So I started saying Hail Marys, and pretty soon I started drifting off to sleep. I wasn’t awake, but also not fully asleep, when I audibly heard a woman’s voice say to me, “I love you.”

My eyes flew open, and I thought, What was that?! It wasn’t a voice that I recognized. Then it dawned on me. I had been saying Hail Marys, and she came to comfort me!

In September of 2018, I started RCIA. I cannot say enough about what a great experience it was! We had excellent teachers, and I learned so much about our Christian faith, what they believe, the sacraments, and all the wonderful things Catholicism has to offer. I especially liked the teaching about the Eucharist, which is one of the things that really drew me to the Catholic Church. In all my years as a Protestant, I knew there were deeper things to communion than what I understood, but I could never really grasp what they were.

When it was fully explained, I was thrilled to finally discover what Holy Communion really is and what it means to us as Christians. When I was a Protestant, we hardly ever talked about sin. Holiness is essential, but I didn’t understand how to become more like Christ and deal with my sins. In learning about the Sacrament of Reconciliation, I began to understand the importance of confessing our sins to the priest. I didn’t understand the necessity of penance until after my first confession, when I forgot to do it. When I went to Mass the next day, I could immediately tell something was wrong, and then I realized that I hadn’t done the penance I had been assigned! It is a very important part of confession. I still struggle with understanding purgatory, something I didn’t know about at all before. I recently took an online class from goodcatholic.com about what we believe, and I encountered one of the best explanations of purgatory that I have ever heard.

On April 20, 2019, at the Easter Vigil, I was confirmed at the age of 67. The confirmation name I chose was Anne. St. Anne, the mother of Mary, is the patron saint of seamstresses, of which I am one. St. Anne was the grandmother of Jesus and a name that has been given to many in my family.

I have been a Christian all my life, but becoming Catholic feels like coming home. St. Andrew is a wonderful parish, and I sing in the choir, go to weekly Adoration (where we pray before Jesus in the Eucharist), attend weekly Rosary prayer, and attend Bible studies. I figure I will be learning about God and our relationship to Him for the rest of my life, and that thought makes me very happy.

My husband has now retired again and attends a Protestant church in our area. He doesn’t mind that I attend Catholic Mass, but he prefers to remain a Protestant. I join him at his church about once a month. I am the only Catholic in my family of Protestants, and my prayer is that someday I will have others in my family join me. Even if they don’t, it is okay because they are Christians and accept the choice I have made. Even so, Father, make us one (John 17).

The post An Advent Wreath Made Me Catholic appeared first on The Coming Home Network.

Mallory is author of Rekindled: How Jesus Called Me Back to the Catholic Church and Set My Heart on Fire.

Find more about Mallory’s work at walkingwithpurpose.com.

The post Mallory Smyth – Catholic revert and former nondenominational Christian appeared first on The Coming Home Network.

Early Life

For all my parents’ suspicion of tradition and liturgy, my childhood community still had a genuine reverence for baptism. When I was nine, in 1996, I witnessed a few baptisms at my church and asked to be baptized myself. My baptism is one of my clearest memories, not just in its physical details but in my sense of its reality. Although I had been taught that it was only an outward expression of my interior faith, I had a real sense that something had happened to me. It was simultaneously the most formal and the most spiritual experience I’d ever had.

Years later, I encountered echoes of that baptismal experience in Anglican liturgy. I attended a private Christian high school that used the Book of Common Prayer in its morning chapel services, and the beauty of that reverent liturgy surprised me. I loved praying aloud in Thomas Cranmer’s gorgeous prose. There, I experienced the energy of Christian truth with the beauty of language. Surprisingly, I found I could pour my soul into Cranmer’s words more fully and authentically than I ever could in the extemporaneous worship I’d grown up with.

At the same time, I began to discover Church history. I learned the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds in Bible class and read snippets from St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. To my astonishment, I found out that true Christianity had existed — and, indeed, flourished — after the deaths of the Apostles and before the birth of Protestantism. This discovery contradicted my Protestant homeschool curriculum, which taught that true Christianity was essentially lost after the Apostles’ deaths (with the possible exception of St. Augustine), not to be resuscitated until John Wycliffe and Martin Luther came along in the 1500s. Just as the Wycliffes and Luthers thought of themselves as rediscovering the lost truth of Scripture, I felt I was rediscovering the lost truth of Tradition.

