[Religion Moderator]

I am making a point all across the Religion Forum that we can have great, continuing debates (and fewer abuse reports) by not making the issues personal.

The problem was in the phrasing of the first sentence of your post:

Ah, your true disposition revealed, not that of an inquiring soul, genuinely seeking to understand another's view, but that of a modernist with a hatred for "Latin purists". You're in good company here.

It could have been phrased without being personal, for instance:

Modernists with a hatred for "Latin purists" do not seek to understand another's view.

See the difference?

[murphE]

See the difference?

I do, but since he chose to state his motives plainly I didn't think I was doing anything but acknowledging them.

I have re read the thread, and frankly I can't see where I was anything but patiently, charitably, and exhaustively responding to Mr. Warthog's question, "what's the hoopla about Latin?" even when he plainly stated the hostility he apparently has towards those who esteem Latin and seek the return of the traditional Latin mass.

[vox_freedom]

I am making a point all across the Religion Forum that we can have great, continuing debates (and fewer abuse reports) by not making the issues personal.

Thanks for posting this.
That said, why is it OK to say, "Please grow-up and act like a Christan." (post 49) and, "But, confusion is the very least of your issues, sister." (post 40) without so much as a cautionary note, much less a reprimand?