Return to Rome: Confessions of an Evangelical Catholic

by Francis J. Beckwith

What does it mean to be evangelical? What does it mean to be Catholic? Can one consider oneself both simultaneously? Francis Beckwith has wrestled with these questions personally and professionally. He was baptized a Catholic, but his faith journey led him to Protestant evangelicalism. He became a philosophy professor at Baylor University and president of the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS). And then, in 2007, after much prayer, counsel, and consideration, Beckwith decided to return to the Catholic church and step down as ETS president.This provocative book details Beckwith's journey, focusing on his internal dialogue between the Protestant theology he embraced for most of his adult life and Catholicism. He seeks to explain what prompted his decision and offers theological reflection on whether one can be evangelical and Catholic, affirming his belief that one can be both. EXCERPTIt's difficult to explain why one moves from one Christian tradition to another. It is like trying to give an account to your friends why you chose to pursue for marriage this woman rather than that one, though both may have a variety of qualities that you found attractive. It seems to me then that any account of my return to the Catholic church, however authentic and compelling it is to me, will appear inadequate to anyone who is absolutely convinced that I was wrong. Conversely, my story will confirm in the minds of many devout Catholics that the supernatural power of the grace I received at baptism and confirmation as a youngster were instrumental in drawing me back to the Mother Church. Given these considerations, I confess that there is an awkwardness in sharing my journey as a published book, knowing that many fellow Christians will scrutinize and examine my reasons in ways that appear to some uncharitable and to others too charitable.

Genres: Catholic, Theology, Faith, Biography, Religion, Christianity, Memoir

145 pages, Kindle Edition

First published December 1, 2008

About the author

Francis J. Beckwith is Professor of Philosophy & Church-State Studies at Baylor University, where he also serves as Associate Director of the Graduate Program in Philosophy and Co-Director of the Program on Philosophical Studies of Religion in Baylor’s Institute for Studies of Religion (ISR). With his appointment in the Department of Philosophy, he also teaches courses in the Departments of Political Science and Religion as well as the J. M. Dawson Institute of Church-State Studies, where he served as its Associate Director from July 2003 until January 2007.

Born in 1960 in New York City, Professor Beckwith grew up in Las Vegas, Nevada, the eldest of the four children of Harold (“Pat”) and Elizabeth Beckwith. He graduated in 1974 from St. Viator’s Elementary School and in 1978 from Bishop Gorman High School, where he was a three-sport letterman and a member of the 1978 Nevada State AAA Basketball Championship Team.

In 2008-09 he served on the faculty of the University of Notre Dame as the Mary Ann Remick Senior Visiting Fellow in Notre Dame’s Center for Ethics & Culture. A 2002-03 Research Fellow in the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions in the Department of Politics at Princeton University, Professor Beckwith currently serves as a member of Princeton’s James Madison Society. He has also held full-time faculty appointments at Trinity International University (1997-2002), Whittier College (1996-97), and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (1989-96).

A graduate of Fordham University (Ph.D. and M.A. in philosophy), he also holds the Master of Juridical Studies (M.J.S.) degree from the Washington University School of Law in St. Louis, where he won a CALI Award for Academic Excellence in Reproductive Control Seminar.

He has served on the executive committees of both the Society of Christian Philosophers (1999-2002) and the Evangelical Philosophical Society (1998-2003) as well as on the national board of the University Faculty for Life (1999-present). The 57th President of the Evangelical Theological Society (November 2006-May 2007) , Professor Beckwith served from 2005 through 2008 as a member of the American Philosophical Association’s Committee on Philosophy and Law. In January 2008 he was selected as the 2007 Person of the Year by Inside the Vatican Magazine.

Reviews

[Darby · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a book my Uncle wrote, and I think that it was wonderful. In fact, I am his niece Darby who talked to him about being Catholic. My Uncle is a brilliant man, and I definitely think he writes brilliant, inspiring books. This is an intelligent book,and I recommend it =]

[Brian · Rating 2 out of 5]

In early May of 2007, I found out that Frank Beckwith, then president of the Evangelical Theological Society, had converted to Catholicism. I knew of Frank’s name primarily from Greg Koukl, his co-author of Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-Air. I followed the story with interest for a month, and it is just now that I’m getting around to reading Frank’s book about the reconversion.

