I found the article compelling, I was curious as to the thoughts of others as to the merits and I was rewarded with those thoughts. I am surprised that you didn't directly answer my question, although you imply (with a non sequiter dig at me and the author by dragging Luther into the discussion -- do you really think either the author or I are heretics out to destroy the Church?) you think the answer is a resounding "No". Then you clarify your thinking that the issue was not really the author's intent but mine. Not that you stint on taking the author to the woodshed. You assume facts not in evidence to do so --"But this, of course, is not what he did", how do you know that? It may well be that he did, in fact, appeal to the hierarchy and they failed to answer. We do not know. We do know that the same Canon says, "...and they have a right to make their opinion known to the other Christian faithful,..." which I daresay publication does. You disagree.
Since, in fact, I posted the article in no small part to show how our Church was facing similar trials to that the Lutheran congregations are facing and I "pinged" a poster of the Lutheran faith, that seems to indicate to you some sort of bad faith. Why? Assisi I and II "pinged" many pagan faiths, not only to discuss issues in common, but to celebrate their various prayers in common (or at least in the same place as) with the Holy Father, including heretical prayers, schismatic prayers and even pagan prayers, practices and sacrifices.
As always, I find your posts erudite and informative, if not always compelling. Thank you.
although you imply (with a non sequiter dig at me and the author by dragging Luther into the discussion -- do you really think either the author or I are heretics out to destroy the Church?)Narses, this is an absolutely unfair comment by you. I made it clear that “I don’t state this to compare Sungenis to Luther. I state this to make it clear that one can actually fail to give glory to God, despite one’s best intent.” Despite making my intent clear, you claim it’s a dig at you (whom I didn’t reference in that section, so it can’t possibly be a dig at you) and a dig at the author, and go on to wonder if I think of the two of you as “heretics out to destroy the Church?”
I expressly made it clear that was not what I was doing, I was demonstrating that the best of intent does not guarantee it gives glory to God.
If you are going to twist my words to imply I mean something I expressly denied, I am done discussing this with you.
That comment is not well taken. Good night.
patent +AMDG