Why Are So Many Protestant Students Converting to Catholicism?

The pursuit of truth has a great deal to do with it.

It was brisk last weekend in College Station, Texas, but the weather did nothing to deter students from packing into St. Mary’s Catholic Center, which serves Aggie Catholics at Texas A&M. That Saturday night, 61 students were baptized, while another 67, already validly baptized in other Christian denominations, were received into full communion.

This is part of a broader and now well-documented trend. College students across the country are committing their lives to Christ, and many are turning specifically to the Catholic Church. Fox News, a reliable barometer of the national mood among cable news devotees, which I begrudgingly cite, reported that over 90,000 U.S. adults became Catholic in 2024. I was one of them, leaving my Protestant background to join the Roman communion two years ago this Easter.

Make no mistake. Catholicism has become cool. The Free Press declared as much last year. Dioceses are reporting year-over-year conversion increases. The Catholic Standard reports that in 2024, adult baptisms into the Catholic Church reached 34,552, while receptions into full communion totaled 55,453—both figures up significantly from 2023. The Archdiocese of Newark alone received 1,701 individuals this year, a 72 percent increase since 2023. Pew reports that roughly 59 percent of Catholic converts come from Protestant backgrounds. Indeed, all the students I spoke with—whom I did not hand-select but randomly approached—were former Protestants.

But why are so many formerly-Protestant students converting?

To be sure, the students I encountered had not left Anglicanism, confessional Lutheranism, or the historic Reformed traditions, communions that share much of what draws people to Rome. These include liturgy, creed, intellectual seriousness, and a deep-rootedness in Church history. They had come from what one philosopher I spoke with described as the “low-church” world. Nondenominational congregations, Baptist churches, and other non-liturgical communities have, over time, traded tradition and creed to be, as they themselves would say, a part of the world. Hungering for exactly what those churches had set aside, they looked up and found it in Rome.

A sophomore electrical engineering major, deep into the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults (RCIA), described visiting his Catholic grandmother in San Jose the previous summer and feeling a holiness he had not encountered while growing up in a nondenominational church. He had been raised to find his own faith and concluded that the Catholic Church was the most historically grounded option available. “It went back to the Apostles,” he said. It had compiled the Bible. And above all, there was “the Eucharist.”

For students looking for tradition, especially in a world that has largely opted for so-called progress at whatever the cost, the Catholic Church makes sense when you consider the Protestant churches these students were exposed to. Certain nondenominational churches, as at least two students told me, have drifted too far toward entertainment. Sunday service can feel like something out of The Righteous Gemstones. Stated plainly, the “low church” had become more like the world and less like the Church.

And that diagnosis echoed across every conversation I had. 

A philosophy major who had graduated the previous August told me he had spent years drifting away from the Protestant services he had grown up in, finding them hollow. He flirted with atheism, which he described as “almost inevitable” in corners of American Protestantism that feel unmoored and increasingly indistinguishable from self-help seminars.

What stopped him and eventually turned him toward Rome was “history,” he said. The Catholic Church “traces itself back to Christ” in a way that nothing else in Western Christianity does, with the possible “exception of Orthodoxy.” What ultimately drew him in were tradition, ritual, and a beauty he found inseparable from truth. There is one God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, along with the life, death, and resurrection of Christ, the unity of the Church, and the promise of salvation. That truth is shared across all of Christianity, of course, but what sets Rome apart, in his view, is the seriousness with which it is taken.

Undoubtedly, the unseriousness of certain Protestant denominations is a major factor drawing students toward Catholic pews.

Rock-band megachurches, which one student called “cringe,” have turned the faith into something gratuitous—demanding nothing of you while ensuring you leave feeling thoroughly affirmed. The more serious Protestant traditions—confessional Reformed and high-church Anglican among them—find this just as embarrassing, the philosopher (not the student I mentioned earlier) told me.

No student raised it directly, but as a Protestant to Catholic convert myself, I can attest that certain novelties within “low-church Protestantism” feed precisely the perception these students described. The pre-tribulation rapture is perhaps the most conspicuous example. Though it is a theologically suspect idea, it has, at least, inspired a steady stream of remarkably bad films (i.e., Left Behind)

Then there is the outright capitulation. Some denominations have moved swiftly to align themselves with whatever cultural consensus has most recently hardened on the left. The United Methodist Church, for instance, removed long-standing restrictions on ordaining LGBTQ+ clergy and officiating same-sex weddings in 2024. Some leftist Christian leaders have gone further still, deploying phrases like “Jesus is trans” or describing Christ as a “drag queen” in the name of affirmation. 

