Is There Growing Confusion over Church Teaching?

Crisis Magazine ^ | July 16, 2014 | Dr. William Oddie

[Elsie]

But like the moderator just ruled we can not really discuss anything Catholic on here.

[Elsie]

But that was quite nicely explained away; wasn’t it?

[Elsie]

Gray fuzzy people that I referred to our the ones in my own Church and I sure have the right to call them out on it.

A certain gray, fuzzy religion seems to have a lot of them.

[Elsie]

I merely wanted to know why the Caucus was dropped. I have been informed.

I want to know as well; but I can't find where YOU were informed.

What reply # was it?

[Elsie]

When we go to heaven, that fact doesn’t change.

Exactly WHEN will this occur?

[Elsie]

And yet Catholics put Mary and their so called saints in between them and Jesus.

I wonder why?

[Elsie]

Jesus as dutiful so always respects his Mother.

Luke 2:48

And seeing him, they wondered. And his mother said to him: Son, why hast thou done so to us? behold thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

[Elsie]

She's never failed to come to my aid.

HERESY!!!

[Elsie]

So everything you touch turns into something Catholic??

[metmom]

None of these comments qualifies as a disparaging remark. The topic of this thread is Catholic and regards Church teaching. There is nothing here that disparages any other denomination; hence, the Catholic Caucus remains.

Is the level of deceit really that bad?

In post NYer: #10, Verga is challenging someone on their poor understanding of church teaching. In her response, she suggests the individual consider seeking another church more in keeping with her personal views.

In post 10, other denominations are referenced by name. Post 10: " I hear the Anglicans and Presbyterians have made some interesting changes to their teachings lately. " That alone, in and of itself, disqualifies this from being a caucus thread.

NYer: In post #26, Verga remains on topic, lamenting the fact that many Catholics do not read the catechism.

In post 26, the poster says no such thing but rather goes off topic by making comments about another non-Catholic FReeper and bringing in a topic across threads.

Post 26:Sadly certain anti-Catholic bigots like to ask: "Who interprets the CCC?, it's turtles all the way down." That is a direct quote.

NYer:In post $43, another freeper is simply relating the reaction received for citing scripture.

That is not simply *relating a reaction*. That is taking the opportunity to make a cheap shot at another religious group.

Post 43: I got beat up but good by the proddies last week for telling them the same thing.

[af_vet_1981]

You gave me your opinion that I was wrong, posted a bunch of what I suppose is Scripture, but since there were no references nobody unfamiliar with Scripture would know that, and and considered it what?

you, at least, you have your soul imprinted so you know; the scripture does not derive its power from chapter and verse. Those who are without need to hear the words themselves, the seed as it were, and do what they will.

So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;

11 Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee

[af_vet_1981]

OK, so you don’t think all those verses support the security of the believer.

They do IFF the believer overcomes and endures to the end without wavering, believing and obeying everything the LORD Jesus taught us by his apostles. There is no guarantee of salvation to the reprobate who depart from the faith they once held.

[metmom]

Again......

OK, so you don’t think all those verses support the security of the believer.

Then perhaps you could enlighten us as to why *sealed* doesn’t really mean *sealed* and why *guarantee* doesn’t really mean *guarantee*.

[metmom]

Those verses don’t use future tense, they use past tense.

I am currently seated in the heavenly places IN CHRIST JESUS.

Jesus promised that He would lose none of those whom the Father gave Him.

That verse about enduring to the end is for those in the end, going through the tribulation, not those of the church age. Again, another verse taken out of context.

[defconw]

Do you see what happens now? This thread now has absolutely nothing to do with the original topic. So Thanks for shutting us down. It would have been nice to have been able to keep our discussion to ourselves.

[verga]

It was until a couple Catholics tried dragging those bigoted heretics through the mud under the supposed cover and protection of the caucus label. The RM saw through that in a heart beat and removed the label and are now they trying to blameshift and play the martyr and blame it on the RM and those bigoted heretics instead of taking responsibility for it themselves.

It was an honest mistake and I admitted it.

[CynicalBear]

>>You’re right. You are free to choose to do it all you want.<<

But not free to promote the error of Catholicism on here without being called out and shown scripture to point out those errors.

[CynicalBear]

>>Why don’t you just leave us alone?<<

Because you come here and promote practices and beliefs that are contrary to or added to God’s infallible inspired words from scripture. We cannot allow those to stand unchallenged or we would be disobeying God’s words to us. If you don’t like the challenge of defending beliefs you have then perhaps this isn’t the type of thread you should open and participate in.

[defconw]

It was OUR thread to begin with. You were allowed to hijack it.

[daniel1212]

nor any of the posts challenge or ridicule any other confession.

In post #26, Verga remains on topic, lamenting the fact that many Catholics do not read the catechism.

That is frankly absurd, another example of the "defend-at-any-cost-to-credibility" response we so often have seen here by RCs. For that fact is that in post #26 rather than Verga lamenting Catholics, he (she?) responds,

Sadly certain anti-Catholic bigots like to ask: "Who interprets the CCC?, it's turtles all the way down." That is a direct quote.

But you either seem to see what you want to see or misconstrue the response to avoid impugning a RC. Yet Verga has commendably confessed his error,

And outside relegating those who ask the question as being "bigots," mistaking this for an open thread is easy to do, but making RCs out to be victims because if it is the problem. However, look at how many more hits it received.