Anglicans: Why don't you come home to Rome?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dempsey1919
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi, emeraldcoast,
emeraldcoast said:
Hi Tom, I am going to throw Reason into the mix…😉
Click to expand...
I have told you nothing contrary to reason - so, let’s recap before we go too far afield:
1-A Mother is anxious about her adult daughter’s choice(s) … and is advised to pray following the persevering example of St. Monica
2-The idea is not to engage in fighting or praying AT someone… but to pray that God’s Will may be done.
3-No posts that I have seen recommend that this Mother come between her married daughter and her son-in-law… only prayer has been recommended.
Is it really Mandy’s or anyone else’s business?
Click to expand...
Yes, it is, but probably not the way your posts have been going. There is still a bond between the parents and their offspring - sometimes these bonds get messy, but this is because the bonds are not being respected. The most critical theological concept taught by the RCC - is that God so loved the world that He gave us His only begotten Son so that we would have eteranl life. We are to have faith in Christ and follow His teachings through the Chruch He founded on Peter. Our life on earth is but a short time, and our married life even shorter - but we are destined to live forever after our passing. And, this is where a Mother’s prayers for her adult married daughter to return to the fold of the RCC are focused. her question was what could she do - and the answer is prayer - NOT to fight with this family unit.

Let me make a small comment on ‘reason’. We run a risk by placing the lense of ‘reason’ to our eye before we try to see Christ’s guiding Hand in our lives. We are told that the wisdom of this world is foolishness.

Was it reasonable for:

1-Peter and the other Apostles to leave their homes to follow a wandering preacher?:nope:

2-The Centurion to tell Christ that he knew Christ could heal his son from a distance and did not have to travel to the sick bed? :nope:

3-Peter got out of a perfectly good floating boat in a raging storm and tried to walk on water? :nope:

Reason played no part in any of these three examples - faith did.

Now, it was really was quite reasonable for Martha to tell Christ not to open up her brother’s tomb because of the stench - and, if she had her way, her brother would have remained in the tomb. That is the kind of reason working to destroy faith.

In my opinion, I think we would best be ‘faithful Christians’ as opposed to ‘reasonable Christians’. I really do not think we can reduce our beliefs to what we consider reasonable at the time. There is nothing ‘reasonable’ with Someone Who is Perfect choosing to die for sinful mankind, is there?

God bless
 
I guess I would spend some time in conference with a local Anglican priest and talk to them about your doctrinal concerns. Then you can compare them to what your local Roman priest tells you about the same issues. You might be surprised that Anglicans feel just as doctrinally right as Romans do! LOL.

Best of luck to you. I know, having been Roman for 30 years that it is not easy to let go of dogma I considered accurate. Also the “we are the first, and the ONLY church” is hard to release. But remember there are fine minds in many faiths and the answers you have lived with for years may not be the only ones. Only by true discernment and reading, studying and praying will you be able to answer this for yourself. I will pray for all of those in discernment this week. Blessings.

Alexia, God bless you for caring so much and for your sympathetic ear. I’m accustomed to being blasted in CAF when I express doubts or frustrations. Your kindness and prayers are much appreciated! Thanks so much,

In Christ,
Scott

Thames Swim Team 1995, Tiber Swim Team 2003 and Possible Thames Return Swim Team 2008? lol
 
tqualey said:
Hi, emeraldcoast,

I have told you nothing contrary to reason - so, let’s recap before we go too far afield:
1-A Mother is anxious about her adult daughter’s choice(s) … and is advised to pray following the persevering example of St. Monica
2-The idea is not to engage in fighting or praying AT someone… but to pray that God’s Will may be done.
3-No posts that I have seen recommend that this Mother come between her married daughter and her son-in-law… only prayer has been recommended.

Yes, it is, but probably not the way your posts have been going. There is still a bond between the parents and their offspring - sometimes these bonds get messy, but this is because the bonds are not being respected. The most critical theological concept taught by the RCC - is that God so loved the world that He gave us His only begotten Son so that we would have eteranl life. We are to have faith in Christ and follow His teachings through the Chruch He founded on Peter. Our life on earth is but a short time, and our married life even shorter - but we are destined to live forever after our passing. And, this is where a Mother’s prayers for her adult married daughter to return to the fold of the RCC are focused. her question was what could she do - and the answer is prayer - NOT to fight with this family unit.

