Catholic Advice on Internet 3
Greetings Fellow Experts!!! There are several people on this board who are not following a very Christian-like approach to those other experts on this board who have differences in outlook, sexual orientation or some other "foible" you have taken it into your heads to be judge and jury on. No one has the right to cast stones or disparaging remarks at another expert because of something that you disagree with.
Each one of us has our own crosses to bear. None of us is perfect and that is what we are all on this earth to perfect. We are all sparks of the divine and all of us are reflections of the creator. Each of us is perfect in His sight. How can any of you stand before another self-righteously thumping your Bibles and saying that so and so is going to Hell because he or she is not like you? That is the beauty of this world. We should be celebrating the differences, not condemning them. "I leave you with these 3 things--Faith, Hope and Charity (love), but the greatest of others is Charity." You may not agree in your hearts with specific orientations or viewpoints, but you can all agree to respectfully disagree with this.
There is an old adage that what comes around goes around. There is another way of saying this "What you put out will return to you" So, if you want to stoop to hatred and misunderstand, you will get it back in spades. If you want to embrace a more positive loving accepting approach, this too, will be returned to you. Remember, As you so, so you reap and Do unto Others as you wilt have them do unto you. I chose to learn about different religions, cultures and lifestyles because by learning about them you erase ignorance, which is nothing more than fear. Take time, please, to examine your motives. There are as many interpretations of scripture as there are people who interpret it. We all came from God and back to God we will one day return. All I ask is you think about it and treat all who choose to volunteer as experts here with respect and love. Blessings of Spirit to all of you! :) Laurie
Somewhere a Psalm verse says: "Teach me to know my unknown sin" (It's not a literal citation, I couldn't find the verse). It's ever a gift of God to receive a deeper insight of one's failures and sins. So thank you for your help.
But, please, could you tell what answer or question of mine "casts stones", offers a "disparaging remark", is "thumping the Bibles", is "saying that so and so is going to hell because he or she is not like you", does "stoop to hatred and misunderstanding"? It would help me to know where and when.
Because I would have to apologize to the persons who received that answer and/or question of mine. That's why I would like you to point out where and when I have incurred in these malfeasances. I have to rely on your information.
I have no psychic faculties. Moreover, to get this information I can't use witchcraft because the Church shuns all things that have to do with it. God through the Bible has clearly declared these practices an abomination (Deut 18):
9"When you come into the land which the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominations of those nations. 10"There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, 11"or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. 12"For all who do these things are an abomination to the LORD, and because of these abominations the LORD your God drives them out from before you. 13"You shall be blameless before the LORD your God. 14"For these nations which you will dispossess listened to soothsayers and diviners; but as for you, the LORD your God has not appointed such for you."
I hope I'm not thumping the Bible!? It's more like paying attention to the teaching of the Lord I think.
The Catholic Church guards the heritance of the forefathers. You will find the same clear doctrine in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
"2115 God can reveal the future to his prophets or to other saints. Still, a sound Christian attitude consists in putting oneself confidently into the hands of Providence for whatever concerns the future, and giving up all unhealthy curiosity about it. Improvidence, however, can constitute a lack of responsibility.
2116. "All forms of divination are to be rejected: recourse to Satan or demons, conjuring up the dead or other practices falsely supposed to 'unveil' the future. [Cf. Deut 18:10; Jer 29:8.] Consulting horoscopes, astrology, palm reading, interpretation of omens and lots, the phenomena of clairvoyance, and recourse to mediums all conceal a desire for power over time, history, and, in the last analysis, other human beings, as well as a wish to conciliate hidden powers. They contradict the honor, respect, and loving fear that we owe to God alone."
2117. "All practices of magic or sorcery, by which one attempts to tame occult powers, so as to place them at one's service and have a supernatural power over others - even if this were for the sake of restoring their health - are gravely contrary to the virtue of religion. These practices are even more to be condemned when accompanied by the intention of harming someone, or when they have recourse to the intervention of demons. Wearing charms is also reprehensible. Spiritism often implies divination or magical practices; the Church for her part warns the faithful against it. Recourse to so-called traditional cures does not justify either the invocation of evil powers or the exploitation of another's credulity."
You see, in the Lord I can love a witch as a sister in Christ but I certainly can't love witchcraft. I can't respectfully agree to disagree. Abomination is abomination. Saint Augustine who has coined the maxim: "Love and than do what you want" has said also "suaviter in modo fortiter in re" meaning that you should treat the other one with kindness but regarding doctrine you should very categorical. When the Lord has spoken, there can't be any quibbling.
