I don’t call it anything other than what I have: heresy. In fact, I don’t talk about it very much with other Christians. Here, it’s safe. Most of the readers of these fora are Catholics, who are effectively insulated against the kind of things that I say. The remainder of the readers are either sufficiently open-minded to consider the ideas critically or sufficiently closed-minded to ignore them completely. Were I to attend a Protestant church and to start disseminating my ideas, I could easily shipwreck someone else’s faith. I will not be responsible for yet another division within the Christian Church.
Yes, but can any of them play guitar?
I would expect that it would be beneficial to both: the ex-Protestants would bring their familiarity with the Bible into Catholicism, which would mellow out their literalist reading of same, allowing them to understand the text better.
There is no particular reason why it should. There is a difference between good-Catholic scholars and good, Catholic scholars.
I have notice the opposite trend, where the former protestants are leading the charge against more liberal Catholic positions such as evolution and creation and further instilling more literal interpretations and even Bible-worship.
What I meant is that I want good scholarly research and discussion revolving around Catholicism and in the magisterium. The moral behaviour of the scholar has no bearing on the value of the scholarship. Good behaviour (even for a Catholic) does not correspond to good scholarship. The inquisition has recently also presented a “we could have cared less” argument about moral behaviour in its censureship of Kung and Curran (along with the editor of America, whose name excapes me). All three were morally above reproach, it was their teachings and writings that upset the reactionary holy office.