Posted on 10/08/2014 11:39:09 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
Why would intelligent, successful people give up their careers, alienate their friends, and cause havoc in their families...to become Catholic? Indeed, why would anyone become Catholic?
As an evangelist and author who recently threw my own life into some turmoil by deciding to enter the Catholic Church, I've faced this question a lot lately. That is one reason I decided to make this documentary; it's part of my attempt to try to explain to those closest to me why I would do such a crazy thing.
Convinced isn't just about me, though. The film is built around interviews with some of the most articulate and compelling Catholic converts in our culture today, including Scott Hahn, Francis Beckwith, Taylor Marshall, Holly Ordway, Abby Johnson, Jeff Cavins, Devin Rose, Matthew Leonard, Mark Regnerus, Jason Stellman, John Bergsma, Christian Smith, Kevin Vost, David Currie, Richard Cole, and Kenneth Howell. It also contains special appearances by experts in the field of conversion such as Patrick Madrid and Donald Asci.
Ultimately, this is a story about finding truth, beauty, and fulfillment in an unexpected place, and then sacrificing to grab on to it. I think it will entertain and inspire you, and perhaps even give you a fresh perspective on an old faith.
(Excerpt) Read more at indiegogo.com ...
absolutely not, we are just a little more assured that we will have one at all.
FOTFLOL!!!
2612 post was neat, how’d you do that??
If people were walking in the Spirit, they would not be sanctioning murder in the name of religion and posting Scripture to support it.
there is a Catholic Mass every day of the week, you pinged metmom also and she doesn't, apparently attend any services
there is a Catholic Mass every day of the week, you pinged metmom also and she doesn't, apparently attend any services
Nice dodge and attempt at obfuscation. You said “the sabbath”. What day is the sabbath?
rejecting Catholicism is rejecting the church that Christ founded and thus rejecting Christ....not rejecting a denominationn
First of all it's courtesy to ping someone when you talk about them. Lack of manners is telling. Second, what business of hours is it what "services" anyone attends? Could you show from scripture where "services" was required?
they demand nothing..the religious orders are open only to volunteers, some nun's habits were more extreme that others but they, themselves chose and designed them. Most nuns no longer wear them (unfortunately) but no Catholic woman was ever forced to wear anything.
Even IF it were so, and it's not, just where in Scripture does Jesus sanction the church killing people who reject Him?
Purgatory does not purify from sins.
It’s only the shedding of blood that can cleanse from sin.
If Jesus’ blood isn’t enough to cleanse us from our sin, then NOTHING else in all creation is capable of doing so.
If anything else in all creation were capable of cleansing us from sin, Christ died for nothing. His death was a needless torture and murder of an innocent man.
Could you show the passage from scripture that teaches that?
Amen.
A mere rote assertion, while ignoring that the presuppositions behind it effectively nuke the church.
.learned peopple have studied the scriptures, for than legth of time and until a few hundred years ago, all agreed that what was in the bible was the absulute truth.
And thus the modern evangelical movement arose to counter liberal revisionism, which much of Roman scholarship subscribes to, while there never was comprehensive doctrinal unity in Catholicism, less alone all correct.
along came protesters and decided that they were better prepared, somehow, to interpret what the Catholic bible said.
Actually, contrary to your bare assertion of fantasy, before the Reformation,
"For nearly half a century, the Church was split into two or three obediences that excommunicated one another, so that every Catholic lived under excommunication by one pope or another, and, in the last analysis, no one could say with certainty which of the contenders had right on his side. The Church no longer offered certainty of salvation; she had become questionable in her whole objective form--the true Church, the true pledge of salvation, had to be sought outside the institution. It is against this background of a profoundly shaken ecclesial consciousness that we are to understand that Luther, in the conflict between his search for salvation and the tradition of the Church, ultimately came to experience the Church, not as the guarantor, but as the adversary of salvation. ( Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith for the Church of Rome, “Principles of Catholic Theology,” trans. by Sister Mary Frances McCarthy, S.N.D. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1989) p.196). http://www.whitehorseinn.org/blog/2012/06/13/whos-in-charge-here-the-illusions-of-church-infallibility/)
Cardinal Bellarmine:
Jaroslav Pelikan (Lutheran, later Eastern Orhodox), The Riddle of Roman Catholicism (New York: Abingdon Press, 1959), also found:
"Recent research on the Reformation entitles us to sharpen it and say that the Reformation began because the reformers were too catholic in the midst of a church that had forgotten its catholicity..."
