Why I could personally never chose to be Catholic

[Webers_Home]

-
● Luke 11:1-2 . . He was praying in a certain place, and when he had
finished, one of his disciples said to him, “Lord, teach us to pray just as John
taught his disciples.” He said to them, “When you pray, say: yada, yada,
yada, etc."

When I was a little boy, just about every night at bedtime I recited the
classic lay-me-down-to-sleep children's prayer. In my opinion; a rote prayer
like that one is okay for getting kids started communicating with God.

Jesus' disciples were full-grown men physically. But they were just babies
spiritually. A prayer like the Our Father is a good place for spiritually
immature Christians to begin, but it's not a good place for them to stay.

● 1Cor 13:11 . .When I was a child, I used to talk as a child, think as a child,
reason as a child; when I became a man, I put aside childish things.

Now you take Jesus for example. There is no record of him ever even once
praying the Our Father. In point of fact, when examining Jesus' prayers, it's
readily apparent that he typically prayed in a conversational style instead of
reciting rote. Two good examples of his style are located at Matt 11:25-26
and John 17:1-26. Jesus' style is the style that mature Christians are to
follow as their role model.

● Eph 4:15 . .We should grow in every way into him who is the head, Christ

● Eph 4:11-13 . . And he gave some as apostles, others as prophets, others
as evangelists, others as pastors and teachers, to equip the holy ones for
the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to
the unity of faith and knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to
the extent of the full stature of Christ

When people have been Christians for some time, and still reciting rote
prayers, I'd have to say that their spiritual growth has been stunted, i.e.
they're not developing properly because they haven't been getting adequate
nourishment.

/

 

[bbyrd009]

Not at all because

ah, that was for mjr, BoL, sry

I'll ask you again:
Do you think that it is the Church that is being spoken about in Rev. 11:19 and Rev. 12:1?

i would encourage you to ask someone from your faith about this BoL, why ask me if all of our terms are defined differently?

 

[BreadOfLife]

i would encourage you to ask someone from your faith about this BoL, why ask me if all of our terms are defined differently?

Then explain your terms.
Why are you so afraid to answer this question?

 

[BreadOfLife]

-
● Luke 11:1-2 . . He was praying in a certain place, and when he had
finished, one of his disciples said to him, “Lord, teach us to pray just as John
taught his disciples.” He said to them, “When you pray, say: yada, yada,
yada, etc."

When I was a little boy, just about every night at bedtime I recited the
classic lay-me-down-to-sleep children's prayer. In my opinion; a rote prayer
like that one is okay for getting kids started communicating with God.

Jesus' disciples were full-grown men physically. But they were just babies
spiritually. A prayer like the Our Father is a good place for spiritually
immature Christians to begin, but it's not a good place for them to stay.

● 1Cor 13:11 . .When I was a child, I used to talk as a child, think as a child,
reason as a child; when I became a man, I put aside childish things.

Now you take Jesus for example. There is no record of him ever even once
praying the Our Father. In point of fact, when examining Jesus' prayers, it's
readily apparent that he typically prayed in a conversational style instead of
reciting rote. Two good examples of his style are located at Matt 11:25-26
and John 17:1-26. Jesus' style is the style that mature Christians are to
follow as their role model.

● Eph 4:15 . .We should grow in every way into him who is the head, Christ

● Eph 4:11-13 . . And he gave some as apostles, others as prophets, others
as evangelists, others as pastors and teachers, to equip the holy ones for
the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to
the unity of faith and knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to
the extent of the full stature of Christ

When people have been Christians for some time, and still reciting rote
prayers, I'd have to say that their spiritual growth has been stunted, i.e.
they're not developing properly because they haven't been getting adequate
nourishment.

Another load of ignorant, anti-Catholic manure . . .

First of all - Jesus was a faithful Jew.
The Jews prayed MANY prayers that were formulaic and not "conversational" - from the Shabbat Blessings to the Mourner's Kaddish.

As for repetitious prayer - Jesus engage in that as well.
In Matt. 26:44, He prayed the exact same prayer three times in the Garden of Gethsemane after the Last Supper.

Gee, whatta ya know? Jesus prayed formulaic prayers - repetitiously.
Isn't that what you anti-Catholics are always condemning us Catholics for??

