What's in the name anyways?

[setter]

Can one consider themselves a “good and faithful Catholic”, and be considered by others as a “Catholic”, if they publicly hold positions contrary to Catholic faith and morals, specifically when it contradicts in grave matters? I have stumbled across this in these forums and always receive admonishment, while the offending party receives assurance, when pointing out such an untenable position to hold (regardless if one is actually engaging in sinful behavior or not) while claiming the identity Catholic.

 

[JimLancNY]

I would say this is a simple no, public or privately… To be Catholic means to accept all teachings of the Magisterium, especially in faith and morals… not just those which seem to be acceptable at the time.

I am not one to judge as I am a sinner… But I know it is wrong to warp or twist the faith so I feel like I am not sinning…

Truth is Truth… You take the teachings of the church as a whole. If you do not accpet Catholic teaching you are not Catholic… Is that not what the protestant reformation was all about… “We like this, but don’t like that”

 

[FightingFat]

I would say yes.

Ideally, being Catholic means following all the rules and tenets, but following them blindly is empty and pointless. Catholicism is a jorney of discovery, and that can often mean exploring in order to better understand. As long as your intentions are true, I think it is more important.

 

[JimLancNY]

I would respectfully disagree with FightingFat…

Catholicism is not about discovery… Chirst has revealed all that needs to be revealed… Christ is Truth… He said it Himself… “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life”.

I agree that we must more fully “Understand” our faith, but to say we need to discover our faith is an error unless the way you used the word “discover” is more in line with better learning what has been handed down through the teachings of the Catholic Church. My apologies if that is the case.

 

[Corki]

Can one consider themselves a “good and faithful Catholic”, and be considered by others as a “Catholic”, if they publicly hold positions contrary to Catholic faith and morals, specifically when it contradicts in grave matters? I have stumbled across this in these forums and always receive admonishment, while the offending party receives assurance, when pointing out such an untenable position to hold (regardless if one is actually engaging in sinful behavior or not) while claiming the identity Catholic.

Can they be considered by others to be Catholic? Yes. Even those who have been formally excommunicated (rare, these days, I know) are still Catholics.

Can one consider oneself to be a “good and faithful Catholic” as you describe it? Not without deluding themselves. Either a) they know what the Church’s teachings are, understand their duty to assent to the Church in matters of Faith and morals and chose not to. This would negate the “faithful Catholic” part. OR b) they are really confused about what a Catholic is supposed to know, have not studied their faith and are not attempting to resolve the difference. This would negate the “good Catholic” part.

Among my Jewish friends there are some that identify themselves as observant Jews and others who call themselves “cultural” Jews. I guess your example could be one of a “cultural” Catholic.

 

[setter]

Can they be considered by others to be Catholic? Yes. Even those who have been formally excommunicated (rare, these days, I know) are still Catholics.

Can one consider oneself to be a “good and faithful Catholic” as you describe it? Not without deluding themselves. Either a) they know what the Church’s teachings are, understand their duty to assent to the Church in matters of Faith and morals and chose not to. This would negate the “faithful Catholic” part. OR b) they are really confused about what a Catholic is supposed to know, have not studied their faith and are not attempting to resolve the difference. This would negate the “good Catholic” part.

Among my Jewish friends there are some that identify themselves as observant Jews and others who call themselves “cultural” Jews. I guess your example could be one of a “cultural” Catholic.

This is a helpful response (yours too JimLancNY).

 

[dulcissima]

I am still learning what it means to be fully Catholic, and I am pretty sure that I am not alone in that.

Is anyone on this forum actually qualified and do they actually have the authority to tell someone that they are not a Catholic? I still have a lot to learn, but my guess is that is not the case.

I do realize that some people are quite enthusiastic about informing others about the truth of the Church’s teaching. This is a very brave thing to do, a duty that many shy away from. To be honest, I have learned more on these forums than I ever learned in RCIA thanks to people who have patiently shown me the truth in contrast to my flawed perception of the truth. For instance, just before the forums crashed there was a rather spirited back and forth discussion involving “scandal”. There was one poster, and I forget his name, who patiently rebutted all of my objections to his assertions. He successfully helped me to fully understand the church teaching, and in just one night. Had he been judgmental or called me a bad Catholic, I doubt that I would stuck around for very long and certainly wouldn’t have been open and receptive toward learning the truth.