I want to focus on the theology more than the background Frank provides, so I will skip ahead to the fifth of seven chapters and dive right in. Here is his list of the main theological issues that originally prevented him from becoming Catholic: (1) the doctrine of justification, (2) the Real Presence in the Eucharist, (3) the teaching authority of the Church (including apostolic succession and primacy of the Pope), and (4) Penance (79).

He writes, “One may wonder where the Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura factored into all this. To be blunt, it didn’t. Primarily because over the years I could not find an understanding or definition of sola scriptura I found convincing enough that did not have to be so qualified that it seemed to be more a slogan than a standard” (79). He then quotes D.H. Williams that the “Magisterial Reformers such as Luther and Calvin did not think sola scriptura as something that could be properly understood apart from the church or the foundational tradition of the church, even while they were opposing some of the institutions of the church” (79-80). This seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding about the sola in sola scriptura. The entire idea is that authority comes from the Scripture alone, so why should we think that Luther would think that the authority of Scripture alone is only understandable with assistance from the church? That’s what he was fighting against, and when being examined by Johann Eck he spoke in German - so the people could understand him - that a peasant armed with one verse of Scripture has more authority than a Pope or a church council who do not rest their doctrine on the Scripture.

Frank goes on to say, “I had for some time accepted a weak form of sola scriptura: any doctrine or practice inconsistent with Scripture must be rejected, though it does not follow that any doctrine or practice not explicitly stated in Scripture must suffer the same fate, for the doctrine or practice may be essential to Christian orthodoxy” (81). I would love to know what doctrine or practice that is essential to orthodoxy is not found in sacred Scripture. Once again, the dividing line of Scripture and tradition is at the forefront.

“Luther and Calvin had unfortunately assimilated philosophical ideas that were deleterious to the Reformers’ noble intent for the proper restoration of the Church. For this reason, the task of proper restoration fell to thoughtful Catholic reformers that led to the Council of Trent and its successors” (77). However, the 4th session of the Council of Trent opens with a statement that the council “clearly perceives that these truths [of the Gospel:] are contained in the written books and in the unwritten traditions…” and it originally read “these truths are contained partly in the written books and partly in the unwritten traditions.” Tradition in the Roman Catholic Church has binding authority on the conscience, and the magisterial has the right to interpret Scripture. This lengthy passage from that same council makes that point abundantly clear:

“Furthermore, to check unbridled spirits, it [the Catholic Church:] decrees that no one relying on his own judgment shall, in matters of faith and morals pertaining to the edification of Christian Doctrine, distorting the Holy Scriptures in accordance with his own conception, presume to interpret them contrary to that sense which holy Mother Church, to whom it belongs to judge of their true sense and interpretation, has held and holds, or even contrary to the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, even though such interpretations should never at any time be published. Those who act contrary to this shall be made known by the ordinaries and punished in accordance with the penalties prescribed by the law.”

Luther wanted tradition judged by Scripture but this passage shows the ultimate authority residing in the Church, where tradition would judge Scripture. On his website, Frank approvingly quotes Peter Kreeft, "The Protestant Reformation began when a Catholic monk rediscovered a Catholic doctrine in a Catholic book. The monk, of course, was Luther; the doctrine was justification by faith; and the book was the Bible." The problem with this, of course, is that it is a Christian doctrine in the Christian Bible. Frank ends up rejecting the Reformation and instead finding solace in the Church Fathers, who were closest in their thinking to Roman Catholic teachings. He found in that tradition the backdrop to embrace Catholic teachings and never does more than touch on Penance or the Eucharist, and completely ignores the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary and baptismal regeneration.

But earlier he did say that, “The other issues that most Protestants find to be stumbling blocks - the Marian doctrines and Purgatory - were not a big deal to me…because I reasoned that if Catholic view on Church authority, justification, the communion of the saints, and the sacraments were defensible, then these other so-called “stumbling blocks” withered away, since the Catholic Church would in fact be God’s authoritative instrument in the development of Christian doctrine” (79).

