My blessed home has a great post today on Catholicism. She was brought up Catholic and now is not. I hope you go take a look and read why she has changed..
My response to that is no longer on Sallie's blog. However to paraphrase, I said she should do a brief google search and she would see the author of the article may not even be authentic.
Sallie has deleted all of my comments since then (what is it with these people?) But on my blog we had the following exchange:
Sallie said...
Elena -- I too did a google search... at least lets be honest and not leave posts at other peoples blogs pretending we don't know who someone is..
God bless,
Sallie
Elena said...
Huh? What does that mean?
Sallie said...
That means that you came to my blog and posted as it you just happened to look her up in google and found out about her. That is not true from the look of your blog. You pretended something that wasn't true (as in oops I just happened to search google and found) for the sake of deterring people from going to see for themselves what was written. These are actions that make people wander where the sincerity is.
I want people to be able to look for themselves and decide.
God bless,
Sallie
Elena said...
Sallie, as I explained on your blog, I was talking about googling the author of the article Candy extensively quoted from, Mary Ann Collins. If you look closely at Candy's article, you will see the link to Mary Ann Collins's book.
I didn't just happen to google Mary Ann - only googled her because Candy linked to her. And I never pretended that I just happened on Candy's blog. That would be absurd. I've been blooging about the things she writes for the past six months or more.
Sorry for the confusion. Thanks a lot for the benefit of a doubt.
I had also apologized on her blog if I had been unclear.
As a followup, I e-mailed her under the title of "Are We OK now" because I hadn't heard anything from Sallie and I wanted to know if she understood about Mary Ann Collins and if she had done any further reading on her.
I wrote: I'm just wondering because after I explained who I was referring to as to the googling, I heard not another word from you!
That friendly inquiry was met with more false accusations. All I was really looking for was a
"Oh gee Elena, I get it now. Sorry for the misunderstanding."
That's it.
Couple this experience with Amy calling me a liar and a hypocrite last week and then not taking it back after she was shown that I was not deleting posts here willy nilly, gave me pause. As I wrote on my own blog something in me has snapped. It's hard to explain but I'll try.
Before I sort of felt as if all of us, Catholics, Protestants, Evangelicals, Candy, Kelly, Faithful Catholic, Sallie, all of us, were really on the same side but we just had some differences of opinion and like sisters do, we still love and respect each other.
I no longer believe that. I don't think women can engage in friendly apologetics. As I blogged, it is a similar feeling to when my son was assaulted, but I have another family analogy that is even closer. My first cousin deliberately set out to defraud my parents and steal my inheritance and she has for the most part succeeded. She is still in my family, but if I could separate and cut the part of me that is related to her out of my body with a sharp knife, I would do it. That's how painful her betrayal was.
That's what I'm feeling.
I'm still wrestling with what I'm feeling about this past week.
27 comments:
Do you know that Amy has been by the blog recently? She hasn't commented lately, and I see from her blog that her husband has been in the hospital. She might have left in the middle of the conversation and just not picked it up again.
Elena, you are so right. I think it is because these women (Candy, Amy, Sallie, etc.) spend a lot of time TELLING everyone how Christ-like they are, how perfect & harmonious their homes are because of *their* special care and how wrong everyone else is if they do not do the same things they do, think the same things they think and follow the strict schedule they do. Maybe if they tried instead to DEMONSTRATE the love of Christ with respectful exchanges then readers such as myself would not consider what they write as something other than non-fiction. I swear sometimes I'd be mad as a wet hen if their blogs weren't so laughable.
Thanks for the excellent blog you've created. I've learned more here in a few months than I have in a long while. I'm not planning to convert anytime in the future, but it is refreshing to read respectful discourse, at least on the parts of some.
If any of the guilty read this comment, I'm sure I'll get to read about how disrespectful my comment is, and how disrespectful the posts you, Kelly and others make are. That's where you can separate the mature from the immature. Those who are immature equate disagreement with disrespect. It's "their way or the highway" as my grandma is fond of saying!
Blessings,
Mom to One (who is a chatterbox lately)
Hon, it's like trying to argue with a cold-war Communist.
There is a group of people out there who have created their own society, their own culture, almost their own country. They occupy the same geography we do, they may on increasingly rare occaisions live right next door to us. But more and more they are living in their own country.
