BlueDragon:
Ok, I will save it. If you wrote to encourage your brethren. Why include me??? In the future, if you are writing to encourage your brethren, then I think that would exclude me. Trust me, I will not get my feelings hurt if you leave me out of your pings.
Given your post, the only reason I can see that you pinged me is because you must have felt the need to do so for some reason only you in your heart know. Again, I don’t know why you pinged me, but my hypothesis is you perhaps were hoping to provoke me? draw me into a debate with you?
I understand, you reject the Catholic understanding of Liturgy and Eucharist and I guess after the links I gave you, you pretty much feel the same way about the Eastern Orthodox. Fine you reject it, I accept it.
So Let’s make a deal, no need for you and I do debate our views of Eucharistic theology. My views align with Rome and the Catholic Church, yours I assume align with Reformed-Calvinist views.
I am comfortable leaving it at that.
No. Though if you chose to "be provoked" for what also served as comment towards statements and positions put forth by yourself elsewhere recently, then there is little I can do as to your own choice in reaction.
This began originally as I did say in the first two comments pinged to yourself, that and very much to establish confirmation from yourself (which you did supply twice, than you) that the missing "priest" or "priests" in so-called "Protestant" texts were not some evil plot bias, as hinted towards by the person I also pinged to this comment.
If I rejected it altogether, in toto, then why would I have spoken of those who do find the grace, even the Spirit of Christ in those settings?
You are correct. I pour my heart on these pages, and still you do not understand me.
Myself, and my experience does not fit the "form" and language you are most accustomed to. Perhaps.
Yet I understand you, quite well enough, even to knowing much of what you will say in reply to me, even as I write that which I do.