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

[grandmama16]

Thank you for the nice comments to my TOO LONG post on the situation with my older daughter and her death. I didn’t mean to go on and on but I just wanted to tell a story of praying for a long time and God’s answers not always being ours.
There sure have been a lot of good answers here to the main questions and support of the One Holy Apostolic Cathiolic Church.
I’m very happy being a Catholic. Sure I take exception to what one priest will say, or a Bishop will allow, but I know that there is an ultimate authority that Christ left here. No problem thinking for ourselves…I have many questions on certain bible passages such as 1 Tim 2:15 …and I don’t think it’s wrong to have opinions. However on dogmatic teachings obedience must prevail. It’s a hard thing but essential, I think, when it comes right down to it or chaos would reign. Blessings on all of you…M.A.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

My experience was the opposite of yours! Our Anglican Vicar never had time to speak to me. I contacted him once because I was having serious problems and he told me to ring back and make an appointment in a couple of months as he was busy!
I was never visited in hospital by the Anglicans and experienced the services in our local Anglical church as little more than show and tell and a bit of a sing song. No reverence, no contemplation, no real prayer - it was meaningless for me. The communion was ‘fitted in’ between the vicar’s in jokes, notices about money and the youth group and the WI and requests to fill in questionnaires (during the service!) about what we thought the ‘aims’ should be for the next year. I had more opportunity to worship God in my own back garden! Rather than become pagan I came home to the Catholic Church.
I think it comes down many times to the minister and there are good, bad and indifferent.
I’m much happier and at peace in the Catholic Church, for reasons too lengthy to write about right now.
Karen

Maybe different religions or different forms of the same religion are best for different people.​

 

[Cinette]

Maybe different religions or different forms of the same religion are best for different people.​

What about “…One Lord, one Faith, One baptism…” “There will be one flock and one Shepherd”.

I prefer vanilla but when it comes to religion there can be no flavours because there is only one God.

:yup:

 

[anon52328184]

good morning!!! i was reading what fran65 had written and it sounds like what i experienced in the episcopal church. the eucharist was fit in between the announcements and the offering and the social hour and the jokes.
maybe i am being too hard or critical. if so, please forgive me.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

What about “…One Lord, one Faith, One baptism…” “There will be one flock and one Shepherd”.

I prefer vanilla but when it comes to religion there can be no flavours because there is only one God.

:yup:

• Others than Catholics are baptised
• Other Christians believe there is one God, & one Church, too
• In the context of the passage “There will…One Shepherd”, which is in John 10, Christ is the Shepherd, & He is talking about His “other sheep” - He is talking about his knowledge of “[His] own”, not about the arrangements for the government of His Church by men; IOW, He is not talking about “Church order”:
• John 10:11 I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.
• Jhn 10:12 He who is a hireling and not a shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf snatches them and scatters them.
• Jhn 10:13 He flees because he is a hireling and cares nothing for the sheep.
• Jhn 10:14 I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me,
• Jhn 10:15 as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep.
• Jhn 10:16 And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; **I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd. **
• Jhn 10:17 For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.
• Jhn 10:18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again; this charge I have received from my Father."
• There is no indication of what form that one flock will take, even if it is applied to the Church on earth.
• Why should unity in Christ be impossible where there is unity in the Spirit ? Unity of that sort makes the official boundaries irrelevant. Sin, like grace, crosses the official boundaries. In reality the boundaries exist only because they are allowed to stay in place, & they are in place only because of human sin, often in the remote past; which has had effects which are often or mostly or in many cases irrelevant now. When Anglicans & Methodists differ very little, why perpetuate the old divisions
• Something not yet tried by the CC is this: letting resolution of differences follow visible unity. So far the order has been reversed. Why not be imaginative, & accept the possibility that maybe unity in doctrine won’t come unless as a result of visible unity ?
  The notion that only the CC = the Church may have been plausible in the ancient past, but it depends on ignoring the sins of the Church & the graces in other Churches. If they were all full of nothing but scandals & error, & the CC full of nothing but holiness & truth & goodness, the idea would be plausible. As matters actually stand, that notion is predicated on ideas about the CC & the other Churches which either are no longer taught in their original sense,or even taught at all. For example, it made sense at a time when sacramental efficacy & fruitfulness were seen as indissoluble from being in the “true Church”. Such a position is no longer held by any theologian, nor taught by any bishop: it would be condemned as erroneous.

