Posted on 03/30/2010 10:38:29 AM PDT by NYer
WASHINGTON, D.C., MARCH 29, 2010 (Zenit.org).- This Easter, thousands are planning to become Catholic, including a man who almost lost his life five times.
The U.S. bishops' conference shared the story of Jeremy Feldbusch, 30, from Blairsville, Pennsylvania, who is among the thousands preparing to enter the Church Saturday evening.
Feldbusch was in the armed services in Iraq, and on April 3, 2003, he was wounded with shrapnel from the conflict, which resulted in blindness in both eyes and traumatic brain injury.
He was expected to die shortly after, or if he lived, to sustain extensive brain damage. Doctors put him into a coma with a ventilator for six weeks in order to reduce brain swelling.
The medical professionals attempted to remove the ventilator five times, but on each attempt, Feldbusch "died" and had to be resuscitated. On the sixth try, he finally regained consciousness.
The patient, who had been baptized a Methodist, asked his father, "Why did God take my eyesight?"
His father replied with a different question, "Why did God let you live?"
The bishops' conference reported that through the process of rehabilitation, Feldbusch "began to think that things happen for a reason and resolved to spend his life helping other wounded service members."
He decided to enter the Catholic Church, and will be received on Saturday, the 7th anniversary of his life-changing injury in Iraq.
Growth
The conference press release noted that thousands more will join Feldbusch, with especially high numbers of new Catholics expected in the South and Southwest regions of the United States.
The Diocese of Dallas, Texas, is preparing to receive 3,000 new Catholics. Of these, 700 are catechumens (never before baptized) and 2,300 are candidates (already validly baptized into the Christian faith, but seeking full communion with the Church).
Also in Texas, the Archdiocese of San Antonio is reporting that 1,112 people will enter the Church. A good number of these are young people, who have already reached the age of reason, including 214 child catechumens and 124 candidates.
The Diocese of Forth Worth in that same state will welcome around the same number of new Catholics.
The Archdiocese of Atlanta is preparing for 1,800 new Church members, which is the largest group ever recorded for that region, the press release reported.
On the West Coast, the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, which is the largest diocese nationwide, will receive 2,400 new members.
In Seattle, 682 people will be baptized into the Church, and 479 welcomed into full communion.
The Archdiocese of Portland, Oregon, will welcome 842 new Catholics.
Other dioceses who are expecting over a thousand new members are: Detroit, Michigan (1,225); Cincinnati, Ohio (1,049); Denver, Colorado (1,102); Arlington, Virginia (1,100); Washington, D.C. (1,150).
In the Archdiocese of Washington, 18 of those preparing to enter the Church are students from St. Augustine School, the oldest African American school in the nation's capital.
The conference communiqué noted that the Catholic Church, which is the largest denomination in the United States, with over 68 million members, has shown a 1.5% increase in membership numbers this past year.
Any baby baptized would be rebaptized in a Baptist church because that trip to the sprinkler can as a baby means nothing
Well, then, your protestations mean nothing, because, as far as the Baptist church is concerned, a Methodist's baptism by sprinkling as a baby does not baptise him into Christ, but only into Methodism.
I rest my case.
Except that that isn't the "teaching of Rome" -- darkened or otherwise -- so your objection is groundless.
Trent merely said that good works, performed by a man who is already justified in Christ, strengthen the grace of justification in him.
They don't gain it, win it, cause it, or anything else like that. They only strengthen what God has already placed within him, and they are most certainly the fruit of that grace.
fish hawk:
Ahhh, so now you that you have been called on “The Father” thing, you tell me/us not to get hung up on it. And this “all these things that are not scripture” really means “all these things that disagree with DutchBoy and my interpretation of scripture”.
Trust me, anything you and DutchBoy can throw, I will hit out the park.
Expand your vocabulary, it'll keep you from embarrassing yourself."
Not to embarrass you, my FRiend, but the (sic) is me quoting Marshmallow using "vale" instead of "veil". You may wish to read more closely, a common need among Catholics.
xsmommy message
Words strike me — nasty defensive"
Perhaps by now you realize what you stepped in, Salvation, but it was xsmommy that used those words on me in the prior post. I was just noting that it seemed hers were the problem. Give the Mod a jingle and see what they think.
Reading should be a hobby you take up. When used with the Bible it reveals all form of error promulgated by Rome.
i only rarely step into the Religion forum so i am heartily sorry if broke any rules here. i find so little Christian love on these threads that i avoid them. i continue to pray for you and hope that more than makes up for any offense that my words caused you.
