Catholics and Faith Alone

[DaveXR650]

I’m not sure I understand… is this author indicating that Vance is in the throws of converting to Catholism because of social status issues?

I don't know if he's saying Vance did. Just that he thinks that is a trend. Renn writes about cultural trends and he thinks that the influence of culture from Protestant thinkers is pretty much over. The remaining conservative religious influence in his mind is from a Roman Catholic perspective. I like to read on "First Things" and "National Review" and from seeing who is writing what I think he has a point. I can't think of any conservative writers or commentators off hand who are Protestant and have any stature of note with the possible exception of Al Mohler. (Oh yeah, Carl Truman, also.)

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I don't know if he's saying Vance did. Just that he thinks that is a trend. Renn writes about cultural trends and he thinks that the influence of culture from Protestant thinkers is pretty much over. The remaining conservative religious influence in his mind is from a Roman Catholic perspective. I like to read on "First Things" and "National Review" and from seeing who is writing what I think he has a point. I can't think of any conservative writers or commentators off hand who are Protestant and have any stature of note with the possible exception of Al Mohler. (Oh yeah, Carl Truman, also.)

I personally have a problem with Roman Catholicism’s hierarchical posturing and stance they take with controlling people but perhaps that’s just my experiences with them. Saint's Francis and Bonaventure, etc were not interested in a theocracy rather of contemplation and quite prayer… not domination. Hopefully Vance sees that and is being directed there vs the power freaks. If he gets in that head game then I’d feel sorry for him. To understand ‘Roman’ Catholicism you need to be born and raised in it, you need to feel the grit of it, the agony and the ecstasy of it… blah blah blah. It’s very heady.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

In context, intellectual assent by itself is the issue.



I don’t care about Catholic apologists talking points as such, it’s a valid point about Scriptural interpretation.
You have no final arbiter of Scriptural interpretation, among all the private interpreters. You aren’t facing this problem but are deflecting.

Regarding “ diversity “ in belief in the Catholic Church, what you might be looking at is dissent, this is nothing new.

The Catholic Church is so massive that even it’s enemies take shelter in its branches. As Jesus stated in the mustard seed parable.

Without this massive Catholic tree, Protestantism and Baptist’s would be annihilated by the secular world. Protestants never stood in the arenas of Rome, never faced pagan Europe, it inherited a pacified world, it rebelled unjustly.



Sounds like Benny Hinn, the end result of Protestantism.



This is what actually convinced me. I looked for a precedent in the old covenant and I found it in Moses. Moses was very humble and conciliatory to the Protestants of his day.
They used God’s word against Gods chosen authority as well, yet Moses was humble and took it to the Lord.
Protestants can never be humble, a certain pride is at the heart of their beliefs, they will concede nothing to heal a rift. This is why I know they wrong. They are dogmatically possessed. They protested Moses “lording” it over them.
They oppose the Chair of Moses as they oppose the Chair of Peter in the new Covenant, ardent in their hatred of authority and priesthood.
Korah is the perfect old covenant Protestant, everything they accuse the Chair of Moses of they accuse the Chair of Peter of and are in rebellion against the Church.

See any denominations in Moses time? There was one chair that God established with Moses. Korah tried the each man bring his own offering, how did God receive that?

I am in awe witnessing the new covenant repeating the old covenant.

Correct me if I am wrong, I’m assuming that you do not have the ancient blood lines of the Romans… rather you are of some German and/or Celtic ancestry, otherwise why would you be where you are now? Rather than peaking into Jewish histrionics, I suggest you take a hard look first at your ancestors and their religious journey then look at the Romans and their long history of conquest (of both Christian their own kind) & then the world at large. It’s fascinating! Note, a good read into early Romans would be ‘Coriolanus’ a play from Shakespeare for insight. There is interplay between the Patrician class and the plebeian’s, constant wars, and assassinations… that’s your Roman worldview, which leads to the Roman Catholic Church operation. Also note that the RCC has little or nothing to do with Celtic forms of Christianity, Slavic, German …. Only Roman domination which is always absolute.

 

[DaveXR650]

To understand ‘Roman’ Catholicism you need to be born and raised in it, you need to feel the grit of it, the agony and the ecstasy of it… blah blah blah. It’s very heady.

I'm on Renn's e-mail list and I noticed he has more on Protestant conversion to RC and more on Vance's story too. I think you might find it interesting. There is also a video which I have not watched yet.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I'm on Renn's e-mail list and I noticed he has more on Protestant conversion to RC and more on Vance's story too. I think you might find it interesting. There is also a video which I have not watched yet.

Since I’m a convert to The Primitive Baptist movement I am more than interested in his thinking process… so yes I would be interested in his logic

 

[Darrell C]

Important to have the correct understanding of faith don’t you think, considering it is a salvation issue.

More importantly, how exactly does an unbeliever come to have faith.

If you can answer this, you can answer the question, "What must I do to be saved?"


God bless.