Let me make a small comment on ‘reason’. We run a risk by placing the lense of ‘reason’ to our eye before we try to see Christ’s guiding Hand in our lives. We are told that the wisdom of this world is foolishness.

Was it reasonable for:

1-Peter and the other Apostles to leave their homes to follow a wandering preacher?:nope:

2-The Centurion to tell Christ that he knew Christ could heal his son from a distance and did not have to travel to the sick bed? :nope:

3-Peter got out of a perfectly good floating boat in a raging storm and tried to walk on water? :nope:

Reason played no part in any of these three examples - faith did.

Now, it was really was quite reasonable for Martha to tell Christ not to open up her brother’s tomb because of the stench - and, if she had her way, her brother would have remained in the tomb. That is the kind of reason working to destroy faith.

In my opinion, I think we would best be ‘faithful Christians’ as opposed to ‘reasonable Christians’. I really do not think we can reduce our beliefs to what we consider reasonable at the time. There is nothing ‘reasonable’ with Someone Who is Perfect choosing to die for sinful mankind, is there?

God bless
Click to expand...
Tom,
It sounds like we both agree that the way ahead for Mandy is through prayer - no arguments there.

There is always a bond between parents and offspring, but there is also a time for letting children live their own lives. All of us have to find salvation for ourselves through our personal relationship with Christ - we can’t be given it by a Church or denomination or guilted into salvation. Our parents can only guide us so far - if we do not discover and embrace our faith of our own free will and through our personal relationship with the Lord it is not our Faith, but rather someone elses.

How is it faithful to wish someone doubt their own faith and their own relationship with the Lord? Mandy’s daughter and her husband have apparently found a way to share a common love for Jesus Christ in their marriage - how can that be bad? Being reasonable, and embracing the fact the God gives us an intellect to reason with, does not imply a lack of faithfulness. Instead, we can have faith that God will allow us to use our reason, our faith, and the traditions of our religion in concert to find our individual paths to His Salvation.

I understand your position.

God Bless!
 
tqualey said:
Hi, emeraldcoast,

I have told you nothing contrary to reason - so, let’s recap before we go too far afield:
1-A Mother is anxious about her adult daughter’s choice(s) … and is advised to pray following the persevering example of St. Monica
2-The idea is not to engage in fighting or praying AT someone… but to pray that God’s Will may be done.
3-No posts that I have seen recommend that this Mother come between her married daughter and her son-in-law… only prayer has been recommended.

Your examples of Apostles not using “reason” but “faith” are excellent but I must agree with Emeraldcoast about the three-legged stool. Anglicanism says SCRIPTURE-TRADITION-REASON while Romanism says SCRIPTURE TRADITION MAGESTERIUM. I don’t think reason is a bad thing. Sometimes we need to use common sense in unique circumstances or on individual bases. St. Augustine’s personal life was very sordid and his sex life even more so. He felt such a deep guilt for the sexual wild oats that he sewed for so many years that, when he became Bishop of Hippo (he was elected by the way, by his parish, not appointed by a pope) he had an intense hatred of sexuality and considered even loving sex that was procreative to be sinful! He felt that the sexual act was a piece of the “Fall of Eden” and a nasty concession to be had to make babies. He had some brilliant theology at times but his relationship with Monica, his personal life, and the rest are not things I’d ever use as analogies for family crises.
Click to expand...
 
What I miss most about Anglicanism is, when I felt a dilemna or a spiritual crisis/question or concern, I prayed to the Lord, read scripture, and maybe spoke with my priest. But when I’ve become Catholic there is very little thought of prayer and discerning the Lord’s will for me but rather, “consult your catechism! Page 2040 paragraph twenty says_______”…I find it hard to believe that every single reality of God’s will is always to be had in the catechism.

I read in there the other day that animals do not have souls and, as a result, they may be experimented on. I thought, “well that’s sure touching!” My wife commented, “why do we take pets to St. Francis Day Feast for blessings if we’re going to hand them over to a lab to be disected and tortured for medical experiments? We’re not supposed to mistreat blessed objects like palms or crucifixes, etc. but we can experiment on animals?” I’m an animal lover and my pets are amazingly intelligent, caring, loving, and devoted. While simple, I feel they will be in heaven. I really don’t give too dangs what Catholic Answers says. I guess there’s still a ton of protestant floating around in me lol…

I also get ticked off about how the Catholic Church is so sympathetic toward harboring illegal aliens. Drives me nuts. They don’t seem to respect sovereignty or the rule of law. My old Anglican priest would’ve gone nuts at such a suggestion.

The other thing that bugs me is scapulars. I sometimes feel like Jesus would have RAILED against such a notion. I talk to folks who firmly believe wearing a hunk of cloth with a picture in it keeps them safe from hell. Sounds very much like the jewish mentality of Jesus’ time, superstitious and works-based.

Ok, I know these issues are unrelated but I have to just say that when I was Anglican I would’ve applied reason to these issues. Now I have to apply the catechism and I just personally don’t agree with it.
 
i think anglicans don’t come home to Rome because they are proud protestants who want to think for themselves and don’t want to have to profess to believe in what the Catholic church proclaims.

they like the fact that they are somehow in control of their faith and not at the mercy of the Pope.

and some probably don’t even really know the differences between the Catholic church or the anglican communion and probably don’t care.

and some are probably just anti-catholic, anti-Pope. they probably feel they are close to being catholic and that is good enough. they say the nicence creed and have the eucharist once a week, so in their eyes, they are fine.

why should they want to come home to Rome?

i was different. i was an anglican for many years and never questioned it until i was in my mid-40’s. then i did convert and came home to Rome.
it is still new to me. after a year, i may still decide to return to the secular life i led for 35 years in between the episcopal church and the catholic church. i am willing to give it a try though.
 
GKC said:
Take note. It does. I’ve been a serious Chesterton collector for over 40 years. I own (with a few small exceptions) everything he wrote and published, between boards, along with all the major works on him. And Belloc too. among any others. It’s a hobby.

That definition of Papal infallibility lacks a couple of technical details, of the complete dogma as it was promulgated by Vatican I. You might look it up.

I’m sure the Holy Father and the Holy Spirit are on intimate terms, yes.

Perhaps my “colleague” knows me better.

GKC

*Anglicanus Catholicus *
Click to expand...
😛

are your initials DA by any chance?

😛
 
GKC said:
Take note. It does. I’ve been a serious Chesterton collector for over 40 years. I own (with a few small exceptions) everything he wrote and published, between boards, along with all the major works on him. And Belloc too. among any others. It’s a hobby.
Click to expand...
I’m jealous. I’ll bet all of them are signed copies ta boot! 🙂

Howdy buddy. Just dropped in this eve to say Hi. Hope all is well.
 
gurneyhalleck1 said:
What I miss most about Anglicanism is, when I felt a dilemna or a spiritual crisis/question or concern, I prayed to the Lord, read scripture, and maybe spoke with my priest. But when I’ve become Catholic there is very little thought of prayer and discerning the Lord’s will for me but rather, “consult your catechism! Page 2040 paragraph twenty says_______”…I find it hard to believe that every single reality of God’s will is always to be had in the catechism.
Click to expand...
Oddly enough, I find that the most comforting thing about Catholicism vs Anglicanism. There ARE answers not open for revision! 😃
I read in there the other day that animals do not have souls and, as a result, they may be experimented on. I thought, “well that’s sure touching!” My wife commented, “why do we take pets to St. Francis Day Feast for blessings if we’re going to hand them over to a lab to be disected and tortured for medical experiments? We’re not supposed to mistreat blessed objects like palms or crucifixes, etc. but we can experiment on animals?” I’m an animal lover and my pets are amazingly intelligent, caring, loving, and devoted. While simple, I feel they will be in heaven. I really don’t give too dangs what Catholic Answers says. I guess there’s still a ton of protestant floating around in me lol…
Click to expand...
CA, while a nice resource is not exactly the source and summit of Catholic teaching (no offense, guys). The Church has never ruled definitively on whether our beloved animal companions will be in heaven with us. We do know that all we need is in heaven, and if you can’t imagine happiness without your pet labradoodle, well, I’m sure God will arrange things appropriately 😉
I also get ticked off about how the Catholic Church is so sympathetic toward harboring illegal aliens. Drives me nuts. They don’t seem to respect sovereignty or the rule of law. My old Anglican priest would’ve gone nuts at such a suggestion.
Click to expand...
That’s kind of a hot button issue right now. It’s a matter of prudential judgement and I think the US Bishops are taking things juuuust a little too far at the moment. Again, this is another thing that is not a matter of doctrine.
The other thing that bugs me is scapulars. I sometimes feel like Jesus would have RAILED against such a notion. I talk to folks who firmly believe wearing a hunk of cloth with a picture in it keeps them safe from hell. Sounds very much like the jewish mentality of Jesus’ time, superstitious and works-based.
Click to expand...
I think such things have been taken to the extreme you describe, which is a shame, since sacramentals can and do ususally serve their proper function, which is to help bring us closer to Christ. If they don’t do that for you, simply don’t use them. We’re not required to use every tool in the toolkit! 👍
Ok, I know these issues are unrelated but I have to just say that when I was Anglican I would’ve applied reason to these issues. Now I have to apply the catechism and I just personally don’t agree with it.
Click to expand...
Well, the nice thing is that you can still apply reason to it. If you buy the tired old Anglican canard that “Catholics check their brains at the door”, we can compare the theological works coming out of both churches and see who comes out worse! 😉 (Let’s see… J. Ratzinger vs. R. Williams? or Schiori? ha!)