Awaiting your help regarding my failures your psychic faculties surely can reveal to you that I haven't condemned you to hell nor am I trying to provoke some misunderstanding and much less hatred regarding persons that exercise those abominations.
I'm asking for information so I can apologize. That's all.
marusasma asked this follow-up question on 1/7/2001:
Greetings Vale! Thank you so much for your very interesting, but sarcastic answer! I do sincerely appreciate that you took the time to look up my AskMe Pages and this I do appreciate; however, they do not tell the whole story.
I am not, nor have I ever, dumped upon you or your religions beliefs or your spirituality, so please, do not disparage mine. I can only speak the truth as I understand it to be through my vast research and learning. Although you can dump on me for being a "psychic" and doing things "of the devil", it does not come from the devil as I simply do not deal with entities from the lower realms. My gifts come from God, just as surely as those of being able to write well, my artistic abilities and so on and so forth. Why these particular abilities would be considered less a legacy than "normal" gifts, I can't tell you; however, the Bible is filled with people who prophesy and heal. Were these people considered acting under the influence of the Devil? If so, then you have some good Holy Fathers up here in Massachusetts who have the gift of healing who must be worshipping the Devil as well. Personally, having met these men, I hardly think so. How can you answer healing prayers at LaSalette? Were they any different than the healing that comes through me when I help out the sick? Is it of the Devil when I offer comfort and peace to the dying and take away their fears of the transition we call death? I hardly think so. I have done no more or no less than other people that follow God in their hearts.
When I flunked out of nursing school back in the '70's the first time, I asked God that if he would allow me to get my RN, that I would serve him. Although he went about it in his own time frame, I obtained my RN and am keeping my end of the bargain.
For me, I only do things with the highest good in mind. Perhaps this will get me ridicule, as it is doing now because of your fear and misunderstanding, but to persecute somebody because their belief system is different is no more right than people fighting each other because of so-called religious differences or some other insignificant reason. I chose to write this missile on this particular board because some good people were being attacked, not necessarily by you (if you noticed, I did not single out specific individuals--this is neither the place for it or the time); however, one of the things that I have learned is that ignorance equates fear and the more you understand something, the less you fear it. Plain and simple.
I understand all too well how people can twist and turn things around into something that (a) wasn't said or (b) wasn't intended--all for their own purposes. I didn't come here out of hate or to rock the boat or to disparage your faith. It was because the teachings of the Church and Christianity and, for that matter, most other major religions, espouse love and forgiveness, how can one crucify somebody because their understanding is different from somebody else's. That is what ecclesiastical boards have been grappling with for years on end!!! If these learned men of Cannon Law can't come to a consensus of opinion, how can you expect all of us as individuals, not to do the same? You can put 10 of your parishioners in a room and ask them the same question and probably get 10 different interpretations of the same thing.
As for your quotes about magic and sorcery (which I don't do anyway), those things came about in the middle ages as a way of controlling the people. They have absolutely nothing to do with the basic premise of the Church or the basic premise of Jesus Christ or of God.
I have to keep my pact with my maker. This I am doing. When I don't act on my convictions or don't act with the highest good in mind, then I am lost. I can only speak truth. I came here in love and in love I will depart. Blessings of Spirit to you and yours! PAX! :) Laurie
Thank you for your prompt answer. I recommend you for the service you are doing. God bless you.
As for helping the experts to be better experts, I think it would be better to proceed according to the method of the Christian community. I think it's indicated too when there is a possible error, misunderstanding or misinformation.
Remember Mt 18?
15 "And if your brother sins, go and reprove him in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother.
16 "But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed.
17 "And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax-gatherer.
18 "Truly I say to you, whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
19 "Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven.
20 "For where two or three have gathered together in My name, there I am in their midst."
The New American Standard Bible, (La Habra, California: The Lockman Foundation)
I hasten to repeat that I'm talking about information and understanding not about willful antagonism and misinterpretation. I'm not talking about sin. Therefore, if I see someone on the board giving answers that are doubtful I offer a public corrective answer. If it's necessary, I write PRIVATELY to the expert and offer my arguments regarding his post.
In your case we have a typical problem. You say you have studied the religions. I contend that your post shows a misunderstanding of Catholic faith. Please, it's not your fault! You have information but you have shown no Christian faith as far as I can fathom and you don't understand about the magisterium of the Church. About that anon., let's first clear the ground so we can tread without getting tangled up.