Whatever one’s views on those questions, it is difficult to describe any of this as the Church shaping the culture. Rather, the culture appears to be shaping the Church—and that kind of arrangement holds little appeal for the students I spoke with. One described his entire low-church upbringing as, simply, “silly.” The Catholic Church, whatever else one thinks of it, is not silly. (The tall hats and the indulgences are a different matter).

A nun at St. Mary’s, who had watched the night’s events with joy, offered a humble account of what she was witnessing. None of it had been organized from the top down, she told me. There was “no staff campaign and no promotional push.” Students were simply “telling their friends” about the Church, and their friends were coming.

She was not entirely sure what to attribute it to. She mentioned the Jubilee Year of 2025, a year of intensified prayer and intercession. She is probably right. But a few other factors may also be at work.

The Catholic Church in America enters this moment with a remarkable tailwind. Pope Leo XIV, the first American pope, whom the students call “based,” has generated considerable attention. He has weighed in on American foreign policy, recently critiquing the Iran War—a fact that will delight some and irritate others, but which has stirred an awareness of the Church that previous popes had not managed to achieve in America. When the pope is from Chicago and has opinions about American conduct abroad, Catholicism feels less like something inherited from the Old World and more like an active participant in American life. There is also the rise of Catholic media, which is finding a massive audience among young people. YouTube channels like Pints with Aquinas, which recently joined Ben Shapiro’s Daily Wire, have turned Thomistic philosophy and sacramental theology into digestible videos and podcasts. And, as the Free Press suggests, Catholicism today is countercultural. A generation ago, atheism was the edgy move. Today, the edgy move is to walk into a Mass and make the sign of the cross.

Even so, there are reasons to be cautious about the scale of the revival.

Research by Pew suggests a stabilization in the decline of church attendance rather than a clear reversal. Growth appears concentrated in larger, better-resourced congregations, while smaller churches continue to empty. Still, roughly 30 percent of Americans identify as religiously unaffiliated, Protestants continue to outnumber Catholics in the United States, and fewer than half of those who call themselves Christian attend church regularly. Most American Christians, in other words, are Christians in the same way most people are gym members: nominally, and with about the same attendance record.

But the philosophy graduate (not to be confused with the philosopher) had no patience for the naysayers.

The revival, he told me, is probably understated rather than overstated. “More people are coming to the faith,” and more are curious than anyone is willing to admit. “Even committed atheists want ritual,” he added. They want transcendence. They want to be accountable, and more than that, they want meaning that demands something of them. The problem, he believes, is that when people picture Christianity, they often picture its least serious expressions: celebrity pastors, spectacle-driven services, or those “cringe” concerts mistaken for worship. Many, he said, “have never encountered a Catholic Mass.”

By 2:00 a.m. Easter morning, the pattern was clear. These students are not drifting into Catholicism. They are arguing their way into it, drawn by intellectual rigor, sacramental weight, a history that reaches back to the Apostles, and a beauty they find inseparable from truth.

So why are so many Protestant students converting to Catholicism? The pursuit of truth has a great deal to do with it.

Follow Jared Gould on X. 

  1. I grew up Southern Baptist and married a catholic woman. I was taught from an early age that Catholics worshiped Mary and that the pope was the only one able to speak to god. Having discussed everything with my wife and seeing how she views things and doing my own research, I’m starting to realize how much of what I was taught was false or a lie. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t considering converting to Catholicism not only because of the unity but also the worship and reverence they have for God and Jesus Christ. Southern Baptist churches have become rumor mills where supposed brothers and sisters in Christ gossip mill as they half-heartedly sing along to hymns while another up and coming pastor from said church builds a new church right down the road from his original. That’s not servicing and worshiping God to me and I think a lot of people are hungry for a more meaningful worshiping experience with Jesus Christ and they’re finding it in Rome

  2. Yes, I am going to say this.

    With the exception of Maryland, the United States was established as Protestant nation, except that the Protestants didn’t get along with each other. In 1660, Mary Dyer was hung on Boston Common for the offense of being a Quaker and being in Massachusetts.

    Oliver Cromwell was a Puritan, and the American Revolution essentially started with James II and the growing rift between the Puritans in Massachusetts and the Anglican British officials. Without going to all the details, the hatred on both sides got to the point where each used the other’s church at some point to stable their horses during the Revolution.

