Posted on 05/02/2015 9:53:03 AM PDT by ebb tide
Sorry, I should have pinged you on my last post. It appears that certain Catholics don’t see conversions for the Church as the same thing as conversions for God. They are confused and it isn’t any wonder. Vatican II and the post Vatican II popes have certainly confused many on the need to convert others to the one true faith.
False ecumenicism. Oh I want to go looking for some way to doubt the pope Vatican II and the whole 200 years of the church Jesus founded
So I can run around trying to convince others to reject it? You think people like you aren’t all over the place so disquiet they’re never satisfied letting people be. They have to snarl their doubts and fears constantly
A tip about working to convert people that negativism doesn’t attract a lot of people
Be gone
ok bro, no response to my last. i guess we’re closing.
i reviewed the thread to see if there’s anything you said that i’ve missed. aside from the argument from authority, i basically get the following.
teaching, leading and converting are not the same thing according to you as lead by the teaching of the Catholic Church. ok. i can study that further in Scripture.
the other remaining issue for me is your accusation that i’m guilty of the sin of pride in this matter.
well bro. after some self-examination, i’ve think i may have been guilty of feeling both vexed and superior to you in the heat of the debate. i’m sorry for that and ask your forgiveness and God’s as well.
in terms of pride against God or pride against the Catholic Church or it’s members. no, i really don’t think so. i have a lot of love and respect for catholics (e.g., my personal friends, and theologians/historians like Aquinas, Daniel-Rop, Benedict, etc.).
‘eaching, leading and converting are not the same thing according to you...’
Eh, according to the dictionary
Do you believe that the Catholic Church is God’s Church? Working for conversions for the Catholic Church = working for conversions for God.
You are a product of the Vatican II politically correct, false ecumenical theology..so much so that you don't even realize it. Rather than seeking the truth, you prefer to call those who recognize the changes in the Church as "negative" and "snarly".
I get it. I once didn't want to accept the fact that there are major issues with Vatican II. I once had my head in the sand too. But I didn't make it a practice of attacking those I didn't want to listen to and telling them to "be gone".
ok bro. we’ll let that be the last word. may God bless.
No problem. Anybody who mistakes papal assassins, and thinks Jesus only founded a 200 year old Church, must be very confused.
And I don’t think any pope, who formerly as an archbishop knelt before heretics and sought their “blessing”, who now, as Pope, kneels on Holy Thursdays to wash the feet of infidels, but does not kneel at the Consecration of the Body and Blood of Christ, nor kneel at Eucharist Adoration is a very good example for “confused Catholics” to become less confused.
Good point. Another example of a confused person.
Anybody who can’t let an argument go. An argument wit a 2000 year old institution founded by Christ, after three days ...
Can you not complete one full sentence?
Complete sentence? If course not I’m writing from a phone - charging around riding shotgun
I have a life
I recommend it
I am not going over to your anti Catholicism so I’ll let u have last word but I’m not going over to your way of thinking
Francis’ latest in false ecumenism ...brought to you by Vatican II’s decree on ecumenism, “Unitatis Redintegratio”.
In clear contrast to Pius XI’s “Mortalium Animos”...again.
You will have to find your pius X recruit elsewhere. Not interested. Never have been
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.