Interesting . . .

 

[bbyrd009]

Then explain your terms.
Why are you so afraid to answer this question?

i never even really read the Q, BoL, no offense meant,
but i hope you understand that i am not interested in mixing the Catholic perspective with Christian ones,
nor being drawn into judgement of your beliefs, ok
pray to the mother of God all you like, it is not my business; but it is also not Christian

imo you are a pagan who attempts to distort Scriptural principles to fit your perspective, and any desire to attach Catholicism to Christianity is strictly wishful thinking, that i frankly don't even understand the desire for, WChristianity being in the state it is.

i guess even calling you a pagan is really me giving you a break, and short-shrifting my pagan friends; really there is a better and more obvious term to be applied here wadr.

i don't mean this like it sounds, "pagan" is not a put down to me, see, give me ten moral "pagans" over one holier than thou Christian any day, and i understand that you have been indoctrinated into the cult from birth, but imo you should not even be allowed to call yourself a Christian here; or the site should actually be called "Catholicboard."

now that said, i love Catholics, ok, regardless of whether you buy that or not; but i have recently noticed that the ones who appeal to me the most seem to be the ones who have departed from formal Catholicism the most, fwiw. Priests included, which i don't really get? i just notice that they--the priests who appeal to me--decline to answer certain pointed questions, etc. Priests can be hypocrites too, who am i to judge

 

[aspen]

Webster

I hope you do not sing popular protestant worship songs........

Extremely repetitive.....

 

[Webers_Home]

-
● Mark 14:35-36 . . He advanced a little and fell to the ground and prayed
that if it were possible the hour might pass by him. He said; “Abba, Father"

The bulk of the New Testament is translated from manuscripts penned in
koiné Greek. But the word "abba" isn't translated from Greek: in point of
fact, it isn't translated at all; it's the actual word; viz: a transliteration.

Abba (ab-bah') is an Aramaic word that means "father" the same as the
Greek word pater (pat-ayr') means father; except that abba means father in
a special sense. It isn't just a noun; it's a filial vocative.

For example: when I'm puttering around out in the garage, and my son and
his mother are in the kitchen talking about me, the noun "dad" is merely a
label that informs my wife who my son is talking about. But when my son
wants to get my attention and calls out: "Dad!" then the same noun
becomes a filial vocative.

● Gal 4:6 . . And because you are sons, God has sent forth the spirit of His
son into your hearts calling out: Abba! Father.

Gal 4:6 reveals something very important. The spirit of God's son always
compels Christ's believing followers to call out to his Father, never to his
mother, and the reason for that is actually quite simple. Christ always prays
to his Father; never to his mother; ergo: the Father's children exhibit the
very same behavior because the spirit of His son compels them to pray like
His son.

That, by the way, is a pretty good litmus test. If somebody is comfortable
praying to Jesus' mom, they give away the fact that they lack the spirit of
God's son in their hearts; which means of course that they have yet to
undergo adoption into His home.

● Rom 8:15 . . For you have not received a spirit of bondage again to fear;
but you have received a spirit of adoption, whereby we call out: Abba!
Father.

The Bible instructs Christ's believing followers to pray in the Spirit (Eph
6:18, Jude 1:20). When people pray in the Spirit; they pray in accordance
with Mark 14:35-36, Gal 4:6, and Rom 8:15. In other words: they don't pray
to Mary and/or angels and departed saints; no, they pray to the son's
Father.

Bottom line: God's kin should feel an overwhelming compulsion to pray to
their adoptive Father without their having to be told to. It should come
naturally (so to speak), just as naturally as it came to Jesus. And they
should feel an equally overwhelming disregard for praying to somebody else.

So then, people with a habit of praying to Jesus' mom and/or angels and
departed saints; obviously have neither the spirit of God's son in their heart,
nor the spirit of adoption; and that is a very serious condition to be in.

● Rom 8:9 . . If anyone does not have the spirit of Christ, he does not
belong to Christ.

FYI: This is a very easy issue to cross check. According to God's testimony,
as an expert witness in all matters pertaining to Christianity; people lacking
eternal life are also lacking God's son (1John 5:11-12). Well; seeing as how
John Q and Jane Doe pew warming Catholics do not believe it's possible to
obtain eternal life prior to their passing; then for the moment they are quite
christless; which means of course that they are lacking the spirit of God's
son to direct their prayers.

