Harry Wallace, of Harper’s Choice, was what he called a “cradle Episcopalian,” a person baptized and raised in the Episcopal Church. As a youth, he was an altar boy and later served as a Eucharist minister in the church.
But Wallace, 53, said he and his wife, Pam, became increasingly disturbed in recent years by the liberalization of the church. As the church hierarchy moved toward accepting gay unions and ordaining gay priests, Wallace began to feel more and more uncomfortable.
“The angst and the division was troubling,” Wallace said. “In our tradition and our belief set, we were becoming more and more marginalized.”
Last year, Wallace and his wife converted to the Roman Catholic Church.
Their decision was hardly unique. Such conversions are part of a trend encouraged and recognized by the Catholic Church — a trend that also is a two-way street, as even Catholics concede.
Sure, there’s some two-way traffic; very little, unrelated to the similarly small stream of Anglo-Catholics becoming Roman Catholics (most Episcopalians so inclined already have done, years ago): Protestants reading their way in, pushed by the liberalisation of their denomination, not different from Scott Hahn-like Protestant conversions, and middle-aged liberal RCs who’ve dropped their church’s teachings but are still in the 1950s habit of going to church (or why the Episcopalians haven’t sunk below a million members on their rolls – yet). The reasons there’s little traffic either way and in most places the two sides don’t compete: class and culture. The Episcopalians look down on RCs as backward immigrants who need to be enlightened; the Irish-bred liberal RCs hate the English for persecuting their ancestors and as part of that, as well as their liberalism, hate high-church practice, thinking the Episcopalians are snobs for liking nice artsy old-fashioned stuff.
Yep, it is a two-way street. I’ve heard from liberal RCs I know who are worried about us shedding “homophobes” in their direction.
I sometimes wonder how accurate the political words “liberal” and “conservative” (as used a lot here and I’m guilty too)) are for purposes of Church discussion. Wouldn’t “orthodox” or “unorthodox ” or “heretical” be more appropriate??? Using political terms seems to make light of the trashing (if any) of traditional Church teachings.
Surely that’s the reason for “reappraiser” and “reasserter”?