You stated that how it was done (medium) was not relevant. And furthermore he was engaging in evangelization. I simply stated that how it was done was relevant. Then you stated the following . 2) Sincere dialogue is from a sincere mind and heart and exists irrespective of medium used to communicate.
So first, you do mention sincerity. Secondly, you state that sincerity can exist "irrespective of medium used to communicate." So the medium used to communicate can be through Penthouse as sincerity can be expressed through any medium. My argument for the nth time to you is that medium is relevant and indeed it can condition whatever sincerity you might have. My further argument is that an impersonal screed of propaganda posted on the internet without notice to a fellow Christian is just the kind medium which undermines a claim of sincerity.
No, the definition of evangelization is clearly broader than you have given it as shown in theology, history and lexicography.
That sounds impressive but unfortunately you don't want a broader meaning you want a narrow meaning. Not a secondary meaning. And that's where you get into begging questions by resort to Catholic or Protestant doctrine. Then questions are begged and no one goes anywhere in this issue.
More of your hand wringing. We live in a technological age. There’s no reason why a public figure can’t be addressed in a public way when he has made his faith a public point.
So the hell with personal manners and private discussion. An impressive feat of technological debasement.
Many people are offended by the truth. Some people are offended by the simplest and least offensive of things. If Baldwin is offended over this then let him say so. Claveau intended no offense as is clear.
It's not "clear". Indeed as I stated by bracketing off 'born again' and by taking a shot at Protestantism, "absolutely none to support the Protestant contention," he now sets the scene for a devisive process. Nice guy this Claveau.
No. Labelling him as a poser - without any knowledge of him whatsoever is presumption. For me to determine that he - working his whole adult life to evangelize others probably has accomplished more good than you while you sit around and attack him calling him a poser is just common sense.
Fairly easy to claim with his divisive methodology and chauvinist use of some Protestant phrases, such as 'born again' as a parenthetical anomaly of Christendom.
Claveau is interested in evangelizing Baldwin. Baldwin does not need to be a theologian to hear the gospel. You point makes no sense. You would have it that people can only talk to their exact peers? No lay person can speak to a theologian.
No. There is no accusation there. There is no criminal or moral fault there. There is no accusation nor is there any accusatory language involved. He INVITES him to learn more. Invite is not accusatory. Again, you are just making things up out of thin air.
I see no invitation here. I see rhetoric, confrontation and patronizing attitudes.
How would he have this verbal conversation? How would he get Baldwin to call him without an invitation - and this is one right there!
There are numerous ways none of which need be explained to someone who uses the internet as skillfully as any blogger would. A simple invitation for personal discussion would even do it. But no, this guy wants to grandstand.
It's not evangelization it's propaganda and divisive.
It was someone opposed to this letter in this thread who posted Baldwin’s thoughts on Catholicism. Baldwin made comments about the Catholic faith in public. So why can’t a Catholic respond in some way.
He has views like everyone else. But did he post a grandiose letter somewhere calling this guy out? That's the issue. An issue which you seem incessantly unable to categorize as anything other than full of goodwill. It's not. Calling a Christian out on a blog for the purpose of trying to indoctrinate him is worthless and insulting. I suggest counterproductive and hurtful to any cause of Christianity.
I am willing to bet the fact that you once were Catholic but no longer are has more to do with your angst then anything else.
Boy you're a mind reader now. Can you read Baldwin's mind as well?
There is no wasting of time when addressing a Christian and encouraging to seek the fullness of the faith.
This has all the goodwill and encouragement of a wet rag.
There is nothing wrong with a public figure being sent an open letter.
He's a Christian who happens to be a public figure. So you would advocate exploiting the public figure so you can "evangelize" him or rather propagandize him from my perspective. You and the letter writer are such humanitarians. Full of goodwill.
Claveau is interested in evangelizing Baldwin. Baldwin does not need to be a theologian to hear the gospel. You point makes no sense. You would have it that people can only talk to their exact peers? No lay person can speak to a theologian.
The writer is not talking the gospel. He's talking down to him and insulting him by using 'born again' and suggesting Protestantism has no evidence to support it's contention on the point he is asserting. Well whooptie doo. Isn't he bright. And so appealing in his condescension of the long debate about transubstantiation.
Incorrect. His remarks - as posted by someone opposed to the letter - show he has forsaken his Catholic faith.
You and the writer's attitude make me cheer for Baldwin now because with this debased method of discussion and condescension he should do his best to avoid the likes of your kind if it is representative of Catholic "evangelizers." Muslims would be proud to have this kind of religious shakedown.
You wrote:
“So first, you do mention sincerity.”
No, I mentioned “sincere”. This is what you accused me of saying: “of stating sincerity only is necessary”.
I never said EVER, ANYWHERE that ONLY sincerity was necessary. I said:
“Sincere dialogue is from a sincere mind and heart and exists irrespective of medium used to communicate.”
That is an entirely different issue. You accused me of saying only sincerity mattered when I actually said sincerity can exist no matter what the medium used to communicate. Your accusation is about ONLY SINCERITY. What I actually said is about SINCERITY EXISTING. Those are not the same thing.
Again, actually deal with my words rather than making stuff up and falsely claiming I said something I never said.
I read over the rest of your reply and it’s filled with the usual distortions and outright fantasies.
1) Evangelization and its meaning is not going to be dictated by you. Deal with it.
2) “personal manners” nor “private discussion” are not threatened by this open letter. You apparently are.
3) Claveau bracketed “born again” as is proper. You don’t like that. It doesn’t matter.
4) The truth - in case you didn’t know - is always divisive.
Remember what Christ said about Himself?
5) You say, “I see no invitation here. I see rhetoric, confrontation and patronizing attitudes.”
Do you see this? “I invite you return to your Catholic roots and invite all “Bible Christians” to explore the truth of Catholicism.”
Now, you can claim, along with your hand wringing, that this is just platitudes, but then again, Claveau does this all his life. Doesn’t sound like a platitude. It is something he lives.
6) Prove Claveau can get personally in touch with Baldwin. Prove it. Don’t just claim it’s so. Prove it.
7) Again, your former faith is key.
8) And the personal attacks continue: “You and the writer’s attitude make me cheer for Baldwin now because with this debased method of discussion and condescension he should do his best to avoid the likes of your kind if it is representative of Catholic “evangelizers.” Muslims would be proud to have this kind of religious shakedown.”
Lent, when you get the courage to actually do what you insist Claveau should have done, you let me know. Also, be sure and tell me he responded. Otherwise, with your attitude what is the point of this? You are so filled with anger over your fallen away Catholic faith, so seething with rage and so ill equipped to carry on a simple conversation about a simple open letter, that this is pointless.
The letter stands. Hate it all you like. It stands. Baldwin may respond. He might not. But others, men of goodwill, will. They will become what you once were and what you have abandoned. Rage in the darkness all you like, Lent. Claveau will probably sleep just fine tonight. I know I will. You will be wringing your hands. I pity you. I will pray for you. I hope you will pray for me too.