[DennisR]

“...many mainline denominations have bought into it.”

And therein lies the problem. These denominations tend to be very liberal theologically. As in thinking it is okay to be gay, for example. That said, why would anyone want to adhere to Catholicism when it is so anti-biblical with its teachings and traditions? It’s a mystery to me.

[SkyPilot]

And therein lies the problem. These denominations tend to be very liberal theologically. As in thinking it is okay to be gay, for example.

So true. Lera does a ping list, and one of the threads is a weekly message by John Haller.

A few weeks ago, he gave an in-depth analysis of this new ecumenicism being peddled by the RCC (specifically by Francis). Lera can add you to the ping list if you want. Very enlightening discussions.

[Elsie]

... why would anyone want to adhere to Catholicism when it is so anti-biblical with its teachings and traditions?

I'd call them more EXTRA-biblical than ANTI.

[daniel1212]

And therein lies the problem. These denominations tend to be very liberal theologically. As in thinking it is okay to be gay, for example. That said, why would anyone want to adhere to Catholicism when it is so anti-biblical with its teachings and traditions? It’s a mystery to me.

Indeed, and the "What wee believe" section of the New Life church at issue lacks anything specific besides the The Nicene Creed, which itself is critically lacking as a statement of faith, and the church also offers,

Declaring the reign of Christ into the atmosphere changes the atmosphere.

There you go. Climate Change Church.