I think it is important to realize that we are all works in progress. I know that it can be frustrating dealing with someone who is maligning Church teaching, but I think patience is really important. Sometimes I have less patience than I should have and have been guilty of driving someone off the path by not listening carefully enough and just talking at them. It is important to meet people where they are at and then encourage them that they can make it to where they need to be.

It is good to keep in mind the words of St Vincent de Paul:

We should remember that he (Christ) himself said that by gentleness we inherit the earth. If we act on this we will win people over so that they will turn to the Lord. That will not happen if we treat people harshly or sharply.

 

[JimLancNY]

Very well stated dulissma…

I agree 100%… and I think the danger in these types of posts is that someone can take what someone says in good faith as judgemental.

I would like to be clear though that Truth is Truth and we need to be very careful in not diluting it or stating it incorrectly in order to make sure we are politically correct. With that being said and as you so wonderfully put it… we need to show compassion and tenderness as being critical can cause more harm than good.

 

[FightingFat]

:clapping: I agree! Wonderful post dulissma!

 

[AlanFromWichita]

One is Catholic based on having been baptized into the Church, or accepted into the Church after a valid baptism.

One should never claim to be a “true and faithful Catholic” as a way to differentiate himself/herself from another. That is presumptuous pride and elevates oneself above another.

If one wants to make distinctions between Catholics based on observable behavior, then the specific behavior should be described but never judged. For example, it is not sinful (even if possibly tempting) to observe that Joe Shmuck has made statements that appear to be at odds with Catholic teaching. One might even properly put them into a category of people who teach such, for example, “progressive” or whatever. The minute it takes on a judgment, such as by calling them “disobedient Catholics” then it becomes sinful.

Why? Because if we judge others as “disobedient” because of their behavior, then we judge ourselves according to the entire law. I can say, “it seems Father X is not aligned with Rome on some of his sermon points,” because that is an objective observation. When I say, “Father X is not acting in good faith,” then I have judged both him and his behavior.

There is no such thing as “judging the behavior” as a separate issue from judging the person. One may observe the behavior, and even lovingly talk about it and even warn the person doing whatever it is, but one may not judge it – especially as a mortal sin – because there is never a way for a human to know objectively if another has sinned. The difference between observation and judging may seem subtle to those who are not very sensitive to word choices, but it makes all the difference in the world – to the heart and mind which yearns to be renewed in the spirit to become like Christ’s.

Alan

 

[Pug]

Can one consider themselves a “good and faithful Catholic”, and be considered by others as a “Catholic”, if they publicly hold positions contrary to Catholic faith and morals, specifically when it contradicts in grave matters?

That word “can” that you start with, what do you mean by that? The person saying that they are a good and faithful Catholic most likely finds their position to be reasonable based on the truths that they hold in the forefront of their mind as they type. Possibly if you question them, you might find an inconsistent truth that they also believe, but weren’t including in their analysis at the time. Most people harbor little inconsistencies. I doubt most people who type that here are deliberately squelching a twinge of “oh, but what about this”. If they are, they assess it as irrelevant to the current discussion. You’d have to ask them each time.

It is Jesus who is faithful, not us so much.

Perhaps you are asking if a person can be profitably admonished or told that their position is internally inconsistent. Yes, I have seen it happen. Perhaps you are merely asking about what is socially meant by the phrase “a good Catholic”. I think that is a harder question, often based on culture or who raised you. Perhaps then the approach would be to ask them what they mean by the phrase.

 

[setter]

That word “can” that you start with, what do you mean by that? The person saying that they are a good and faithful Catholic most likely finds their position to be reasonable based on the truths that they hold in the forefront of their mind as they type. Possibly if you question them, you might find an inconsistent truth that they also believe, but weren’t including in their analysis at the time. Most people harbor little inconsistencies. I doubt most people who type that here are deliberately squelching a twinge of “oh, but what about this”. If they are, they assess it as irrelevant to the current discussion. You’d have to ask them each time.