So the idea that the Church is the CC is based on ideas which are now no longer regarded as permissible - which is like holding to the belief of the Fathers in there being no salvation outside the Church with a modern knowledge of geography; they had no idea there was an America or an Australia - they thought the whole world had heard the Gospel. Yet we are tied to a doctrine they believed true, even though their belief depended on a mistake. It is not the same doctrine if its it has changed in meaning, & the knowledge about the existence of unevangelised peoples in America & Australia changed its meaning; theologians familiar with the existence of Australia were holding a doctrine the Fathers did not hold.

When doctrine ignores things like the growth of knowledge about the world - in this case, about its population - it is heading for trouble

BTW - however good the logic of a doctrinal position may be, it has to face facts: no amount of argument, & no amount of logic however valid, can prevail against the realities of life. Which is why the disproof of the possibility of motion cannot alter the fact of motion.

 

[Cinette]

• Others than Catholics are baptised Absolutely – no doubt about that.
• Other Christians believe there is one God, & one Church, too Yes, which One?
• In the context of the passage “There will…One Shepherd”, which is in John 10, Christ is the Shepherd, & He is talking about His “other sheep” - He is talking about his knowledge of “[His] own”, not about the arrangements for the government of His Church by men; IOW, He is not talking about “Church order”:
• John 10:11 I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.
• Jhn 10:12 He who is a hireling and not a shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf snatches them and scatters them.
• Jhn 10:13 He flees because he is a hireling and cares nothing for the sheep.
• Jhn 10:14 I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me,
• Jhn 10:15 as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep.
• Jhn 10:16 And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd.
• Jhn 10:17 For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.
• Jhn 10:18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again; this charge I have received from my Father." Yes, we will all be One – those who are already in “the kingdom” and the others who are not. That is how I see it also
• There is no indication of what form that one flock will take, even if it is applied to the Church on earth. Jesus said that it is HIS Church. You also said to Paul “Why are you persecuting me” We are all one with God. The Kingdom of God begins here on earth in our hearts.
• Why should unity in Christ be impossible where there is unity in the Spirit ? Unity of that sort makes the official boundaries irrelevant. Sin, like grace, crosses the official boundaries. In reality the boundaries exist only because they are allowed to stay in place, & they are in place only because of human sin, often in the remote past; which has had effects which are often or mostly or in many cases irrelevant now. When Anglicans & Methodists differ very little, why perpetuate the old divisions
• Something not yet tried by the CC is this: letting resolution of differences follow visible unity. So far the order has been reversed. Why not be imaginative, & accept the possibility that maybe unity in doctrine won’t come unless as a result of visible unity ?
The notion that only the CC = the Church may have been plausible in the ancient past, but it depends on ignoring the sins of the Church & the graces in other Churches. You forget that Jesus said that the Holy Spirit would guide us. When we sin and go off the tracks we are brought back by His guidance. There was such a thing as the Counter Revolution.

If they were all full of nothing but scandals & error, & the CC full of nothing but holiness & truth & goodness, the idea would be plausible.The CC is not full of nothing but holiness but we do have our Holy Father to teach, guide and put us back on track. Renewal is a constant thing. I think that what many Protestants don’t like about the CC is that it will not compromise and bend to the whims and fancies of the people. There is a notion in today’s world that the Church must bend to the people because “the people are going to do it anyway”. Look at how the Anglicans, followed by other Protestant churches first were against articifial birth control and then in 1931 (I think) the Anglicans changed their mind. Other churches followed and then, as predicted, the next thing was abortion, etc. etc. etc. The CC and the Pope were accused of being “old fashioned and conservative” but they were right.

As matters actually stand, that notion is predicated on ideas about the CC & the other Churches which either are no longer taught in their original sense,or even taught at all. For example, it made sense at a time when sacramental efficacy & fruitfulness were seen as indissoluble from being in the “true Church”. Such a position is no longer held by any theologian, nor taught by any bishop: it would be condemned as erroneous. So the idea that the Church is the CC is based on ideas which are now no longer regarded as permissible - which is like holding to the belief of the Fathers in there being no salvation outside the Church with a modern knowledge of geography; they had no idea ther was an American or an Australia - they theough the whole world had heard the Gospel. Yet we are tied to a doctrine they believed true, even though their belief depended on a mistake. [Your ideas here are somewhat confused!/COLOR]

Thank you for taking the trouble to answer me. I find some of your comments insightful. I am no theologian. I just have a childlike Faith and seek to learn.