I'm pleading guilty of shoving you. Some time ago I posted a open question on the board reclaiming from the experts that on this board it's not admissible to give mere information of faith, that somewhere and somehow the expert should witness his-her faith. Therefore, when I see a question or exhortation and can't quite fathom the direction it I shove a bit.
You say it's sarcasm. Not so. It's more a bait (not baiting), not in order to provoke you but in order to help clear up the background. I asked you information regarding who has failed. Then without reference to your person I cited the Bible's teaching about witchcraft and magic together with the teaching of the Church. That was shoving you. And you answered marvelously with a confession of faith, of your faith. So far so good.
I contend that you haven't made the necessary distinction between doctrine and love. In the Catholic Church, it is not possible to disagree on essential and authoritative doctrine and continue being a Catholic. Let me explain.
The more recent evangelical communities expel drunkards, sinners, and malefactors but admit that in the same congregation someone preaches that Jesus is the second person of the Holy Trinity and others allege that He is only a prophet.
In the Catholic Church, the reaction is quite the reverse. The reason consists in that Jesus doesn't want to pull out the weed in midst the Church until the very last moment. However, when someone reneges a fundamental tenet he willfully denies the authority of the Son of God incarnated. He separates himself from the Church. As I argued in the prior answer, the Christian loves the sinner but hates the sin. In addition, if someone expresses somehow that sin isn't sin there has to be a quick and strong reaction.
Does this swift and strong reaction condemn those who have expressed this kind of opinion? Objectively he-she is wrong. I don't know if subjectively he-she be accountable of willfully disobeying God's will. Assuming guilt would be judgment. That is very dangerous because we will be judged by the same criteria that we have used in order to judge. Nevertheless, that doesn't change the fact that objectively the opinion expressed is gravely wrong.
The Church doesn't invent or modify the doctrine. She is guardian only and has to transmit the Lord's unchanged teaching to all generation. Therefore, if an expert on this board pretends to teach something non-orthodox he will be bawled out for committing a grievous error. It would be against love not doing it. The error would mean that the person involved puts his-her opinion above the will of God. That is dangerous, even lethal.
Now, even that person is not automatically condemned to hell. He-she can be saved. If erroneously in his-her conscience he-she believes strongly in the error being the truth he-she will be saved. Why? The Lords respects goodwill and knows about our limitations. Catholics learn from the cradle that they have to form their conscience according the teaching of the Church because she is the only one who can interpret rightly the revelation of Christ throughout the centuries.
Telling someone that he-she is very wrong about the doctrine of Christ is a service of love. Therefore, if there are some strong expressions it is not against love. John Paul embraced the sick people with aids but he tells the entire world that having homosexual intercourse is a sin. Love the sinner and hate the sin.
It's not your fault having written as you have because of your outlook. One additional and essential element has to be considered in order to understand Catholicism. It's about faith. Let me use a comparison. Everybody can read a love letter and might be moved but only those who really are in love can understand the exorbitant expressions of mutual donation and appreciation. You may have studied religions but if you have not experienced that the risen Christ as believed, preached and celebrated by the Catholic Church through fait gives you now and here the Holy Spirit, that is, life eternal and abundant.
You mention the Spirit. I contend it's about a spirit of your dimensions and not the Spirit of Christ. God has revealed Himself in His Son in order to give us His Holy Spirit through the teaching and the sacraments of the Church. Nobody has seen God. His only Son has told us. There is a dimension that is out of reach to anyone who doesn't have Catholic faith. It's not his-her fault as it isn't anybody's fault if he-she hasn't fallen in love. There would be only a problem when the person involved doesn't want to fall in love because it changes his-her project of life. Objectively I can say that person commits a grave fault pushing away one of the greatest gifts of God. Subjectively I don't know the reason of this behavior. It might be that he-she has seen abuse in his-her family and fears similar suffering.
It has been necessary first to clear up this essential part. Cleared up this basic tenet I can comment the opinions of yours about persecution, crucifying, twisting, so called religious or other insignificant differences, ignorance, grappling for years on end, and so on.
We have first to agree that bawling someone out on the Catholicism board for teaching erroneous doctrine is not against love. On the contrary! When someone is on his way and doesn't see he is going straight into an abysm, you don't whisper or make polite gestures. You yell. Out of love.
Secondly, the Catholics have the magisterium as an inerrant guiding light that assures them of the right interpretation of scripture and doctrine. In the essentials, there can't be differences if we want to remain Catholic.