It is Jesus who is faithful, not us so much.

Perhaps you are asking if a person can be profitably admonished or told that their position is internally inconsistent. Yes, I have seen it happen. Perhaps you are merely asking about what is socially meant by the phrase “a good Catholic”. I think that is a harder question, often based on culture or who raised you. Perhaps then the approach would be to ask them what they mean by the phrase.

I appreciate everyone’s thoughtful posts.

I am referring to those folks who present themselves as lock step on the road to salvation while publically living or verbalizing direct opposition, contradiction to the Catholic faith in matters of faith and morals; this despite having it been pointed out in discussion the inconsistency of their postion with clear presentation of Church teaching (“untenable position”).

Too often I have seen how others run to apply emotional bandages to the hurt feelings and rebuke to the one who offended with pushing this person away from the Church. I am left wondering how much the person wanted to know the truth, their readiness to know and accept the truth, and if hurt feelings are only a superficial reaction to having their ego defenses ruffled a bit. I get the impression with such folks that they are looking for the first excuse to be offended to terminate and exit the discussion at hand – immaturity, need to handle with kit gloves, only a bottle with the nipple on presentation of the gospel?

I understand the importance of assessing and attempting to meet folks where they are at, but for the openly dissident (and at times ardently defiant) Catholic, what is one to do if not pander to and walk around such hypocrisy? I suppose let it go, allow the holy Spirit to convict in absence of poking a gentle finger (maybe even waving finger) at their illusionary belief and/or denial too much, lest they be offended by the method.

I am reminded of the various approaches that Jesus took with those he encountered in his day, and that one size does not fit all. With some, our Lord was severe, cutting and harsh (the religious and self-righteous); others he lovingly challenged with an all or nothing cutting edge which did not yield immediate conversion (the young rich man); to the Gentile woman He withheld in a way that made her acknowledge the authenticity of the faith (the Canaanite woman with the demon oppressed daughter) and commended the obedient trust and humble acceptance of the faith (the Roman centurion with the sick slave); He harshly admonished those most close to him (Peter); He gave gentle confrontation and persuasion (the Samaritan woman at the well); often simple instruction and explanation to those open to and seeking to know the fullness of the truth (the scribe whom Jesus saw answered wisely; explaining the parables to His followers; interpreting the signs of the times; …); uncompromising presentation of the gospel to the cutting point of disillusionment and departure from Him (“Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you;” John 6: 53); …

 

[dulcissima]

I am reminded of the various approaches that Jesus took with those he encountered in his day, and that one size does not fit all. With some, our Lord was severe, cutting and harsh (the religious and self-righteous); others he lovingly challenged with an all or nothing cutting edge which did not yield immediate conversion (the young rich man); to the Gentile woman He withheld in a way that made her acknowledge the authenticity of the faith (the Canaanite woman with the demon oppressed daughter) and commended the obedient trust and humble acceptance of the faith (the Roman centurion with the sick slave); He harshly admonished those most close to him (Peter); He gave gentle confrontation and persuasion (the Samaritan woman at the well); often simple instruction and explanation to those open to and seeking to know the fullness of the truth (the scribe whom Jesus saw answered wisely; explaining the parables to His followers; interpreting the signs of the times; …); uncompromising presentation of the gospel to the cutting point of disillusionment and departure from Him (“Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you;” John 6: 53); …

That is a very good idea. You will never go wrong reflecting on the example of Jesus.

 

[dulcissima]

Setter, I just wanted you to know that I am spending some time thinking over what you have said. I have recently left an abusive marriage, and I can see that I have the tendency to be “too understanding.” That has been counter-productive because by being so understanding, all that I have really accomplished is to enable my husband’s destructive behaviors by protecting him from the consequences of his choices. Perhaps I need to keep this in mind when it comes to being “too understanding” when it comes to sinful behavior.