 

[slyboots]

Come home…Come home…
Ye who are weary come home…

If you are weary of the Episcopal church sliding into unitarian congregationalism…
If you are weary of a church that cannot even definitvely decide to be pro-life from conception to death…
If you are weary of mediocre praise music and yelling preachers who drive big cars bought with offerings that should be given to the poor…
If you are weary of having no authority who will say “this is the official teaching of the Church” and expect us to live by it…
If you are weary of adulterers and homosexuals and child molestors telling you their behaviors are not sinful…
Come home.
We too are a Church of sinners. But at least we know that these things are not God’s will for us.
We are not perfect in our behavior or the practice of our faith. But it is the Church of Peter, Anacletus, Linus, Clement…and Christ said the gates of hell will not previal against it even though Satan will continuously try.
Come home.
Yes, we have had some bad knocks. Yes, some priests did some serious evil to some children. Yes, mistakes have been made in the worst ways. But Christ promised. And You can always believe Him.
Come home.
My cradle Episcopalian husband and I did. My daughter did and then married a Catholic and are raising Catholic children in the faith. My BIL and SIL did and they have four beautiful Catholic children at least one of which will by God’s grace have a religious vocation. My son and his wife did. We are all at home.
Come home.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Gottle of Geer,

Cinette answered a number of your concerns. Let me try my hand at just two:

Gottle_of_Geer:

The notion that only the CC = the Church may have been plausible in the ancient past, but it depends on ignoring the sins of the Church & the graces in other Churches

.

While I can not really comment on the “…graces in other Churches…” I feel confident to comment on the sins you are concerned about.

Actually, it started from the very beginning: Christ chose a loud-mouth, braggart who was known to the group for his lack of self-restraint and his ability to continually put his foot in his mouth. He demonstrated he did not know how to handle a sword and on Holy Thursday night, betrayed the very Man who said He would build His Church on this (obviously cracked and crumbling) “rock”. Just what can you expect from such a weak and sinful leader? The obvious answer is: “Not much!” and you would be right - if that was all there was to this. Fortunately, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity did not want anyone to think that His Church (and let me clarify that: the Catholic Church) was built on human strength and virtue. Rather, in spite of these obvious human frailties (as profoundly modeled by Peter as no one else has) the Holy Spirit would guide His Church so that weak men would not steer it wrong.

This brings up another interesting item: with all of the comproises on doctrine that we have seen with the Anglicans during the past five years (specific to homosexuality and having one of their Bishops being an active homosexual) look at the position of the CC over these past 5 years on this topic. No change in teaching - but, 5 years is only a drop in the bucket when viewed against the entire history of the CC. And for almost 2,000 years, homosexualiy has been soundly condemned by the CC. Of couse you could go further back to the OT - but, I think you get the idea. There are certain items that the CC has stood for and has not waivered for an excellent reason: it is following the Will of God.

Being error free only addresses doctrine. The humans who are in the Church are just that: human. These men are subject to the same temptations that beset Peter - whom the devil wanted to sift as wheat! Some Popes have been, unfortunately, very well sifted. And that proves two things: none of the Popes were immunized agaist their humanity when they were elected and all of the Popes were guided by the Holy Spirit when it came to proclaiming the doctrine of the Church. There were some real disgraceful Popes in the Church’s history - but, despite all of this sin and scandal, as you pointed out, there has never been a change in doctrine. (Baptism is still necessary, men - through the Power of God- can forgive [or not forgive] sin, the Eucharist is the Body, Blood. Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, etc.)

There is no human explanation that would lead anyone to conclude that poor leadership will not lead to the destruction of the organization. When looking at the Catholic Church you must not only look at the human leadership - but, the Divine.

Now it could be that I misread your BTW statement:

BTW - however good the logic of a doctrinal position may be, it has to face facts: no amount of argument, & no amount of logic however valid, can prevail against the realities of life.

Logic can only take you so far - and, it certainly will not take you heaven. The ‘realities of life’ are that we were not only born into a sinful world but we ourselves are born in sin. Without the Love of God we would all be lost. And, “God so loved us that He gave His Only Begotten Son so that we can live.” His Son gave us the Catholic Church to mother and guide us on our journey through this life. Christ said that He would, “…not leave us orphans…” and He hasn’t. And, that is the reality of life. Ultimately, all the rest is truly and merely a distraction.

