[metmom]

You know, you can’t have it both ways.

On one hand you admit that the writings of the Catholic church fathers are not infallible and on the other hand you scorn those who also do not recognize them as being infallible.

So, just what would make a Catholic happy?

If a Catholic questions their integrity, well that’s OK because the writings must be submitted to the authority Scripture and to the Magesterium, because, after all, the “Church Fathers” are not in and of themselves infallible.

If a non-Catholic questions their integrity and thinks that they must be submitted to the authority of Scripture because they are not infallible, then the non-Catholics are sneeringly setting aside and regarding as inferior those same writings.

Why is it OK when Catholics do it and not OK when non-Catholics do the very same thing?

Explain to me how something (the writings of the “church fathers”) that must submit to the authority of something else (Scripture) is not inferior to it? Is Scripture not superior to the works of men?

[lastchance]

No I scorn those who somehow think that their understanding of what the Church has always taught is superior to what the historical record of the Fathers’s understanding.

[lastchance]

Whoops my reply to you came out a bit garbled. Way too tired to redo it right now.

[Quix]

So, just what would make a [Roman] Catholic happy?

I know, Teacher: