I’ve Become a Catholic

Earlier this year, after a lifetime in charismatic Evangelical churches, including 13 years helping to lead a Baptist church, I became a Roman Catholic. 

Earlier this year, after a lifetime in charismatic Evangelical churches, including 13 years helping to lead a Baptist church, I became a Roman Catholic. 

For the last 6 months I have not written or talked about this change publicly both because I wanted to give a chance for my family to adjust to our new lives and because I do not consider myself qualified to be an internet apologist for Catholicism. However, I have just begun a new academic year as a Catholic University Chaplain (you can follow me here and here) and, since posts have begun to appear that look conspicuously Catholic, I thought I had better say something for those who are confused or bewildered.

Catholicism is Great

First, I really like being a Catholic. I don’t want to come across as a triumphalist convert. I am acutely aware of all the foibles, failures and frustrations of the reality as well as the theory of the Catholic Church. But notwithstanding all of that; I love her. Catholic Christianity is saturated with grace, makes coherent sense of Scripture, invites me to participate in the single greatest intellectual and spiritual tradition in the history of humanity, provides me with beauty and wonder, enfolds me in the most diverse organisation in the world, and, most significantly, offers me the substantial body and blood of my Saviour. I go to Mass often; I would go every day if I could.

My wonderful, intuitive and succinct wife pointed out to me a while ago that we used to speak often of being hungry and thirsty for Christ. Now I feed on him each week in the sacrament. When my priest hears my confession and speaks the words of forgiveness and cleansing over me it does not merely communicate a spiritual reality, it brings that reality into existence in my soul. The liturgy in my local parish is not as much fun as a really well constructed and executed worship set. But it brings me the voice of Scripture and prays in return everything that needs to be said in a way that is both concise and beautiful.

Moreover, to become Catholic is to join oneself to the whole communion of the Saints throughout the ages in a way that is real and powerful. My experience of the history of the church and her great heroes as a Protestant was similar to the way I might think of great Spurs players of the past; I can look at them and learn from them but not play with them. Indeed, I am being generous here; as a Protestant I could only really publicly learn from or acknowledge a few – principally Augustine and the Reformers. Aquinas, Bonaventure, Therese of Liseaux and so on were, to say the least, suspect. Were they great heroes for us or suspect? Now I not only learn from the saints, I pray with them and they with and for me. My whole understanding and appreciation of the truth of the resurrection of the dead and the communion of saints has been transformed by the knowledge that those who go before us still stand with us, pray for us and do so powerfully.

Being a Catholic is great.

I Still Love Protestants

I still love Protestants.

Becoming Catholic is obviously a huge decision. It has meant changing job, moving house and has put strain on relationships I had previously thought strong. There are obviously some profound theological differences between the evangelical and Catholic understandings of Christianity. I don’t want to diminish those differences. Some are relatively trivial. Others are more profound. But for all this I do believe that my brothers and sisters in Protestantism are just that: brothers and sisters and I have nothing but love for them. 

My own reception into Catholicism is not, from my perspective at least, a repudiation of the evangelical charismatic world or a denial of God’s work within it. I remain grateful for all God did in me and my family through the work of bodies like New Frontiers and the brothers and sisters we worshipped with and pastored at HBC. I believe the Spirit is really at work in and through them, changing lives, saving souls and healing bodies. The work those churches do is extraordinary and profound as is their love for Scripture and the Spirit. I would not be who I am without them; I love them and continue to pray for them.

This is, no doubt, hard for some to hear. Inevitably there is a sense of loss when someone becomes Catholic, especially if, like me, they have worked and pastored in a Protestant context. For those who hear of my conversion and feel some sense of pain at it, I hope it will be reassuring to know that I became Catholic because I positively believe the Catholic understanding of Christianity to be a true and good fulfilment of everything I experienced in my Protestant faith. It is not, in this sense, a rejection of anyone but rather a continuation of the same pursuit of Christ that characterises evangelical piety. Indeed, a crucial part of my own emotional journey towards Catholicism was reading the works of Joseph Ratzinger and deeply desiring the knowledge of Christ and the joy in his beauty that I discovered there.

So, how did it happen?

