Posted on 01/28/2011 9:32:34 AM PST by marshmallow
LOL!!!
What a joke. All this whining about *Catholic bashing* all the while bashing Protestants in posts 11, 13, 16, 17, 18,.... for their *Catholic bashing*.
The RM has graciously derived the
ECUMENICAL THREAD
and the CAUCUS THREAD
designations.
Failure to use them is NOT the RM’s fault.
Wailing and whining after the fact—in large part because of RC CHOICE to NOT use such designations—is childish to the max.
And now 121 is deleted.
Mod, resign. You are not worthy of the name.
Lastchance: Edit out that last part. The article still stands on its own merits.
Well, there's real honestly and integrity for you....
Leave the thread.
Never wrote it was.
You seem to be assuming that I care that much about such net conventions and sensibilities.
I’ve pontificated at length on the topic here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2347476/posts
You are quite welcome to avoid my posts.
Assumptions about my anger and yelling are likely to continue to be at best seriously flawed if not thoroughly wrong.
I find “vitriolic” to say far more about the person using the term about me than it says about me.
Even folks I’ve never met face to face on FR and even who do not agree with a lot of my perspective know that’s a dreadfully inaccurate and poor term to use about me and even about my emotional and dramatic posts.
“but I would not do that because I would be shamed to say I had done so on the Day of Judgment”
It has taken a long time for someone to come along and say this; thank you for saying it.
I have often had the same thought when reading comments on contentious threads.
Many seem to post as if they were the “man behind the curtain”-—but the Lord sees all, and we all will be held accountable for every word.
It does not change the substance of the article at all.
Protestants in name only do exist, as I wrote I do not consider them to be actual faithful Protestants. An example would be those “Protestants” who do not believe in the bodily Resurrection or the Virgin birth or that Jesus was God or who teach that homosexual behavior is not sinful. I may disagree with you but you are not a Pagan.
The article was about evangelizing in a culture that believes it is Christian but is in many cases truly Pagan. The most specific example of such cultural Christianity glossing over actual Paganism I can think of is how certain sects support abortion.
So how do you get those who because they sit in a pew on Sunday believe themselves to be Christian (although they just voted in favor of same sex unions.) to understand they are being served a corrupt Gospel?
Do not ping a poster who has been instructed to leave the thread.
I am aware I have been guilty of bad conduct but I hope the Lord will bring my faults to mind so that I may be ever mindful of them and the offense they give to Him.
Well I see there’s a battlefield here.....some things just never change. This thread is like a street fight!
As impossible as it might be for y’all to imagine it . . .
I’m keenly aware that Jesus is—essentially—observing every character I type AND the heart motives behind every word, thought and feeling.
Perspectives are interesting things . . . and no two are identical.
I have never thought you had ill motives.
Aye Aye, Wasn’t aware of that when I posted.
Sorry.
Don’t forget the fact that the vast majority of the under 35s in Ireland don’t attend mass. Even”devout” Portugal couldn’t stop gay marriage.
PRAISE GOD FOR YOUR DISCERNMENT AND INSIGHT
And honest candor.
MAY GOD Bless you with all the good things you might desire from God this week.
Then why did you, in post 31, suggest editing out the line that included the word *Protestant* so that it could be posted as a caucus thread?
That comes across as being more than a little deceitful.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.