Think about it. They attend different churches, which preach a far different theology and believe system than anything in our country. They have their own businesses, and try to only have each other as customers. They either have their own schools, or when they homeschool they have their own textbooks and curricula so their children learn a completely different history and science and civics than ours do. They have their own media outlets, their own news sources, their own raido stations and TV channels. They have their own universities, their own doctors, their own gyms, their own...well, everything. As a result they could, and prefer to go from cradle to grave and never associate with the rest of us.
Think of it, never have to understand someone not of their country. Never have to entertain a new concept. Never have to look at a new book or try a new food or work with a new co-worker who doesn't share your specfic belief structure.
If that's hard to imagine, put it in black and white terms. Yes, I believe it's that segregated.
And in many parts of the country they are in control of the local goverment and the local legal system. It's not too big of a stretch to say that they have their own towns and counties. Right there in what we thought was the good old USA.
It sounds like you live in LA, or thereabouts. LA is one part of the country that's still held by us, over in Normalville. Most if not all of the coast is. I used to live in Monterey, and can vouch for good chunks of Nothern CA. As a result of this, I'm guessing you've never seen this segregation at work.
We're in Oregon now, and we've seen this first hand in some of the small towns around here. One town didn't want non-church members to stop, so they bought out the grocery store and gas station and now will only sell to card carrying church members. If you live there and you need to shop you have to head for the urban area 30 miles away. As an example.
Now, those of us over in Normalville may run the gamut from conservative to liberal, but we're just not that cut off. We deal with everyone, have more exposure to the world, and sometimes even try to see things from other's point of view.
The only places these people and those of us in Normalville tend to interract are at the goverment level, like the DMV or getting a marriage or say a contrctors licence. (ever hear them complain about the liberal goverment licening everything, and how much they hate it) The federal goverment (no comment there). The hosptials, when they don't have their own, and in the military. And reports have been comming out that they tend to gravitate to certain units, word gets out that this CO wants their kind and not some non-believer. Which I find extrememly scary myself.
The point I'm trying to make is, don't think of them as sisters. I sincerely don't think they think of you that way. Think of them as citizens of a somewhat hostle nation, which has not exactly declared war on what we consider the United States, but isn't friendly either. Your goal is to fend off the rhetorical attacks so maybe someone will defect to Normalville somewhere along the line.
That might make this blog the VOA. And you're doing a wonderful job with it.
I have one more comment I've been wanting to make though it has nothing to do with this post.
Someone posted a while back (in a rant about how Elena shouldn't be so "mean" to Candy by having this blog) that Elena had posted such an unattractive, unbecoming photo of Candy on this site. Ummm... if you check out her most recent "how I dress" weeks, EVERY SINGLE photo is of her, from the neck down, standing in the same place in her kitchen, chest jutted out, arms away from her sides slightly with her scrunchie on her wrist. SO, what picture EXACTLY *should* Elena post?
Just had to say something I probably shouldn't!
Mama to One
Elena,
I don't know what's happened to Amy. While she was here posting, she seemed to go back and forth between nice and not so nice. I admit I do that too sometimes. I tried to point out to her that I didn't believe that you were deleting comments but rather whoever was writing them was deleting their own comments.
I don't know what happened with Sallie. I do know I saw her posts at her blog and commented on the first two. I saw your comments when they were first made but, I didn't see if they'd been removed. And, of course I'm not privvy to any email conversations you two may have had. I know sometimes it feels like when I try to clarify things, I just get myself in deeper somehow.
As for Candy, well, what can any of us say? I have presented her with a challenge on my own blog. As yet, she has not responded and she would not post my comment on her blog. I think the post from her SIL confirmed for most of us who we are dealing with in that regard.
I can imagine that it's difficult for you as you've taken alot of flak for the mere existence of this blog. Stand firm, stand strong. I've said before and you've no doubt read comments from others that this is a very helpful forum for most who visit. It's not true that none of us can debate or discuss civilly. Only some of us can't. We are all human and we get angry and hurt and frustrated. Any of us who can't acknowledge that in ourselves certainly has no business piling on to you. You've maintained your positions and represented your faith honorably and admirably. Not everyone who reads here is waiting to pounce if and when you make a misstep. Not everyone is wanting to crucify you for any momentary evidence of any frustration or anger you might feel. It's actually quite refreshing to read your posts and be able to so clearly recognize your humanity. It's nice that you don't feel the need to present as "perfect."
I know too well that feeling of stepping back and shaking my head and wondering what the heck happened. My point is that you can't let the reactions of others dictate what's important to you. You have strong convictions. You have good intentions. You do an excellent job of presenting our teachings and offering additional resources for those who are willing to attempt to understand. You'll not succeed in convincing every single person but, if even one person learns something, isn't it worth it? Keep walking the walk and talking the talk. You're doing an excellent job. Offer up your feelings of betrayal. These too shall pass. There are people here who truly would not ever betray you.
"Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice' sake for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."
God bless you!
Elena, You know that I have questioned your motives for this blog. And while I still don't know quite how I feel about it, I also hope that I have not been one who has added to your sadness and frustration. If I have, I really am sorry. The hurt in your voice makes me sad with you.
Elena,
I want to encourage you too keep going with your blog here. Although some women lower themselves to personal attacks it is a wonderful thing you do here. I admitt I was blinded by the "Candyland" mentality. But I have seen that I was wrong, she is wrong. She has good housekeeping advice but in many areas is way out. I recently read on her blog (in the old bits) that she believes mental illnesses are a sign of weakness and medication for them is wrong. Big turn off for me!
You are doing a great job being balanced and fair. More than those against you are.
Carry on Sister!
Amy
Elana --
I would appreciate it if you would not spread lies about me.
Thank you,
Sallie
Exactly how was Elena lying about you, Sallie? She didn't say anything spiteful but seems to be trying to figure out why you chose to end the conversation while you seemed to have yet to understand what it was that Elena meant.
What e-mails happened between you are just between the two of you, but from what I read on your blog before her comments were taken down there were no lies about anything. Only confusion as to what Elena meant by asking you to do a google search on the author of the article.
You certainly aren't being personally attacked by her so please don't take it that way. For the most part she is just expressing her anxiety and "still wrestling with what I'm feeling about this past week".
"That friendly inquiry was met with more false accusations." is simply not true.
As I tried to explain to Elena, I do not feel like anything I said would have made her happy. I was in a lose lose situation because the defenses had already went up. Now, I come here to find this quote as well as the link to the story I linked to not being that story. How could I not feel like Elena isn't spreading lies about me?
Sallie
I can understand your frustration. Some people will never hear you no matter what you say. oh, they listen, but they are not hearing you. You will never change Candy's beliefs. Ever. She's not willing to open her eyes and learn something new. Hopefully some of the ones who follow her will see things in a differnt light as time goes on.
I spent some time reading her old blog. It is apparent she has hopped, skipped and jumped her way around religions and took a bit from this one and a piece from that one and basically formed her own. She loved each one at first, and once they didn't fit her agenda she moved on to another.
Same with her blog. Everything is either about religion bashing or schedules. One day a post on whey usage and cooking, the next is Catholic bashing, and the next day she is talking about her next installment of her HMB. Very erratic.
Her bashing is like beating a dead horse. Her arguements are always the same and always will be the same. She's closed minded. One of her posts she took a test online and it said she doesn't put a lot of emotion/feeling into decision making. Explained a lot to me there.
I have enjoyed this blog. I have learned so much, questioned things, sought answers, prayed more, and read more than ever! I have opened my heart to how other people feel about things and how they see things - both Catholics and non-Catholics.
You will not be able to change those who are not open to change, but just as Blondie said - you are planting seeds. :) Good seeds!
If you need to take a step back from this place...totally do it. This lady, Sallie...while nobody knows anyone truly personally, seems abit immature to keep stating her 'personal wounds' here instead of emailing you to resolve the matter. You haven't expressed ANYTHING derogatory against her or anyone else for that matter. Yep. When the truth of it all sinks in (about the plugging their ears while saying they are open to dialogue (and I'm not naming names, just a few come to mind)...best to walk away. So many of the women I've read over time ... Amy, Stephanie, Candy... 'spin' their posts. Promoting the love of God while holding a matchbook in their hands (or is it in their hearts?). I don't even bother commenting. Amy just did a post over hubby, but...if you read it, you'll realize that DURING HIS TIME IN THE HOSPITAL she was still doing giant size posts on this or that, NEVER ASKING FOR PRAYER FOR THE MAN FROM THE GET-GO. Shows where her priorities lie. Stephanie is off-the-wall. Hope she burns all the pinecones in her yard...they be evil, ya know!!! I've been to Sallie's. Seems like such a nice blog. Too bad she feels the need to 'clear the air' about you publicly, after you respectfully show her in your description. These ladies are not content in and of themselves, if they need to bash anyone or anything. "Love your neighbor as yourself" is lost on them. They don't actually love themselves. Most (not all) are still insecure and unhappy with an area or two of their lives/marriages or mothering that to validate who they are, they need to 'round up' like-minded folks to feel better. Rather than change. God forbid. And I'm not talking leaving their faith for the catholic one. I was raised a catholic until my parent's divorce. I received Christ as savior when I was 