BRETHREN IN CHRIST:
To Sedes and polemical Eastern Orthodox  – your manner of disputing on the internet follows this general pattern:
1. You have not sufficiently studied the subject under dispute. Ex: Sedes, you have never read Torquemada or Cajetan on the central question, nor can you prove what theological note is the sententia of Bellarmine.
For Eastern Orthodox: you have never read, for example, the Imitation of Christ but simply believed Brianchaninov’s incredible bias against the spirituality of your own Latin saints, or, perhaps what is worse, you disparage St. Augustine more than Mark of Ephesus would ever presume himself worthy to speak.
2. Thus, you rely on straw men and ad hominem to prove your opinions. Therefore your disputes are unconvincing and, moreover, hazardous to your own eternal salvation. As it is written: Every idle word that men shall speak, they shall render an account for it on the day of judgment (Mt. xii. 36) or again whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire (Mt. v. 22).
3. Therefore I will ignore your comments unless you do the following:
For sedes: list every primary source you have read on the question of a heretical pope besides Bellarmine.
For Eastern Orthodox: list Latin Saints you have read, the secondary Catholic sources you have read, and the Latin spiritual works you have read both pre- and post-1054. Confirm that you have read Soloviev and you can refute him.
The last time I gave such conditions, the Eastern Orthodox did not follow the directions and then attempted to ridicule me into disputing with them, proving my point exactly. Unless you follow these guidelines, your comments will be ignored. This is for your own sake and mine. If you think I’m trying to be arrogant or condescending to you, I suppose you can ignore me.
 Here I will distinguish between Eastern Orthodox who have questions of Catholics, or simply wish to have a civil disagreement (always happy to talk with such Orthodox), with those “polemical” Eastern Orthodox who seek to refute me. I am open to refutation, but only under the above conditions.