On the other hand, there are some other things that I have learned as a result of receiving some counseling. One is that my counselor tells me that I need to learn to listen with a “third ear.” I need to not only listen to the words that someone is saying, but I need to examine what it is that is feeding those words. Most of the time what is behind these words is the frustrated feeling that needs are not being met. It is important to acknowledge those needs if you want to make a connection with someone, because if you fail to make a connection, you are going to fail to offer them anything of use. It is important also to express to them that your care or concern for them is not based upon them meeting with your expectations. You must demonstrate to them that regardless of whether they see things the way that you want them to, you will still respect them as fellow human-beings and will still be concerned about their well being. This doesn’t mean that we have to be permissive or abandon our values, just that we will show that person the same quality of respect whether or not we agree with them.

Mt 5: 43- 48"You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your heavenly Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brothers only, what is unusual about that? Do not the pagans do the same? So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.

1Pt 1:22-23 Now that you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth so that you have sincere love for your brothers, love one another deeply, from the heart. For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.

1 Pt 4:8-10 Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins. Offer hospitality to one another without grumbling. Each one should use whatever gift he has received to serve others, faithfully administering God’s grace in its various forms.

Heb 10:24-25 And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another–and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

Rom 15:1-2 We who are strong ought to bear with the failings of the weak and not to please ourselves. Each of us should please his neighbor for his good, to build him up.

 

[setter]

Setter, I just wanted you to know that I am spending some time thinking over what you have said. I have recently left an abusive marriage, and I can see that I have the tendency to be “too understanding.” That has been counter-productive because by being so understanding, all that I have really accomplished is to enable my husband’s destructive behaviors by protecting him from the consequences of his choices. Perhaps I need to keep this in mind when it comes to being “too understanding” when it comes to sinful behavior.

On the other hand, there are some other things that I have learned as a result of receiving some counseling. One is that my counselor tells me that I need to learn to listen with a “third ear.” I need to not only listen to the words that someone is saying, but I need to examine what it is that is feeding those words. Most of the time what is behind these words is the frustrated feeling that needs are not being met. It is important to acknowledge those needs if you want to make a connection with someone, because if you fail to make a connection, you are going to fail to offer them anything of use. It is important also to express to them that your care or concern for them is not based upon them meeting with your expectations. You must demonstrate to them that regardless of whether they see things the way that you want them to, you will still respect them as fellow human-beings and will still be concerned about their well being. This doesn’t mean that we have to be permissive or abandon our values, just that we will show that person the same quality of respect whether or not we agree with them.

Mt 5: 43- 48"You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your heavenly Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brothers only, what is unusual about that? Do not the pagans do the same? So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.

1Pt 1:22-23 Now that you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth so that you have sincere love for your brothers, love one another deeply, from the heart. For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.

1 Pt 4:8-10 Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins. Offer hospitality to one another without grumbling. Each one should use whatever gift he has received to serve others, faithfully administering God’s grace in its various forms.

Heb 10:24-25 And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds. Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another–and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

Rom 15:1-2 We who are strong ought to bear with the failings of the weak and not to please ourselves. Each of us should please his neighbor for his good, to build him up.

I appreciate you sharing your growing insight and wisdom into artful listening and pertinent scriptures (never enough scripture for me).

My problem is that I have a hard time not calling out darkness into the light when detected, whether the person is a collaborator with or has been duped by the devil and shades between. I have a tendency to focus on the eternal welfare and destiny needs of the person and secondary visit the underlying psychological, sociological, emotional, … needs at hand. These CA forums really are not conducive to in depth, encompassing interaction deserving of intricate matters. Folks who feel rejected, abused or grossly misunderstood because of such medium limitations ought to reassess their expectations when there is an absence of malice.

I always attempt to render the respect deserving of another in Christ, a fellow creature made in God’s likeness and image, and appreciate feedback if I have violated the dignity of another.

 

[Strider]

One is Catholic based on having been baptized into the Church, or accepted into the Church after a valid baptism.

One should never claim to be a “true and faithful Catholic” as a way to differentiate himself/herself from another. That is presumptuous pride and elevates oneself above another.