14. If Jesus were to sit in ANY church, even if there were things He didn't agree with, He would be LOVING all and the power of that love would spread across the meeting place. He wouldn't bash. He only turned over the tables as the temple is sacred for God, and not be used for selling. That truly was the only time and instance that I can truly understand would be wrong. But, in any event.....His heart of love would be and is so vast to not have ANYONE feel they didn't measure up to be in His presence. The invitation salvation is for all. But there is no love of God when He says "Be ye separate" gets confused with "don't love your neighbor as yourself". Because that's what it is. IMO, Stephanie's nuts. Far gone. Amy is a disgruntled 'wannabe' teacher in the shackles of homemaking and wifehood/stay-at-home. Candy? Loner from way back. Still a loner. Never learning. Never being blessed by another. These women have amassed an amazing readership by their peculiarities, more than by any truth they think they have. Amy is probably the gentlest soul out of the 3 mentioned (I don't know nor read Sallie's blog, so really...). But she is very conflicted. She doesn't simply use her blog to share her day or discoveries. She gives lessons, basically. That's fine. But I was appalled at how she waited until the man was home to share on her husband. As a christian?? C'mon. Ask for prayer. Anyway, Elena, I'm sorry to go on this long. I really want to encourage you to follow your heart with this blog. Many are inspired and encouraged. I have found myself so blessed by your humor that you sneak in to your sayings, because they show a 'real' woman. God bless you, hon. My private blog is so I can rant and delete, if necessary, from the 'junk' I read out there. I read good, uplifting places, too. Do what you need dear. Want to take a break for a week or more here? Do it. Want to shut it down? Do it. If it brings you peace, do what brings YOU PEACE. Unfortunately, you will not find peace from the folks mentioned here (yep...Sallie included, just because she's too defensive). Hugs to you! Have a blessed Sunday in Christ's love.
I'm puting this here because I don't know where else to put this. It's completely off-topic, so if someone wants to move it, go ahead, just tell me where it goes so I can follow it. This is just the only place at the moment where I know Catholic women are gathering....
Did you ever feel the deep down need to just stop what you are doing and pray for someone? It's about 5:45 out here, I've been up all night to help my husband switch his schedule around, and I was just putting away some laundry when I felt like someone needed prayers right this instant. I won't say who because she's a minor, but I just had to stop what I was doing and say a rosary for her. I really think she needs prayers this morning, I don't know why, it's a gut feeling on my part. But if you ladies would, as you go to Mass or say a rosary today, could you put a word in for her? I could just be overtired, but a little prayer never hurt anyone. Thanks.
Okay, I think Candy is freaky and insane, and I think your blog to answer her lies is funny. I really enjoy reading your answers to her anti-Catholic attacks (which are very juvenile, and that a Catholic catechized on the most basic level could refute).
Is this a good reason for you to continue something that gives you grief? No, of course not. But I certainly would miss it if you stopped!
It sounds like you live in LA, or thereabouts. LA is one part of the country that's still held by us...
Can I ask who "us" is? The United States is a country that was founded in part on religious freedom. As the Kings of England changed reign, the national religion changed with them. The so called Pilgrims who came to this country came to escape persecution, so they could worship as they saw fit, not as the King dictated.
When it comes to religion in the United States, there is NO "us" or "them".
Other than that, Elena I've said before how much I appreciate this blog and how much I've learned from it. But, it is your blog, and it is up to you whether to continue or not. If it is no longer fulfilling its intended purpose and you are not satisfied with it, then by all means, end it. If, however, it's just because a few people have taken personal offense and become nasty in this, don't let them get to you. It gives them too much control over you and they aren't worth it.
(.......Everything is either about religion bashing or schedules. One day a post on whey usage and cooking, the next is Catholic bashing, and the next day she is talking about her next installment of her HMB. Very erratic...... )
And what is the big deal if her posts are to do with something different everyday? It is good to show that you have other interests instead of doing the samething over and over again. It gets a little boring to see the samething on a blog so many times.....it shows that Candy actually has a life.
Elena, this blog is important. It is a powerful voice raised against anti-Catholicism. You have stood up to the bullies who spew their bigotry and you have done it with more class than I would have shown.
I will be praying for you and your fellow contributers.
And what is the big deal if her posts are to do with something different everyday? It is good to show that you have other interests instead of doing the samething over and over again. It gets a little boring to see the samething on a blog so many times.....it shows that Candy actually has a life.