Well, I don't feel any anger or hatred, but I appreciate your concern. I do feel passionate about pointing out the destructive heresy that Rome peddles, if by some means God would decide to open eyes with my words and lead folks away from that terrible, self-righteous cult.
I will pray for you, also, nina.
Not sure what you are so concerned about. My reply was to Salvation who wanted to have me rebuked for using “nasty and defensive”. I was pointing out to him that if he had bothered to read, instead of pounce, he would have noticed that the word “nasty” was originally from you.
You don’t have be sorry, and you didn’t break any rules (that I know of). If you think I was nasty for saying Rome is wrong, that’s perfectly okay with me. I don’t agree, and I think that some of your words got a little heated. But, that too is okay. I believe Rome has done a grave disservice to, no they have blasphemed, the fair Name of Jesus Christ by adding all of the traditions and ceremonies to “faith”. You don’t seem to agree. We can still get along and wait to see who’s right.
But, I am interested in how you define “Christian love”. If I say that Rome is a cult, and you say, “That is nasty.” is that love or must we agree to be loving? Curious.
Thanks for the English lesson, 'fessor, but you're illiterate.
Vale of tears is a phrase that refers to Earthly sorrows that are to be left behind when one enters heaven. The term "vale", is an alternative word for valley. Look it up. Here, let me help.
"Veil" is an article of clothing which covers the face.
Glad I could be of assistance.
Perhaps the Holy Spirit was in the break room?
I stand corrected.
There are so many errors in this entire post, I hardly know where to begin. But, I will help you with just one of the many gigantic errors of Roman Catholicism. It is the same error that the Reformers argued against in an attempt to free the enslaved of Europe: You don't do what you try to teach others to do.
Rome suffers the same error that Judaizers of old did. Acts 15, they thought they were doing the Law and that the Gentiles should be taught to do the same. Peter corrects them, after he himself had been rebuked by Paul for the same error (Galatians). But, "Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are." Rome has been doing this for centuries and cannot seem to hear Peter (in spite of claiming he is their first pope).
So Paul explains exactly what became of the Law and the "doing" that you now advocate.
"But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as rigtheousness."
The RCC is sometimes subtle in their error, sometimes blatant. When confronted, they say this isn't taught. Next thing you turn around...there it is: Part and parcel of salvation.
Pay special attention to canons 3-8, 16, and 18.
To put it into perspective, yes you are swinging the bat but you are in the Milk league. You are not doing so good in the Meat league. Remove the blindfold or strike out.
I’ll reiterate, expand your vocabulary to keep from embarrassing yourself. An apology for the slur against Catholics would be nice as well.
Don’t have the time (nor the inclination) to comment on each item. But looking at the big picture, notice that the tenets are supported by small snippets of Scripture, the way an encylopedia is used as compared with understanding the flow of the story.
In particular, Canon 3 specifically addresses the Pelagian controversy and sides with Augustine. It uses a reasonable understanding of Rom. 10 as Paul quotes Isaiah. Yet, Canon 13 then uses the most misdirected, flimsy, wrongheaded understanding of John 8:36 to support the restoration of free will. Go read it yourself. Then read the larger context of John 8 and ask yourself...does it really have anything to do with the restoration of free will? Please... And don’t throw the YOPIOS up here. You are asking me to interpret what you have posted. You are interpreting what was stated at Orange. Understanding material is both necessary and fair.
I would be happy to apologize for an error in my statements or a slam against Catholics individually. But, if you are waiting for an apology for pointing out the massive, deep, demonic errors of the RCC, you may as well let that dream go. Rome needs to crawl on its knees and apologize to the world, to God, to every constituent for teaching heresy for centuries.
But looking at the big picture, notice that the tenets are supported by small snippets of Scripture
It's not a Bible study, it's a doctrinal statement. That's how they're typically written, whether they're written by Catholics or Protestants. At least it takes the trouble to cite Scripture for its claims, unlike, say, this.
Yet, Canon 13 then uses the most misdirected, flimsy, wrongheaded understanding of John 8:36 to support the restoration of free will. Go read it yourself.
I did. It makes perfect sense to me, especially in view of verses 34 & 35.
II Orange is infallible Catholic dogma. Including this part:
CANON 18: ... Recompense is due to good works if they are performed; but grace, to which we have no claim, precedes them, to enable them to be done.
... which specifically contradicts a claim you make above.
fish hawk:
Again, anything you can throw, I can hit. You have already been shown to pick and choose 1 passage and read it without any theological connection or understanding in light of how the Church Fathers understood the passage, the same ones who were responsible for helping the Church come to fix the Canon of Scripture.
So your “Father” attack on the Catholic Church has been hit over the Old Yankee Stadium, when it was roughly 457 to center field.
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.