Among converts to Roman Catholicism, few expressions are as common or as celebrated as the declaration that they have finally "come home." Conversion memoirs, testimonies, podcasts, parish newsletters, and social media posts are saturated with the language. Former Protestants describe their entrance into the Catholic Church not as joining a different religious institution, but as a return to where they always belonged. The metaphor is emotionally powerful. It evokes warmth, completion, and the end of a long journey. It also deserves far more criticism than it usually receives.
The first thing that should be said is that "coming home" is not a neutral description. It is a loaded theological judgment masquerading as a personal feeling. If someone says, "I feel at home in the Catholic Church," that is an entirely subjective statement. Nobody else can dispute it. But when someone says, "I came home," they are making a much larger claim. A home is not merely a place one happens to like. Home is where one properly belongs. The phrase therefore carries an implicit judgment that every place the convert previously occupied was, in some sense, not where they truly belonged. The convert may insist that they are merely sharing their experience, but the language itself goes well beyond autobiography. It contains a verdict.
What makes the phrase especially problematic is that it often assumes the very thing that is supposedly being argued for. Roman Catholic converts frequently arrive at the conclusion that they have "come home" because they have accepted the claim that the Catholic Church is the one true church founded by Christ. But for everyone outside Catholicism, that claim remains precisely the point under dispute. The homecoming narrative therefore smuggles a controversial theological conclusion into an apparently innocent metaphor. Instead of arguing that Rome is the true church, the convert speaks as if the matter has already been settled. The expression functions rhetorically to bypass debate by treating one side's conclusion as an obvious fact.
If entering Roman Catholicism is coming home, then what exactly does that make Protestants? What does it make lifelong Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists, and others who have devoted their lives to Christ? The uncomfortable implication is that they are religiously displaced people who have somehow spent decades outside their proper spiritual residence. Catholic converts often insist that they respect the Christians they left behind, yet their favorite metaphor quietly communicates the opposite. It suggests that the churches which taught them, nurtured their faith, and introduced them to Christ were ultimately inadequate waystations at best.
Indeed, many conversion stories display a striking ingratitude toward the traditions from which converts emerged. A person may spend thirty years in a Protestant church learning the Bible, developing a prayer life, engaging in charity, and growing in devotion to God. After conversion, however, those same decades are often retrospectively recast as a period of wandering. The old church becomes little more than a holding area before the "real" destination was discovered. The irony is hard to miss. The very communities that produced the convert's faith are frequently reinterpreted as evidence of spiritual deficiency once the convert leaves them.
The hubris embedded in this narrative becomes even more obvious when viewed from outside Catholic assumptions. Imagine an Eastern Orthodox convert declaring, "I finally came home to the ancient apostolic faith after escaping Roman innovations." Imagine a Baptist proclaiming, "I came home to genuine biblical Christianity after leaving sacramental ritualism." Catholics would immediately recognize both statements as theological claims rather than innocent autobiographical observations. Yet many seem unable to recognize the same dynamic in their own language. What sounds triumphalist and exclusionary when spoken by others suddenly becomes humble testimony when spoken by themselves.
The appeal to history, a staple of many conversion narratives, fares no better under scrutiny. Converts frequently argue that they have come home because the Catholic Church possesses historical continuity with the early church. But even if one grants substantial historical continuity, the conclusion does not follow. Even if an institution can trace its lineage through history, that does not automatically establish all Christians as properly belong within its jurisdiction. The convert's conclusion requires considerably more argument than is usually provided.
There is a remarkable degree of self-congratulation woven into many Catholic conversion stories. The typical narrative follows a familiar pattern. The convert is presented as an unusually diligent truth-seeker. They examined history more carefully than others. They read the church fathers more honestly than others. They followed the evidence wherever it led. Eventually they arrived at Catholicism, at which point the search ended. The obvious implication is that those who remain Protestant have either failed to investigate the evidence or lacked the courage to embrace its conclusions. Whether intended or not, the narrative often flatters the convert while diminishing everyone who reached different conclusions after studying the same material.
The psychological dimension should also not be ignored. Converts frequently cite feelings of peace, certainty, coherence, and relief as evidence that they have finally come home. Yet these experiences are hardly unique to Catholicism. Converts to Orthodoxy report them. Converts to evangelical Protestantism report them. Converts to Judaism report them. Human beings routinely experience profound feelings of fulfillment when they adopt new identities that provide structure and meaning. Such experiences may be genuine, but they are poor evidence for the objective truth of the beliefs involved. If a sense of home proves Roman Catholicism true, then the same standard would have to validate nearly every religious conversion on earth.
The most revealing aspect of the "coming home" rhetoric is how resistant it often is to self-examination. Converts rarely stop to ask what assumptions are being built into the phrase. They rarely ask whether the metaphor unfairly delegitimizes other Christian traditions. Instead, the expression functions as a kind of conversational trump card. To challenge it can seem heartless because one is apparently questioning someone's deeply personal experience. Yet personal experience is precisely what should remain personal. The moment it is transformed into a universal statement about where everyone truly belongs, it ceases to be merely anecdotal and becomes a claim requiring justification.
Ultimately, the phrase "coming home" is far more revealing than many Catholic converts realize. It reveals a tendency to confuse personal satisfaction with objective truth. It reveals an assumption that one's own destination was secretly everyone else's destination as well. Most of all, it reveals how easily a private emotional experience can be elevated into a sweeping judgment about the spiritual lives of millions of other Christians.
People are free to join whatever groups that they believe are true. They are free to describe the experience however they wish. But the rest of us are under no obligation to accept the hidden premises packed into the language of homecoming. What is presented as a humble testimony often turns out, on closer inspection, to be a remarkably confident declaration that the convert has finally arrived where everyone else ought to be. And that is a much bigger claim than the rhetoric usually admits.
No comments:
Post a Comment