Conversion is Both a Process and a Punctuation Point

Coming to the Catholic Church was very like getting engaged. I can tell you the time and place I became engaged to Heather. It was a Sunday evening in late August in my parents’ living room. I know what we ate just before it (lasagne) and how it happened (I wrapped a ring in a series of boxes like Russian dolls before going down on one knee). I asked her to marry me, she promised to do so and we were engaged. In the same way I can tell you the day and the time I became a Catholic. On 20 March 2025 at about 1845 I stood before Fr Con Foley at Christ the Prince of Peace in Weybridge, promised to receive all that the Catholic Church teaches as revealed by God. He laid his hand on my head and prayed for the Spirit to fill me and use me. I was filled with joy and then received my first Eucharist. It was, like our engagement, one of the most important days of my life.

It is important that both our engagement and my reception into the Church were definite moments. Before I asked Heather to marry me, she had made no promise to do so. We were not pledged to one another. Something changed in that moment as we went from one state to another. In the words we exchanged and the physical pledges we offered, our status was altered. Before that service on 20 March I was not a Catholic. I had not promised to obey the Church’s teaching, had not acknowledged it as revealed by God, and could not receive the Eucharist. When people ask me when I became a Catholic, therefore, I tell them that I can name the day and time just as I know the moment I became a fiancée (and later, even more so, a husband).

At the same time, conversion, like engagement, is the culmination of a process that takes time, sometimes years, proceeding on occasions dramatically and at others imperceptibly. My engagement to Heather was the fruit of a year of friendship and love between us. Going back further, it flowed from the work of God in both of our lives shaping our desires for a partner and a life lived for God. Over time it became increasingly clear where that process would likely be leading until Heather was sat at a dining table with a ring on her finger and a crying man at her feet. We were not engaged until that moment, but that moment came because of everything that had gone before.

My coming to the Church was similarly a process that, viewed in retrospect began many years ago. It proceeded through a thousand questions, prayers and experiences that led to it. It came through my wrestling with Scripture, with prayer, with pastoral work and with history. It came through moments of grace and joy, tears and frustrations, through pain and through the providence of God.

I mention this to reassure those who find themselves on a spiritual journey of whose destination they are as yet unsure. I did not believe my journey would lead to the Church until it was nearly over. Christ led me through all my preaching, friendships, prayer and pain to a place I did not anticipate. It was a hard journey. And yet, from this side I can see his grace and love in it.

For me my conversion is a process and a punctuation point. Prior to 20 March I never preached or taught anything that was distinctively Catholic. My theological arguments proceeded using Protestant sources and logic. Nor did I receive communion in a Catholic Church. I was not a Catholic until that time.  And yet from the perspective of my being a Catholic I can see how that evangelical work, the love of Scripture, of the Church, of God’s people and work, led me to find my home in Rome. I hope it will lead me deeper and deeper into God’s love and his Church.

Where To from Here?

If you are still reading this post, I imagine you may be interested in what I am going to do next and what has come of my wonderful wife and her ministry. I am at present working on finishing my PhD examining Baptist doctrines of the Church in conversation with Joseph Ratzinger. While I am doing that, I am the Catholic chaplain at Royal Holloway University and about to begin teaching RS at a local secondary school. I have no idea what God’s plan is for me in the future save that I would love for it to involve bringing as many people to know Jesus, to find love in his Church and to receive his grace as I can.

Heather’s story is her own to tell. For the moment I can say that she, too, has experienced a great joy in becoming Catholic and has found particular peace and fulfilment in the Eucharist and in a deepening relationship with the Saints of the Church. She is currently working in a prison as a chaplain. I have never seen anyone more obviously used by God to bring light into darkness.

If you would like to know more about how this all happened, please feel free to reach out to me privately. We value and covet your prayers above all.

3 Reasons to Pray (and Read) the Psalms

The Psalms are an amazing resource filled with imagery that captivates and captures the imagination of artists and saints from Bach to Coolio. They reveal God, teach us to pray, and offer practical wisdom for life.

We’ve just started a new sermon series looking at the Psalms. It’s a powerful book filled with imagery that captivates and captures the imagination of artists and saints from Bach to Coolio. But it can also be confusing and, in places, disconcerting.

