Posted on 10/08/2014 11:39:09 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
Why would intelligent, successful people give up their careers, alienate their friends, and cause havoc in their families...to become Catholic? Indeed, why would anyone become Catholic?
As an evangelist and author who recently threw my own life into some turmoil by deciding to enter the Catholic Church, I've faced this question a lot lately. That is one reason I decided to make this documentary; it's part of my attempt to try to explain to those closest to me why I would do such a crazy thing.
Convinced isn't just about me, though. The film is built around interviews with some of the most articulate and compelling Catholic converts in our culture today, including Scott Hahn, Francis Beckwith, Taylor Marshall, Holly Ordway, Abby Johnson, Jeff Cavins, Devin Rose, Matthew Leonard, Mark Regnerus, Jason Stellman, John Bergsma, Christian Smith, Kevin Vost, David Currie, Richard Cole, and Kenneth Howell. It also contains special appearances by experts in the field of conversion such as Patrick Madrid and Donald Asci.
Ultimately, this is a story about finding truth, beauty, and fulfillment in an unexpected place, and then sacrificing to grab on to it. I think it will entertain and inspire you, and perhaps even give you a fresh perspective on an old faith.
(Excerpt) Read more at indiegogo.com ...
Did Paul write that to a CATHOLIC church?
I thought that I was the only one up this early...
Did you ever go to Mass? There are three readings at each Mass, more than at most Protestant services, so I hear.
If a Catholic goes to daily Mass, he hears most of the Bible over a three year cycle.
Did the Church hide the Bible from you?
But having the Bible without the Church leads to a proliferation of errors, as exemplified by the countless Protestant sects, who all can't agree on a single doctrine, (even Sola Scriptura; see high church Anglicans), except that they're not Catholic.
Ironic considering the history of the Catholic church and the rampant immorality that has existed within it for over almost 1,000 years.
Scripture.
Just guilty.
That’s how the Catholic church likes to keep its people thinking about themselves.
Yes, only it is integration, not editorializing, especially when I had previously quoted the Ephesians passage in color in 1975 ...
Peter became the chief apostle, the servant of all, as shown in other scriptures that I assumed were common knowledge.
Hearsay. OK.
If a Catholic goes to daily Mass, he hears most of the Bible over a three year cycle.
Been debunked NUMEROUS times.
And certainly nowhere near what a person can get reading it for themselves everyday.
Did the Church hide the Bible from you?
Essentially. They certainly never encouraged anyone to read it for themselves. Rather they DIScouraged it by telling us that we could not understand it and had to have THEM tell us what it meant, to interpret it for us.
And I KNOW that I am not alone in that.
But having the Bible without the Church leads to a proliferation of errors, as exemplified by the countless Protestant sects, who all can't agree on a single doctrine, (even Sola Scriptura; see high church Anglicans), except that they're not Catholic.
Show us where the assumption of Mary is stated in Scripture. And her perpetual virginity, the immaculate conception, purgatory, praying to someone besides God.
4:45 every morning, walk the dogs, hit the gym, and go to work. In bed between 11:30 pm and midnight.
NONE at ALL?Methinks you failed to think this through.
The fall back position on those that can not / will not use reason.
This morning I awoke early; dreaming about how out of control our government is!
Then I couldn't go back to sleep.
HMMMmmm...
The fall back position on those that can not / will not use Scripture: Well; it COULD happen!
That is a sad statement t on several levels. First of all, what's with this church group mentality? Belonging to or meeting with a group doesn't save. Individuals are saved. In Revelation we see that there are individuals who are still try even though the overall group is being condemned. We see God telling His people to "come out" of groups so they won't be subject to the plagues that are coming on the group.
And what is this mental hang up of some earthly human leader? The indoctrination of the need for some earthly leader is not found in scripture. Christ is the head of every man and the Holy Spirit is his counselor. Scripture shows localized assemblies of individual believers. Paul excoriated people for following or identifying with some leader.
>>It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles,<<
You mean like pedophile priests who simply get moved rather than removed? Give us a break. You want to paint with a broad brush? How about we paint with that broad brush and assign the sins of those priests on all Catholics?
People had better "search the scriptures to see if what they teach is true" and if not had better "come out of her my people" if they teach something the apostles didn't teach.
How about we just preach Jesus and let the Holy Spirit draw those God has chosen?
Pfiffle. A lurker reading just your post would, or at least reasonably could, believe you were presenting Ephesians as a source for the content you cite. "Integration" would allow me to say, for example, that Ephesians teaches that the ecclesia is built on the work of the prophets and apostles, the second worst of whom was Peter (right after Judas), who once was told by Jesus that he, Peter, was speaking for Satan, and who required special remediation for major spiritual lapses at least twice in his career.
Now I could call that "integration," but it would be confusing on several levels. For one thing, I'm wrapping it in with Ephesians, not a specific passage in Ephesians, so the reader could think that I'm saying that's all in there somewhere and they just missed it. For another, we don't know if Peter was really the second worst apostle. That would be an opinion, not a Scripturally stated fact, in Ephesians or anywhere else. And if someone concluded from that I was misleading them, what should my response be? Probably, Oops, No, I had no intent to mislead but yes, I should have been more clear.
Peter became the chief apostle, the servant of all, as shown in other scriptures that I assumed were common knowledge.
It is common knowledge that Roman Catholics believe in the Petrine office. It is also common belief here, among Protestants, that belief in the Petrine office has no Scriptural warrant and was a consequence, in reality, of the shifting political fortunes of the Christian religion in Rome. So no Protestant reader of your statement would be very likely to accept that as a natural or correct "integration," but rather as an unannounced emendation based on wishful thinking.
Must get to work now. Later ...
Peace,
SR
She wasn’t supposed to see that.
The get anathema tagged.
Just like Paul said, “those pesky Bereans”. Right?
He was not a lurker; I had already posted to him.
you were presenting Ephesians as a source for the content you cite. "Integration" would allow me to say, for example, that Ephesians teaches that the ecclesia is built on the work of the prophets and apostles, the second worst of whom was Peter (right after Judas), who once was told by Jesus that he, Peter, was speaking for Satan, and who required special remediation for major spiritual lapses at least twice in his career.
Is that how you think ? Career? I see bias, the same antiJacob bias I've encountered my entire career, now being given voice against Shimon, as well as the Catholics who love him.
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.