Over to you if you want me to continue.
May you fare well!
PS. I'm not conversant with some colloquial expressions. I' have looked up the word "dump" and get as synonyms: "plunk, chuck, put, abandon, leave". Could it be "impose"? In that case, I hope you will see that nobody wants to impose anything.
marusasma asked this follow-up question on 1/8/2001:
Greetings! Your arguments are interesting, but I am not asking you to compromise your belief system one iota. I understand where you are coming from and fully respect your views, please do not get me wrong here. However, what I was trying to say is that sometimes people can have a bit more compassion for what they perceive, or understand, to be a sin and the person who commits it--the sinner.
One of your experts stated that she thought she understood when a particular questioner was brought to mind and she felt she could have answered it with a bit more compassion or understanding. As you know, there are many ways to say something. Sometimes you can show the person that although you don't condone what he or she is doing because of such and such, you can understand their pain and remorse or pain and suffering in the case of certain blood borne diseases and this is what I was trying to say. You won't be compromising your beliefs, just responding in a more humane and compassionate vein. As you say, the Pope may abhor homosexuality as being a form of perverted behavior, but he has not let the suffers know that he can still love them and show compassion for their suffering. See?
I think as humans, as dumb as we all can be--lol, we allow our actions and yes our mouths! (or in this case our fingers) be clouded about how we feel about a certain behavior over-ride to dealing with that person. You might want to check out a couple of answers that I wrote to some of your other experts regarding this. This is all I'm trying to say here.
It is interesting, just as an aside, that the mandate that you quoted on your last paragraph about the magistrium (misspelled) was quite interesting. In some respects it reminds me of the fundamentalist religions who believe that the only way, the right way is theirs. I understand this is a Catholic Board and you are coming from that standpoint, but you also need to understand that true religions are like the colors of the rainbow, all come from God and are manifestations of Him. But that is another story here and I digress. Thank you so much for your insights! :) Laurie
The preceding post was necessary in order to understand the line I'm pursuing.
My problem is not the likelihood of compromising my faith. What I'm attempting to do is trying to give you inkling about Catholicism. You put in the same neighborhood fundamentalism and magisterium. That's like bringing an ice cube to the equator or at the North Pole trying to maintain the water in its liquid state. I read somewhere an erroneous suggestion that fundamentalism occurs when you have to chose between love and truth, you chose truth.
I contend that without truth there can't exist real love. The reason: Everything deteriorates to our week diminutive human dimensions. John Paul II has written an encyclical letter regarding that problem. The title is "Veritatis Splendor – The Splendor of Truth."
Let's look at the heart of my argumentation. If it is true, that God – in Whom you believe – has established a special way to communicate salvation to humanity; shouldn't all the believers in God pay attention to that unique approach? Certainly, He has many ways to save those who without personal responsibility fail to pay attention.
However, the fact is undeniable. God has spoken and has granted to humankind, as some are wont to say, the "superhighway" to Him. Pardon the vulgarism. It's His only begotten Son incarnated. He has characterized Himself: "I'm the way, the truth and the life." It's not "a way, a truth, a life."
That's radical, isn't it? Well, if He is the true intermediary between God and man, He can't speak in a different way. Only through Him can we be saved. And humanity is not perfect. Even the saint falls out or down seven times a day. That's not my discovery. It is Scripture.
The Catholic Church by the grace of the Holy Spirit is the zealous custodian of the Word and interprets His revelation in every generation. Consequently, the Church speaks utterly on behalf of the Lord. The Church's official teaching of the Pope in accordance with the Bishops of the entire world has the authority of God.
If this is true, you only may define true love if you do it in accordance with the Church's doctrine. It's not a feeling, a sentiment or an intuition. It's the manifestation of the Holy Spirit in every faithful. Basically, it's God who loves through the believer. The Holy Ghost makes a temple out of the body of the believer. The Holy Spirit's inhabitation in a faithful comes from hearing the Word and from being incorporated into the mystical Body of Christ by means of the sacraments. It's being reborn through water and the Spirit.
Your rainbow image is enticing but skewed. The Church respects the religions. The Vatican Council II has elaborated a document regarding the relations of the Catholic Church with those religions: "The Church doesn't reject anything that's true and holy in other religions. She considers with sincere respect… the rules and doctrines that… frequently offer a ray of the truth that illuminates all men." One of the first post-evangelical Christian authors, Saint Justin, has an explanation. He teaches that all truth comes from the Logos spermatikós. In the Logos, everything has been created and everything that is true or good comes from Him. However, the whole truth can be found only in His Church.
