No, no “hit and run” here.
I state the facts and leave it to people like you to make fools of themselves stating otherwise.
Pearls before swine comes to mind.
I will not get in the gutter with you.
Could you define "fact"? Or is that too guttery for you? Could you explain how stating things which are not true about us Catholics and then expecting to be believed is reasonable?
Could you state precisely what is "in the gutter" about the things I posted?
Certainly someone who did not "rejoice in the evil" would not merely hurl charges like "in the gutter," but would substantiate them and explain what exactly was "in the gutter" about the behavior he was demeaning so that the poor, ignorant, benighted papist could amend his ways.
This is why a certain class of those who attack us is almost entirely without credibility. They say things about us that aren't true. They make vague and incomprehensible charges not only about our Church but about ourselves. They consider it somehow beneath them to try to express themselves in a way which is understandable. Then they disparage those who ask them to support and substantiate their wild accusations.
If it's "in the gutter" to back up your statements, to show what their claim to truth is, then maybe the gutter isn't such a bad thing to be in. What I mean by "hit and run" is the posting of wild and inaccurate accusations and the failure to make any effort to support them when they are challenged. You may think that's evangelism. It seems more like little boys throwing mud at somebody dressed for church, m9issing their target, and then running away.
Is it the superstition of your cult that the mere articulation of accusation will bring about conversion in the elect? Does this sect believe that merely citing verses from Scripture, no matter how irrelevant, is enough to demonstrate the superiority of one's views?
How very interesting! How very sad is a mistaken sense of one's own correctness supported and defended by a wall of truculent unwillingness to support what one says!