anything that illustrates the falseness of catholicism is anti-catholic. if i had a recording of O’Brien saying the phrase and it was on a website you deem anti-catholic you still wouldn’t like it.
“anything that illustrates the falseness of catholicism is anti-catholic.”
Then that would mean nothing is anti-Catholic since there is no falseness of Catholicism. But anti-Catholicism does exist. You demonstrate it all the time.
“if i had a recording of O’Brien saying the phrase and it was on a website you deem anti-catholic you still wouldn’t like it.”
The problem is you keep making false claims:
1) the quote you ORIGINALLY posted was not from the book but from an anti-Catholic website.
2) you denied it was even though that is an objective fact as I demonstrated last time (ellipses and brackets were added by anti-Catholics).
3) you continued to deny the obvious even when it was PAINFULLY obvious to everyone.
4) What you originally claimed O’Brien said he never in fact said.
5) You continue to mischaracterize what he said to the point where you even claimed in post #45 that O’Brien was “conflated on his message. One place he says this, the other place something else.” In reality he knew what he was talking about and you’re the one who is confused. But most likely it isn’t confusion at all but this:
“To Protestantism False Witness is the principle of propagation.” (John Henry Newman, Lecture 4. True Testimony Insufficient for the Protestant View)