Theos-Talk Archives (July 1996 Message tl00665)

Alan said:
>I have read your post with care, and it is clear to me that you wish to
>adhere to Roman Catholic teaching and opinion in your subject matter, so
>that what appears at first sight to be serious discussion is in fact
>polemical, and intended to support particular sectarian doctrines.
>Under such circumstances, although I can refer to the same source
>material, and other material not so far used, there would seem to be
>little point in continuing discussions.

Yes, I am a catholic and never concealed it. It doesn`t means that I adhere
totally with Roman Catholic doctrine. There is a papal document at century
XIX that forbids any catholic to participate of any theosophical forum, so
Unveiled Isis certainly is not a recomended reading to catholics..
My intention to participate in this list is to discuss Unveiled 
Isis, that I read recently. It is not my intention to discuss specifically
about Roman Catholicism, and I think that this is not the appropriate forum to 
it. I already presented some material that is in contrast with orthodox 
thought. For instance,in my last text I referred that some books were 
refused in synod of Laodicea, and even the orthodox Eusebius, considered 
as disputed writings: Revelations, epistle of James, Jude, second epistle 
of Peter, and second of John, all of these considered canonical today.

My aim is to obtain new knowledge, new references, discuss some point of
views that probably are different from mine. So I would like that you give
me historic references. I am open to this dialog, even knowing that maybe 
I am discussing with non-christians.

I have no more words to say. I hope that had become clear that is not my
intention to [support particular sectarian doctrines], but only to discuss
about questions that arose when reading Unveiled Isis.

Abrantes