    The Calvert family had established Maryland as a refuge for English Catholics, but Catholics really weren’t here until the mid 19th century, and initially it was French Canadians coming down from Quebec, and Irish Catholics fleeing the potato famine.

    It’s an understatement to say that they were not treated well. There was a great deal of bigotry and discrimination — the so-called Blaine Amendments that the Supreme Court is in the process of striking down came out of this era, along with this infamous cartoon of Thomas Nash: https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-nast-state-aid-cartoon-nthe-american-river-ganges-one-of-thomas-nasts-95474721.html

    This bigotry and prejudice extended through the 1950s. When Jack Kennedy ran for president in 1960, the concern was that because he was Catholic, “the Pope would be in the White House” — that Kennedy would do whatever the Pope told him to do.

    However, as the Catholics grew to have voting majority in several of our large cities, they proceeded to turn around and treated the Protestants just as badly as they had been treated. One example I remember being told about was Harvard professor being subjected to a literacy test before he could vote — and his response was to move out to the suburbs. And they wrote a book about James Michael Curley (the last hurrah).

    A lot of this ended in the mid ‘80s with Pope John Paul II, he ended it on both sides, and that’s a very good thing. We’re all Christians, and we should act like it. We have differences of belief that we think are inconsistent, but we don’t know they’re not. And we are all Christians.

  3. The things that differentiate between the RCC and nondenoms is not historical unless you start counting 2-300 years after Christ. There is no Priest or Pope in the NT. The NT leaves us with a very simple structure and practice. “Worship” is defined by Rom 12 as a whole life, 24/7 activity, not limited/defined by what one does in the public gathering, much less on Sunday morning.

    Interesting to note, that the vast majority of nondenoms are in agreement with Nicene theology, and without a hierarchy of control.

    The migration is all about feelings. Anglicanism and RCC is making people feel the way they think they should feel on Sunday mornings. It has very little to do with exegesis or interpretation, particularly ignoring the shouting and dancing described in the Psalms.

  4. No mention of the sexual perversion within the Catholic Church. Nothing about the bad popes throughout the history of the Catholic Church. I’m not sure that a church that spent so much money and time protecting sexual predators is the right choice to find God. The Catholic Church and its leaderships are not pure of heart anymore than any other human is. They may be scholarly, but not free from serious sins.

  5. I think that while you might have a few rogue priests & dioceses (given the sheer volume of priests & dioceses in the world that’s inevitable) it’s that even with Vatican II the Church teaches basically the same doctrine that it’s been teaching not just for the last 100 years but for twenty centuries.

    If you examined the various Protestant doctrines of 100 years ago of the various denominations the disputes were about things like the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, important but much of it minutia to the outside world. Abortion, gay marriage, contraception, transgenderism all of these positions were identical with only the wildest & rarest sects differing. Even on divorce while it was allowed it was discouraged.

    Since the Lambeth conference of 1930 this has changed and the mainline protestants have thrown away even the semblance of faith chasing out people for believing in parts of scripture that were never in dispute between Protestants & Catholics even in the time of Luther, Calvin & Henry VIII

    While there has been some bending pushed by the media and the culture (and their ally the prince of the world) it has not broken as promised by Christ to Peter.

    Add to that access to the writings of the Early Church Fathers who are clearly Catholic clearly Celebrating a recognizable Catholic Mass and that does it.

    Truth tends to shine brightest when put next to a lie

    1. Don’t make the mistake of thinking that there is a uniform protestant theology, or even that the various national organizations actually speak for the individual congregations.

      While there is some dissent in the Catholic Church, e.g., the Latin mass still being done in places, the Protestant minister answers to his congregation and not any church hierarchy.

      The related problem is that the congregation has to hire a minister from the pool available, and one which they can afford. A surprising number of ministers are part-time, where priests may be assigned to two or even three different parishes, the minister often has another job, e.g. driving a school bus, or even his own home oil heating business.

      It’s changing now, but the other factor is that during the Vietnam war, divinity school was one of the few graduate schools that prevented one from being drafted. Hence, we wound up with a lot of ministers who weren’t in it for God as much as not going to Vietnam, and that caused a lot of problems.

      And there is the same problem that the Catholics have — getting young people wanting to become clergy. I say young people because some (but absolutely not all) Protestant churches accept female ministers, and I’m honestly not sure if that’s because of equity or a shortage of males. Probably some of both.