“...To prepare books like the Magdeburg Centuries they combed the libraries and came up with a remarkable catalogue of protesting catholics and evangelical catholics, all to lend support to the insistence that the Protestant position was, in the best sense, a catholic position.
Additional support for this insistence comes from the attitude of the reformers toward the creeds and dogmas of the ancient catholic church. The reformers retained and cherished the doctrine of the Trinity and the doctrine of the two natures in Christ which had developed in the first five centuries of the church….”
“If we keep in mind how variegated medieval catholicism was, the legitimacy of the reformers' claim to catholicity becomes clear. (Pelikan, pp. 46-47).
"Substantiation for this understanding of the gospel came principally from the Scriptures, but whenever they could, the reformers also quoted the fathers of the catholic church. There was more to quote than their Roman opponents found comfortable." (Pelikan 48-49).
However, Scripture, tradition and history can only assuredly consist of and mean what Rome may say they do, and which is the real basis for the veracity of Rome for a RC. Thus no less than Cardinal Manning stated,
"It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive, and their pretension was to revert to antiquity. But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine....The only Divine evidence to us of what was primitive is the witness and voice of the Church at this hour." — Most Rev. Dr. Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, Lord Archbishop of Westminster, The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost: Or Reason and Revelation (New York: J.P. Kenedy & Sons, originally written 1865, pp. 227,28
Thus we come back to the same terminal circularity behind the veracity of Rome, with its presuppositions which invalidate the NT church, as it began contrary to the Roman premise of assured veracity with its presuppositions.
now you come along, probably born in the 50's 60's or 70's and after weeks or months of diligent study of the bible, has come up with your own interpretation and determined that the Catholic church has been in error for 2 centuries.......O.K. I guess
While my position is historical one, and requirtesd the church to continually validate that it is the church of the living God thru Scriptural substantiation, which the NT church began under, your response actually further indicts you as one that invalidates the NT church, as your premise here is that historicity equates to a level of veracity that excludes being wrong. And which would invalidate "prophets, and wise men, and scribes" (Matthew 23:34) whom God raised up but the historical magisterium rejected, and disallows following itinerant preachers - including their Lord - by which the NT church began.
And indeed, your position places you in the company of those who heeded the men who demanded,
Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed on him? But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed. (John 7:48-49) ,
Which is only part of the testimony from scholars, even Catholic ones.
However, Scripture, tradition and history only assuredly mean what she says they do, which is the real basis for the veracity of Rome for a RC. Thus no less than Manning stated,
"It was the charge of the Reformers that the Catholic doctrines were not primitive, and their pretension was to revert to antiquity. But the appeal to antiquity is both a treason and a heresy. It is a treason because it rejects the Divine voice of the Church at this hour, and a heresy because it denies that voice to be Divine....The only Divine evidence to us of what was primitive is the witness and voice of the Church at this hour." — Most Rev. Dr. Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, Lord Archbishop of Westminster, The Temporal Mission of the Holy Ghost: Or Reason and Revelation (New York: J.P. Kenedy & Sons, originally written 1865, pp. 227,28
so.....Charles Martel and the Crusaders who ran the moslem hoardes out of Europe and freed up previously Christian countries from them were murderers?????
Which - even if the 1st century believers were RCs which they most manifestly were not - means nothing assuredly doctrinally unless being the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation means such is the assuredly infallible interpreters of it. Do you want to affirm your nuking of the NT church again?
Since when is self-defense ever considered murder?
No, the murder charge is for the Catholic church who slaughtered those who dared to dissent from its teachings.
And your comment is also detracting from the original comments were those of other Catholics who approved of the church killing those who it deemed heretics, which is murder, plain and simple.
Nice try at obfuscation but a fail on lots of levels.
you post a lot of your personal opinions.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.