I read in this article, “Rome goes fishing in Anglican pond“, that
The Roman Catholic Church was going to extraordinary lengths to make it easy for disenchanted Anglicans to convert to Catholicism.
They could join the Roman Catholic Church as full members, but hang on to many of their Anglican traditions and practices – and indeed preserve much of their “Anglican identity”.
I would say that there was never much distance between them, and this should elicit a big “ho-hum” from most US Protestants. That is confirmed here:
Since the Protestant Reformation, when the Church of England broke away from Rome, it has been a sometimes uneasy coalition between its Catholic and Protestant members.
Sorry about that whole “Protest” thing! They’re ready to kiss and make up. Nietzsche writes in The Antichrist that Luther saved the Roman Catholic Church by reforming it just when it was about to become fully pagan and, in his eyes, finally legitimate.
In a related article, “Faith Diary: Changing loyalties“, we find this:
In the United States, 10 nuns at an Anglican convent near Baltimore have taken the extraordinary step of converting to Roman Catholicism, citing the Episcopal Church’s liberal approach to homosexuality as a reason.
However, further on in the article we find this alarming news from the African missionaries to the pagan Americas:
The Anglican enclave planted in the United States by the Nigerian Church has accused the Episcopal Church of unintentionally encouraging conversions to Islam by moving away from a simple message and liturgy.
The Convocation of Anglicans in North America (Cana) cites research by bodies such as the Pew Institute to show that Islam is growing rapidly, and attracting Protestant women in particular.
It says they are marrying Muslim men partly because of the dearth of marriageable men in their own churches.
Cana says the women are attracted by “the apparent order and simplicity of the Islamic faith and its ability to successfully manipulate governments and public policy”.
Why would Protestant women be marrying Muslim men? Is it because they crave the old-fashioned order and simplicity of being legally subordinate to men?
This quotation goes behind and beneath the trite “culture wars” reporting to identify the crucial threat to American Protestantism: “the apparent order and simplicity of the Islamic faith and its ability to successfully manipulate governments and public policy.” The Republican political animals are surely trembling now at the thought that their god, the federal government, might be stolen from them.
That is coincidentally confirmed by this article, “Republican men hormonally emasculated by US election“:
American neuroscientists say that men who voted for Republican candidate John McCain in the recent presidential elections suffered a serious loss of testosterone as a result of the Obama victory. The hormone, produced by one’s wedding-tackle, is considered essential for basic manliness….
Men who had voted for McCain – or the libertarian candidate Robert Barr – experienced a 28 per cent loss of testosterone almost as soon as the contest was over. LaBar notes that levels of testosterone, produced by both male and female gonads but in much larger amounts in men, are directly linked to important masculine behaviours such as “aggression, risk-taking and response to threats”.
Apparently the male GOP and Barr voters reported feelings of “unhappiness” and “submissiveness” following the crushing defeat of their chosen national leaders.
How can this be? What is going on in their tiny little brains? The study itself provides a possible answer:
The findings indicate that male voters exhibit biological responses to the realignment of a country’s dominance hierarchy as if they participated in an interpersonal dominance contest.
Finally, a resolution to the problem of why some people, at least, are so tied to political contests that actually have nothing to do with their personal lives. My faith in the stupidity of the crowd is confirmed.