It certainly is a piece of something. It doesn't prove anything other than the Catholic point that Scripture is NOT self interpreting. It proves that even if one accepts Sola Scriptura, one needs an equally infallible teaching authority in order to not be in error on significant issues of dogma and doctrine. After I clean up the errors in the "what Catholics can disagree on" lists I will probably use this in my RCIA and apologetics classes.
It also proves that Protestants, by definition, are a pretty disagreeable lot. After you get past the unity of not accepting the authority of the Church or the Apostolic Tradition Protestants don't agree on much else to the point that even calling them an identifiable group is a stretch.
Peace be with you.
Jesus took care of that - John 14:26 "But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you."
John 16:7 "But I tell you the truth: It is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you."
After I clean up the errors in the "what Catholics can disagree on" lists I will probably use this in my RCIA and apologetics classes.
IOW, you plan on having all catholics agree with you, i.e. all not properly catechized?
Hopefully, you were humble and asked permission to do so and, also, given credit to our own Daniel - after all, you wouldn't want others to think it was your hard work!
"What a piece of work."....It certainly is a piece of something.
Something you plan on using!
Your response is simply another example of your refusal of objectivity, and as before, to acknowledge anything that impugns your church, as the fact is that the list shows that Catholics under sola ecclesia can also be “are a pretty disagreeable lot” on what their Church, and Tradition, History and Scripture teaches.
And which your own attempts to to clean up the errors in the what Catholics can disagree on” according to how you see it, can illustrate.
And while your point is that Scripture is not self interpreting, neither is the supreme authority for Catholics, with its “formulations” etc. that has resulted in the SSPX and sedevacantist dissent, in commitment to historical RC teaching.
We can all pray that, when Natural Law presents his students with his revised list from your comment and they study together what Catholics are and are not “allowed” dissension on, a few will come to Free Republic and read these dialogs for themselves and the truth of the gospel shines through to those who sincerely seek it.