When a protestant posts a defamatory quote which cannot be authenticated and a Catholic challenges it, that challenge is not an excuse, it is a justifiable defense.
I took the time to try to find the quote and the circumstances about which or around which it might have been said. Finding no other credible or unbiased source for it, I did comment on what I found out about the supposed author of the quote.
If defending a specious lie or clarifying something that on the surface may be confusing is making excuses, then I am guilty as charged.
I fell head first into the yawning trap you set when you posted an unsubstantiated quote by responding as if honest debate or inquiry was your intent. The fact that you did not defend your post or offer a less biased source for it is revealing.
Enjoy the glee you must be feeling from your cheap shot, you got me, smvoice.
Perhaps you did not read the credit to the author. Look again, or give me the post number and I’ll look at it for you. “Which cannot be authenticated?” BWHAHAHAH! NOTHING your Church SAYS can be “authenticated”. From fraudulent writings contributed to the early Church Fathers, to varying and disagreeing statements and “histories” of popes and their decrees, excommunicating each other, concordats with EVIL, and persecution of all who do not bend the knee to Rome. It’s ALL one big fraud. You’ll look in vain for a truthful exegis on the Catholic Church. Unless you look at former Catholics who have come forward with the “truth” of your Church. But then, you won’t believe them, will you? They are Church “heretics” and “anathema”. That leaves a real conundrum. Challenge away, it’s one institution’s lies against former member’s testimonies. You choose which to believe. You all take at face value what is presented to you as truth. The Scriptures are not searched to “see if those things were so”. They are just accepted as “fact” by the “faithful”. That’s not my problem. That’s RCC members problem. It seems. Good luck