Here’s the thing. It sounds like you’re saying you want to be the one to make the final call on how to interpret scripture through your own gifts of reason and intellect and experience. This is, fundamentally, a protestant approach to living a Christian life (and, I might add, the primary cause of the continuous divisions within protestantism, especially Anglicanism at the moment). Living as a Catholic doesn’t require you to cease using those gifts (after all, it’s not possible to NOT use them), but we believe that you must, in the end, submit to the mind of the Church on matters where She has determined such submission is required (ie, articles of faith).

While this comes across as arrogance, the Church merely sees itself as passing down the teachings handed down by the Apostles (and with the authority to apply such teachings to new situations which arise over the course of human development).

My advice as a brother in Christ is to put down the Catechism and try reading some Ratzinger. Specifically Jesus of Nazareth. It’s important to see that despite how easily we fall into the trap of arguing about rules and regulations and doctrines and scapulars, that the focus of everything we do is the person of Jesus.
 
steve_b said:
I’m jealous. I’ll bet all of them are signed copies ta boot! 🙂

Howdy buddy. Just dropped in this eve to say Hi. Hope all is well.
Click to expand...
Greetings, Pard,

Only one signed Chesterton, two signed Bellocs, and a few other such folks. Not as easy to get them as science fiction authors.

Life is a constant challenge, constantly changing. Hope you’re doing well.

GKC
 
Grace & Peace!
chris_molter said:
Oddly enough, I find that the most comforting thing about Catholicism vs Anglicanism. There ARE answers not open for revision! 😃
Click to expand...
Hi Chris. Just wanted to respond to this as it is also, for me, a version of one of the reasons why I cannot consider swimming the Tiber–that so often, Roman Catholicism as popularly practiced or portrayed becomes a form of legalism, almost a kind of perpetual quiz show in which getting the right answer appears to be tantamount. I don’t think that’s Christianity, to be honest–I don’t think that’s real Roman Catholicism, either, really (but it seems to be the on-the-ground reality). That quiz show point of view has more to do with how people create an individual or corporate identity–who gets it right, who doesn’t, who’s in, who’s out–than with walking the Way. I find it very illuminating that Jesus does not say, “I am the Answer!” But, “I am the Way. I am the Door. I am the Vine.” All those things imply a commitment to movement in, through, and with. They don’t imply getting it right.

On the moral plane, for instance, if religion is about getting it right, then I think it becomes little more than an intellectual or forensic exercise–the formation of conscience is replaced by appeal to a catechism or to a code or to a scripture–it becomes a process of textual exegesis rather than a lived process of moral struggle which bears the fruit of virtue. Transformation is put off. Salvation becomes not a process of growth in the Spirit, but a matter of finding the right interpretation or answer to replace the wrong one.

The parallel to the “answers” point of view in evangelical protestantism is the Bible-as-instruction-book position which I find equally strange. If we believe in the Christ who (among other things) willingly occupied the position of outcast other in order to lead us to a new understanding of ourselves in which casting people into the position of outcast and doing violence to them was no longer acceptable or imaginable, then I don’t think we can turn to scripture as the answer key to a cosmic fill in the blank test. Ultimately, that view is about who gets it right and who gets it wrong, who is saved and who is damned, who is orthodox and who is heretical, who is us and who is them–and all that’s just a game that’s good for the ego but not much good for anything else.

