Dear Friends,
So the good news is that I am perceived as being offensive to EVERYONE!
I suppose there is some virtue in that . . .
However, that was never my intention, to be offensive to either Orthodox or Latin Catholics.
One could throw into the mix criticisms I've made of my own UGCC.
Engaging in conversations is always so, well, engaging. Being critical is a necessary component to that, as is that of levity.
However, in both cases of "offensiveness" that I'm being accused of here, I simply don't accept that I am being offensive as the statements I have made are being taken out of their context.
When the issue of the Orthodox Bishop seeking transfer from the MP was brought up, I responded at one point with, "Where do I go to get transferred?"
That was taken as offensive to Orthodoxy, and some other epithets were applied to me, and, as I am led to understand and do not doubt, a number of others here privately made their anger and consternation about this known to the Moderator.
I still do not see how my statement above can be taken as offensive against Orthodoxy, that I am for the breakup of Orthodoxy etc.
First of all, I am not Orthodox so from what could I hope to be transferred? From the Moscow Patriarchate like the Bishop in Britain? How is that possible?
That statement could only have a context concerning my union with Rome alone! That was thinking out loud (as I've done on a number of occasions over the years) about either rethinking one's union with Rome or else leaving it altogether. The Orthodox Bishop in question considered leaving the MP jurisdiction to achieve, in his mind, a greater good. That is also something that I've raised here as a question respecting union with Rome for Eastern Catholics. That statement was simply affirming that again.
And while I know I will be accused of "reinterpreting what I said after the fact," the fact is that I know what I intended and I don't appreciate motives being imputed to me in so doing, as the Moderator seems, I believe, to have done. I don't accept his interpretation of my statement, I find it offensive but I won't argue the point and have tried to make peace for the sake of peace in Christ.
That doesn't change my perception of the injustice meted out to me as an Eastern Catholic and participant here for which I do not ask for an apology as no apology would be forthcoming since it is clear my argument is not accepted as valid by the Moderator and presumably those who agree with him.
Secondly, the charge that I have offended Eastern Catholics by the use of "Uniate" is one that I find more amusing than substantive.
My accuser has, on another thread, quoted me out of context to show contradiction in my position.
Again, context is all-important. "Uniate" is an offensive term, but it does have wide usage among many writers and ecclesial commentators who intend no offense by it.
In discussions on this forum it is sometimes used to denote a certain EC attitude of avowed "second-class Catholic citizenship" that was formerly the fertile ground for the acceptance of Latinizations in our Churches.
That is persists among EC bishops, clergy and laity is an established fact and to call a spade a spade, or "Uniate attitudes" is simply to call a spade a spade.
The quote that was brought against me tried to show that I contradicted myself in calling on others who use the term "Uniate" to apologise and to cease and desist.
That is true and there is nothing contradictory about that position.
To call all EC's "Uniates" i.e. to be in possession of the Uniate mentality or, as I've also said, "Roman Catholics of the Byzantine Rite" as certain Latin Catholics and Orthodox writers have referred to EC's (e.g. even the great Fr. Lev Gillet) - this is simply offensive.
No one is denying there are EC's who are pro-Latin in ecclesial and devotional attitudes and there is nothing wrong in denoting them, in discussions, as "Uniates." Indeed, a number of them would welcome that designation.
In short, the charge that I have offended EC's by calling them "Uniates" is simply vicious since I have NEVER referred to all EC's as Uniates.
As for motives of the Vatican in not affirming the de facto Patriarchal status of the UGCC - these do not emanate from me, but from MANY, including those outside the UGCC. IF they are offensive to those who uncritically defend the Vatican's Ost-politik, as Peter seems to be, then that same ost-politik is gravely offensive to the UGCC and its many martyrs for union with Rome. Again, this is something that does not originate with myself and I can't believe I'm reading this on this forum.
In both cases, my own explanations have been either ignored, denied or else dismissed. I find that simply and deeply offensive and unjust.
It is said that familiarity breeds contempt. And although I have truly been angry and upset with posters here in the past, I do feel that the contempt with which I have been treated here of late is unjustifiable and is disrespectful in the extreme toward me as a person and a participant of this forum.
The Administrator and others have sometimes charged me with being overly sensitive and also with being egotistical and self-absorbed, as well as unstable as shown in a number of "huffs" and "I'm leaving here" statements by me that are ultimately and, in time, reversed by my addiction to participation here.
That is probably all true, as is also the fact that I'm quick to apologise and have truly lost any remaining credibility here that I may yet have (and that is a question too). Certainly, the charges of offensiveness given here point to me having no credibility and that is doubtless my fault too.
All I know is that when one's words are taken out of context and motives are imputed, the very basis for meaningful and respectful conversation has been removed.
Then it's not a question of a troublesome, unstable poster with a history of "comings and goings" doing one more retake - then it's simply a question of removing oneself from a context that will no longer admit that person to a respectful participation permanently.
If criticism of the Vatican, the MP, the Latin Church, the UGCC or anyone else is in violation of the rules of the Forum, then I am guilty as charged. To be offensive to anyone, IS in violation against the rules of the Forum. If the former implies the latter, however, then any basis for meaningful, critical discussion has been removed.
(And what the quote from C.S. Lewis above has to do with anything here is truly beyond me.)
Anyway, I apologise for the perception of my viciousness and for any other negative thing emanating from me here.
From now on, I'll keep contentious religious issues to myself.
Cheers everyone and God bless!
Alex
You always give us a good laugh, besides you have the capacity of humbling yourself to apologize for any wrongs that you might have committed. Hey! Now how many people are capable of doing that? 
. Here you are, probably more highly educated in theology than anyone else, (Well, maybe with the exeception of a few like Apoutheoun and the Administrator John ), and yet you can joke around and be humble enough not to speak with the authority that your education and knowledge entitles you to 
!