_______________
Don't you think her way of posting is erratic? MOST people debate a topic (lasting usually more than one day), learn, conclude and MOVE ON. She has not. The point is she has been shown the errors of her misinformation and yet she still continues to toss out misinformation. Did anyone goolge the supposed Mary Ann Collins, A Former Catholic Nun? Or did yall just accept it as truth because Candy said so? Anyone ask a catholic or schedule an appointment with a Priest to discuss things? Or did you just assume we were all wrong in what we keep telling or explaining? Anyone ever read about chick tracts and jack himself? Or do you just believe it because, afterall, it's on the internet and MUST be true?
And no, she has no life - or one that she shares. A blog is only a snippet of someone's life and they chose what they share, but she shares the same things over and over and over.. her HMB, her tweaking of schedules and Catholic bashing. She talks often of training up her children and church practice. Doing something over and over until they get the hang of it. Guess she needs to be told over and over again too about her misconceptions of the Catholic faith - she is a slow learner.
Faithful Catholic's blog has a request for Candy - and she sent it to her as a comment. I'm waiting to see what Candy does. My guess is she ignores it. Why? Because she has no fact to back up any of her mistruths.
if you can't say something nice then. . .,
Whether or not Candy or any of us "has a life" is immaterial. We all, quite obviously, have lives. This blog is entitled "Visits to Candyland" and has a clearly stated purpose.
On the other hand, Candy's blog, which is entitled "Keeping the Home" is used for more than one purpose, which is fine, except that one of those purposes is to spread lies and deceptions and foster contempt toward a group of people who follow a particular religion. I fail to see the relevance of her diatribes against Catholicism to "keeping the home." Maybe you can enlighten me as to the connection.
I'd like to point out that prejudice in all it's forms can be insidious. In Candy's case, she lures in well-intentioned people, mostly women or mothers who are interested in gathering information on housekeeping, home management, home schooling and even home birth. That's all well and good. Then, out of the blue, they pop over to her blog and are greeted with some statements of hers which, while they reflect her opinions to which she is entitled, are factually inaccurate. She also likes to post pieces she's found elsewhere on the net that reflect, and in her mind validate, her erroneous beliefs about Catholicism. There is no integrity in that. Then, when anyone attempts to challenge something she presents as factual, she deletes their comments. What does that tell you about Candy's character?
Does she have every right to post the stuff she posts? Absolutely. Is it in keeping with her professed Christianity? I think not.
If you hold a strong belief in something, some cause or ideal, and you happen to find that some person you support or business you patronize is in strong opposition to your cause or ideal, do you continue to support or patronize them?
I liken this situation to that of several well-known, large companies that manufacture products that most everyone uses. In discovering that they financially support causes which I personally find morally reprehensible, I choose not to endorse their positions by not purchasing any of their products. I do that because I do not want to support in any way any company who contributes money to a cause to which I strongly object.
Taken a step further, I could act in a manner to make it more widely known among their consumers that they support these specific causes in effort to decrease their sales even further. In so doing, I am attempting to decrease their profits thereby decreasing the amount of financial support they lend to these causes, and send a message that there are people who will use their power as consumers to indicate what they think and how they feel about certain causes and those who support those causes. In my book, that's responsible. If I hold a strong belief or opinion about something, I am obliged to support my belief or opinion in any ethical manner possible, no?
I think you'll find as you mature that for people of faith, there is nothing about which they feel more strongly than that faith. So, while I recognize that all don't share my faith, I am still responsible to protect and defend that which I hold dear. I don't denigrate or ridicule the faith of others and I don't let it go unanswered when others do that to me.
Here's the difference. Candy states whatever she wants and refuses to even acknowledge differing viewpoints. Sure, that's her right but, again, it shows a lack of integrity and reveals her true intent. She claims to be attempting to "save" all the "poor" catholics who are being "deceived" but, she refuses to talk to us. Of what does that remind you? How can you "save" or educate someone with whom you refuse to communicate?
Elena started this blog in effort to refute the false statements that Candy makes on her blog. That's Elena's right. In all the posts I've read on this blog, I've not ever seen Elena attack or denigrate in any way Candy's faith. And, and this is important, Elena allows anyone to comment on her blog. As has been a topic of discussion on this comment board, Elena hasn't deleted posts except two times. She's acknowledged doing that and she's even warned posters when she intended to do so. Candy doesn't extend any such courtesy on her blog.
