1. Are evangelical converts to Catholicism apostates? The question has a sting to it inasmuch as apostates are typically viewed as hellbound.
Although Catholics might view the characterization as offensive or melodramatic, it cuts both ways. In traditional Catholicism, to convert from Catholicism to the Protestant faith is tantamount to apostasy.
2. One issue is there a uniform answer to that question. Or is it convert-variable? The idea of apostasy is that an apostate is sinning against the light. They've been exposed to the truth, but turn their back on the truth. A clear-eyed repudiation.
In that regard, it's my impression that the overwhelming majority of evangelical converts to Rome are laymen or seminarians. It's far rarer for an evangelical minister to swim the Tiber, and almost unheard of for an evangelical seminary professor or college prof. to swim the Tiber. So it rapidly thins out the higher up the ladder you go. Why is that?
i) One possible reason is that most laymen aren't professional Protestants. They don't do it for a living. Switching sides doesn't cost them a midcourse career change.
Likewise, seminarians aren't locked into a career path. They're in-between. Although seminary is the normal career track to pastoral ministry, they are still at the cadet phase where they haven't enlisted. But once you become a pastor, it's a lot costlier to change your mind. You lose your job, and your MDiv isn't a very marketable degree. So that's a disincentive.
But it's striking that despite that, many priests leave the priesthood. The traffic goes both ways.
ii) In addition, one reason some men go to seminary is because they are searching for answers. They have questions which they hope seminary will answer. Depending on the answers they find or fail to find, they will turn right, left, or go straight ahead.
iii) Why is it so rare for an evangelical academic to switch sides? There's the disincentive of having to make a midcourse career change. Keep in mind that the same consideration applies to Catholic academics.
iv) On the other hand, if an evangelical seminary prof. were to switch sides, he'd be a trophy convert. So it would be easier for him to find Catholic employment.
v) Finally, evangelical philosophers, theologians, church historians, and Bible scholars know too much to be impressed by the claims of Rome. Unlike some seminarians, they've already thought through the issues. They may not have equally good answers to every Catholic objection, but they have convincing objections to Catholicism.
3. It depends in part on the starting-point. For instance, some Anglicans and Lutherans have a Protestant center of gravity while other Anglicans and Lutherans have a Roman Catholic center of gravity. When Catholic-leaning Anglicans and Protestants switch to Catholicism, is that a conversion, or were they never committed to Protestantism in the first place? Their ultimate sympathies were always Roman Catholic, so that when the scales tipped, they automatically tip in that direction.
4. Assuming for discussion purposes that evangelical conversion to Catholicism is apostasy, what makes it apostasy? Is it because the sect you're converting to is apostate? Or is it the act of converting from truth to falsehood apostasy? Is it the destination or the downward spiral?
5. Why do some Protestants think conversion to Rome is apostasy? One traditional argument draws a parallel between the Galatian anathemas and Tridentine theology. Just as the Judaizers adulterated the nature of justification, the Tridentine position is analogous.
There are lots of other objections, such as how Mary usurps Jesus in Catholic piety and theology. Indeed, a writer like Alphonsus Liguori goes out of his way to create parallels between Jesus and Mary.
Those are more traditional objections, and they could be multiplied. In addition, the church of Rome has been officially liberalizing since about the mid-20C.
6. Apropos (5), we need to distinguish between logical and psychological defection. In the examples under (5), the allegation is that an evangelical convert to Rome is an apostate by implication. He's converting to a sect that's objectively and gravely erroneous.
Of course, the convert doesn't view it that way. From his subjective perspective, he's become convinced that evangelical theology is on the wrong path while Catholic theology is on the right path. And he's discovered stock responses to Protestant objections.
That generates a potential paradox: someone can think they're moving from lesser to greater truth when in fact they're moving from greater to lesser truth. A subjective promotion may be an objective demotion.
7. Here's another distinction: some Catholic objections are a priori objections. The question of authority. Who decides? An infallible book necessitates an infallible interpreter.
Historical discontinuity. Where are the Protestants in early church history? Why aren't the church fathers Protestants?
Where is the church? Where do we find the "visible" church?
Other Catholic objections are a posteriori objections. "Pervasive interpretive pluralism". "30,000 Protestant denominations".
These are understandable objections. Mind you, persuasive arguments can be bad arguments. For instance, atheists find objections to Christianity convincing. So that, by itself, isn't exculpatory.
I've responded to the Catholic objections on multiple occasions. Color me unimpressed.
8. There's a sense in which some evangelical converts didn't reject the Protestant faith–because they never understood it in the first place. So they were in no position to make an informed comparison. Consider the following:
and the two concerns most frequently cited by Protestants: sola scriptura (all truth can be found in the Scriptures) and sola fide (man is saved by faith alone).
Yet that's a misdefinition of sola fide and sola scriptura alike.
9. Then you have converts for whom the motivation is more emotional or aesthetic. Some Protestants suffer from an inferiority complex. Some Protestants hanker for "liturgy". Some Protestants are drawn to fancy Catholic architecture. Mind you, that's comparing Catholicism at its best, and not the folk masses with a guitar-strumming priest.
10. On a related note is the fact that many alternatives look nicer on the outside than the inside. That's another paradox. Like those reality shows about people who buy repossessed storage units (Storage Wars). They go to the highest bidder. It's a gamble because they have to buy it to find out what's inside–at which point it's too late in case they lose the bet.
That goes to a distinction between apostates and backsliders. You can enter, look around, and leave.
I haven't answered the question I posed at the outset. Rather, I've discussed permutations of the question. Certainly, people can make willfully and woefully bad theological judgments.