But it was more than just beauty and historical curiosity that attracted me. Liturgy and tradition offered an answer to the arbitrariness and inconsistency of my childhood church. It was a relief to learn that worship wasn’t dependent on my feelings. As much as I loved my childhood Protestant community, it was fatally unstable and fell apart when I was twelve. My parents never recovered from the loss of that community. It left me with many questions: How do I know that what I was taught about God is true? How do I choose which church’s reading of the Bible is right? How do I worship God if I don’t “feel the Spirit” at a given time? In Anglican liturgy and tradition, I had begun to find some answers.

This caused some tension with my parents. They didn’t like me reciting creeds and written prayers and reading about doctrinal minutiae. They had assumed the school’s “empty” rituals would roll right off me, since I’d been raised in their revivalist tradition. It caught them off guard when I fell in love with things they considered essentially worthless. But once they were assured that I still loved Jesus, they kindly tolerated it and chalked it up to my personal eccentricity.

Young Adulthood

Then, in college, I met real Catholics, both classmates and professors. They were not the superstitious idolaters or shallow “nominal” Christians I had heard about growing up. They were true believers, careful thinkers, and kind friends. My first-hand encounters with faithful Catholics directly contradicted the second-hand characterization I’d received.

Though I remained a happy Anglican at age eighteen, my interest in pre-Protestant Christianity was growing. I signed up for a history course on Ancient Christianity and was surprised by the writings of Ignatius, Perpetua, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Athanasius, and anonymous works like the Didache and the Martyrdom of Polycarp. These authors wrote confidently about things I had been taught were Medieval inventions: bishops, purgatory, the holy Mass, even the papacy. Not only were real Catholics different from what I expected, but the early Church, in original sources, looked a lot like the Catholic Church, not the loose network of “house churches” described by my former Protestant pastors. The early Church had a sacred ecclesiastical structure from the beginning, and it prized apostolic succession — a concept whose antiquity fascinated me.

Indirectly, the Ancient Christianity course also introduced me to the development of doctrine. One book in particular made a deep impression on me: J.N.D. Kelly’s Early Christian Doctrines. Although Kelly himself was a Protestant and studiously maintained a Protestant perspective in his work, his book outlines a fascinating history of theological explication. I realized, reading his book, that Christian doctrine was not just a set of propositions clearly spelled out in the Bible itself, but the result of long and even painful centuries of study and controversy. It would be many years before I picked up St. John Henry Newman’s Essay on the Development of Doctrine, but already I had a profound sense of dependency, of being beholden to these ancient bishops I had barely ever heard of, for my most foundational beliefs. I began to think maybe the nice, devout Catholics I’d met might possess something we Protestants didn’t.

But something — rather, someone — kept me from exploring Catholicism more actively at that time. While I was discovering Church history, I was also dating the young man I soon married. He was raised in a conservative Lutheran family and rigorously catechized in that tradition. When we talked about theology and doctrine, he appeared to have all the answers, chapter and verse. Whereas I was newly encountering the Church Fathers, he had read some of them before (especially St. Augustine), and he knew where to find some quotes that seemed to agree with his Lutheranism. Whereas I had a nascent interest in Catholicism, he had an entire catalogue of anti-Catholic arguments at his fingertips. Although I wasn’t ready to reject the idea of Catholicism forever (especially the doctrine of apostolic succession), I also wasn’t prepared to defend it. I just didn’t know enough.

Although he appeared to have all the answers, my then-boyfriend had the wisdom to see the weaknesses in his own arguments. He realized that there were problems with Protestantism in general and with Lutheranism in particular. So we agreed to journey together, starting from the tradition where he was rooted. I joined his church, where we were married and remained happily for several years. It was a conservative denomination, appreciative of liturgy and intellectual tradition, and comfortable while it lasted.

