How is that comparable please? Your drawings were not any kind of compliment such as "nice hair" would be. They were attempting to show that you think other Churches and Christian bodies are wrong while the one you chose is right. Do you really see any of them as like a compliment?
Ok, change the example to "Hey Jane, you should really change that haircut" and get a lawsuit for bullying.
"lawsuit for bullying". Have you seen this personally?
Which? An event of bullying or a lawsuit because of it?
Saying things like that to another person is rude or cruel or simply out of line depending on the relationship the speaker has with "Jane". Other people's feelings need to be taken into account, I was taught,and for a stranger or an acquaintance to make such a remark is inappropriate to say the least. Do you really think that "Jane" would take such a blunt and personal comment as anything but hurtful and offensive? Would you like to have strangers come up to you and make bald declarations to your face about your looks or some other personal aspect? If others say that they don't like it, would you insist that they're wrong and it's fine for you to make personal remarks because you think it's good for them? What if "Jane" is wearing a wig because she has lost her hair due to cancer or happens to like her hair. Haircuts can be a matter of personal taste so why should just anyone get to be so forward in denigrating them?
You're right. It may be rude. But there are things more important than being polite. The politically correct world we live in pays a very high price for it avoids truths just because they sound offensive. As the black author Thomas Sowell put it, blacks systematically perform worse in certain school subjects, just like Asians systematically perform better in some other subjects. There is nothing in these statements that implicate a cause-and-effect relation between genetics and results, *but* if there weren't so many people shouting "racism!" if someone dares to say it, we could maybe find the reason why this happens probably in some socio-cultural conditions that can be changed to improve these people's lives. Likewise with religion. I love my RC and Protestant relatives and friends. My mother uses to receive a group of RC ladies for prayer nights once a month and while I lived with my parents I participated in it (yes, common prayer, condemned as heresy! oh the intolerance, the pride!)
But here is not a common meeting. It is a place to discuss religion and theology. It's like a science forum. If one says that "theory b" is wrong or even unelegant, this is not an offense. It's a statement for discussion.
Your drawings are your personal opinion of other Churches.
I'll ask once more: do or do not the RC believe that the Church has two heads, one visible on Earth in the person of the current Pope and another invisible in Heaven Who is Christ and that according two infallible popes these two heads are one? Is this my opinion or official doctrine?
Are you intimately acquainted with all of them?
With some more than others. I have traditionalist and even Opus Dei friends and many Protestant friends, not to mention frequently reading RC and Protestant books. In fact RC Chesterton, Anglican C.S. Lewis and Protestant Lee Strobel were fundamental in my conversion to "generic" Christianity. The one I know less about is the Anglican church and not by chance it was where I made the grossest mistake.
Why do you think that that they should humbly accept your simplistic depictions as true? Why should they not object or be offended by an "outsider" passing such a personal judgment?
I never asked to be accepted. That's why I put it in a discussion forum. And in a Orthodox one, by the way. I would never be so insensitive to enter someone else's home to state unpleasant truths they do not want to hear. But, the idea that it is unfitting to do that in a forum that discusses theology, in a subsection for "hot" religious topics... that is what sounds out of place.
Can you put yourself in their place and consider if someone made some kind of drawing about EO that you knew wasn't accurate whether you would just accept it?
First thing I would give them consideration. The assumption that I *know* something without a doubt or possibility of being wrong is the one that is prideful. Faith is trust on what can't be rationally known. That which can be rationally known is always open to discussion. Second, I actually did it when I left my spiritualist beliefs for generic Christianity and then for Orthodoxy. So, yes, I am pretty confortable with having my beliefs confronted and even changing them. And I *do* remember how I felt before that, I *do* remember cultivating feelings of offense and that I did not like it. But let me tell you this: truth is far better than what we like or don't. Worse than that: truth usually lies there where it hurts most (today I see that is part of the Mistery of the Cross). There will never be the loving meeting with truth without the painful crucification of our illusions. And RCism and Protestantism *are* illusions. I do not invade RC or Protestant churches to say that. I do that in an Orthodox forum in a sub-section for disturbing discussions. If not even here this could be so openly proclaimed, where else? Any suggestion otherwise amounts to be nothing less than a call to silence about the truth on what the Body of Christ is about. It's not about infalible bishops or books, but an infalible Spirit of Truth linking all the elements (kat'holos) of the Church by a common confession of faith and the common Flesh and Blood of Christ, spiritually and physically. It is One (and therefore undivided), it is Holy, it is Apostolic, it is visible and it is "kat' holic" and not "katta Pope" or "katta Bible". A church that is invisibly "katta Christ" and visibly "katta Pope" is not where you want to be if you really want to be in Christ. It is a stumbling block and even if it is closer to God than where you before, there is more to go.
I've read that many times and it is natural that those who choose to be in a particular Church believe
Belief and/or faith are the heart of it. But hearts don't walk around alone. In fact, a heart alone is most probably a dead heart. There is *more* to it than just believing. That is why we say "Christ is risen. Indeed
, He is risen."