I could have spent as much time as I have so far on the discussion of justification, but I will come to a close here with something I call Beckwith’s wager and it goes like this: “if I return to the Church and participate in the Sacraments, I lose nothing, since I would still be a follower of Jesus and believe everything that the catholic creeds teach...But if the church is right about itself and the Sacraments, I acquire graces I would have not otherwise received” (115-16). However, Paul, in his letter to the Galatians, writes that there is but one Gospel and plenty to lose if you get this wrong: I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed (Gal. 1:6-9 ESV).

[Bojan Tunguz · Rating 5 out of 5]

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.

[Readnponder · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was curious to see what the author himself had to say about his switch from Protestantism back to the Catholicism of his childhood, as opposed to commentary from others. This book provided that. Some of the theolgical reasons he gave were over my head. When I understand more, I may go back and re-read those sections. However, I'm glad he included the sections for those who can track with the arguments.

[Debbie · Rating 4 out of 5]

Francis J. Beckwith stunned the Protestant Evangelical world when he returned to the Catholic Church of his youth on April 29, 2007. This brief account from the former president of the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) of why he left his prestigious post to return to the Catholic Church is a quick read, but at times extremely deep.

Francis Beckwith has a PhD from Fordham University and currently is a professor of philosophy and church-state studies at Balylor University (a Baptist school). Prior to his return to the Catholic Church he had written and co-authored many treatises on Protestant Reform theology, which he knows inside-out. He discusses the theological implications of Reform thinking with traditional Catholic understanding of issues from salvation and good works to the efficacy of the sacraments and Biblical inerrancy.

At times he seems almost too reserved in his attempt to avoid alienating any of his Protestant colleagues, but his charity and good will makes him all the more accessible to non-Catholics. He even has a blurb on the back cover of his book from the 2006 ETS president.

But I do like a good argument, so my favorite part of the book has to be the final chapter, where he explains the differences (as he sees it) between faithful Catholics and faithful Evangelicals. He even re-prints the ETS press release which they issued immediately after his resignation and his counter response to them.

Overall this is a very charitable and at the same time thoroughly engaging and readable book.

[Bob Lozano · Rating 4 out of 5]

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!

[Chet Duke · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was really impressed with this book, so much so that I read it in one day. Beckwith is a good philosopher, and I respect the boldness with which he speaks about his journey of faith. He is respectful and generally cordial in his tone, though I detected some animosity towards the ETS. I definitely want to better understand Catholicism after reading this (especially Ratzinger).

A couple of things I wish he had done: he approached Protestantism from a distinctly Reformed perspective. This is understandable considering his experience in Protestantism. I would have enjoy more interaction with/response to Arminian theology. "Protestant" and "Reformed" were used almost interchangeably, and I understand that; I just wish he had touched on an Arminian perspective as well. Secondly, I wish Beckwith's book dealt more with the doctrine of Immaculate Conception, Penance, and baptism. These doctrines were mentioned but not really discussed.

[Jeremy Gardiner]

I read this book from my 2017 reading plan as "a book from a theological viewpoint you disagree with". Because I do disagree with the premise going in, I'm going to refrain from rating. I picked this up as I've been fascinated to see Roman Catholics who seem to be very serious about their faith and have a biblical worldview (like Matt Walsh as an example). I've been wanting to pick the brain of a serious, biblically literate Catholic so I thought this book would help. I thought it might be especially good since Francis is an intellectual and has spent significant time in my world as an evangelical. Unfortunately, I didn't get what I had hoped for. The story of conversion was very unsatisfying as it was more feelings/pressure based than intellectual. The theological explanations on core issues raised even more questions rather than giving me clarity. I'd like to hear more so I can understand evangelical Catholics better, but I didn't find that clarity from this book.

[Kevin Pilot · Rating 5 out of 5]

When I was a kid at a fundamentalist Baptist Sunday school, I was taught that Roman Catholics were misguided, thought they could earn their way to heaven and prayed to Mary instead of God and Jesus Christ. I lived in a predominately Catholic town, a lot of my friends were Catholic, my own father was Ukrainian Orthodox, and my mother was Mennonite, even though she ended up at this little Baptist church.

