You know what, D-fendr? I AM ignorant. Of everything the RCC does. Everything it changes, “improves”, “implicitly states”, “explicitly states”, adds to, takes from, spins, twists, contorts, commands, threatens, takes credit for and denies culpability in. There is NOTHING that the RCC has not tried to “change” for her benefit. So, yeah, call me ignorant. I’m so ignorant that I refuse to defend the indefensible.
Or you could just say you jumped on the “disappearing second commandment” without due diligence to check, accepting it apparently based on fundamental prejudicial view. I’m no longer surprised that some are willing to believe the most outrageous things, I think because they have this idea of the Church that belongs back during the Wars of Religion.
I forget who said it, but it goes something like: Not many oppose what the Church teaches , but what they think the Church teaches.
And there is a way to cure ignorance, but it takes time and a willingness to know the subject before engaging in discussion.
The Church is as old as Acts, she has weathered every variation of false doctrine and theology and heresy you can think of and then some. The Church’s writings, by theologians, Saints and scholars, in her long history are immense, accumulated over two millenia. The language and terminology are specific developed over this long history and encompass all aspects of Christology, Salvation, liturgy, church structure, spiritual practice, etc.
A shallow knowledge combined with severe prejudice is not recommended preparation for real discussion.