Try not to get too carried away with the ‘graces’ of others. God works in wonderous ways - and the main way He has established is through the Catholic Church. There is no time in recroded history where Christ came back to earth, fired the Pope, revoked His promise to build His Church on Peter - then went to England and promoted Henry VIII to Head of the Church (and, of course went German, Switzerland, France, the U.S. and commissioned the other ‘Reformers’ to go in their different directions and set their own contradictory paths to finding Christ).

Ultimately, we are all challenged to act upoon the lights we have been given in a sincere, humble and prayerful manner. This is how we all will be judged.

God bless

 

[Janet_S]

When doctrine ignores things like the growth of knowledge about the world - in this case, about its population - it is heading for trouble

This seems to be the make-or-break issue for most people when it comes to Catholicism–birth control.

It’s debatable whether overpopulation is at a crisis point now. In my country, USA, there are more people dying from overeating than from starvation. But, just for the sake of discussion, let’s assume overpopulation is at a crisis.

In that case, the Church does have a remedy. It’s called chastity. Doesn’t it seem strange that an age like ours, which is so concerned about overpopulation, is so obsessed with sex?

I don’t think the Church’s position on BC is ridiculous or behind the times. It’s the only voice of clarity in a confused and mixed-up world.

 

[AlexiaMusing]

I believe that we should all pray for the Anglican Church. The people must feel terrible without any authority they can really trust. There are some wonderful clergy in the Anglican Church and they too must have a heavy heart. Unity is so essential.

I really cannot see how the clergy can come home to Rome just like that, They can’t leave their Church in the hands of SSA, whacky, goofy “clergy”

So I think we should pray, pray and pray for the Anglican Church.

:tsktsk:

PS I am not against people of same sex attraction (SSA) just those loud, vulgar, practicing homos who have created a sub-culture. Some of the greatest spiritual mentors were of SSA. As long as they are celebate.

It seems some want to think that we are all in dire straights. You see, most of us have no desire to have authority we can trust. We don’t believe that this is what God intended, that we simply obey a man or group of men who tell us what to believe and think. You should pray for those who are in poverty, victims of war, sick and in need of health care and others who really need prayers. We Anglicans are fine, thanks for asking!

 

[AlexiaMusing]

yes, we definitely need to keep the anglican church in our prayers.

i didn’t realize how much the episcopal church had strayed away from the scripture because i didn’t go to church for 30 years. i left the church when i went off to college.

i wasn’t sure what you meant by SSA. that is the first time i have seen that meaning same sex attraction. i know that the priest at my old church said that they were welcome to the church as long as they were celibate.

i didn’t know any though. so i never got to hear their story. if there were any at our church, they definitely were not loud or vulgar.

there are so many different types of anglicans now that i get really confused.
there are the new age anglicans, the middle of the road anglicans and then there are the orthodox anglicans. i am not sure what the future holds, but
i pray for the people i left behind in the anglican communion. they definitely didn’t want to follow me to the RCC.

We have not strayed from scripture as we see it dear. We, shocking as it may seem to you, think that we have the same ability to read and understand as you do, or as you are told to do as it were. I am thrilled that you have found the faith tradition that suits you, but please don’t denigrate those of us who are very happy in our Episocopal Church.

 

[AlexiaMusing]

Hello new poster Alexia. So from your post it sounds like you have been a member of the Anglican church from 1988 to 2008 (20 years) and you were a member of the Catholic Church from 1958 to 1988 (30 years)?

Is this right?

Is there something you are driving at? I was born into a Catholic family, and converted about 20 years ago. Your point? Is there something I 'm doing wrong being new as you put it? I don’t certainly mean to offend anyone. I’m slightly bewildered I guess???

 

[grandmama16]

This seems to be the make-or-break issue for most people when it comes to Catholicism–birth control.

It’s debatable whether overpopulation is at a crisis point now. In my country, USA, there are more people dying from overeating than from starvation. But, just for the sake of discussion, let’s assume overpopulation is at a crisis.

In that case, the Church does have a remedy. It’s called chastity. Doesn’t it seem strange that an age like ours, which is so concerned about overpopulation, is so obsessed with sex?

I don’t think the Church’s position on BC is ridiculous or behind the times. It’s the only voice of clarity in a confused and mixed-up world.

Wow…you said it! :clapping: Great job!! People just do not want to even think about chastity or, heaven forbid “self control”. Goodness, whatever would the the companies who make Viagra and Cialis do? :crying: Thank you for your straight forward post. :extrahappy: M.A.

 

[anon52328184]

i always like to hear from alexia because she loves the anglican church and makes intelligent arguments. i can understand what it must be like to come here and read what is said about the anglican church or the episcopal church.
please forgive us. you probably get tired of reading the same things we say.
i know when i first joined the RCC i was bragging to my anglican friends and
probably was very annoying to them. i have since learned that i will not win people to the RCC with that type of behavior. people have to find out for themselves i guess. those that are anglicans, are choosing to remain anglicans for one reason or another. i would be curious to find out why you left the RCC for the anglican church. forgive us if we get carried away and sound high and mighty. that probably is not good on our part.

 

[piperspop]

Perhaps you haven’t heard… we are trying to come home, but as junior partners, not absorbed members. Why take this approach? Because we feel our liturgy and church discipline have a great deal to offer to the Church, and should not be discarded out of hand. Who are we? We are the Traditional Anglican Communion, 400,000 strong, and carrying on the “Faith once delivered to the Saints”.

We are a worldwide association of orthodox Anglican Churches.
In the United States, we are the Anglican Church in America.
Here are two references, one to a recent letter from Cardinal Levada to our Primate, Archbishop John Hepworth.
themessenger.com.au/news.htm
The second is a statement on Christian Unity from our Bishop, the Rt Rev George Langberg. I hope you find it as insipiring as I do.
anglodiaspora.proboards85.com/index.cgi?board=news&action=display&thread=378
pray for us.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Perhaps you haven’t heard… we are trying to come home, but as junior partners, not absorbed members. Why take this approach? Because we feel our liturgy and church discipline have a great deal to offer to the Church, and should not be discarded out of hand. Who are we? We are the Traditional Anglican Communion, 400,000 strong, and carrying on the “Faith once delivered to the Saints”.

We are a worldwide association of orthodox Anglican Churches.
In the United States, we are the Anglican Church in America.
Here are two references, one to a recent letter from Cardinal Levada to our Primate, Archbishop John Hepworth.
themessenger.com.au/news.htm
The second is a statement on Christian Unity from our Bishop, the Rt Rev George Langberg. I hope you find it as insipiring as I do.
anglodiaspora.proboards85.com/index.cgi?board=news&action=display&thread=378
pray for us.

Piperspop:

Thank You.

About 3-1/2 years ago, I got involved in a trial balloon that turned into lead on 3 straight “Anglicans to Rome” threads. You won’t believe the flak I got from American Roman Catholics and how much they didn’t want what I had been told had been proposed by Pope John Paul II himself from happening. I’ll only tell you that, if not for the kind words of a lot of the Eastern Catholics and those from outside the United States, I would have told Archbishop Hepworth to give up (And I’ve known Fr. Joseph Fessio, a former student of Pope Benedict XVI, since the late 1970’s!).

It was that nasty. That’s one reason Cardinal Levada is so guarded - He has to be convinced that obeying the Lord is so important that the repercussions here would be worth it - And one reason for the delay from the Vatican.

Let us all fast and pray, and let us all beg everyone we know to fast and pray, because the devil, the Accuser of the Brethren and the Father of Lies is working overtime to stop this.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[TriuneUnity]

Piperspop:

Thank You.

About 3-1/2 years ago, I got involved in a trial balloon that turned into lead on 3 straight “Anglicans to Rome” threads. You won’t believe the flak I got from American Roman Catholics and how much they didn’t want what I had been told had been proposed by Pope John Paul II himself from happening. I’ll only tell you that, if not for the kind words of a lot of the Eastern Catholics and those from outside the United States, I would have told Archbishop Hepworth to give up (And I’ve known Fr. Joseph Fessio, a former student of Pope Benedict XVI, since the late 1970’s!).

It was that nasty. That’s one reason Cardinal Levada is so guarded - He has to be convinced that obeying the Lord is so important that the rapprocussions here would be worth it - And one reason for the delay from the Vatican.

Let us all fast and pray, and let us all beg everyone we know to fast and pray, because the devil, the Accuser of the Brethren and the Father of Lies is working overtime to stop this.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

I have never met a Traditional Anglican before. So I have to ask; is there a reason you’re a Traditional Anglican verses becoming a Roman Catholic?

