Jewishness of Litvinov is germane to an anectode of his crossing himself.
To love someone is to correct their error. You can be assured of every serious Catholic’s love for the Protestants, who we dearly wish to come home to the Church that gave them the Holy Scripture.
You can argue with esthetic preferences for food and architecture with someone else. The concept of depravity of man has been socially harmful; Rao shows why. Of all his analysis you chose periferal issues of Rao’s character, and even those you could not get right.
Got more?
What "jewishness"? The man was a bolshevik/atheist, had been for a while. Using Litvinov as an example, and emphasizing his Jewish heritage, in an article about Protestantism strikes me as gratuitous. It brings to mind Cardinal Vlk's identification of Rao as an anti-semite; that and the fact that Rao's co-speaker in the Czech Republic, E. Michael Jones, has problems with anti-semitism, too.
To love someone is to correct their error. You can be assured of every serious Catholic’s love for the Protestants, who we dearly wish to come home to the Church that gave them the Holy Scripture.
Yah, right. I can "feel the love" fairly often on FR when I engage RCs on contentious topics. It pleases me that I don't live in 16th century Europe, where in certain nations my "errors" might have delivered me to the tender mercies of the Holy Office.
You can argue with esthetic preferences for food and architecture with someone else. The concept of depravity of man has been socially harmful; Rao shows why. Of all his analysis you chose periferal issues of Rao’s character, and even those you could not get right.
Sure, Rao toots his horn about the doctrine of total depravity, but as I stated he can't accurately define the doctrine and thus arrives at a flawed analysis of Protestantism and society.
Got more?
Sure. Are you what Cardinal Vlk calls a Lefebvrist?