I’ll admit to always being a skeptic, so I asked my Sunday school teacher “well if Martin Luther found the truth, where were all the Christians before him?” Hiding in the hills. Being persecuted and killed. John Wycliffe. Huss. My Mennonite grandfather had the best answers because he equally loathed Roman Catholics and other Protestants, for good reason.

This is a story that continued, in various manifestations, well through my time at Christian college and later into seminary. Francis Beckwith’s book Back to Rome really resonated with me for a variety of reasons. One is my lifelong skepticism of the story of the relationship between the Roman Catholic church and the Evangelical church. Another is his story about this time when he was in the Evangelical church, a bright-eyed convert who was attracted to the Evangelical church for many of the same reasons I was. Finally, the intellectual process he went through not to tear apart another belief system but to challenge his own. His investigation is far from conclusive, and even though he is an apologist, he doesn’t make the mistake of cherry-picking or proof texting his facts.

Now granted, I am a cognitive psychologist and I understand how his bias to return to the RC church played a role in his journey but I did not come from the Roman Catholic church and our journeys are surprisingly similar.

1. I remember taking a Roman Catholic theology class in a well-known Evangelical seminary, and the text given to us was a book about Roman Catholic theology by evangelical Norman Giesler and the Catechism. We used the catechism mostly to read passages that we would critique and “prove” wrong. I read the whole thing. And I found some books written Roman Catholic apologists. And an online forum on Roman Catholic theology. Beckwith’s process was similar in that he took his objections to Roman Catholic theology learned in an Evangelical setting and challenged them, interacted with Catholics and read source material. The good news for you is that you don’t need to do all that work, this short book does an excellent job of summarizing the process both of us went through.

2. Beckwith points out in answer to my question of “where were all the true Christians before Martin Luther?” that Roman Catholic tradition does extend back to the early church. And everyone, whether they are Protestant or Catholic, appeals to tradition. Being a “Biblical church” or appealing to sola scriptura still requires interpretation. And interpretation is built on the study of others, and that is tradition. Another point Beckwith brings out is that tradition often favors on one strand of teaching over another. It also favors one interpretative method over another. In my time in seminary (which was over 7 years, I have 2 MAs in both Philosophy and Theology, and 2 Hebrew classes short of another in Biblical Studies), I found my fellow students, who leaned heavily to a Reformed tradition, leaned into the writing of Paul. So, if you had a teaching of Jesus, that wasn’t well defined, you could interpret through Paul. Beckwith does a good job of bringing these problems of what he calls “Protestant methodology” out. Most Evangelicals when they appeal to historic writings of the church do so selectively. This is why you can have both Protestant Evangelicals, and the Roman Catholic church fully embrace the teachings of St. Augustine.

3. Beckwith does a good job of pointing out difficulties with forensic justification. Most evangelicals, drawing on the Reformed tradition, separate justification (being saved) and sanctification (being made more like God). When you add concepts like salvation at an event in time when you repent and ask to be saved, you run into a lot of problems. Now Beckwith doesn’t bring this up, the idea of raising your hand, asking Jesus into your heart and being “saved,” whichisn’t an old tradition. It comes out of the Dutch Reformed movement. The problem was that if you are predestined to be saved, how can you know you are predestined and what assurance do you have of salvation. The Dutch Reformed church decided that if you had an event, a spiritual moment of conversion, you could look back on that and be assured of your salvation. Later the Pietist movement took this idea on the road, and it worked itself into the Evangelical tradition. Martin Luther didn’t raise his hand and accept Jesus (even though some point to an obscure passage of his conversion among what must be 100,000’s of words he wrote). John Calvin didn’t accept Jesus into his heart. Certainly, Augustine didn’t. This idea is anachronistic.

Forensic justification’s problem is that the Bible seems to say that you will be known by your fruit, and not everyone that claims a salvation experience has fruit. Some popular reformed teachers then say, “well, you must have never been a Christian at all,” which brings back that same problem the Dutch Reformed church had, how do you know you are saved.

