You think you understand these words. Just astonishing.
You have been doing this thing too long. Take bits and pieces from things.
Still the " lawyer "?
I will be praying for you.
"Wow." You still do not even see it is Rome who exalts herself as the supreme judge, which presumption is an advertisement for challenges, and which often result here due to RCs who engaging in constant advertisement/promotion of Rome, and then her defenders resort to tactics such as but dismissing things which impugn her as "lawyering, or postulating psychoanalysis, etc. Last week i was called a pope!
Or is it only the Mormons whose self-promotion is not to be challenged?
You have been doing this thing too long. Take bits and pieces from things.
Rather, it is RCs like you who have been resorting to such charges as the above too long, and in response have a history of making false charges or insinuations.
Since it is Rome that exalts herself and is thus to be examined, and it is you who is making charges in her defense, do you deny that Rome supported what i stated it did, in contrast to official teaching of the present? What is it that you can prove that i have misrepresented?