  6. In discussing pursuit of truth, one really needs to ask a question of why it was so important to the Puritans that every child, both boys and girls, be able to read the King James Bible?

    The answer, of course, is it they believe that the ability to read the Bible was a necessary prerequisite to salvation. That one had to read the Bible for himself or herself and individually understand the truths contained therein.

    At its most basic, the distinction between the Protestant and Catholic traditions is the question of if you read the Bible for yourself, or if you have someone read it to you. If you are responsible for understanding what it means or someone else is responsible for telling you what it means.

    Where a Catholic priest is an intermediary between the individual and God, the Protestant minister is a teacher, and the individual has a direct relationship with God. Hence the Catholics have confession, the Protestants do not — the minister does not serve as an intermediary.

    The Catholic Church has an extensive hierarchy and his run is a top down organization. The Protestant church is the exact opposite, it has an annual meeting very similar to a town meeting where the churches budget is voted on, and where the congregation may vote to fire the minister.

    (During my freshman year at college, I promised to come back and vote to fire the minister if my vote was needed — the minister instead resigned. He and the choir director were both married, unfortunately not to each other, and there were other issues.)

    There are advantages and disadvantages to both models. The advantage to the Protestant model is that it’s your church and you can run it the way you want to, with the disadvantage being that you have the full responsibility for running it. The advantage of the Catholic model is that everything is run for you, but that you really have no say in how it’s run.

    From a business standpoint, the Catholics can afford to run Newman centers at a loss because they know that the graduates will give to a Catholic Church somewhere else, with some of those donations going into the larger church to subsidize the Newman center. As the Protestants have individual churches, there isn’t the same revenue stream going back to the church in the college town.

    This, and the desire of young people to want to belong to something, is why the Catholic Church does well college students. At the same time, middle-aged Catholics joining Protestant churches because they have gotten fed up with being told what to do and think.

    The current Pope is likely to badly exacerbate this, if forced to choose between him and Donald Trump, MAGA will stay with Trump. Until recently, i.e. until the last two Popes, the Catholic Church managed not to go off the deep end of leftism, it doesn’t fly the gay pride flag the way some Protestant churches do.

    It’s completely unfair to say that either approach is a sole exclusive way to pursue truth, and the two have come together much more than they used to be, remember the Puritans and neither stained glass nor music in their services.

    1. Protestant and Catholics have radically different views on justification and sanctification. Both cannot be true. The conservatives basically lost the battle with Modernism last century. Not much is left of them. The Protestant “church” is horribly fragmented (some 30,000 denominations worldwide) and mostly liberal/progressive and arguably not even Christian. The Catholic church appears more unified because the same battles took place but remained within the Catholic umbrella. The current pop is a Marxist, as is the Catholic church generally. Jesus ask if there would be faith in the earth when He returns. The implied answer was no. Jesus said also that many would come to Him at the final judgement crying “Lord, Lord” claiming that they had done great things for Him, only to hear Jesus say “I never knew you.” He said the road to salvation is narrow but the vast majority prefer the road that leads to hell. He knew what was coming. What is left now of Biblical Christianity is a small remnant. It is not the Catholic church or the so-called Orthodox church. There is a resurgence of both now in the US, but that is not a cause for celebration. The Catholic church is basically a distillation of every heresy promoted by the early church. It is noteworthy that every book of the New Testament warns about the danger of false teachers. The early church was flooded with them. That is how the Catholic church was born. Nothing has changed since Paul and Jesus issued those warnings.

      BTW, the Puritans did have music in their services. They sang the Biblical Psalm exclusively. In France when the Huguenots (French puritans) were burned alive at the stake, the Catholics tore pages from their Psalters and stuffed them in their mouths to silence their singing. Read Foxes Book of Martyrs.

      1. “Protestant and Catholics have radically different views on justification and sanctification. Both cannot be true.”

        We live in a three dimensional world (height, width, depth), there is growing evidence that time is both variable and a fourth dimension. There well could be a fifth and sixth dimension.

        Just because the two are incomparable in our understanding of reality doesn’t mean that they aren’t to those with more knowledge that we have.

