<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Conversion Stories</title>
	<atom:link href="http://purifyyourbride.stblogs.com/2009/06/03/conversion-stories/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://purifyyourbride.stblogs.com/2009/06/03/conversion-stories/</link>
	<description>Random Thoughts of a Catholic Convert</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:48:50 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Randy</title>
		<link>http://purifyyourbride.stblogs.com/2009/06/03/conversion-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-2807</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 13:58:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://purifyyourbride.stblogs.com/?p=496#comment-2807</guid>
		<description>Truly high praise. Thanks so much. 

I ran into Ken over on David Waltz&#039; blog. He seems to be quite busy there. David is well able for him.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img style='float: right; margin-left: 10px;' src='http://www.gravatar.com/avatar.php?gravatar_id=947063ee626033bce3f4cb5127f8e414&amp;size=60&amp;default=http%3A%2F%2Fuse.perl.org%2Fimages%2Fpix.gif' alt='' />Truly high praise. Thanks so much. </p>
<p>I ran into Ken over on David Waltz&#8217; blog. He seems to be quite busy there. David is well able for him.
<div style='clear:both'></div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin T.</title>
		<link>http://purifyyourbride.stblogs.com/2009/06/03/conversion-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-2801</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin T.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 02:58:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://purifyyourbride.stblogs.com/?p=496#comment-2801</guid>
		<description>I just never really asked the hard questions about when the good church that held the councils became the bad church that taught the heresies. 

A remark worthy of Chesterton.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img style='float: right; margin-left: 10px;' src='http://www.gravatar.com/avatar.php?gravatar_id=03c21cf2cbbe7d27d3234246768180b5&amp;size=60&amp;default=http%3A%2F%2Fuse.perl.org%2Fimages%2Fpix.gif' alt='' />I just never really asked the hard questions about when the good church that held the councils became the bad church that taught the heresies. </p>
<p>A remark worthy of Chesterton.
<div style='clear:both'></div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy</title>
		<link>http://purifyyourbride.stblogs.com/2009/06/03/conversion-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-2762</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:45:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://purifyyourbride.stblogs.com/?p=496#comment-2762</guid>
		<description>I shall try and find time to read his website. Things are busy. 

&lt;i&gt;The view of SS in the ECF is “scripture + regula fidei”, which, I guess is the material sufficiency view.&lt;/i&gt;

This is not SS. It is scripture plus something else. That makes it an explicit denial of SS. The church fathers had a high view of scripture. They never used it to attack the church. They never used it to reject the faith as it was widely held at the time. That is what the reformation concept of Sola Scriptura did. It was foreign to the early church and it is foreign to scripture.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img style='float: right; margin-left: 10px;' src='http://www.gravatar.com/avatar.php?gravatar_id=947063ee626033bce3f4cb5127f8e414&amp;size=60&amp;default=http%3A%2F%2Fuse.perl.org%2Fimages%2Fpix.gif' alt='' />I shall try and find time to read his website. Things are busy. </p>
<p><i>The view of SS in the ECF is “scripture + regula fidei”, which, I guess is the material sufficiency view.</i></p>
<p>This is not SS. It is scripture plus something else. That makes it an explicit denial of SS. The church fathers had a high view of scripture. They never used it to attack the church. They never used it to reject the faith as it was widely held at the time. That is what the reformation concept of Sola Scriptura did. It was foreign to the early church and it is foreign to scripture.
<div style='clear:both'></div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken Temple</title>
		<link>http://purifyyourbride.stblogs.com/2009/06/03/conversion-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-2760</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken Temple</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:00:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://purifyyourbride.stblogs.com/?p=496#comment-2760</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt; Randy wrote: I am not sure who David Waltz is. But if he thinks the ECF’s believed in Sola Scriptura he does not know much.&lt;/i&gt;

Randy,
You did not read his web-site or his explanations or arguments with me and others contributing.  He is Catholic.

David Waltz is very deep and a Roman Catholic.  You should check out his web-site. (above)

The view of SS in the ECF is &quot;scripture + regula fidei&quot;, which, I guess is the material sufficiency view.

Our disagreement is over what exaclty the &quot;regula fidei&quot; was in the EC.  Was it a doctrinal statement of basic content?  or was a method to use to interpret Scripture?  (that would lead to expanding the doctrinal outline as the centuries passed.)

Anyway, he is very fair and thoughtful.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img style='float: right; margin-left: 10px;' src='http://www.gravatar.com/avatar.php?gravatar_id=6f35deec69de7c07febd341b29474d6b&amp;size=60&amp;default=http%3A%2F%2Fuse.perl.org%2Fimages%2Fpix.gif' alt='' /><i> Randy wrote: I am not sure who David Waltz is. But if he thinks the ECF’s believed in Sola Scriptura he does not know much.</i></p>
<p>Randy,<br />
You did not read his web-site or his explanations or arguments with me and others contributing.  He is Catholic.</p>
<p>David Waltz is very deep and a Roman Catholic.  You should check out his web-site. (above)</p>
<p>The view of SS in the ECF is &#8220;scripture + regula fidei&#8221;, which, I guess is the material sufficiency view.</p>
<p>Our disagreement is over what exaclty the &#8220;regula fidei&#8221; was in the EC.  Was it a doctrinal statement of basic content?  or was a method to use to interpret Scripture?  (that would lead to expanding the doctrinal outline as the centuries passed.)</p>
<p>Anyway, he is very fair and thoughtful.
<div style='clear:both'></div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy</title>
		<link>http://purifyyourbride.stblogs.com/2009/06/03/conversion-stories/comment-page-1/#comment-2727</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2009 14:11:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://purifyyourbride.stblogs.com/?p=496#comment-2727</guid>
		<description>Chris,

My experience with NFP was very similar. My wife and I had decided to use NFP when we got married. Catholicism was not even a remote possibility at that time. So it was not really part of my conversion story. Really a separate conversion. Those conversion stories, often from contracepting Catholic to Humanae Vitae Catholic, are also wonderful to read. God is doing a lot of great things in people&#039;s lives. 

I was encouraged one time when my wife and I tried to name all the families with 5 or more kids in our parish. There were about 15-20. It surprised me because I would not have thought NFP was so common. I know it is possible for people with small families to be practicing NFP as well. We has 2 children and at one point decided to stop after 3 miscarriages. If we had not reconsidered we would have been a 2-child NFP couple. So I am sure there are many out there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img style='float: right; margin-left: 10px;' src='http://www.gravatar.com/avatar.php?gravatar_id=947063ee626033bce3f4cb5127f8e414&amp;size=60&amp;default=http%3A%2F%2Fuse.perl.org%2Fimages%2Fpix.gif' alt='' />Chris,</p>
<p>My experience with NFP was very similar. My wife and I had decided to use NFP when we got married. Catholicism was not even a remote possibility at that time. So it was not really part of my conversion story. Really a separate conversion. Those conversion stories, often from contracepting Catholic to Humanae Vitae Catholic, are also wonderful to read. God is doing a lot of great things in people&#8217;s lives. </p>
<p>I was encouraged one time when my wife and I tried to name all the families with 5 or more kids in our parish. There were about 15-20. It surprised me because I would not have thought NFP was so common. I know it is possible for people with small families to be practicing NFP as well. We has 2 children and at one point decided to stop after 3 miscarriages. If we had not reconsidered we would have been a 2-child NFP couple. So I am sure there are many out there.
<div style='clear:both'></div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