But if scripture is an experiential record of the revelation of the Good One who calls us into communion with Him not through law but through love, then catechisms and laws and codes of morals assume a different gravity–not of compulsion, coercion or infallible command, but of invitation to an experience of the God of Love. It’s not about getting the answer right–it’s about accepting the invitation, walking the Way, going through the Door, becoming a part of the Vine.

To me, this is why the “crisis” in Anglicanism is so worrisome, at least insofar as it has been popularly framed–because it seems to represent a tacit (and I think misguided) understanding that abiding by the Royal Law of Love to which St. James refers is not worth it if we can be right instead. This mindset leads to a loss of collegiality on both sides.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

Deo Gratias!
 
Mark,

I can’t disagree with anything you wrote in response. Rest assured, though, I do not see the Faith as a way to merely answer questions or arrive at correct understandings. (and from my limited understanding of Catholicism, I don’t believe it does either.

However, there is a danger to viewing the Christian life as only a pathway or a journey in which the journey of self-discovery IS the end in and of itself. (I’m not suggesting that was your point, of course) Without the boundaries or guidelines that the Church provides (through the handing down of the Apostles’ teachings) chaos in inevitable as each believer becomes beholden only to his or her own conscience (formed or malformed as it might be), or, as I’ve had Episcopal clerics put it to me: “The God within”.

To me, the brilliance, clarity, and truth of Catholicism is that not only does it allow for the mystical and experiential (just read Ratzinger, St John of the Cross, or St Therese as examples), but the concrete, legal, and defined (Augustine, Aquinas, etc.) Although some emphasize one more than the other and at times, one seems almost lost in the shuffle, Catholicism is a both/and, not an either/or.
 
Hi, gurneyhalleck1,
Your examples of Apostles not using “reason” but “faith” are excellent but I must agree with Emeraldcoast about the three-legged stool. Anglicanism says SCRIPTURE-TRADITION-REASON while Romanism says SCRIPTURE TRADITION MAGESTERIUM. I don’t think reason is a bad thing.
Click to expand...
Glad you liked the examples. There were a bunch more, but you get the idea - without faith in Christ, our efforts and energies are not worth much.

Reason isn’t a bad thing - quite the opposite - no one was ever accused of being too reasonable as a criticism! I really prefer the term reason to ‘common sense’ - mainily because I have never found it all that ‘common’; have you? 😃

Reason actually goes a long way to keeping us acting as human beings. The only real limitation is that reason just does not go far enough on our journey to Christ - you just run out of ‘gas’ before you get to your destination.
Sometimes we need to use common sense in unique circumstances or on individual bases.
Click to expand...
You know, on the surface, this really does sound pretty good, but the problem is that everyone sings the same tune whenever our wishes confront God’s Plan. If every driver thought that the ‘Stop sign’ was for the other guy there would many fatalities. 😦

Take the abortion and homosexuality issues as they are currently playing out in the Anglican Church and Catholic Church. It really is pretty dull the way the Catholics address this issue: murder, abomination… next thing you know we will be hearing about fire 'n brimstone! And the basis for these condemnations is just the Law of God as clearly expressed in Scripture. Ah, now for a version of originality that allows for both abortion and homosexuality we just need to see which Anglican group wants to do what. These groups would like to believe that they have elevated ‘common sense’ to an art form. Actually, these are just the same old sins with 21st Century coloring: “non- discriminatory”, “openness”, “inclusive”, etc. :confused:
St. Augustine’s personal life was very sordid and his sex life even more so.
Click to expand...
You know, Augustine really did have some problems. But, he is not known as St. Augustine because he persisted in these problems - but that he cooperated with the Grace of God and, as an Early Church Father, helped to establish the Catholic Faith as we know it today. 🙂

As an example, while no one doubts that Augustine was a ‘reasonable’ man (in addition to being very intelligent) he recognized that when a matter was turned to the Pope for resolution and the Pope decided the issue - the matter was settled. “Rome has spoken, the cause is finished.”

God bless
 
gurneyhalleck1 said:
I guess I would spend some time in conference with a local Anglican priest and talk to them about your doctrinal concerns. Then you can compare them to what your local Roman priest tells you about the same issues. You might be surprised that Anglicans feel just as doctrinally right as Romans do! LOL.

