You also seem to ‘assume’ a lot of things to. How has that gotten you through life?

I think we need to have a nice long talk. You need to understand so much more…

Jesus being involved was pure speculation. You really need to read columns better tyo get the actual gist.

Your definition of torture seems to be highly maligned as well. May God truly have mercy on your soul.

The last six paragraphs were necessary. Too bad you didn’t approve.

But I remember God telling Peter, “Upon this Church, the gates of hell shall not prevail.”

We must remember the fight will be long and difficult, but in the end we know exactly who will be called to be with Him.

They are both very good articles, and though I think we still disagree, my cursory reading of them suggests that what you have written is accurate, if not necessarily comprehensive.

You should be commended for your vigorous defense of the faith in those articles, and indeed I thank you.

I will not, however, debate this. It is obvious that we are at an impasse and that we both must move from our current positions before we may move forward.

Please continue to pray for me, as I will for you.

You’re still erring about the definition of ‘torture’. That’s too bad. And it’s not even a Catholic thing.

It’s unfortunate that you believe that I claim to be more Catholic than the pope. Are you assuming again?

I’m also glad you admit what exactly what the Church is. I’ve got two columns about the Crusades and the Inquisition that give the true facts. Whether you want to believe truth or not is your call. Just give me your e-mail and I’ll be glad to send them to you.

I’ve already prayed for your soul, as I have mine. I hope the Holy Spirit does not wait until after your mortal life to see the truth.

I hope God blesses you despite your faults. He’s blessed me already.

Convincing someone to follow the path of righteaousness was not the point you seemed to be making. Also, Joan of Arc was not stated by the actual Church to be burned at the stake. I don’t see how she could be named by the Church as an honored saint if that was the case.

I’m also glad you admit the error commited by Amazon. TAN Books seemed to get closest to the truth whn they called the book ‘a true history book’. But I guess you still haven’t read it yet.

I suppose all of this would be easier if there were an explicit statement about waterboarding by the pope, which I acknowledge that there does not seem to be.

I joined this discussion out of concern that a fellow Catholic might be making use of God’s name to advocate the torture of persons, which is blasphemy. I believed that the Holy Spirit might be able to work through me to turn you from this belief and back to the path of righteousness.

My intent is not to make you face truths about Christ that may be incompatible with your convictions if that would push you from Christ, but rather as it says in Hebrews, to ensure “that none of you may have an evil and unfaithful heart, so as to forsake the living God. Encourage yourselves daily while it is still `today,’ so that none of you may grow hardened by the deceit of sin.”

I could have very easily ignored your opinion or dismissed it as I told a third party about a faceless person on the internet, but doing so would be even more hateful, since so doing I would be declaring that I do not care if you get your eternal reward.

We share a common background, and I hoped that that would help me to convince you.

It is clear that you are very certain of your position, and that continuing to debate this may simply encourage you to look on me with disfavor rather than to examine your position, which will cause more harm than good.

I will make one final plea here that you take time to reevaluate your position. From some of your responses, I get the sense that you value certainty and consistency. In some of your arguments (which I apologize for turning this into rather than a cooperative discussion), about infallibility and past excesses by the clergy, it sounds like you are trying to be more Catholic than the Pope, who claims only the infallibility in doctrine that he has and has acknowledged the sins committed by clergy in the name of the Church (the Church herself, we must be careful to say, did not commit these sins and is herself indefectible).

I will probably leave off here. At any rate, I will adjourn my half of the debate. From here, I may (but probably will not) continue a more constructive discussion, but it will be a dialogue of encouragement, not of rebuke. Some years later, we may take up the issue again, but for now, I simply leave you and wish you well on your journey.

I ask that you would pray for me, and I will keep you in my prayers. May the Lord Jesus Christ bless you.

I did not mean to imply that we are definitely joined by people who may be enemies of the Church, but rather that we may be joined by people who are definitely enemies of the Church.

I regret the error, and if I have caused offense, I crave pardon.