No. Not so. Not true.
I merely refuse to let you exclusively, monopolistically OWN the generic term "catholilc."
I strongly believe that all who have accepted Christ as their Personal Savior and who seek to walk in His Spirit as well as they can manage with His help
. . . all such belong to The Universal Catholic Church made up of all believers of all denominations and probably plenty who've never darkened a denominational door.
It's a matter of doctrine, to me, not personal insult.
If I were to be insulting deliberately, you would definitely know it.
"Romanist" is merely a term that works for me and others given my doctrinal perspective--which I must be true to or take another, different one! LOL.
BTW, I consider it a lie to label my terms "fake" etc. They were carefully arrived at in an effort to find a term true to my doctrine which communicated and was not inherently insulting.
I suppose we could talk about Mary's fake after-Christ virginity but that would probably best be on another forum.
Even if you believe that, then there should be no problem in calling Roman Catholics, Roman Catholics. Unless you believe that Roman Catholics of "all believers of all denominations" are the only ones who are disqualified from calling themselves Catholics.
"Romanist" is merely a term that works for me and others given my doctrinal perspective
And "n*****" is merely a term for black people that works for certain white people given their demographic and moral perspective.
I already get it that you feel comfortable using bigoted epithets.
I'm just cluing you in that people who are slandered by such epithets don't share your comfort.
I suppose we could talk about Mary's fake after-Christ virginity
That would be a second thread-hijacking following your judge pal's first act of hijacking.
But you merely underscore my point that you are being deliberately offensive just to get a rise out of people.
And worse, you are dragging the Messiah's mother into your little fit of pique.
Disedifying in the extreme.