The Roman Catholic church does offer a better explanation but I’ll let you read the book, since I am not an expert on Roman Catholic theology. My “aha” moment was reading Moltmann in seminary (I was supposed to be looking for what was wrong with his theology, but I became corrupted) and he said something to the effect that salvation isn’t an event that occurs now but at eschaton. It isn’t completed now, even if you are assured by a promise now. And it isn’t just about you, the idea is that the corrupted world will be restored and the promise to you is to be a part of it. The individualistic nature of modern Evangelical theology of salvation is another problem Beckwith doesn’t address directly but I can tell you isn’t historic, IMHO.

In the interest of disclosure, I am not a Roman Catholic. I don’t go to church anymore, although I am thinking about returning and this book is part of my process of deciding how and where. I haven’t studied theology or Biblical Studies for over a decade now; the last 5 years I’ve studied cognitive psychology at the graduate level and the last two also machine learning and artificial intelligence. Most of my recent work is in the hard (ish) sciences, like evolutionary game theory, complexity theory and data sciences. Most of my colleagues are atheists. I am not. I don’t have a horse in this race. I just like a good read that is well thought out by someone who thinks clearly and does his research. I can say from my own journey down this path (mine more of a critique of evangelical theology and thought without a particular goal). This isn’t going to make you a Roman Catholic (although you never know) but it’s a good start to answering some of the myths coming out of Reformed and Evangelical circles.

[Andy Gainor · Rating 3 out of 5]

It delivered lots to think about, although I was not convinced. It did however, offer the best defense of catholic theology I have read to date. The author was charitable and witty, overall enjoyable to read. It encouraged me to love Christ more. I whole heartily agree with the authors sentiment about the ETS not accepting Catholics. That was 10 years ago, so perhaps they have changed the stance.

To set the stage as to why I read this book it’s important to point out that, I was in fact, baptized, received first communion and confirmed as a Roman Catholic growing up. According to my DNA test, I am 68% Irish particularly in the southern part (Munster) which has had strong catholic history. The reason I say that is to illustrate the deep catholic roots of my family. A good example is a story of grandparents going on a pilgrimage to Ireland 20 years ago, simply to receive communion at holy sites. They even went with their local priest! a very catholic family - I left the Roman Church as a young 18 year old who had heard the gospel two years previously at a moment of personal all time low. For those two years I struggled with my “newly found faith” (debatable if it was then or rather a return to faith of my youth) in the body of my local parish. My parents, who were mostly secular and nominally Catholic at best, did little to represent the church of our heritage. Like the author, I saw Christ lifted up and exalted in the protestant world and ran to it. I never was taught to love and exalt Christ in the Catholic Church like I was there. I had never clearly heard a simple articulation of the gospel although being in mass every Sunday. 10 years later, here I am still protestant and with a much more refined eye of theology than I was at an eager 18.

All that was a long way to say that when I came across this book, I felt I would be filled with pride to not listen to what it had to say. I listened, and have a new appreciation for the Roman Church, but as far as returning, I am not there. I am not closed to the idea, I would even go as far as to say I would like it to work, but there are lots of things I would have to overcome, and that at best, would be a long road.

[Adam Shields · Rating 4 out of 5]

Short review: this is a short Catholic to Evangelical back to Catholic conversion story. I think it is useful to read books like this to both humanize the religious struggles that real people have and to understand what actually motivates people's religious thoughts. One of the most interesting parts of this was that Beckwith (a philosopher) said that he was not concerned with many of them traditional evangelical concerns about Catholicism (apocrypha, role of pope, purgatory, etc) because either the Catholic church had authority to make those decisions (and he would just accept them) or they didn't (and he wouldn't move back to Rome). This is a level of trust that is nearly unheard of in the Protestant world and makes a lot of sense. At the same time I would like to have heard more details.

I did find his discussion at the end about the problems of evangelical 'sola scriptura' theology very good. And I pretty much agree (as a Protestant) that sola scriptura as currently popularly understood is broken. prima scriptura is a better model and much closer to the actual reformer's positions.

