[Judith Anne]

Just a note:

Extravagant language can be misunderstood; the more words iused, the greater the possibility of error. OTOH, If the writer wants to obfuscate a meaning, what better way than to bury it in wordiness?

Instead of taking a discussion point by point: throwing a glob of multiple points, interspersed with insulting references, claims of loving intent, whining about being attacked, and noble vows to take the high road—

That might constitute something worthy of the racist and disgusting appellation of a “shuck and jive.”

Pardon me, but use of that out-dated phrase is very telling, particularly when one uses it against Catholics, saying they do that. IMHO it reveals something very important about the way the writer views Catholics.

[Quix]

HOGWASH.

Except for the wordiness—for some of us a genetic defect—

I find the last paragraph of that post particularly Thoroughly untrue.

I can understand that some folks would have great difficulty seeing the lack of truth in that paragraph because of systemic blinders and biases at a core foundational level.

[OLD REGGIE]

Extravagant language can be misunderstood; the more words iused, the greater the possibility of error. OTOH, If the writer wants to obfuscate a meaning, what better way than to bury it in wordiness?

Oh! That explains the wordiness of the Catechism and the Code of Canon Law.

[Petronski]

Some folks think the Catechism is too long. I guess reading it makes their mouths too tired.