/

 

[BreadOfLife]

i never even really read the Q, BoL, no offense meant,
but i hope you understand that i am not interested in mixing the Catholic perspective with Christian ones,
nor being drawn into judgement of your beliefs, ok
pray to the mother of God all you like, it is not my business; but it is also not Christian

imo you are a pagan who attempts to distort Scriptural principles to fit your perspective, and any desire to attach Catholicism to Christianity is strictly wishful thinking, that i frankly don't even understand the desire for, WChristianity being in the state it is.

i guess even calling you a pagan is really me giving you a break, and short-shrifting my pagan friends; really there is a better and more obvious term to be applied here wadr.

i don't mean this like it sounds, "pagan" is not a put down to me, see, give me ten moral "pagans" over one holier than thou Christian any day, and i understand that you have been indoctrinated into the cult from birth, but imo you should not even be allowed to call yourself a Christian here; or the site should actually be called "Catholicboard."

First of all - Catholic OR Christian is an oxymoron.
You see - Catholics were the very first Christians, my historically ignorant friend.

I have asked you the following question three times now and you have dodged it three times. You can call me a "pagan" all you want - but it is simply another cowardly dodge. It's a simple question.

If you were secure in your faith, you would have NO problem answering it:
Do you think that it is the Church that is being spoken about in Rev. 11:19 and Rev. 12:1?

1 Pet. 3:15 commands us to give a reasoned response when people have questions about our faith.

 

[BreadOfLife]

● Mark 14:35-36 . . He advanced a little and fell to the ground and prayed
that if it were possible the hour might pass by him. He said; “Abba, Father" The bulk of the New Testament is translated from manuscripts penned in koiné Greek. But the word "abba" isn't translated from Greek: in point of fact, it isn't translated at all; it's the actual word; viz: a transliteration.

Abba (ab-bah') is an Aramaic word that means "father" the same as the Greek word pater (pat-ayr') means father; except that abba means father in a special sense. It isn't just a noun; it's a filial vocative.

For example: when I'm puttering around out in the garage, and my son and his mother are in the kitchen talking about me, the noun "dad" is merely a label that informs my wife who my son is talking about. But when my son wants to get my attention and calls out: "Dad!" then the same noun becomes a filial vocative.

● Gal 4:6 . . And because you are sons, God has sent forth the spirit of His son into your hearts calling out: Abba! Father.

Gal 4:6 reveals something very important. The spirit of God's son always compels Christ's believing followers to call out to his Father, never to his
mother, and the reason for that is actually quite simple. Christ always prays to his Father; never to his mother; ergo: the Father's children exhibit the very same behavior because the spirit of His son compels them to pray like His son.

That, by the way, is a pretty good litmus test. If somebody is comfortable praying to Jesus' mom, they give away the fact that they lack the spirit of God's son in their hearts; which means of course that they have yet to undergo adoption into His home.

● Rom 8:15 . . For you have not received a spirit of bondage again to fear; but you have received a spirit of adoption, whereby we call out: Abba!
Father.

The Bible instructs Christ's believing followers to pray in the Spirit (Eph 6:18, Jude 1:20). When people pray in the Spirit; they pray in accordance
with Mark 14:35-36, Gal 4:6, and Rom 8:15. In other words: they don't pray to Mary and/or angels and departed saints; no, they pray to the son's
Father.

Bottom line: God's kin should feel an overwhelming compulsion to pray to their adoptive Father without their having to be told to. It should come
naturally (so to speak), just as naturally as it came to Jesus. And they should feel an equally overwhelming disregard for praying to somebody else.

So then, people with a habit of praying to Jesus' mom and/or angels and departed saints; obviously have neither the spirit of God's son in their heart, nor the spirit of adoption; and that is a very serious condition to be in.

● Rom 8:9 . . If anyone does not have the spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.

FYI: This is a very easy issue to cross check. According to God's testimony, as an expert witness in all matters pertaining to Christianity; people lacking eternal life are also lacking God's son (1John 5:11-12). Well; seeing as how John Q and Jane Doe pew warming Catholics do not believe it's possible to obtain eternal life prior to their passing; then for the moment they are quite christless; which means of course that they are lacking the spirit of God's son to direct their prayers.