My full review is on my blog at http://bookwi.se/return/

[Rosamund Hodge]

I had never heard of Francis Beckwith before he became a Catholic in 2007, but it was big news in some circles because he was well-known as the president of the Evangelical Theological Society. I picked up this book because I had enjoyed some of his essays and was curious about his story.

It's a very short book, and feels rather like an expanded magazine article. As such, it's fine, and it certainly gives a clear, concise picture of his journey. It's not quite satisfying as a book, though--not only is it very short, but it's split between autobiography and theological discussion. Result: it doesn't give much insight into the personal experience of conversion, while it skims over the theological points, all of which I've seen discussed before in other conversion stories. If you're looking for a general Book About Conversion, it's not your best bet.

But if you're looking for That One Guy's Story, well, there you have it.

[Jason · Rating 4 out of 5]

Francis Beckwith explains his decision to convert from Protestantism to the Catholic Church. His decision attracted attention because he was the sitting president of the Evangelical Theological Society at the time of his return to the Church where he had been confirmed as a young man.

An interesting insight into what prompted this high profile conversion. Beckwith understands why people remain protestant. The reasons for his conversion were not necessarily clearly proven arguments. In the end, he finds the argument for Catholicism to be more convincing.

This makes sense to me in matters of faith and mirrors my own conversion. While I am convinced of the truth of the Catholic Church, I understand the people can come to different conclusions based on how they weigh the evidence.

[Christopher · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was another book recommended to me by a good friend. I have undertaken an organic interest in Evangelicalism and what exactly it is. For more on that, check out my review of another book on Evangelicalism.

Return to Rome is Francis J. Beckwith's testimonial on how he initially left the Roman Catholic Church, became the president of the Evangelical Theological Society and subsequently returned to the Roman Catholic Church, leaving his post behind him.

Beckwith is a superb technical writer...

Finish the review on my blog: wetalkofholythings.com
Link to post: http://jmnz.us/XJREJD

[Ericca Thornhill · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a great book for those who question Catholicism. The author is kind toward both Evangelicalism and Catholicism, giving good philisophical and biblical based reasons, including history and the writings of the church fathers, for his reason for leaving Evangelicalism for Catholicism. Interesting book. It gives the best reasoning I've ever heard for just why God had to come down and sacrifice himself on the cross for us, which is something that I've always had trouble to REALLY understand. :)

[Chad Toney · Rating 4 out of 5]

Compelling and engaging. Will likely leave many evangelicals with *more* questions about how the president of the Evangelical Theological Society could do such a thing (!), but will leave little doubt as to Beckwith's sincerity and his love for his evangelical brethren.

[Julie · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a good book but I wished it was a little longer. I would liked to have heard more about his journey.

[Elizabeth · Rating 5 out of 5]

I just completed Francis Beckwith's book "Return to Rome: Confessions of an Evangelical Catholic". Beckwith has a clear and straightforward writing style that makes even his heavier ideas easy to digest and accessible whether you have a heavy theology background or not. Sometimes conversion stories can become heavy-handed, overly-triumphalist slam sessions against one's previous belief system. However, Beckwith maintains a rather even-hand throughout his book. This may be because he maintains his evangelical identity while embracing his Catholic heritage.

I think this book, while not a comprehensive case for Catholicism, is certainly an adequate introduction to the reasons why an evangelical would (or could) embrace Catholicism. I personally enjoyed the way he interacted with contemporary evangelical thinkers such as Greg Koukl, Norm Geisler, RC Sproul, and ETS as a whole to challenge the strict division between "evangelical" and "Catholic" and address common misunderstandings of Catholic doctrine. Even more admirable, he admits other perspectives can be reasonable, even when he doesn't find them compelling. This is an unusually gracious admittance from any side of the aisle.

In what it seeks to do, this book is one of my favorite in its genre. Clear, concise, gracious and intelligent.