This sounds shocking, exorbitant and outrageous. How can an institution have the daring and assert that she is the safeguard the full truth?
The answer is pure logic. If God willed it so, you have to abide by it and you certainly have to speak in accordance with it. It's not about conceit or arrogance. It's about observance or obedience, nothing more. And nothing less. You can't be conceited about a gift you don't deserve. And if God talks about witchcraft the Church can't change His judgment.
What about those of good will who shall never obtain a notion about that essential truth? God acts in them according their disposition. But they don't know about God acting for and in them. They are like someone who's loved beyond human measure and is not aware of it. Sad, isn't it? It's heartbreaking.
Poor lady, you ventured onto the Catholicism board and you get doctrine you cannot possibly understand. (I'm shoving!) You are talking about the study of religion and I'm talking about what God wants to say to you because He has spoken His final Word.
You know, someone studying religions without embracing one is like a sick man perusing a medical manual about healing methods without getting cured ever or, a better image, he is reveling in all these wonderful procedures and doesn't know he's sick. Don't fret. You are not alone. We all are sick and need redemption. And blessed those who know about their condition because they will be seeking a cure. Moreover, Christ has come not for the healthy ones but for those who are ailing.
I'm conscious that consistent reasoning never has brought anyone to embrace the faith in Jesus Christ as preached by the Catholic Church. In the first place, faith is a gift of God. In the second place you have to let it grow in midst of a community that lives this kind of faith. Moreover, in the third place it means that you have to be conscientious that you can't save yourself because you can't stop sinning even striving to the utmost of your capacities. And last not least only the wisdom instilled by faith may open the inner eyes so you may contemplate the mysterious work of God in the world's and the individual's life. Anything else is pure human dimension. Faith is knowledge inspired by God.
Resume: you are to be commended for helping the experts on the Catholicism board to have more love. However, when you are offering the reasons for it you should beware. There is no real love without truth. Perhaps you have been following the advice of Saint John of the Cross: "To go where you don't know you have to go the way you don’t know." He's talking about mystical experiences but his saying could be adapted to intellectual peregrinations into undiscovered and unknown regions.
Consider this post a road sign. Nobody obliges you to travel that road. However, you can't claim that nobody shoved you in the correct direction!
vale – fare ye well!
PS. I think you understand now that you have to make a sharp distinction between fundamentalism and fidelity. The magisterium by definition is never to be even mentioned in the neighborhood of fundamentalism. Look at Bartlett's definition: "Main Entry: mag·is·te·ri·um. Pronunciation: "ma-j&-'stir-E-&m; Etymology: Latin: teaching authority especially of the Roman Catholic Church."
You will find an explanation of what magisterium means at
After reading it, you will understand what it is all about.
marusasma asked this follow-up question on 1/11/2001:
Greetings once again! Your arguments are indeed interesting, but if God can chose to speak to one, it is logical that he can speak to one person or two people, why can't he speak to whomever he pleases since we all have the spark of divine here? I'm just posing this question.
There is no reason to think that Buddha or some of the other great prophets or founders of religion aren't also servants of this same God. Perhaps God chose them to send a similar message that would be embraced and understood by the peoples they taught. Although Jesus did say that quote, I am the way the truth and the light, was he specifically speaking about himself or about his Father in Heaven? Because of the way his teachings have been passed down over the years, and changes have been made with each revision, it has been noted time and time again that the original wording has been changed or translated from language to language, oftentimes missing out on the original.
Since I am neither a biblical scholar, but continue learning and studying, I am wonder if this is what Jesus was really saying. Since neither of us were there at the time, I surely can't say and neither can you. Both of us can only rely on what we have been taught or read up on. There was a translation of the original Lord's Prayer from the ancient Aramaic to modern day English and the difference between the actual translation vs. the one that we are familiar with is like night and day. It was extremely interesting to read. So, if such a well-known prayer can be revised from its original form and intent, why not the rest of the scriptures? Just an interesting aside here.
But I digress here, since you've led me on an interesting tangent, the point of this whole question in the first place was not a lesson in Catholic or even Christian ideology, just a request to think and respond in a more loving and compassionate way. There are many people who are turned off and get away from religious beliefs because of this hard core approach (and I'm not saying that you are guilty of this), and there have been many people over the years who have expressed this same opinion to me over and over again. I think that you certainly can get your point across quite well--LOL--but I also know that you can tone it to be more compassionate and loving at the same time. Its just a difference in approach here.