Even if you don't agree with the purpose of this blog, you'd have to acknowledge that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. Most of us are praying that Candy will take her ball and go home. If Candy heeded the advice of your moniker this blog would be unnecessary.
I've noticed that you have popped into these comments once before and stated that you see no reason for Candy to bother to read these comments. Rest assured, she does read them. It's obvious based on how she responds. Other than to make snide comments, you haven't really stated your own opinion about what Candy says about Catholicism which is the stated purpose of this blog. Care to share?
I'm also curious about your profile. It appears you are attempting to be provocative. Do you care to comment?
Of course, you're free to behave as Candy does; make a statement but refuse to dialogue. What would be the point of that?
When it comes to religion in the United States, there is NO "us" or "them".
It should be that way, perplexity, I agree with you. But in my opinion (my opinion only, not anyone else's) there seems to be a group in this country who have cut themselves off from the greater culture, to the point of turning this into an us/them situation. Perhaps the best analogy would be to the Amish, except this group is less up front about it and seems to have political aspirations.
As for what I see (again, my opinion only) as the difference between the parts of this country where these people are in the majority and have control of the local culture vs. Los Angeles, Well, from my personal observations it's almost as big a difference as LA and Lancaster County, PA. My point there being that you can't really escape the greater culture in LA.
Now because they have voluntarily cut themselves off so much, and they have no wish to explore other viewpoints communicating with them is, again in my opinion, a lot like talking to someone from another, isolated country. It's a lot harder and more tiring than you would expect, especially if you're used to a place such as LA or San Francisco, where you have to deal with other cultures daily to hourly.
To that end I likened this blog to the Voice of America. And I think the work Elana & co is doing here is just that important and that they are doing an amazing job.
At least that's the way I see it.
Does she have every right to post the stuff she posts? Absolutely. Is it in keeping with her professed Christianity? I think not.
Faithful Catholic, I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one. Nobody has the right bear false witness against their neighbor, and that is especially true if it's a billion "neighbors".
Misunderstanding, I understand. As a Catholic I have had (and probably still have) misunderstanding about my faith. This means I need more catechesis, reading and prayer.
However, if after having her statements corrected, Candy (and other anti-Catholics) continue to post the same canards (or quote other "authorities" posting the same canards), that's calumny and it's a sin and she shouldn't do it.
If she does it publicly, and refuses to write retractions or post the corrections, then the scandal needs to be corrected publicly.
If I said something like "[Random Protestant Denomination] husbands and wives are required by their faith to have sex with their clothes on" and a member of the [Random Protestant Denomination] church came on and corrected me, pointing to the documents of their church I'd acknowledge that I was wrong and issue an apology.
I think the biggest problem is people who define their faith by what they're not. And most of the time their particular religion is Not Catholic™.
If you start poking legitimate holes in the dam of their ignorance. And all the things they were taught about the Catholic Church were dead wrong or misunderstood, they start having no other choice than to wonder why they are not Catholic?
The Holy Spirit doesn't shout in your ear. He whispers. :)
Tony- Amen brother! What agreat comment.
The most crucial problem with the Roman Catholic Church is its belief that faith alone in Christ is not sufficient for salvation. The Bible clearly and consistently states that receiving Jesus Christ as Savior, by grace through faith, grants salvation
(John 1:12; 3:16,18,36; Acts 16:31; Romans 10:9-10,13; Ephesians 2:8-9).
The Roman Catholic Church rejects this.
The official position of the Roman Catholic Church is that a person must believe in Jesus Christ AND be baptized AND receive the Eucharist along with the other sacraments AND obey the decrees of the Roman Catholic Church AND perform meritorious works AND not die with any mortal sins AND etc., etc., etc. Catholic divergence from the Bible on this most crucial of issues, salvation, means that Catholicism is a false religion.
If a person believes what the Catholic Church officially teaches, he/she will not be saved. Any claim that works or rituals MUST be added to faith in order for salvation to be achieved is a claim that Jesus’ death was not sufficient to fully purchase our salvation.
*Ifyou*
The Bible is a Catholic book and the Catholic church makes absolutely no divergences from it. The fault here lies in your personal interpretation of Holy Scripture.
Blondie- Well put! As I study the Bible and the Catechism I am finding that the Roman Catholic Church has not only got it right but is a much more well thought out interpretation of the Bible.
I'm late on this, but "ifyou", could you please cite some of this "official Catholic doctrine" for us?
If it is official, surely you would be able to quote from the Catechism on this.
Post a Comment