Intellectual Struggles with Protestantism

But our misgivings would chafe from time to time. At first, the most salient intellectual problem was sola Scriptura. Over time, the logical inconsistency of this key doctrine bothered us more and more. If sola Scriptura were truly essential to Christian teaching, why was it not articulated explicitly in the Bible itself? And if sola Scriptura were an indispensable Christian doctrine, how could it have gone so largely unnoticed for fifteen centuries? The Church Fathers appeal to Scripture continually in their writings, but they also appeal continually to tradition and to the authority of the Catholic Church. Although I can’t give an exhaustive discussion here, two books that effectively outline these inconsistencies are Sola Scriptura by John Whitehead and By What Authority? by Mark Shea.

Our teaching experience also brought out problems with sola Scriptura. My husband taught a high school seminar on the Gospel of John and the Epistle to the Romans, in which he and the students had to rely solely on the Biblical text for their arguments. They could not refer to outside interpretive sources. Surprisingly, he found it difficult to steer the students toward a Lutheran-friendly interpretation of Romans without presupposing certain Lutheran doctrines. Needless to say, this experience struck a blow to Lutheranism’s self-identification as the most Biblical denomination. It also led us both to re-read the New Testament more carefully, looking for its authentic meaning rather than for proof-texts. When read more holistically, the Bible often seemed to agree more closely with Catholic than with Protestant theology.

Beyond sola Scriptura, we struggled with the Lutheran Protestant doctrine of sola fide, which can also be described as “monergism” — the belief that our salvation is accomplished by God alone, with no active human participation. Not only does this doctrine necessitate some procrustean readings of the words of Jesus; it also contradicts the teaching of all pre-Reformation Christianity. The differences between Catholic and Protestant soteriology have filled many volumes, but I found the most concise and helpful resource to be Grace and Justification by Stephen Wood.

As we studied and reflected on these issues, we also discussed our concerns with Lutheran pastors and other knowledgeable Lutheran friends. Whereas I had once found Lutheran arguments impressive and convincing, I now found them circular and flimsy. They would assert sola Scriptura but, when presented with coherent Catholic interpretations of Scripture, they would fall back on sola fide, arguing that the Lutheran interpretation of Scripture must be the correct one because it teaches strict monergism. But when asked where sola fide comes from, they would claim it comes from sola Scriptura, without addressing alternative scriptural interpretations. In the end, when confronted with this circularity, the Lutheran apologists would assert a “pastoral” dichotomy. Sola fide must be true, they argued, because to believe otherwise inevitably leads either to “works righteousness” (the belief that we can save ourselves by our own efforts) or to despair (the belief that we can never be saved). I found this response unsatisfactory, partly because it sidestepped the theological question, and partly because it didn’t match reality. I knew too many Catholics, by this time, who were neither self-righteous nor despairing. If anything, they were more humble and joyful than most Protestants.

Alongside sola Scriptura and sola fide, we encountered the intellectual problem of ecclesiology. For Lutherans (and for most other Protestants except Anglicans), the Church is essentially a human institution — a tool for transmitting doctrine. Its structure is not a matter of divine revelation but of human expediency. St. Paul’s discussion of bishops and elders in his epistles are just suggestive guidelines, sketching out what to look for in church leaders generally.

But a study of the ancient Church starkly contradicts that view. Before the natures of Christ had been defined, before the New Testament was compiled, before there was even a coherent definition of the Trinity, the Apostolic Fathers were certain that God had established bishops and given them authority. The doctrine of Apostolic succession — that Jesus gave His Apostles the power to ordain bishops and ministers, and that they passed that on to their successors — is among the oldest doctrines we have. It is arguably as old as the doctrine of the divinity of Christ. (An excellent reference for tracing these developments is The Teachings of the Church Fathers by John R. Willis, S.J.)

