Posted on 01/11/2007 10:55:59 AM PST by HarleyD
There are churches that break up over the color of carpeting. That isn't anti-Christian but just plain stupidity. If the issue is more serious like homosexuality or abortion, I would leave (and have left) in a heartbeat. That would not drive me to Rome.
That being said, there are many wolves among the sheep in all groups. I would suggest the real people who are "anti-Christian" are the ones you don't know about.
As Christ says in Matthew you know Christians by their fruits. If the fruits of protestantism are rotten then it makes sense to look for a different tree. Not a different branch of the same tree.
"Fewer," not "less." Send the author back to 4th grade, please.
WE did the same--left the leftist ELCA for LCMS for these very reasons. The church of Rome has plenty of advocates for the acceptance of homosexuality and the promotion of abortion. Catholics have a difficult time divorcing themselves from the Democrat party. They're Democrats first, Catholics/Christians second.
At least two other Neocatholics inform us how they literally became enlightened while visiting a local Catholic church. Jim Forest, for instance, relays the following account: One afternoon when I was praying in the chapel, I felt as if I were in a river of light. Opening my eyes, I found that indeed I was. Light of a deep golden color was pouring through the lancet of the window over the Mary altar on the right side of the church, and I was in the center of its narrow path. I closed my eyes and enjoyed being bathed in light.
I picture Jake Blues standing in a ray of sunshine in the back of Rev. Cleopus Brown's church in the Blues Brothers movie, saying "I have seen the light!".
Read this in detail later.
Labelling and quoting people without naming names ... "one neocatholic" said this and "one neocatholic" said that ... is poor journalism. It's also dishonest.
Perhaps, but they still don't change church doctrine to make the church bless these things; protestants do.
Three strikes and you're out for this author. Jim Forest, labelled a "Neocatholic" in this quotation, is Russian Orthodox.
Arguing from Scripture? Poor apologetic for Catholicism that.
As far as the last part goes, it appears to be poor reasoning, as Protestantism came OUT OF Catholicism. The same argument can therefore be applied to Catholicism.
Not a very well put together argument that. Do try again.
The footnotes are available in the article. I didn't list them because there are over 83. I thought the article was long enough.
Do the footnotes identify the "neocatholics" and provide sources for the quotations?
I've attended mass with him (most recently on Christmas eve, and then at midnight Christmas morning), and while there is much that I respect of the Catholic Church, I've never been convinced it's "the way, the truth, and the life," as, obviously, Jesus Himself can only claim to be those things, and we take possession of those things in Him by means of His Holy Spirit.
I know Catholics whom I hold in the highest regard for their spiritual maturity (and many of those who have influenced me the most in my spiritual journey have been Catholics -- St. John of the Cross, Thomas Merton, Thomas a Kempis, to mention a few). I also know some Catholics who for all their devotion to the Church and its sacraments, seem to have lost Jesus in the midst of all the trappings. And I know some who have left the Catholic Church and have found a more meaningful walk with Christ as non-Catholics. And I know evangelicals who are tired of the shallowness and "glitz" that has become "evangelical Christianity" who might find a more meaningful worship in a Catholic context. But to me, "follower of Christ" is a more appropriate label for any of us who know Him as Savior and Lord than a sectarian label. Whether Baptist, Orthodox, Catholic, or Presbyterian, tell me about Jesus, not your church's distinctives.
We have "Protestant Orange" carpets in our church :>)
I see. I retract the "dishonest" charge. It's still poor journalism, and using the footnotes to bad-mouth the subjects of the article is TACKY.
This person is not serving his cause, but making himself and what he supports despicable.
That's what I thought he was saying. I protest!
LOL...Anyway, as I told him, if it weren't for a few choice corrupt Popes and practices along the way, his claim that the Catholic Church is the ONLY Christianity might be more convincing.
You ought to qualify that as "some Catholics" or even "many Catholics".
I doubt very much that Alan Keyes, Antonin Scalia, Henry Hyde, or Sam Brownback, just to name a few, consider themselves "Democrats first, Catholics second". In fact, none of them consider themselves Democrats at all.
You could also say that we are a "branch" of the catholic church.
Brownback is becoming questionable. He's "grown" in office.
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.