Replies

Seems to me, you’re very insecure in your own beliefs. Possibly that is my own wishful and loving thinking though. In that light (it appears to me) that insecurity leads you to look for reasons or temporal proofs, that you can find in the media, to deny the truth of the one Holy and Apostolic Church...the one and only Church that, despite its stains, the gates of hell are prohibited by God from prevailing against. In your heart you should know, and probably do know but are yet unwilling to humble yourself enough to admit, you are merely among the separated errant brethren. You are also willingly refusing Christ in that you know about all seven but only preserve and practice receiving only two of the seven sacraments/graces offered by God. Unlike an ignorant evangelical, your judgement on the day will not be limited as a result of one’s ignorance. This is because once you put forth the energy to deduce the truth, and still deny the truth, you have denied Christ Himself. You are in grave danger.

Seems to me, you’re very insecure in your own beliefs. Possibly that is my own wishful and loving thinking though

That is quite a try, but if anything, it "seems to me," that the diagnostic physician needs to heal himself. Rather than being moved by insecurity, it is RCs who evidence they seem driven to blindly promote Rome ass if to reassure themselves (or perhaps gain indulgences they feel they may need); in response to i write from a position of confidence against her basic errors, esp. as a former RC who became born again while still an RC and spent 6 years as a faithful attendee therein, and knows the stark contrasts btwn institutional faith and regeneration, while you must resort to psychological speculation in order to deal with the exposure of lack of clothes for your emperor.

If you want to deny that i wrote here, then attempt to do so, while resorting to such psychoanalysis is actually an argument against what faithful RCs are bound to trust in and feel they are driven to defend.