Please address that ~ not my secondary argument that Germany wasn't all that old a state and age old but well-known historic and cultural divisions continued to play a part as recently as 1932 ~ and that still do.
You still have to tell us if you respect the Pope when he tells you what is or is not legitimate within Christianity. I'd really like to know that because several of your comments suggest you are not well-versed in current intra-Catholic communion so I don't know if I'm dealing with a fallen-away Lutheran or a Uniate who pines for the Good Old Days where the folks loved their Church Slavanic chants.
You wrote:
“Your comments have been made in response to my conclusion which was: “In the end one bunch of Germans voted for the Nazis and another bunch of Germans voted for a different bunch of politicians.””
False. Look at post 8.
“Please address that ~”
Address what? What you said is like saying, “In the end one bunch of Americans defeated another bunch of Americans in the Civil War.” It is a statement devoid of any noteworthy comment so there is nothing to address.
“not my secondary argument that Germany wasn’t all that old a state and age old but well-known historic and cultural divisions continued to play a part as recently as 1932 ~ and that still do.”
What? You were talking about “...Franks in the West...more barbaric Germanic cousins in the East...some Slavs working their way up from the bottom of the barrel ....Rome civilizing the Rhine Valley, and losing wars further East...the Holy Roman Empire into three states, and then...In the end one bunch of Germans voted for the Nazis and another bunch of Germans voted for a different bunch of politicians...Did you know these people even use different dialects and figures of speech?”
Quite frankly your comments were bizarre and disjointed to say the least.
“You still have to tell us if you respect the Pope when he tells you what is or is not legitimate within Christianity.”
No, actually I don’t. Since that question has absolutely nothing to do with the subject at hand it is completely irrelevant. Again, what do the Coptics have to do with the German election of 1932?
“I’d really like to know that because several of your comments suggest you are not well-versed in current intra-Catholic communion...”
I have never heard of “intra-Catholic communion.” As far as I know that’s something out of your imagination. Even if it is not it is not deserving of my comment. I don’t care what you would “really like to know” either.
“...so I don’t know if I’m dealing with a fallen-away Lutheran or a Uniate who pines for the Good Old Days where the folks loved their Church Slavanic chants.”
All of those concerns are essentially unimportant and in fact inconsequential. I have no difficulty arguing with you - and easily defeating you in post after post - even though you have not labeled yourself. I can do this simply because all the facts are on my side and I don’t propose irrational, nonsensical ideas as if they were truths - which is what you’re doing. Learn from that. Truth is not dependent upon how you label yourself. This is not about you. This is about truth and facts. You possess neither one as far as I can see from your posts here.