What strikes me as humorous is the way you fancy yourself a linguist - yet you don't even understand the English language that you write in.

Hasn't anybody ever explained to you how a dictionary works? You see, when you don't know the definition of a word, there is this wonderful book called a "Dictionary". It explains the meanings of words.
In this case, you have falsely stated that Jesus "NEVER" prayed to His mother - which is a flat out LIE.

Allow me to educate you:
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary:

Full Definition of pray
transitive verb
1: entreat, implore —often used as a function word in introducing a question, request, or plea<pray be careful>
2: to get or bring by praying

intransitive verb
1: to make a request in a humble manner
2: to address God or a god with adoration, confession, supplication, or thanksgiving

You see - the PRIMARY definition is ask, entreat, implore, request, etc. This is legal, juridical language that is used in police reports, court documents, etc.
Worship or adoration are SECONDARY definitions.

Now, that being said - Jesus undoubtedly prayed to His Mother MANY times during His life.
One example is John 2:4, where He asks His mother "Woman, what does this have to do with me?" at the Wedding at Cana.

Homework, WH - do your homework . . .

 

[bbyrd009]

First of all - Catholic OR Christian is an oxymoron.

to you perhaps, yes

You see - Catholics were the very first Christians, my historically ignorant friend.

or more likely the first Strong Men or better yet Paul's wolves, my obviously damaged brother

I have asked you the following question three times now and you have dodged it three times.

i have not so much as noticed or paid any attn to whatever the Q is yet, for the reasons that i stated

You can call me a "pagan" all you want - but it is simply another cowardly dodge.

i struggled to find a better word there; as i said, you do not rise to the level of pagan imo, i guess i should have just been honest and said hypocrite. And being that i am one too, then maybe with that understanding we could proceed. Pagans who practice righteousness are better than we are, imo.

It's a simple question.

If you were secure in your faith, you would have NO problem answering it:

ha pls, ppl who exhibit no security whatsoever in their faith seem to have no problem providing "answers" at length lol, so that is a fail imo

Do you think that it is the Church that is being spoken about in Rev. 11:19 and Rev. 12:1?

the Revelation of Christ occurs in a soul who is constructing a Temple, so i don't see how it could be about anything else, but i'll go read them real quick, brb...

...and the time has come to destroy those who destroy the earth.

awesome, been looking for that one...prolly why i'm even here. Anyway to answer your Q, i think the woman in 12:1 could easily be contemplated as Israel, the Church, yes; For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. The "12 stars on her head" is pretty much like a "hi! my name is _____," and the moon under her feet here indicates her path, the moon being "reflected light," or following Christ, imo.

but fwiw i could also give you a completely different perspective, that might be no less valid. Iow i have not given any answer here, nor am i inclined to do so.

 

[Webers_Home]

-
The apostle Paul said that things written in the past, were written for our
instruction (Rom 15:4). Here's a case in point.

● Gen 28:20-21 . . Jacob then made a vow, saying: If God remains with me,
if He protects me on this journey that I am making, and gives me bread to
eat and clothing to wear, and if I return safe to my father's house-- Yhvh
shall be my god.

What did Jacob say? Yhvh wasn't his god up to that point? Not necessarily. It
wasn't uncommon in those days for people to dabble in other gods right
along with Yhvh. The practice was later strictly forbidden by the first of the
Ten Commandments.

● Ex 20:1-3 . . And God spoke all these words: I am Yhvh your god, who
brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. You shall have no other
gods in my sight.

"in my sight" is a combination of two Hebrew words that essentially refer to
Yhvh's competitors. In other words: it is not God's wishes to have a
market share of His people's devotion; no, He'll settle for nothing less than
100%. (cf. Mark 12:28-30)

● Ex 20:5 . . I, Yhvh thy God, am a jealous God

Webster's defines "jealous" as intolerant of rivalry and/or unfaithfulness.

