Again, there is nothing wrong with quoting another Freeper or stating what you think he/she believes - but do not put words in the other poster’s mouth, i.e. read his mind, attribute motives to him and so on.
“The doctrine of Alter Christi is that the priest when adminstering the Sacraments is acting in the person of Christ”
My post
Dr E’s reply
“Blasphemy.”
So from her reply I can not write that she disagrees with the doctine of Alter Christie because in her strong opinion (belief) it is blasphemy?
Again I understand if she had written
“The doctrine of Alter Christi is an example of extra Biblical teaching from the Catholic Church.”
and I had replied
“You wrote that because you believe all Catholics are against the Bible.”
That certainly would be mind reading and assuming a motive.
So since you make no distinction between the two examples I have to assume one of the following.
Dr E’s writing that Alter Christ is Blasphemy in no way indicates she believes Alter Christi is Blasphemy. Which is sort of hard to glean from her post.
Dr Eckleburg’s post is no longer to be taken as a strong opinion based on religious conviction but must now be accepted as truthful by me. Since I can not state it is her belief it moves out of the territory of being personal and into the territory of being a truth recognized by all people.
Got it. Whatever Dr. Eckleburg writes is true and is not a matter of opinion.
I’ll remember that.