Well, yeah, actually. Some Protestants. There's been right much conversation and right many attacks fo the vapors and righteous and indignant fanning of the hot face over anathemas. Being accused of being too liberal is a nice change. It's like turning over on a bed of nails: not better, but different
Also I don't know about "you people". It's just me and my coffee here ....
I cannot help but wonder why the Catholic Church is so reticent about plainly stating its unpopular but still "official" teachings?
I just have a feeling that won't go away that I'm walking into something here. So I think I will just back off in a wary and gingerly manner. You have some concerns and/or experiences that I'm not clear about,a nd I don't want to say anything wrong.
BTW: I think some kids of higher criticism are useful, and I don't find all thinking about the evolutionary origin of species and the descent of man to be bad.
I don't want to argue about that. I only say it because you attribute these things to Frank Sheed and others as though they were self-evidently dreadful, and I want to be clear that to me it's more where they go with that thinking than the simple notions themselves, so I may not be having the reaction you expect.
I don't want to argue about that. I only say it because you attribute these things to Frank Sheed and others as though they were self-evidently dreadful, and I want to be clear that to me it's more where they go with that thinking than the simple notions themselves, so I may not be having the reaction you expect.
Nope, you're a Catholic, which means I expect you to reject the inerrancy of the "old testament" while hypocritically believing that a dead man came up out of the ground or that bread and wine becomes this man's body and blood. Never mind that science says both of these things are an impossibility; you reject the words of science on these issues while accepting them whenever they deny that the world was created in six days or that Methuselah lived 969 years or that the Red Sea parted. You're so threatened by "your" "old testament" that you have to turn it into a series of fables because if you didn't your chr*stianity would fall flat on its face.
BTW, those scientists you think so much of would gladly tell you that there is no such being as "St. Michael the Archangel." The fact that you persist in believing in this being when you won't believe anything in the "old testament" happened without these same scientists' permission illustrates your hypocrisy. But I'm sure you don't get it.