If one wants to make distinctions between Catholics based on observable behavior, then the specific behavior should be described but never judged. For example, it is not sinful (even if possibly tempting) to observe that Joe Shmuck has made statements that appear to be at odds with Catholic teaching. One might even properly put them into a category of people who teach such, for example, “progressive” or whatever. The minute it takes on a judgment, such as by calling them “disobedient Catholics” then it becomes sinful.

Why? Because if we judge others as “disobedient” because of their behavior, then we judge ourselves according to the entire law. I can say, “it seems Father X is not aligned with Rome on some of his sermon points,” because that is an objective observation. When I say, “Father X is not acting in good faith,” then I have judged both him and his behavior.

There is no such thing as “judging the behavior” as a separate issue from judging the person. One may observe the behavior, and even lovingly talk about it and even warn the person doing whatever it is, but one may not judge it – especially as a mortal sin – because there is never a way for a human to know objectively if another has sinned. The difference between observation and judging may seem subtle to those who are not very sensitive to word choices, but it makes all the difference in the world – to the heart and mind which yearns to be renewed in the spirit to become like Christ’s.

Alan

I must respectfully disagree.
Let’s say U. S. Senator Y is a known life-long Catholic, baptized at two weeks and Confirmed in the 7th grade. The senator attends Mass weekly in the National Basilica of the Immaculate Conception, ostentiously receiving Communion.
The senator has a 100% voting record from NARAL Pro-Choice America, has argued on the Senate floor to keep Partial Birth Abrtion legal in all circumstances and is the prime sponsor of a bill to legalize “gay marriage” on the federal level and has traveled the country campaigning and raising money for this bill.
Based on his observable actions, I can say that he is dissenting from Catholic dogmatic teaching.
I do not try to judge why he does this, for I cannot judge his heart, but his actions are in direct opposition to Church teaching from which there can be no divergence.

 

[dulcissima]

These CA forums really are not conducive to in depth, encompassing interaction deserving of intricate matters.

I think they are uniquely conducive to indepth interaction. Just look at how long some people have been around here and how long posts go on and on. I can’t think of any other medium that lends itself to such an ongoing conversation. You are not even around right now, yet I can share my thoughts with you knowing that at some point you’ll stop by and pick up where we left off. It really is pretty amazing. When I went through RCIA we had classes that were two to three hours in length every week for 9 months. I learned so much, but it totally pales in comparison with what I have learned through these forums.

I really appreciate the way that you consisently present correct information and are always willing to back it up with sources. I especially love that you are not alone in that regard. Despite the fact that there are so many Catholics in the world who say “The Church needs to get with the times” you don’t really hear a whole lot of that around here. It is so nice to come to a place where following Church teaching is the norm, and where people will enthusiastically tell you why the Church teaches what it does.

Just keep in mind though, that when you meet with dissent or even outright contempt, you are better to be patient. Chances are that the thread isn’t going to go anywhere. It’s going to hang out here in cyberspace for sometime. You don’t need to convince anyone within a set number of posts or within a time limit. Several years ago I used to teach a class in “pro-active selling skills.” One of the main points we used to try to teach our sales people was to listen, to ask questions, to get to know the person that they were trying to sell to, that way they could tailor their approach to the individual, showing them how what we were offering met their unique needs. In a way, I think this also applies to evangelization, even amongst our brothers and sisters in the faith. Accurate information is best received through a good connection.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

I must respectfully disagree.
Let’s say U. S. Senator Y is a known life-long Catholic, baptized at two weeks and Confirmed in the 7th grade. The senator attends Mass weekly in the National Basilica of the Immaculate Conception, ostentiously receiving Communion.
The senator has a 100% voting record from NARAL Pro-Choice America, has argued on the Senate floor to keep Partial Birth Abrtion legal in all circumstances and is the prime sponsor of a bill to legalize “gay marriage” on the federal level and has traveled the country campaigning and raising money for this bill.
Based on his observable actions, I can say that he is dissenting from Catholic dogmatic teaching.
I do not try to judge why he does this, for I cannot judge his heart, but his actions are in direct opposition to Church teaching from which there can be no divergence.

I do not see where we disagree, in that you have not claimed his actions were sinful. Therefore, you have observed his actions go against church teachings, and I see that as a fair characterization.

