I have several Co-Contributors here. We have generally compatible views on politics, but we don’t agree on everything under the Sun. This is in the nature of things.
Now and then, one of my Co-Contributors takes me by surprise with a post. I might find that I disagree with it completely. However, if it’s not an outright endorsement of tyranny, a total condemnation of Christianity, or a statement of approbation for the Boston Red Sox, I simply shrug and remind myself that opinions will vary.
Recently, my newest Co-Contributor, Mark Butterworth, has posted several essays on his theological opinions. I don’t endorse those opinions; in fact, I disagree with them almost completely. But they are his opinions. His name, not mine, is the one attached to them, as anyone with moderately good eyesight can see. Therefore, there’s no basis in reason to assume that I share them, as anyone with the brains of a cockroach should realize.
For which reason, I view with consternation, and no small amount of anger, a tirade such as this one:
You [Butterworth] have nothing absolutely nothing to say. I simply cannot believe Porretto let you say so on his site.
But at least, the shallowness of RCC is out and about. Finally.
Porretto – you permitted a man, on your site, to openly deny the Incarnation. Your site, your call, but geezopete, man, do you monitor those who write for you under your umbrella?
It seems not. I confess I once did not measure up to your standards, by your own words, but you, or your surrogate, cannot measure up to the least of Christ’s words. But . . . you publish him.
If Bennie agrees . . .
‘Night, Sports Fans!
This...person, who doesn’t even have the courage to write under his full and correct name, claims to be a Lutheran. Well, whatever that particular denomination teaches its adherents, either it doesn’t include humility and Christian charity, or the lesson passed through his head without encountering anything solid that might retain it.
The first obligation of a decent person, of any faith or none, is to be tolerant of the divergent beliefs of others, as long as they do him no injury. Note: Tolerance, not agreement nor endorsement, is the requirement; in matters of faith, each one of us is utterly alone in his own skull until death should provide him with definite answers. But of course, that requires that he recognize his beliefs as beliefs, rather than trumpet them as mathematically provable facts.
Mister “jb” has a lot to learn and a long road to travel before he rises to the ethical stature of Mark Butterworth.
As I am in great pain and very short of sleep, I will close on that note.