See how comical it becomes?
This statement belies a profound and fundamental lack of understanding of that the Church is. It is not my Church nor D-fendr's Church, it is Christ's Church. It is not, like Protestants see a church, as one among many competing institutions that one os free to join or quit at any time and for any reason. The Church is seen by Catholics as the Bride of Christ, instituted among men by Jesus Himself.
CCC - 874 Christ is himself the source of ministry in the Church. He instituted the Church. He gave her authority and mission, orientation and goal:
In order to shepherd the People of God and to increase its numbers without cease, Christ the Lord set up in his Church a variety of offices which aim at the good of the whole body. The holders of office, who are invested with a sacred power, are, in fact, dedicated to promoting the interests of their brethren, so that all who belong to the People of God . . . may attain to salvation.
"Whatever one may think of its theology and ecclesiology, the cold heart fact of the matter is that the Catholic Church is not just one more institution among others. Structurally and doctrinally, it is the emblem par excellence of the ancient world, a continual reminder to our generation that its life did not begin yesterday, and that Western civilization would be unrecognizable, and probably nonexistent, without it, the Catholic Church reminds us as well that we are living off of a cultural capital that was millennia in the making. Its unabashed affirmation of the centrality of tradition to right conduct, its hierarchical conception of authority, its exclusion of females and homosexuals from the priesthood, and its demand that its clergy take a vow of celibacy are some of the more salient respects in which the Catholic Church has not only distinguished itself from the leveling impulses of our age, but resisted them."
– Jack Kerwick, The Catholic Church and the Left, American Thinker, February 20, 2011
In essence what I'm asking is 'as opposed to any and all others'. It is the general question of authority. How do you determine what is authoritative for you? I asked in general or, if you'd like, using the specific example of your cite referenced here, Drakes.
As has been noted several times, much of this comes down to a question of authority. That's at the root of my questions here.
Earlier I had asked for the source authority of your dating of Paul's epistles, since this seemed critical to your theology. I didn't receive a reply.
So both the specific and general questions remain, if you'd like to answer for yourself, according to your methodology and beliefs.
thanks for your posts.