When I realized this, I read the book of Acts with new eyes. A question that had vaguely disturbed me for years became clear: why did the twelve Apostles themselves have to travel in person to so many places across the world? If Christianity consists of a set of beliefs, why wasn’t it enough for the Good News just to spread, whether by preaching, letter-writing, or word of mouth? Of course, their word as eyewitnesses had special weight, but why was it so important for these twelve specific men to visit every possible city personally? There must have been something that only they, and no one else, could do. The doctrine of apostolic succession makes it clear: they went to ordain bishops by the laying on of hands, because only the twelve Apostles could do that. Apostolic succession also clarifies why the writer of Acts bothers to narrate the ordination of Matthias, and why the Apostles considered it necessary to replace Judas: his role was not informal or optional. It was an office that could not be left empty forever.

But again, for Lutherans and most other Protestants, literal apostolic succession is not essential: only correct belief is essential. Learning the truth about apostolic succession helped me realize more fully that the church I belonged to was not the Church of the Apostles or of the Church Fathers.

Spiritual Struggles with Protestantism

Alongside these intellectual problems, I encountered spiritual problems with Protestantism, most of which arose from Lutheranism’s deeply pessimistic view of human nature. According to Lutheran anthropology, human free will is obliterated by the Fall. Humans cannot desire God or will the good. Even a baptized Christian is merely “covered” by Christ, as in Luther’s famous image of the redeemed soul as a dung heap concealed under snow. In his teaching, a Christian’s holiest act is totally contaminated with sin. Indeed, for the strict Lutheran, there is no act that is not ultimately a sin. In a way, this removes a person’s responsibility for their own sin, because one truly lacks the ability to choose otherwise. Lutheranism actually encourages dwelling on our depravity, assuming it will produce greater dependence on God. But for me (and, I believe, for many others) it led only to presumption, which is a type of despair. If genuine transformation is impossible — if I will always be a dung heap underneath — then what is there to hope for?

This anthropological pessimism clashed with experience. As a classical schoolteacher, I met and worked with people whose goodness I could not reconcile with Luther’s “dung heap” theory of human nature. The Catholics I knew, in particular, were authentically humble but also morally optimistic. They had no problem admitting their faults, but they saw themselves as able and required to do better by God’s grace. Their view of human nature seemed far more consistent with reality, especially as I lived that reality in marriage and motherhood.

On the one hand, living the transformative power of sacramental marriage convinced me once and for all that Catholicism was right to call it a sacrament, not just an “institution.” It changed me from the inside out, in ways that ordinary “personal growth” could not explain. There was also the sheer goodness I could see in my babies and young children. I could not view them as little dung heaps destined for damnation unless Jesus tricked the Father out of seeing their true nature. They had real, essential goodness, given by God but nonetheless their own.

On the other hand, marriage and motherhood presented challenges. Despite loving married life and having a wonderful husband, I felt frustrated with the cycle of unnecessary petty conflict, of which I myself was so often the source. Eventually, I realized I could not improve my marriage without actually becoming a better person. Throwing up my hands and blaming total depravity would never help. To succeed in marriage, I would have to overcome my attachment to personal pride, and to do that, I would have to believe that it was possible. For the sake of my marriage, I had to change my beliefs and decide that God would give me the actual grace to change, not leave me as I was just to convince me of my own worthlessness.

Similarly, motherhood challenged me on a very personal level. So much of it went against my natural inclinations. For a contemplative introvert, it was hard to live perpetually in the presence of multiple tiny, loud beings who demanded all my attention, all the time. I had a choice: to be miserable because I couldn’t have the time and space I wanted, or to trust God to give me the grace to change. Catholicism offered a path forward, because it taught that I wasn’t condemned to wallow in my selfishness but could strive to conform my will to God’s and obey his call to become more generous and less self-absorbed. (Of course, I do believe that mothers need time to themselves. My mistake was not in taking time for myself, but in giving my time grudgingly rather than generously.)

It was St. Therese (whom I later chose as my confirmation saint) who initially showed me this path forward. I had heard her name a few times, and I looked up an audio version of her Story of a Soul. As I listened to it while washing dishes one day, I heard her recount her Christmas Eve conversion. She had the vice of being hypersensitive and bursting into tears over the slightest family tension. When I heard about the sudden grace she received to ignore her father’s callous comment, bypassing the temptation to take offense, I thought, that is what I need. I had stumbled on the answer to my biggest problems, and it had come from a distinctively Catholic source. Though I did not know it at the time, St. Therese would continue to accompany me on the rest of my journey.