Best of luck to you. I know, having been Roman for 30 years that it is not easy to let go of dogma I considered accurate. Also the “we are the first, and the ONLY church” is hard to release. But remember there are fine minds in many faiths and the answers you have lived with for years may not be the only ones. Only by true discernment and reading, studying and praying will you be able to answer this for yourself. I will pray for all of those in discernment this week. Blessings.
Click to expand...
Alexia, God bless you for caring so much and for your sympathetic ear. I’m accustomed to being blasted in CAF when I express doubts or frustrations. Your kindness and prayers are much appreciated! Thanks so much,

In Christ,
Scott

Thames Swim Team 1995, Tiber Swim Team 2003 and Possible Thames Return Swim Team 2008? lol
And I thank you as well for being most kind and courteous. That’s a tad unusual around here so far as I’ve seen. 🙂
 
Dear AlexiaMusing,

First, I want to thank you and all the other members for your thoughts, prayers,comments and good suggestions in relation to the email I sent about two weeks ago:

I am over 70, and I’ve tried almost everything I could think of to get J, my daughter back to the Catholic Faith before I kick the bucket.

J. has had a lot of problems in her two marriages. Thirty years ago after she joined the Army she met a non-catholic guy After instructions he joined the C. Church. They both wanted to get out of the Army, possibly the reason for the quick wedding. Anyway they moved to a State a long way from her Dad and me.

He was not the best choice. When he got her way off so we were unable to have much communication with them. So to make a long story short, he would go out on her and would not come back til morning.

Devastated, she called home.Our son flew out and brought J. out of
that mess. She started an annulment but didn’t complete it.

Then after a few years (while in college) she fell in love with her math tutor. They had a civil wedding, I went to it but her Dad wouldn’t.

He is disabled and in a chair. He had been baptized Episcopal. For years they didn’t go to any church, but then they joined a nearby Episcopal Church and went to their Mass every Sunday

Recently, she got a divorce. Now, she is single and could very well get an annulment. Her first husband is still alive Her disabled man lives by himself.

I have prayed to St. Monica for years. However, my daughter told me that she has made peace with God but I still worry. I still have signed up for her to get the Catholic Digest, I am still hoping she will come to Mass with me.

I have pleaded with her to come but she will not. I think she should go to confession. I am still concerned and don’t know why she will not go to Mass with me. She is still an Episcopal and does a lot of volunteer work for them.

How do I find my first letter?

Mandy31
 
maybe she is happy being an episcopalian and you should leave it at that.
she is a grown person and has free will. you can pray to st. monica all you want, but she has a right to be what she wants to be.
 
Mandy31 said:
Dear AlexiaMusing,

First, I want to thank you and all the other members for your thoughts, prayers,comments and good suggestions in relation to the email I sent about two weeks ago:

I am over 70, and I’ve tried almost everything I could think of to get J, my daughter back to the Catholic Faith before I kick the bucket.

J. has had a lot of problems in her two marriages. Thirty years ago after she joined the Army she met a non-catholic guy After instructions he joined the C. Church. They both wanted to get out of the Army, possibly the reason for the quick wedding. Anyway they moved to a State a long way from her Dad and me.

He was not the best choice. When he got her way off so we were unable to have much communication with them. So to make a long story short, he would go out on her and would not come back til morning.

Devastated, she called home.Our son flew out and brought J. out of
that mess. She started an annulment but didn’t complete it.

Then after a few years (while in college) she fell in love with her math tutor. They had a civil wedding, I went to it but her Dad wouldn’t.

He is disabled and in a chair. He had been baptized Episcopal. For years they didn’t go to any church, but then they joined a nearby Episcopal Church and went to their Mass every Sunday

Recently, she got a divorce. Now, she is single and could very well get an annulment. Her first husband is still alive Her disabled man lives by himself.

I have prayed to St. Monica for years. However, my daughter told me that she has made peace with God but I still worry. I still have signed up for her to get the Catholic Digest, I am still hoping she will come to Mass with me.

I have pleaded with her to come but she will not. I think she should go to confession. I am still concerned and don’t know why she will not go to Mass with me. She is still an Episcopal and does a lot of volunteer work for them.

How do I find my first letter?

Mandy31
Click to expand...
this is only your 3rd post and you just joined four days ago, so how could you have sent an e-mail 2 or 3 weeks ago. interesting there is another thread they are using the initial J for a relative.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top