It’s hard to describe exactly what the shade of distinction I was trying to make. I guess my main concern was that we presume that we are somehow in a better condition than those whose actions we criticize. In other words, I can accept the way you have written it about the senator. What I can’t accept easily is when people presume themselves more or less worthy of, for example, going to Holy Communion. One may speculate but never presume. The risk here is that we end up sounding like the Publican who thanked God for making him righteous unlike the tax collector.

Maybe I don’t see your words as “judgmental” because they reflect your observations without presuming to know what is in the heart of the other person.

Alan

 

[Pug]

I am referring to those folks who present themselves as lock step on the road to salvation while publically living or verbalizing direct opposition, contradiction to the Catholic faith in matters of faith and morals; this despite having it been pointed out in discussion the inconsistency of their postion with clear presentation of Church teaching

My first thought would be that they have no clue about the authority of the Church, or else that is one of the issues they oppose. Perhaps a switch to a discussion of authority would be in order at that point. If they don’t accept it, quoting isn’t much help. Find out why they don’t and address it.

My personal experience with my own historically heretical self is that I assumed the Church was like every other authority in the universe…confused and not saying what it really means. I overcame this first by the power of the HS and second by agreeing with Him to a temporary trying out the Church morality. By grace I agreed to give it a try, and then I could see. But only after quitting the problematic sins first. I simply couldn’t see truth with all that sin floating about. My “trial run of obedience” reeled me in. Maybe such a trial could clear their head as well. Once I saw by my own experience that I had been wrong and they right all along, I could buy the idea that an authority might actually be straight and honest.

Second thought. Shake the dust…IF you are convinced it is right. I do think Dulcissima has some good thoughts. I don’t tease certain individuals (in real life) because I know they lack the trust necessary for such a thing. I forever tease my youngest brother, however, as he trusts me and has always known that I love him.

Trust is not assumed by other posters, especially in the absence of body language. They are not assuming an “absence of malice”. Be aware that people who follow the Church rules assiduously can seem like scary, dangerous people (monsters?) to those who tend to be of a different bent. They specifically fear an unresponsiveness to human needs and good. I’m not fully sure what exactly, but I’ve seen the fear.

Give milk to some and solid food to others. Be all things to all people, that you might win some. Speak Greek to them if that is the language they understand. If they require touchy-feely, gentle language, use it.

 

[dulcissima]

I think they are uniquely conducive to indepth interaction. Just look at how long some people have been around here and how long posts go on and on. I can’t think of any other medium that lends itself to such an ongoing conversation. You are not even around right now, yet I can share my thoughts with you knowing that at some point you’ll stop by and pick up where we left off. It really is pretty amazing. When I went through RCIA we had classes that were two to three hours in length every week for 9 months. I learned so much, but it totally pales in comparison with what I have learned through these forums.

I really appreciate the way that you consisently present correct information and are always willing to back it up with sources. I especially love that you are not alone in that regard. Despite the fact that there are so many Catholics in the world who say “The Church needs to get with the times” you don’t really hear a whole lot of that around here. It is so nice to come to a place where following Church teaching is the norm, and where people will enthusiastically tell you why the Church teaches what it does.

Just keep in mind though, that when you meet with dissent or even outright contempt, you are better to be patient. Chances are that the thread isn’t going to go anywhere. It’s going to hang out here in cyberspace for sometime. You don’t need to convince anyone within a set number of posts or within a time limit. Several years ago I used to teach a class in “pro-active selling skills.” One of the main points we used to try to teach our sales people was to listen, to ask questions, to get to know the person that they were trying to sell to, that way they could tailor their approach to the individual, showing them how what we were offering met their unique needs. In a way, I think this also applies to evangelization, even amongst our brothers and sisters in the faith. Accurate information is best received through a good connection.

You know what. Never mind. I am pretty sure that I have no idea what I am talking about. I think maybe you had it right to begin with. You quite succinctly called a spade a spade, and for some reason I just like to prolong the agony.

Oh, and by “you” I mean Setter (the OP). I do realize that it looks like I am talking to myself.