[Fraser Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Return to Rome is a memoir rather than an apologetic on why someone should join the Catholic Church. Francis was born into a Catholic family and very much catechized into the church at an early age. He finds himself in a Catholic church post-Vatican 2 that is struggling to find how to implement the pronouncements of the council. The confusion leads to the church having sappy liturgical services, water-downed theology, and sisters who look like models with revealing clothing than a chaste virgins. Francis is utterly unfulfilled and alienated in the church of his youth. He finds his satisfaction in the low-church evangelical movement in the Protestant church. After 30 years of being outside the church of his upbringing, through different events in his life, Francis starts to learn about the doctrines of the Catholic church. Over time, he is intellectually convinced of the truth of Catholicism and converts, forgoing his esteemed position as the President of ELS.

Francis made me understand the actual difference between the Protestant and Catholic view of salvation and why it is such an offense to the Christian tradition. Protestants view justification as merely forensic and this is a theological novelty.

[Helen · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am neither an Evangelical nor a Catholic so it was difficult to follow at times. A conservative thread runs deeply through the belief systems he cherishes. The common thread is the belief in life begins at conception. But then there is no argument for LIFE after birth- which I strongly believe the Catholic Church addresses in a good way.
This book does address in a roundabout way the strength of one's childhood upbringing. One's earliest experiences have lifetime pulls. I do appreciate Mainline Churches but I struggle with "Evangelical" in this day and age, where so often that is aligned with literalness and little social justice except for a poinding on abortion laws.

[Aaron Babcock · Rating 3 out of 5]

An ok read

I find Beckwith’s style less fluid and thus, less engaging than other author’s works on the same subject matter. However, on the plus side he addresses many of the key issues faced by protestants contemplating conversion to Catholicism in an accurate and decisive way. Thus, one is likely to find specific answers one is asking for in this work, it simply is arrived at through a narrative that at times unnecessarily strays from the central premise of the book.

[Kavanaugh Kohls · Rating 4 out of 5]

While I came in expecting a "Scott Hahn- lite" story of conversion, Beckwith provides an entirely unique perspective on the Evangelical to Catholic experience. This is by virtue of his journey being not a conversion but a reunification with the Catholic Church, and by his focus on the Church father's and Church history. An easy recommendation for those who deepen their understanding of their faith academically.

[Devin Tarr · Rating 5 out of 5]

Moving!

I highly recommend this work. I think both evangelicals and Catholics will find it inspiring and helpful to their faith.

[Kevin DaVee · Rating 4 out of 5]

Baylor professor or religion, who was a high profile evangelical and returned to Catholicism. Well-written and thoughtful.

[Allen Goforth]

excellent, a different perspective on converting to the Catholic Church.

[Lorraine Shelstad · Rating 3 out of 5]

Amazing story of an evangelical leader in the US returns to the Church of his childhood.

[Rachel Motte · Rating 5 out of 5]

Finally, a conversion story that addresses a Protestantism I actually recognize!

[Teresa · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent story of how Francis J. Beckwith became convinced that the Roman Catholic Church was the true church.

[Samantha Stevens · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a short (only 130 pages of actual text) but rich philosophical and theological account of the author's return to the Catholic Church after decades as an Evangelical Protestant. I was impressed by Beckwith's deep appreciation for the people who journeyed with him while he was Protestant. This book proves that you can disagree on a number of theological issues without malice.

My favorite chapter is 6, "Every Word a Little Branch," in which Beckwith explains the difference between the Catholic and Reformed concepts of salvation and justification, and defends the Catholic position charitably. I've always struggled to distinguish different concepts like justification and sanctification. It only gets more complicated when different theological traditions use the same words to mean different things. Beckwith cuts through the confusion. I will come back to this chapter more than any other.

My one complaint is that Beckwith skims over his transition from the Catholicism of his youth to the Evangelicalism of his adulthood. It seems like on one page he's still a committed Catholic involved in ecumenical ministries, and boom, on the next page he's a committed Reformed Protestant. I suspect that he was trying to avoid criticizing his parents for any failures they made in passing on the Catholic faith. Still, as a young mother I would like to know where he thinks his parents fell short so I can try to avoid similar mistakes. Despite this flaw, I highly recommend this book to both Catholics and Evangelicals. Readers with a Reformed background may find this book especially illuminating.