There are, however, lots of good reasons to persevere with praying (and just reading the Psalms).

1 They Reveal God to Us

The Psalms teach us about God and, in particular, about Jesus. They contain a wealth of doctrine about creation, redemption, purpose and the God behind it all. In particular they point us to the problem of sin – humanity’s brokenness in its relationship to God and to sin. And then they point past the problem to Christ as its future solution.

The Orthodox Study Bible puts it this way:

The Psalms have become for the Church, as for ancient Israel, a book of prayer and praise. All find their fulfillment in Christ, the Son of God.

2 They Teach Us to Pray

Fundamentally the Psalms are a book of prayers and hymns. They are, therefore, a wonderful resource for learning how to pray well. If you want to be a good pray-er then begin by praying the Psalms. That is, after all, what Jesus did: when things were hard (crucifixion hard), and almost everyone had left him, he prayed the words of the Psalms.

The Orthodox Study Bible continues:

Not only do the Psalms predict specific events of Christ’s life, but in them He Himself intercedes for and with His people before the Father. The Psalms can also be seen as a dialogue between the Church, the body of Christ, and Christ her Head. Therefore, they make the most sense to us when they are prayed or sung, not simply read.

Or in the words of the evangelical, Expositor’s Study Bible:

Prayer is a person’s communion with God. Prayers in the Psalter sometimes take the form of complaints against the Lord. The individual or community laments the adversity, describes the evil in God’s world, or petitions God to be true to his promises. Faith cries out for reality, and lament functions as an expression of authenticity…

Praise is a person’s longing for God and for others to be moved with the same desire for God…Israel praised the perfections of the Lord, his kingship, his revelation, and his covenant. But they longed for the fullness of redemption, especially when distressed.

3 They Offer Wisdom for Life

The Psalms contain real practical wisdom for how we should live. Right from Psalm 1, we are given advice about how to prosper – to flourish, be blessed or live well. Fundamentally this is rooted on a spiritual posture of humility, submission and adoration towards God, our Creator. That is the key to everything else.

This attitude of obedience flows out in myriad ways, including things as practically helpful as the benefits and blessings of financial generosity (Psalm 112:5) or about the possibility and grace of forgiveness irrespective of what we’ve done.

Read the Psalms; pray the Psalms; obey the Psalms. Simple.

To dive deeper, watch this amazing video from the guys at The Bible Project.

Free-will, Grace and Election: A Pastoral Guide

One of the theological questions that has the potential to cause the most concern for some Christians is the relationship between God’s sovereignty and our freedom.
It is a topic that I have wrestled with a good deal myself as well as being asked about it by concerned members of my church. I want to explain my conclusions in case they are helpful to anyone else who is wrestling with this issue.

One of the theological questions that has the potential to cause the most concern for some Christians is the relationship between God’s sovereignty and our freedom.

It is an issue that I have wrestled with a good deal myself as well as being asked about it by concerned members of my church. I remember being at University studying law (but interested in theology) and worshipping at a moderately Calvinistic Baptist Church. The prevailing view in that congregation was that Calvinist understandings of predestination were correct. The most popular articulation of that how was the high evangelical Calvinism of John Piper and the movement around him in the US. This caused me a tailspin- what if I was not really ever choosing anything? Was I really free? Did I even exist as a mind or soul in any meaningful way? I was profoundly unhappy for and while before resolving some of these questions in prayer and reading. 

Years later I flirted with the Open Theism of Greg Boyd and others but soon found a similar level of anxiety and dissatisfaction with the exegesis I was being urged to accept. I ended up realising that I did not fully accept the exegesis or synthesis of either the rigorous Calvinists or the Open Theists. I went away and did some more reading (and praying) particularly in the Church Fathers, Reformers and Eastern Orthodox writers. In the rest of this article I want to explain my conclusions in case they are helpful to anyone else who is wrestling with this issue. In keeping with the ether of this blog, I have tried to be as un polemical and consensual as I can while also saying what I think is true.