Jacob's uncle Laban was notorious for polytheism. On the one hand, he
recognized Yhvh as a legitimate deity (Gen 24:50, Gen 31:29) while on the
other hand he harbored a collection of patron gods in his home (Gen 31:19,
Gen 31:30). In the ancient Semitic world; patron gods were equivalent to
Catholicism's patron saints-- objects of devotion; venerated as special
guardians, intercessors, protectors, and/or supporters; viz: alternate sources
of providence.

Jacob's vow reflects a personal decision of his own volition to make Yhvh the
sole source of his providence to the exclusion of all the other sources that
people commonly looked to in his day. So Gen 28:20-21 could be
paraphrased to read like this:

"If God remains with me, if He protects me on this journey that I am
making, and gives me bread to eat and clothing to wear, and if I return safe
to my father’s house-- Yhvh shall be my only patron."

So, although I didn't worship Jesus' mom and the patron saints during the
24 years I was a Catholic from infancy, nevertheless, I practiced polytheism
just like uncle Laban because of my devotion to God's competitors rather
than narrowing the field down to just the one benefactor like Jacob did.

Anyway; that was a very important milestone for Jacob; and it's a very tall
obstacle for John Q and Jane Doe pew warmer to overcome because most of
them feel far more comfortable looking to after-market providers such as
Christ's mom and departed saints rather than looking to God only.

Q: What about Rev 5:8 where it talks about the prayers of the saints.
Doesn't that indicate they pray for us?

A: Even if Rev 5:8 did indicate that departed saints pray for people down
here on the earth, it doesn't eo ipso indicate it's okay for people on the earth
to reciprocate with prayers either to them or for them.

However, when that passage in Revelation is read with care, it's easily seen
that the prayers in question are not the active prayers of saints; but rather,
archived prayers.

● Rev 5:8 . . And when he had taken it, the four living creatures and the
twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and they
were holding golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the
saints.

You see, the bowls in that passage are already full; strongly suggesting that
those particular prayers were prayed in this life; not in the next; and it also
indicates that no new prayers will fit in the bowls because they are already
to capacity.

The details of the prayers in those bowls aren't stated; so it would be purely
conjecture to allege they're intercessory prayers. It's likely the current
prayers of departed saints are for justice and vindication (e.g. Rev 6:10).

/

 

[bbyrd009]

1 Pet. 3:15 commands us to give a reasoned response when people have questions about our faith.

imo it does not, as the Lex will clarify, and i know who my enemies are, see; those of my own household
1 Peter 3:15 Lexicon: but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;

so, fwiw, i find no command here, strictly speaking anyway, and my research on the matter leads me to read defense over reasoned response, Definition: a verbal defense (particularly in a law court), and ppl who have questions about my faith would differ from those asking me to defend a belief, as imo is in view here.

i say that last part bc i would never, ever give a defense of my faith, although i guess that is kind of hard to get here, sorry (imo the hope that is in me might not come to pass; blessed assurance is my faith. I don't lay in bed at night hoping that there is a God, iow). You do not ever have to defend your faith to me, ok, in fact i would respect you the more if you would stop doing that. Defend your actions imo; your faith is irrelevant to me, and defending it = you are not secure in it.

Bam defend your beliefs, should you feel so inclined tho, don't get me wrong, that's why i'm here too

 

[BreadOfLife]

to you perhaps, yes
or more likely the first Strong Men or better yet Paul's wolves, my obviously damaged brother
i have not so much as noticed or paid any attn to whatever the Q is yet, for the reasons that i stated
i struggled to find a better word there; as i said, you do not rise to the level of pagan imo, i guess i should have just been honest and said hypocrite. And being that i am one too, then maybe with that understanding we could proceed. Pagans who practice righteousness are better than we are, imo.
ha pls, ppl who exhibit no security whatsoever in their faith seem to have no problem providing "answers" at length lol, so that is a fail imo
the Revelation of Christ occurs in a soul who is constructing a Temple, so i don't see how it could be about anything else, but i'll go read them real quick, brb...

Careful - your relativism is showing.
That Catholics were the first Christians is a fact of history - not a only true to "me".

As for your second comment in RED - you have called me a "hypocrite" on many times on this forum - yet you have never been able to tell me why. This renders your accusation impotent and worthless

When I accuse YOU of being ignorant - I explain WHY this is the case.

