text: When is it *elite* to try to ensure that what is presented as *catholic* reflects actual historical facts and the church's journey?  As one involved in RCIA, too many *converts* express personal opinions (labeled as catholic truth) when, in reality, they are expressing opinions.
  Many of you in using the term *convert* reveal your own misunderstanding or stuck in the past knowledge of current church RCIA process and liturgical rites welcoming them into the faith.
  Both theology and liturgy speak of catechumens (not baptized) and candidates (baptized) - almost all of the segment MSW and Civilta are citing fall into the candidates category.
  BTW, early church had no *candidates* and thus no folks cited by MSW -duh!!!  (inaccurate history again)  So, guess MSW does know his NT - do you?
  
  Yes, all of us face the challenge of metanoia - but that term's meaning has little to do with *conversion* as used in this post.  Duh?
  
  You and others continue to mix apples and oranges.