        Do not forget that a century ago it was an accepted fact that “matter can neither be created nor destroyed” and then the Manhattan Project learned how to destroy matter (releasing a LOT of energy in the process)…

  7. C.S. Lewis: “A theology which denies the historicity of nearly everything in the Gospels to which Christian life and affections and thought have been fastened for nearly two millennia—which either denies the miraculous altogether or, more strangely, after swallowing the camel of the Resurrection strains at such gnats as the feeding of the multitudes—if offered to the uneducated man can produce only one or other of two effects. It will make him a Roman Catholic or an atheist. What you offer him he will not recognize as Christianity. If he holds to what he calls Christianity he will leave a Church in which it is no longer taught and look for one where it is. If he agrees with your version he will no longer call himself a Christian and no longer come to church.”

  8. I am a non denominational Christian, and it pains me to say that many of Gods churches have strayed into entertainment or have converted the worship of our Lord Jesus into a rocked out version of what they assume people are demanding. Imitating our culture. Instead of changed hearts, clinging to Jesus and our worship being an outpouring of love and adoration to our King, in some churches, worship of our Lord is an inch deep and a mile wide, in an effort to make the message of the cross and our Lord’s resurrection more palatable to the masses. This pablum obviously must work, if the object is a butt in every seat (listen to Joel Olsteen if you can stomach it). Isn’t the object of attending church to study God’s Word, to learn more through scripture in order to gain knowledge of Jesus? To obtain an eternal perspective, and see others made in our Lord’s image with the same love that Jesus views them? Ultimately, our sanctification and transformation into Christ followers demands something deeper than casual christianity entertainment from us. It requires deep relationship with our creator. Ultimately, which denomination you attend means little. Seek a place where you are fed properly, but seek after Jesus with a whole heart, if you hope to find Him. I personally would struggle with the RC Church because the pedophellia preblem within the priesthood has not been properly addressed within the RC Church. I personally find myself drawn more to the Greek Orthodox Church. Doctrinally, they corrected many of the problems within the Roman Catholic Church when they split. Like the RC Church, the beauty of the iconography draws you in.

  9. Sam Hart, your reverence for the Scriptures is commendable and just. Have you ever considered their origins? The collection of books which comprise the NT did not float down, assembled and intact, on a cloud from heaven on some specific date in the first or second century. There were many writings about Jesus, or purporting to be about Jesus, circulating then and later. Who decided which of them was inspired by God, and which were not?

    The Scriptures themselves cannot help decide this. Some books were regarded as authoritative and canonical while others, such as the Gospel of Thomas, were not. The canon was assembled by discussion, at Church councils, over a period of time. And the major criteria for inclusion were three.

    Apostolic, a connection to the Apostles and their close disciples
    Orthodox, that is, the doctrine of the book comported with the Faith as it was being practiced
    Catholic, that is, universal, which is what catholic literally means. The book was in use throughout the Church as established in the world at that time.

    Some books, like that of Hermas, met the second two criteria but not the first. Others, like the Gospel of Thomas and various Marcionite writings, deviated from Orthodoxy.

    The early Church did the hard work of approving and codifying the NT you have in your hand, and the process was refined and approved by prayerful Church councils, over centuries, and with constant reference to the active practice of the Faith throughout the known world. In other words, the traditional practice of the Faith.

    This is why Scripture and Traditional are inextricably entwined. They are mutually informing, and mutually sustaining. Scriptures are canonical because they must, and do, comport with Tradition, and Tradition is informed at every step by Scripture. You can’t have one without the other.

    Also, I think you do Catholics a disservice by saying we believe Christ’s passion was inadequate for remission of sins. That is not true, and no one believes this. Rather, having accepted Christ as Savior, we put on Christ. Did Christ feed the hungry, cure the sick, pray unceasingly? Are we not then obligated to do the same? Did Christ fast? He did not fast for remission of His own sins, rather as a model for us.

  10. I believe there is much truth in what you are saying, Sam.

    What Mike is saying about evangelical “protestantism” is unfortunately true in too many cases also.

    In an effort to be popular with the “cool kids” (modern culture) and gain followers, much of “protestantism” has abandoned sound doctrine, worship, historic confessions, liturgy, and the basic daily and weekly means of grace in Word, sacrament, and prayer.

    So large segments of “protestantism” historically, doctrinally, theologically, and liturgically adrift are not in much better shape than the RCC in many ways.

    These issues are better addressed in conservative Reformed, Lutheran, and Anglican churches, churches that adhere to their historic, biblically sound confessions, polity, and practices.

    Bottom line: Protestants just need to be truly biblically, apostolically, confessionally Protestant, not RCC, EO, or weak-tea evangelical. 