Active Discernment

By the time we had three children, my husband and I had concluded that Lutheranism’s foundational doctrines were inconsistent with both Scripture and Tradition. We felt it was time to begin active discernment, studying Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy to find the true church. We were halted, however, by my in-laws’ reaction to our choice. My own parents, as I mentioned, had simply dismissed my religious leanings as eccentric. As long as I was a Christian, they could tolerate whatever sort of Christian I wanted to be. But my in-laws’ family identity was closely tied to their Lutheranism. They felt that we were rejecting that identity by rejecting Lutheranism and worried that we risked sending our children to Hell by becoming Catholic or Orthodox.

We had expected a negative reaction, but not one so intensely emotional. In an attempt to smooth things over, we agreed to continue attending Lutheran churches and discussing our issues with Lutheran ministers. Although it was painful to drag out the family conflict, this extra period of discernment really helped to point us further on the path toward Catholicism. We had more discussions with Lutheran ministers, although by now the old arguments rang hollow.

But the accusation of idolatry still had some sting. Our relatives fought hard to convince us that Catholics were just making lame excuses when they called it “veneration” or “invoking intercession” or anything but worship. They saw themselves as calling a spade a spade, and us as rationalizing a heretical and potentially damning practice.

After dwelling on this issue, I felt it came down to two questions. First of all, whom should I believe about what Catholics believe and practice? Should I take them at their word when they say they invoke the saints’ intercession but do not offer them the worship due to God alone? Or do I believe Protestants, who insist that, because certain prayers to saints sound like worship to them, they must indeed be worship. This would be like a Muslim insisting that Christians worship three gods. We might claim that we only worship one God in three persons, but the Muslim could still reject our explanation and decide we were polytheists. It was only fair, I concluded, to let the Catholics speak for themselves about their own intentions.

The second question for me was, what is the fruit of prayer to the saints? If it is indeed a trick of the devil to turn us away from God and toward idolatry, then its fruits must be evil. But in my own life its fruit was closeness to God. As I asked for the intercession of St. Therese and the Blessed Virgin, I received grace from God to be happier and to love more generously. The more I thought about the words of the Hail Mary, the more it sank in that this prayer was a prayer of praise to God, of embracing His will, of living in His love. The fruit of this prayer was love of God, not neglect of God for idols.

I also realized that Catholics do not invoke the saints in a vacuum. They have a whole foundation of doctrine about who the saints are and who they are not. Specifically in Mariology, there is a clear definition of who Mary is and who she is not. Within these clear boundaries, it isn’t necessary to live in fear that the Salve Regina gives too much praise to Mary, because a faithful Catholic knows that Mary has exactly the appropriate power given her by God, no more and no less.

In addition to working out these issues, our extended discernment period also helped us narrow our considerations. We had been exploring both Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy from a distance. But when the stakes were raised by our family’s reaction, we realized that we had been considering Orthodoxy largely because it carried less baggage from a Protestant perspective. Nonetheless, the closer we looked, the more we realized that the Eastern Churches had plenty of their own baggage. Additionally, by this time we had learned the history of Roman papal primacy, attested by St. Irenaeus, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, and continuing through Church history.

One Sunday morning, we were on our way to the Lutheran church we’d promised my in-laws to attend. We were living temporarily in Texas and didn’t know the area all that well yet. We found ourselves on the wrong highway and running very late for church. We looked at a map and found that we were very close to the Cathedral of Our Lady of Walsingham, and the Mass was just about to begin. This was the first Catholic Mass we attended as a family, and we have attended Mass weekly ever since. We still had some family conflict to deal with, and it would be another year before we formally began RCIA. But our first public Mass as a family was like crossing the Rubicon. Once on the other side, it felt as though our destination was finally in sight.