Anyway to answer your Q, i think the woman in 12:1 could easily be contemplated as Israel, the Church, yes; For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. The "12 stars on her head" is pretty much like a "hi! my name is _____," and the moon under her feet here indicates her path, the moon being "reflected light," or following Christ, imo.

but fwiw i could also give you a completely different perspective, that might be no less valid. Iow i have not given any answer here, nor am i inclined to do so.

So, you believe that Israel is the Ark of the New Covenant in Heaven?
The Ark of the Covenant in the OT encased and protected the the symbols of God's power, whereas, Israel rejected Christ.

How do you come to this conclusion?

 

[BreadOfLife]

imo it does not, as the Lex will clarify, and i know who my enemies are, see; those of my own household
1 Peter 3:15 Lexicon: but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;

so, fwiw, i find no command here, strictly speaking anyway, and my research on the matter leads me to read defense over reasoned response, Definition: a verbal defense (particularly in a law court), and ppl who have questions about my faith would differ from those asking me to defend a belief, as imo is in view here.

i say that last part bc i would never, ever give a defense of my faith, although i guess that is kind of hard to get here, sorry (imo the hope that is in me might not come to pass; blessed assurance is my faith. I don't lay in bed at night hoping that there is a God, iow). You do not ever have to defend your faith to me, ok, in fact i would respect you the more if you would stop doing that. Defend your actions imo; your faith is irrelevant to me, and defending it = you are not secure in it.

Bam defend your beliefs, should you feel so inclined tho, don't get me wrong, that's why i'm here too

Soooooo, you don't see this as a command?
"always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you"

At the very least, he is telling his readers that this is what they SHOULD do - for those who are followers of Christ.
Your position is just another dodge, bbyrd . . .

 

[bbyrd009]

Careful - your relativism is showing.

careful, you haven't stated any absolute truth from the Bible yet!

That Catholics were the first Christians is a fact of history - not a only true to "me".

that Paul's Wolves would surely rush in as soon as he left trumps all that opinion yack, sorry. History is written by the "winners" after all, right

As for your second comment in RED - you have called me a "hypocrite" on many times on this forum - yet you have never been able to tell me why.

bye, BoL

 

[bbyrd009]

i don't mean to be rude, ok, i just have no interest in talking at an oracle, i hope you understand.

 

[bbyrd009]

How do you come to this conclusion?

not all who are descended from Israel are Israel, hello

Your position is just another dodge, bbyrd . . .

so then "strictly speaking" is ignored, that you might once again make me your b*tch, BoL? See why i am not interested?
i know the Commandments, and i would not take this advice lightly, ok; but neither do i accept your terms

At the very least, he is telling his readers that this is what they SHOULD do

yes, i agree

 

[BreadOfLife]

i don't mean to be rude, ok, i just have no interest in talking at an oracle, i hope you understand.

Funny, because you certainly love to interject during every one of my exchanges with other people.
If you don't want me to talk to you - then butt out of my conversations . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

not all who are descended from Israel are Israel, hello
so then "strictly speaking" is ignored, that you might once again make me your b*tch, BoL? See why i am not interested?
i know the Commandments, and i would not take this advice lightly, ok; but neither do i accept your terms

More evasive drivel.
If you can't address this issue - then you shouldn't interject . . .

 

[bbyrd009]

"Funny, because you certainly love to interject during every one of my exchanges with other people."

actually i avoid it like the plague, and only do so in passing usually, when i perceive that the other ppl might have confused you for a Christian, or since you prefer to believe that you are a Christian, fine with me, then the other ppl might not yet be aware that you are a Catholic Christian, or iow someone who adds to Christian.

arg, still doesn't sound right, but after all we are not IRL here, but on a forum for this purpose, so add to Christian all you like ok, your privilege. You are even paying for it, after all right. Continuing the time-honored tradition of -mancers who state the future for money, and know things--even if you got it reversed, and don't have enough sense to get paid for it, but rather pay to pretend at it. imo. nona my business, but my guess is that you've already been defrocked

More evasive drivel.
If you can't address this issue - then you shouldn't interject . . .

if you don't like it, BoL, you can go write a blog, and i mean that in a good way, ok; this is a forum, and i am not your b*tch wadr.