  11. They won’t find the truth in the RC church.

    Mike Gendron
    orpdtneosS14f5hh306luiaf8m7ah2t191u2u46fml45c1u2t0lah5f64cl7·YouTube·
    The God of truth has left us with only one infallible source for truth on this earth. We must use it to test every man’s teaching and every religious tradition. It is our best protection from being deceived about life’s most critical issue.

    That’s right Mike. The Bible, God’s infallible and inerrant Word, is the only source document that you can trust. Scripture alone, by Christ alone, by faith alone. How Roman Catholics can say that what Jesus did on that cross wasn’t enough and that we need enough “works of satisfaction” to satisfy God’s perfect justice, has to be the ultimate blasphemy. When the Pope pronounced that encyclical at the Council of Trent held between 1545 and 1565, where he pronounced a curse on all those who trust in Christ alone for their salvation, they ceased to be a church. Roman Catholics who believe this teaching are not saved from God’s wrath and will die in their sins. They will then immediately enter hell, a place of unbelievable torment, because they are not wearing the righteousness of Christ. And unlike their fictitious Purgatory, they will never get out. How they can say that what God calls filthy rags – our so called good works, as a necessary requirement to satisfy a Holy God, is beyond me.

    1. You might want to read the Bible and see what church gave us the books you read today. Christ founded a church. Yes, a visible church. The church gave us the Bible (councils such as Hippo and Carthage). Which books should be part of scripture and what books should not be. Where is the Bible does it say, Bible alone? 30,000 plus different denominations all say they believe the Bible, but coming to different “truths.” Makes sense Jesus would have given us a church where the gates of hell would not prevail. Christians before the reformation always believed that we are saved by grace, through faith and works. Belief itself is a work! Interestingly, the Bible tells us not to judge someones salvation, but you have to over a billion people. Read a little church history and you will not see your church anywhere!

    2. Mr. Gould

      I have been a Christian for 50 years. Christianity is not a religion; it is a relationship. A personal relationship with Jesus Christ, the second Person of the Godhead.

      I have a friend who is a missionary in Brazil. I asked him the question a few years ago if Catholicism was a denomination or a cult. He told me he had once attended a class in a Catholic church for preliminary converts. He said, “Jim, a young priest held the meeting. I could not have done a better job of presenting the Gospel myself.”

      Are the Catholic converts in this article looking for the God of the Bible, or an existential “feeling” of being grounded because of the Catholic way of doing things. It sounds to me, like the latter.

    3. This is an ignorant caricature of Catholic beliefs, full of inaccuracies. I would suggest you look into scholarly works on Catholicism rather than Protestant polemics. If it’s videos you like, try EWTN’s Called to Communion, which presents Catholic teachings accurately. David Anders takes questions, many from Protestants, and is unfailingly helpful. He has a doctorate in church history and is a convert from evangelical Presbyterianism. He could really set you to thinking instead of spouting these talking points. May I also suggest that you are a little too interested in thinking about people going to Hell?

      1. Lisa, respectfully, you’re missing the major difference — should the church be an intermediary between you and the Lord, or should you have a direct relationship which the church helps you find?

        On a more realistic basis, the Catholic Church is like McDonald’s — every one of them is pretty much the same. Protestant churches are like pizza joints, some good, some bad, and every one of them different.

        If you’re into theology, take a look at the first Great Awakening which proceeded and arguably helped cause the American Revolution.

  12. Gen Z here. I grew up in the non-denominational atmosphere and I agree with all of the sentiments suggested here. It is very interesting to see this article because I have been yearning for a more “serious” and structured church experience. I think this phenomenon is very real.

    1. You might try a serious reformed church…URC or OPC come to mind, instead of drifting to RC just to find deeper meaning and liturgical seriousness. The Protestant reformation of the 16th century was no minor kerfuffle. The split had deep theological implications. While I’m not as ready as the prior commenter to pronounce every single RC member destined to hell, I do not think RCs theological differences are easily reconciled with robust historic Protestantism.
      I am reformed Presbyterian. I always think the same thing whenever I hear of a convert from “big Eva” to Eastern Orthodox, RC, or even Messianic Christians…”if only they had first darkened the door of a solid reformed church first”
      Anyways those are my thoughts. Hope it at least leaves you a bit to chew on and consider.

      1. Scott Hahn was a reformed Presbyterian pastor. You should read his book, “Rome, Sweet Home”.

  13. I go to gym 2-3 times per week, but I might lose my Christian credentials due to lack of participation:)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Donate Today

Will you help us continue our work to reform American higher education?