Life as a Catholic

Along with my husband and children, I was received into the Church early in the COVID-19 pandemic. There were no public Masses, but we could go to daily Adoration as a family, bringing along all our children, including our tiny newborn who, at the time, seemed perfectly healthy. One day in Adoration, a sudden impulse led me to ask our Lord for true charity. It was a quiet prayer, and the Lord answered it with a quiet feeling of assurance. Several months later, I found myself at my grandfather’s deathbed. I was holding the same baby, who by then was showing signs of developmental problems. My 90-year-old grandfather was a lifelong agnostic who had always gruffly rebuffed my mother’s attempts to evangelize him. While my husband cared for our older children, I sat by that deathbed for two days, nursing the baby, talking to my sometimes-conscious grandfather, and praying the Rosary and the Divine Mercy Chaplet. I hung a blessed rosary next to the bed and put some blessed icons and crucifixes around the room. At one point, when I felt doubtful and prayed for St. Therese’s intercession, it began to snow. (St. Therese herself once asked God for snow to reassure her about her religious vocation.) When the time came for me to leave, my grandfather and I said our last goodbyes, and, to my continuing amazement, he agreed to be baptized. I baptized him, and he died the next day, which was All Souls’ Day of 2020.

The overwhelming grace of his baptism sustained me through the months that followed — months of anxiety and physical exhaustion from caring for my youngest and searching for the cause of his struggles. Finally, just about a year after that quiet prayer in Adoration, I received my son’s main diagnosis, which results in lifelong physical and intellectual disability. Had I not been Catholic, I believe it would have destroyed me emotionally. But God had been preparing me for years: He brought me into His Church, inspired me to read about the Catholic spirituality of suffering, and placed me providentially at my grandfather’s side at the precise moment his heart softened for once in his life. Often, our Lord’s providence seems hidden and frustrating. But in this case, I saw my son’s disability as a direct answer to my prayer for true charity. And I saw my grandfather’s baptism, with all the circumstances surrounding it, as a direct affirmation that the Catholic Church is truly His Church, through which He most effectively saves souls.

Parenting a disabled child makes me appreciate something precious about my Catholic faith. While discerning Catholicism, I read two books in fairly close succession: Reformations by Carlos Eire and Adam, God’s Beloved by Henri Nouwen. In many ways they are very different — a detailed cultural history and a brief personal memoir. But one thing stood out to me in both of them. Eire talks about the difference between implicit and explicit faith. Implicit faith belongs to someone who practices and embraces a religion but may not be able to articulate exactly what he believes or grasp the tenets of his faith rationally. Explicit faith, by contrast, belongs to someone who knows exactly what he believes on a rational level and can articulate its tenets. The ideal is to have both. But many of us — especially those who are uneducated or intellectually disabled — have only one. From its early days, Protestantism emphasized explicit faith to the near-total exclusion of implicit faith. The faith of many Catholics just doesn’t count from the viewpoint of many Protestants, particularly the early Lutheran and Calvinist leaders.

Although he doesn’t use the same term, Nouwen describes implicit faith in Adam, God’s Beloved. The faith of Adam, his profoundly disabled friend who could not speak or walk or feed himself, was an inspiration to Nouwen. It was every bit as real as the faith of any theologian. As I read Nouwen’s book, Adam’s implicit faith became an inspiration to me. Then later, when I had my youngest son and learned of his permanent intellectual disability, I was ready to welcome his simple, implicit faith and awareness of God’s love. Since becoming Catholic, I’ve never worried about my son’s inability to comprehend and articulate a set of theological propositions. It’s enough that he lives within the love of God. It would have been very distressing had I been still confined within either of the perspectives I’d inhabited before — the hyper-emotional, unstable spirituality of my childhood, or the hyper-propositional theology of Lutheranism.

Now, living the Catholic faith, I find I am regaining that quality that was prized in my early childhood: attentiveness to God. Despite her shortcomings, He really speaks through His Church if we listen.

The post Finding Equilibrium appeared first on The Coming Home Network.

Find out more about Casey and Erin at The Bapticatholic.

The post Casey and Erin Phillips – Former Baptist and Non-denominational Christians appeared first on The Coming Home Network.

The post Emily Woodham – Former Anglican appeared first on The Coming Home Network.

The post Dr. Andrew Blaski – Former Anglican and Non-denominational Christian appeared first on The Coming Home Network.