So, you consider reference to the arguments I advance as somehow about me? I call it taking responsibility — a thing with which your side may be unfamiliar, given, as they are, to justifying vicious, spiteful, abusive, and perseverative insult and slander by appealing to some purported divine call to promulgate division?
You consider my retort to the virtually unceasing slander that we do not read Scripture or give it its proper place somehow offensive? That is, in your view it is perfectly appropriate for anti-Catholics to say that we place tradition above Scripture but NOT appropriate for us to reply that it is not so, but on the contrary we, in our opinion, read scripture ,well, all the ways I said. Is it your contention and your criticism of me based on the idea that it’s okay to attack us, but it is not okay for us to counter attack?
You made, or attempted to make, a point criticizing YOUR (mis)understanding of my point. When I respond, you take the sententiousness up a notch, call me, “winney” and accuse ME of being too focussed on myself while you attempt to justify your side’s defense of incivility on the grounds that, despite ample Scriptural evidence suggesting that Paul would repudiate their approach, they persistently claim the same threadbare Scriptural justification.
Actually, I despise this kind of rhetoric. But when I am castigated for being self-absorbed for expressing my opinion of the arguments of those who have no hesitation about expressing their disagreement with me in the most offensive terms, sometimes it seems right to hold up the mirror for a bit.
I logged on just now, with the intention of apologizing for being cantankerous and ill-tempered. But I see that, once again, having the gumption to respond to the argments of anti-Catholics with arguments of my own is held against me, as though my duty were to bow to the abuse and to take my beating. So I guess I’m glad your post preceded my apology.
But I still think I was bad tempered and I still think I was wrong to be so.
SHIRLEY you jest, sir. You appear to believe this is a one-sided problem. As you languish in paradise, we are busy lobbing rolls at you, and mocking in your general direction, is this what you believe? Because, let me tell you what it looks like from this side of the cross. There IS a division between us, not a PERCEPTION of a division. It's called The Cross. You on side, with the Gospel of the Kingdom as your Great Commission, the idea that your church can remit or retain sins, Maryolatry, dogma of purgatory, prayers for the dead, and sacrifice of the Mass, traditions and doctrines of men, and your Pope.
We stand on this side of the Cross, with the Word of God, and the Gospel of the Grace of God as our Great Commission.
We are told by your side we MUST come to your side of the Cross for our salvation. We know better. There is a better way. The FINISHED WORK OF CHRIST.
You don't accept that, placing works in your salvation plan.
We have not divided ANYONE.
The Cross has divided. You refuse to come to the other side. We refuse to go your side.
And you want to believe that humility, and gentleness and love will solve this problem? Humility without the Strength of the Truth is a false humility. Gentleness without the Truth is powerlessness. And Love without THE TRUTH is not LOVE. It is deceitful.
"..because they received NOT the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thess. 2:10).
This is about the truth, Mad Dawg. The truth that saves. Not will save, might save, but SAVES. The moment it is accepted. You choose to take it or leave it, but the TRUTH remains.
We are called to preach the Gospel of Grace, and be instant, in season and out. If it sounds devisive to you, it is. It's the power of Christ, to those who believe.
We ARE indeed divided. By the Cross. Not because we want to annoy your side. Love of the Truth says "listen, read the scriptures, search for yourself, whether these things be so."
Ok...that’s enough ....but you have revealed who you are and about by your responses...it appears you are more about dividing then resolving differences IMO. And that is why some will not debate you...you can’t seem come off the high horse your on...even now it’s about you and if or not it’s about you!...round and round. As I mentioned...there comes a time I simply walk away...this is one.
I won’t wade into the whole of your msg, MD . . .
I just wish to note . . .
I suspect you’ve met a LOT of RC’s over the decades who
DID NOT
have a frequent, heart-felt, meditative, love relationship with Scripture.
You can say—well in the weekly mass etc. etc. etc.
That’s not what we are talking about.