 

[anon52328184]

probably for the same reasons that piperspop gave.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

I have never met a Traditional Anglican before. So I have to ask; is there a reason you’re a Traditional Anglican verses becoming a Roman Catholic?

TriuneUnity:

You’ll need to look up my posts for the answer, because it’s a LONG STORY. I came back to the LORD after having been gone (I mean LONG GONE) for something like 20 years. and, When I came back in Oct., 2003, I was a DISASTER AREA.

Most Roman Catholic Parishes have 2,000+ Parishioners, 1 or 2 priests & 1 Deacon. St. Marys had 200 Parishioners, 2 Priests & 2 Deacons (and still has the same numbers). Most Catholics are lucky if they see their Bishops 3 times during their lives. In the last 5 years, I’ve seen my Diocesan 4 times, a Visiting Bishop 3 times, and my Primate as well as emailed and received phone calls from my Primate and my Diocesan.

If you’re fine, you don’t need that kind of personal attention. but, If you’re a “basket case” (to use Fr. Corapi’s words), that “Personal attention” can be life itself.

Two things that helped my decision were that, (1) in Dec. 2003, Archbishop Hepworth told me that he and the leadership of the TAC were actively negotiating to bring about union with Rome, and that Rome had to proposing something along the lines of the Union of Brest (How the Eastern Catholics are united with the Holy See), and (2) a Roman priest friend of mine told me to stay put, heal my wounds, and then to do what I could to bring about what Archbishop Hepworth had described to me.

If you’re really interested in the TAC and what we’re about, here’s the US website:

TAC - Anglican Church in America
acahome.org/index.htm

Here’s a parish that should be close to you:
At. Anne’s Anglican Church
Diocese of the Eastern United States
stannesanglican.us/

This should explain as much as ONE post can explain. I hope that, between this & what you find in your search of my posts, you’ll have enough information to see that there isn’t much difference between a “Traditional Anglican” and a Roman Catholic, and that it’s mainly in how we worship and explain the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Faith once delivered from our Lord to His Apostles and to the Church, the “Pillar and Bulwark of Truth”(1 Tim 3:15).

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[TriuneUnity]

TriuneUnity:

You’ll need to look up my posts for the answer, because it’s a LONG STORY. I came back to the LORD after having been gone (I mean LONG GONE) for something like 20 years. and, When I came back in Oct., 2003, I was a DISASTER AREA.

Most Roman Catholic Parishes have 2,000+ Parishioners, 1 or 2 priests & 1 Deacon. St. Marys had 200 Parishioners, 2 Priests & 2 Deacons (and still has the same numbers). Most Catholics are lucky if they see their Bishops 3 times during their lives. In the last 5 years, I’ve seen my Diocesan 4 times, a Visiting Bishop 3 times, and my Primate as well as emailed and received phone calls from my Primate and my Diocesan.

If you’re fine, you don’t need that kind of personal attention. but, If you’re a “basket case” (to use Fr. Corapi’s words), that “Personal attention” can be life itself.

Two things that helped my decision were that, (1) in Dec. 2003, Archbishop Hepworth told me that he and the leadership of the TAC were actively negotiating to bring about union with Rome, and that Rome had to proposing something along the lines of the Union of Brest (How the Eastern Catholics are united with the Holy See), and (2) a Roman priest friend of mine told me to stay put, heal my wounds, and then to do what I could to bring about what Archbishop Hepworth had described to me.

If you’re really interested in the TAC and what we’re about, here’s the US website:

TAC - Anglican Church in America
acahome.org/index.htm

Here’s a parish that should be close to you:
At. Anne’s Anglican Church
Diocese of the Eastern United States
stannesanglican.us/

This should explain as much as ONE post can explain. I hope that, between this & what you find in your search of my posts, you’ll have enough information to see that there isn’t much difference between a “Traditional Anglican” and a Roman Catholic, and that it’s mainly in how we worship and explain the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Faith once delivered from our Lord to His Apostles and to the Church, the “Pillar and Bulwark of Truth”(1 Tim 3:15).

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

Thank you for your personal testimony, Michael. That makes a lot of sense and as one who has been in Lutheran parishes that have been that large (2000+) I can understand. At some point, when they get too big, they can become mere sacrament factories (to use the term of the priest who married my wife and I).

St. Ann’s is about an hour away. It would be interesting to visit, if only to see the liturgy.