As for your three transgressions, I give you 1) your intentional misreading of the Catechism regarding Muslims, and I must believe it is intentional since it your error was pointed out yet you refused to recant your position, 2) Your tacit belief in the pathetic Jesuit Oath, and finally 3) the grand polemic that is Fox's Book of Martyrs. 1,2,3...
How very sad.
LOL.
1) The RCC's embrace of the Muslims is well-documented in both the RCC catechism and in JPII's loving lips smooching the Koran.
2) We were asked not to discuss the Jesuit Oath yet you keep bringing it up. You must be awfully familiar with it. Do you deny Jesuits take an oath?
3) "Fox's Book of Martyrs" is a Christian classic. It's read by Presbyterians, Methodists, Anglicans, Lutherans, Congregationalists, etc.
Granted, the RCC is made uncomfortable by a retelling of the Vatican's shameful, blood-soaked history. But that's not my problem. It's yours.
Thank God.
No, the catchesim very clearly states they worship the same God as Christians but they don't.
What I would like to know is when a position can't be refuted (except in the defenders mind), why does it always turn into personal attacks? And why would someone want to follow that god that drives that? Why do you seem to always want to make it personal?