An analogy that comes to mind is the boss who has to reprimand his employee. Instead of taking him quietly into the office and having a reasonable conversation, he screams and yells and causes a scene in the office in front of everybody and not only embarrasses and mortifies the employee, he has now shown the entire office what an uncaring clod he is.
This was the thought that came to mind, and if I thought a bit more, I could probably think of a better analogy, but I think you get the point I'm trying to make here. Anyway, thank you for your interesting comments. It has certainly been a very thought-provoking question for both of us. :) Laurie
To all readers: You can understand the following answer only if you read the several precedent interchanges. I didn't take them off the board.
The last answer posted after the previous ones being rescinded from "public" to "private".
Thank you for your patience. You reiterate your good intentions but do barely look at the suggested answers.
I have praised you again and again for your preoccupation that the experts on this board be more Christian. Thank you.
You told several of us you didn't mean us. Therefore, I reached the conclusion that expressing firmness in doctrine was perhaps the reason of your post. That's why I've tried to argue that your way to enter in the fry didn't take into account the importance of truth it has on the Catholicism board.
In order to show the degree of importance it has I've tried to suggest a new line of thought you found interesting and thought provoking. I suggested that if God has specifically proposed to humankind a special way of approach He considers His favorite then we should pay attention.
There is no possible other interpretation. If you read the gospel of Saint John, you will find that He says clearly: "The Father and I are one." The Jews want to lapidate Him. They understand very well that He declared Himself God. The same reason sufficed for the Sanhedrin, the greatest experts in Jewish religion of their time, as declaration of guilt: blasphemy. He had to die. No variation of translation can and will change that rationale. He said it; he thought it and the highest court of His times understood very well what He said. That's why He received the death sentence.
Furthermore, I agreed that some glimmer of God's truth be in Buddha, etc. Nevertheless, I repeat that the whole truth is Jesus Christ. You wouldn't comment the reasoning that the Church is the guardian of The Truth. That's why being a Buddhist and so on is being content with the second best. As explained above, no looking down, no scorn involved. Either He is the only Son and only mediator or He isn't. That's the truth.
Your reaction consisted in reiterating that we (I) should be kinder and not so intent on getting across an argument or a point. Well, it rouses the suspicion that you think that kindness should prevail over truth. Somewhere in Saint John' gospel Jesus declares: "The truth will make you free." Isn't freedom weighty enough for motivating that I shove a bit? Catholics can't eliminate truth for kindness.
The affirmation that many have felt the lack of kindness and that's why they have no sympathy for the Catholic Church at least should admit the possibility that the Church's unswerving position in doctrine was perhaps a major motive for the reaction described. When someone wants to approach the Church introducing the modern dogmas of relativity in morals and doctrine, ma'am, do you think we should be polite and elegant? How do you do that when someone sticks a deadly weapon into your face? The martyrs of all times loved those who killed them. However, they told them clearly: "You are going against God!"
Then you offered an analogy:
"An analogy that comes to mind is the boss who has to reprimand his employee. Instead of taking him quietly into the office and having a reasonable conversation, he screams and yells and causes a scene in the office in front of everybody and not only embarrasses and mortifies the employee, he has now shown the entire office what an uncaring clod he is."
Oh, oh, oh … you shot yourself in the foot!
In regard to your original post, you had definitely the option to contact PRIVATELY those who needed the kind of help you proffered. However, you posted an open PUBLIC exhortation to all experts. One other expert compared your post with a shotgun's blast of scattered pellets all over the place/board. Where does this position you in your similarity so lovingly detailed at the end of your last post? Your comparison-parabola-analogy is a sort of hara-kiri, ma'am. You screamed and yelled all over the place/board.
(Beginning of memory hiatus
Remember: "casts stones", "disparaging remark", "How can any of you stand before another self-righteously thumping your Bibles and saying that so and so is going to Hell because he or she is not like you? That is the beauty of this world. We should be celebrating the differences, not condemning them".
End of memory hiatus)
You caused a scene in the office in front of everybody and not only embarrassed and mortified the experts, but have now shown the entire office what an xxx xxx xxx xxx. Ouch.
I think we better close our interchange. We could resume them in case you are interested in … kindness AND truth. We just can't "celebrate differences" in teaching, morals and doctrines. They are heresy! How can you celebrate an error?