BRINGING EX-CATHOLICS BACK TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH A PERSONAL STORY

CATHOLIC CLASSICS UNLIMITED BRINGING EX-CATHOLICS BACK TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ^

[MHGinTN]

It is said that a picture is worth ... but alas, people like Vlad are unable to comprehend the subtle truths therein with Elsie’s cartoons.

[vladimir998]

Thanks for proving my point. You attacked the CCC and clearly did not know the 2nd edition was about 100 pages longer because of indices and not textual changes.

[vladimir998]

“...but alas, people like Vlad are unable to comprehend the subtle truths therein with Elsie’s cartoons.”

Really? Well, here are the truths Elsie apparently didn’t comprehend and responded to ultimately with a cartoon.

Here are the facts:

1) You apparently wanted to make hay out of the fact that there is a “NEW” (1997) edition of the CCC - and did so while posting verses from the “NEW” International Version of the Bible and you apparently didn’t see the obvious problem with that.

2) You apparently didn’t know that there are no major differences in the text between 1st and 2nd editions of the CCC. All textual edits boil down to a handful of pages and didn’t change a single doctrine in the least.

3) You apparently were completely unaware that the 2nd edition was published with a huge series of citation indices and a glossary and that those pages accounted for just about every single page of added text to the CCC as a whole. The textual edits to the main text were so minor that none of them singly or even in aggregate added any pages to the text except perhaps - and I really mean PERHAPS - lengthening the CCC by one or two pages overall.

So, you were wrong, on everything. Those are the facts.

Is attacking the Catholic Church for having a “NEW” catechism while posting verses from the “NEW” International Version a sign that someone is “unable to comprehend [a] subtle truth” or just a sign of outright hypocrisy?

[vladimir998]

“Unable to prove his own points; must have others do it for him.”

Wouldn’t that make you:

Liable to prove vladimir998’s points; can’t help but do it for him.

“This is what Vlad has paid his dues for.”

This then must be what Elsie paid his dues for:

“To Protestantism False Witness is the principle of propagation.” (John Henry Newman, Lecture 4. True Testimony Insufficient for the Protestant View)

“You could be a Mormon...”

No, but maybe you should go LDS: http://religiondispatches.org/does-mormonism-encourage-lds-people-to-lie/

[mrobisr]

Yes the seed is the word which sprouts in the non-believer and thus a new believer is born. Now re-read that and you will see that some those new Christians lose their way.