But clearly some are so eager to issue a verdict that they cannot delay long enough to understand the question, even when they're the ones asking it.
No, that was never the debate. The question merely centered around who could claim the language that implied that their particular CAUCUS was the default Church.
I'm happy to call Vatican Affiliates et al
FOYF Folks Of Your Fellowship
or
Vaticans et al
OR
something else agreeable.
I'm not willing to use a label I consider heretical, sinfully arrogant, historically inaccurate--i.e. a historical lie etc.
And, just as most of the rabid Vaticans et al cliques have 1,001 things that their posting style and !!!!CONTROL!!!! PHREAQUE !!!!DEMANDS!!!!! about Trinitarian Protty Christians !!!!REQUIREMENTS!!!! to kowtow, submit, grovel, kiss toes, bow and scrape before the INSTITUTIONAL ALTAR of Romanism etc . . . . just as they indicate that they have 1,001 things that are NON-NEGOTIABLE,
This issue and my now deep seated convictions about it, are non-negotiable.
Doesn't mean I love anyone any less. Doesn't mean I respect anyone any less. Just means I've been forced to draw a line in the sand and I've drawn it, as best as I can discern, where The Lord would have me draw it.
I hope that's clearer.
REALLY!
REALLY!