I think threads like this are not necessarily provocative, they are factual. It’s that someone of a different stripe might think they are being provoked.
I post threads for the educational content — usuall — today I posted a fun one about dissident nuns, but posters either show ther learning and understanding or lack of learning and understanding on the threads.
They can be quite entertaining as well as the source for some good discussion.
Not "necessarily" provocative? Did you read the whole thing before you posted it? Here is the part that was provocative and NOT factual and which prompted my response:
Protestants believe the first Pope possessed the charism of infallibility.
Now, they might not believe that Peter was the first Pope (which he was), but they believe that his Epistles are infallible. They also believe that Luke, Matthew, Mark, Paul, Jude and John wrote infallibly. They believe that Moses "was infallible," too. And Hosea, Micah, Nehemiah, Isaiah, David, Solomon, Zechariah -- any Patriarch, Prophet, Apostle, or Evangelist who wrote a Bibilical Book is deemed by Protestants to be infallible.
But somehow they see things as having changed, and the idea of the gift of infallibility being given to man is laughed off as "Popish superstition" at best, and as "Romish sacrilege" at worst.
Why they believe this, when since Israel's origins God has always provided authoritative leaders, I don't know. From Abraham to Jacob to Moses to David to Solomon, et. al., throughout the thousands and thousands of years of Israel's existence, God gave Israel earthly authority. But Protestants see this authority as having abruptly ended when the Old Testament Covenant was fulfilled and Israel's King of Kings took on flesh.
The author was purposely provocative as well as incorrect - not factual. You and I have had this conversation many times and, regardless of your intent - be it learning or "entertainment" - it should not come as a surprise when others disagree and do so sometimes forcefully. It isn't a game to me.