The first part of this article outlines a classical Christian understanding of the relationship between God’s sovereignty and human freedom, ultimately arguing that John Wesley’s synthesis of these ideas is the most helpful,  but not necessarily the only correct,  way of seeing this question at least within the limits of actual lived human experience.  The second part  will focus on how we can read the Bible well when these issues come up.

Thinking About Free-will and Predestination

The question of free-will and predestination is a massive one and I’m not sure I will be able to answer it satisfactorily. In some ways, that is part of the key to coming to peace with it. We have minds designed to operate within time and to perceive it as acting in a linear way. Then when we try to work out how God (who exists above and beyond time) acts in relation to us we become confused. That confusion is inevitable – it flows from the natural limitations of our present existence; we can’t expect to understand it because it is a question that is by its nature not one that can be grasped by us. I don’t think that this is a cop-out but rather recognises that there is a fundamental difference between ourselves and God that prevents us from even imagining the answers to certain questions (another, related, example is what was there before the beginning / big bang etc? We can’t even properly conceive of an answer because in our experience everything has a prior cause and everything exists within creation – beyond that we can’t speak).

With that said, there are certain propositions that orthodox Christians have generally held to be true whatever background they come from (ie Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Protestant etc). 

  1. God is free to do whatever he wants. 
  2. God knows the future. 
  3. As we perceive it, we are free to act in the present. 
  4. Without God’s prior grace that freedom does not extend to choosing him (ie he has to act first).
  5. There is (at least as we perceive it) the possibility of anyone coming to Christ. 
  6. Our grace-enabled freedom (as we perceive it) continues after we come to Christ into the choices we make to become like him. 
  7. While we have faith in Jesus God will keep us to the end.

Different groups have explained how we can hold all of these ideas together in different ways. On a fundamental level, as long as one is able to affirm all of them the explanatory net underneath doesn’t matter as much as we sometimes imply.

My own preference is for Wesley’s framework which fuses (in my view) the best of Eastern and Western Christianity. In this model, all humanity is fallen and therefore tends by nature to do wrong, all are experiencing the grace of God in some way and this grace is intended to enable them to respond to Christ in a way that is appropriate for them (commonly called prevenient grace), we come to Christ when God’s Spirit opens our hearts to enable us to respond (providing us freedom) and we then choose to respond. At that point God freely and totally forgives us in a way we could never contribute to or merit (justifying grace). Thereafter we have freedom to become like Christ insofar as we remain in relationship with God’s Spirit (sanctifying grace) and God then leads us to glory (glorifying grace).

Throughout all of this I want to affirm that God is sovereignly in control of the future but makes space within his plans for us to have true, grace empowered freedom. In the past I have used the (limited) analogy of a sat-nav in which the destination is programmed but the driver has freedom to keep turning off the route, although I wouldn’t want to push this too far.

Reading the Bible

Having thought about the overall framework Christians might use when discussing these questions, we can now address how we can read Scripture when the topic or language of predestination or election comes up. 

We have to be aware when we read Scripture that we often unconsciously read it with a particular set of prior ideas in mind. In my experience this is nowhere better illustrated than in relation to predestination. 

‘Predestination’

Throughout the Scriptures the writers are trying to balance these truths: 

  1. God is free; 
  2. God knows all things; 
  3. God loves humanity; and 
  4. human beings are (as we perceive it) free; 

In any given chapter one or other of these themes may be more prominent than the others but this will nearly always be balanced out somewhere else. This is why it is important to (as you very commendably have) get familiar with the whole of Scripture.

With that caveat, in the New Testament references to predestination are nearly always to the end state of believers ie what is the final fate of those who are in Christ? The answer is their final salvation and transformation. Thus in Romans 8:29-30, God foreknew those who would respond to Christ and the destination he chose for them was justification and glorification. Predestination refers to where believers are going (ie if we hold to Christ God has chosen a wonderful destination for us, he isn’t leading us nowhere).

Election

When we’re reading references in Scripture to ‘election’ or something similar, it is important to remember two distinctions that are very easy to forget:

  • There is a difference between corporate and individual election.
    In corporate election a group can be chosen because they all fulfil some other criteria. An example would be choosing to cheer for a particular football team. My (undoubtedly wise) choice to cheer for Spurs means that I will also cheer for each of their players, whoever those players happen to be at the moment.
    In individual election a particular person is chosen without reference to their membership of a group or their relationship to an individual.
    The distinction is complicated in Scripture when one person can be chosen (like Jesus or Abraham), which is individual election, and then others are chosen because of how they relate to that individual (like Israel or the church).
    We always need to ask what type of election is being referred to and in reference to whom.
  • People can be chosen for a particular purpose or task without that referring to their eternal salvation. For this reason we always need to ask what the person or people are chosen for.

In the New Testament, references to election are nearly always corporate. They refer to God’s plans for a particular group (Israel, the church, or those in Jesus Christ). Reading them as referring (at least in the first instance) to individuals is misreading them. The question of who is a part of that group is a separate one which is nearly always answered in respect of the church by pointing to those who have faith in Christ. 

For example, Romans 9 is part of the overall argument from 8-11 about the relationship between Israel and the Gentiles in the church. Paul wants to answer the questions, are the Gentiles part of the elect group? If so, how? What about the Jews? His answers are ‘yes’, ‘by faith’, and ‘also by faith.’ The argument proceeds through chapter 9 by pointing out that God determined the criteria by which the Jews were elect (they were children of the promise given to Abraham). Note this refers to Israel as a group rather than the salvation of any particular Jew. God’s choice was sovereign – it wasn’t because Abraham was good or his descendants were good but because God gets to set the entry criterion: 9:14. They then complain that they haven’t done anything wrong; they kept the law so why should the Gentiles be included by faith? Paul’s answer is that membership of the elect group has always been by faith and now it includes the Gentiles: 9:30-33. 

The overall point of the argument is that God determines the group that he justifies. Individual membership of that group is by faith (implying freedom and response, v.32) and not by works. Far from teaching that God predetermines and elects certain individuals prior to any faith of theirs, the chapter teaches that God determines that all who have faith will be part of the elect group whether they are Jew or Greek. The question is then what about Israelites who don’t believe in Jesus and this is what Paul deals with in chapters 10 and 11, a flow that only makes sense if 9 is about the group rather than the individuals.

I point this out because we get so used to reading chapters out of the stream of the overall  argument of the letter that we assume they are talking about us (as individuals) rather than us, the church, (as a group). God has chosen the church – we (together) are elect. On a deeper level this is because he has chosen Jesus and we are in him (this is the point of Ephesians 1). None of this necessitates that human beings are not (as far as we perceive it) free. In fact it implies exactly the opposite – that by God’s grace we are free to enter the elect group through Christ.

One solution to this is wherever you come across a passage that seems odd in its predestinarian thinking, try reading the chapters either side as one block and see if that changes how it comes across.

Further Reading

I would start by checking out Thomas C. Oden’s The Transforming Power of Grace which manages to be steeped in consensual, ecumenical exegesis of Scripture and yet also readable and enjoyable (and thin!).  

For commentaries on this issue, particularly in the context of Romans, there is a deeper and balanced discussion in Ben Witherington III with Darlene Hyatt, Paul’s Letter to the Romans: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary, p.236-259 which I found very helpful. Slightly different perspectives can also be found in Douglas M. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (part of the more Reformed NICNT series) and Scott W. Hahn, Romans (part of the Catholic Commentary of Sacred Scripture). 

Welcome to Deep Church

Welcome to Deep Church.

Deep Church is a blog dedicated to helping Christians (and particularly those interested in theology and church leadership) to access the resources and wisdom of Christian history and the wider Christian world in order to address contemporary church life and the wider culture.

My aim is to post once a week on a variety of topics within the area of church leadership and theology. The posts will be written from a free-church, charismatic perspective but will consciously try and engage ideas and practices from a broad range of traditions and sources.

You can find more about this blog and the Deep Church idea here. If you want to dig deeper into the Christian tradition or understand some of the ideas behind this blog, I’ve set out suggested further reading here.

Finally, if you are involved in the Baptist Union of Great Britain and are considering whether the BU should change it’s accreditation rules, you might be interested in my longer essay, 7 Reasons Why the BU Should Not Change its MRR.