“Hmmm...curious...I understood everything BD said.”
Great. Now explain this:
“The general principles behind the term (neutrally considered) is much what is left over as to differences, after one gives Luther his due (as Ratzinger and others have done) then followed by considerations towards men such as (the late 16th century Anglican cleric) Hooker, who upheld there being necessity of Church as institution leaves the chief remaining additional difference be form of receptionism, which Ratzinger when speaking esoterically does not appear to hold great hostility towards.”
Seriously, what on earth does “is much what is left over as to differences” mean?
“Is this another overt attempt of yours to avoid a topic by asserting you have no idea what is being said or is it merely just another opportunity to insult, and you can’t let it pass you by?”
Nope. I really have NO IDEA WHAT HE IS TRYING TO SAY. The paragraph makes no sense.
“Perhaps an OPEN Religion Forum thread is not for you?”
We’ll see. Explain his paragraph, in detail. Have at it.
Tell you what...if I explain BD's comment, will you answer it honestly?
Try reading the paragraphs in context to one another, and then seen in light of the wider conversation.
The difference concerned dopes who "pope" and those not dopey enough to do so.
Google "receptionism" and while examining what may be found of that, consider also Calvin's description of "pneumatic presence" and the like.
As to demands for greater detail -- you are in no position to demand anything of either her or myself.
I did write a thorough explanation...and was considering inclusion of brief passage from Ratzinger writing rather esoterically tangent to how I had placed mention of himself doing so (in regards to Holy Communion, as the Anglicans call it) but have decided to send nothing until there be some apology for the recent ad hominems.
The satirization I well enough understood.
The Tiber, The Swift (where Tyndal's ashes were tossed as I made mention to you earlier this thread), Da-Nile, all of them rivers, but in contexts in which those are placed, not merely so.