Pity. When we reach the pearly gates, we'll see who won more souls.
I didn't even realise a competition was underway. Well, if there is one underway, I concede to you here and now. I am hoping I can just drag my sorry ass to Confession weely. I have no illusions about how many souls I will have "won."
. I know I am rather deficient on the "wisdom" side but I have always credited Jesus with winning souls :)
I'm not critical of anyone who defends the faith well.
I am certainly not solicitious of those that attack the faith.
I have spent just as much time and energy on this forum defending the faith against schismatics over the last year as you have.
I also realize that the current massive crisis and multiple scandals have lead some folks recently into asking questions they never otherwise would have asked and drawing erroneous conclusions they never otherwise would have drawn. In other words, things have changed over the last 6 months.
I'm not willing to paint every Catholic who enters the fray here as a hidden schismatic with a nefarious agenda. First, its counterprioductive, and second, its ascribing motives and judgemental. Third, your approach is strong on vocab words, bluster, and slur, but weak on wisdom and results.
It would be one thing if you asked Narses to clarify himself, or address certain issues. I'm sure you have some valid criticisms, but you seem to have gotten to the point where you are the lone valid interpreter and defender of the Pope and the Catholic Church. I'm sure reality is more comples than that, but most of us don't claim to speak infallibly for the Pope. There are certainly people on this site who make indefensible statements about the Pope. If Narses is really is the schismatic or heretic you claim him to be, it should be easy enough to make that clear to all. Why don't you come up with a loyalty oath to the Pope and the Church and see who takes it? You told me that you would give me a $1 million if I could find anyone more loyal to the Pope on all of Free Republic. I wish you the best, but how do I know your statement is true?
I also have to ask, since you said you once had one foot in schism: should those who of us who never went near schism consider ourselves superior to you because you did? Should we consider you suspect because you did? Personally, I don't. But you act as if you are the one true defender of the faith, and it's only interpreter.
You said:In the early Church one was FORBIDDEN to kneel at Mass and one received Communion in the hand. I guess this Communist Conspiracy is more insidious than we initially thought. It predated the Communist Revolution by nearly 19 Centuries
Have you read the CCC? What does it say in regard to these matters? Are you suggesting that the early Church is more valid than it was in successive centuries? How come you're allowed to question the Magisterium? Since this Pope and Magisterium are correct, aren't all the proceeding Popes and decisions of the Magisterium equally correct? Pope John Paul II has never condemned earlier Popes' teachings, right?
I also want to ask you about the apparent contradiction in your thinking about Assissi. If you agree with Assissi, then how can you believe that such attacks on those who don't agree with you are okay?
Also, liberation theology has been condemned by the Pope. If someone attack liberation theology, how can you claim they are being unfaithful to the Pope?
I do my best to defend the Pope, but I don't claim to even know everything he thinks, teaches and believes. How can you infallibly judge every Catholic?
God bless you