Many Americans may not have seen the last few moments of the graveside rites
for the old liberal lion. In case you did not, I would relate some of it here.

As the evening sky darkened and grew black the Cardinal read over the casket
words that Teddy penned as he lay dying to the pope.

We may never know just how unuusal this was and we do not know if everything was
revealed in the correspondence between TK and Rome. Curiously, the Vatican
scrambled for two weeks but the pope surely… with curial advice… chose not to respond
in his own hand. So much for a “minor” U.S. senator who endorsed freedom of choice
for women.

Kennedy and the Church in effect were asking for the right to “define” health care in
the United States.

A future headline might thus read:

“U.S. Supreme Court Justices Vote 6 to 3″

Washington

“Today the court handed down its decision in Father Fitzpatrick vs
the AMA that a moral definition of correct health care procedures
is both logical and in keeping with Western tradition.

Thus, all 194 diocesan offices of the Catholic Church in the U.S.
will advise hospitals and healthcare professionals as to which
procedure may be performed so that Roman Catholic medical
professionals will not be religiously compromised in practicing
medicine”.

OR

American Medical Care A Patchwork Quilt

Washington

“With the recent Supreme Court decision favoring Roman
Catholic teachings as to morally acceptable
medical procedures further rulings are expected.

The Jehovah Witnesses have demanded that no blood
transfusions will be administered to anyone under age 25.
Muslims had requested certain halalic rulings…once the Immans
finish their rulings… in Alleppo. Mormons are also insisting
that the ancient…according to the Angel Moroni…LDS rite
of spilling blood as “steam rising from the earth”
(for heinous crimes) be honored as well. Seventh Day Adventists
are also insisting that neither wine nor coffee be served in U.S.
hospitals to patients or guests in keeping with the teachings
of Mary Ellen white.

Most interesting will be the details of expected rulings with regard
to the Appalachian International Church of God and Holy Jesus
which it is reported insists that all hospitals and emergency care
facilities within 500 miles of mountainous communities have a
6 day (the Lord rested on the seventh) supply of anti-venom for
common rattler and copperhead snakes (coral snakes excepted).

At this time it is not known whether the 'Homasmookala Society
of the Sacred Black Widow' and its American Church Wing will
make similar demands”.

One observer noted that “the Americans while pretending to
seek universal health care for all citizens has arrived at a
healthcare plan that had been created at an old fashioned
quilting bee.”

All of these provisions are now being called affectionately
across the U. S. “TeddyBenedict Plans.” LDS people will just have
to live with it (multiple wives included).

Many Americans may not have seen the last few moments of the graveside rites
for the old liberal lion. In case you did not, I would relate some of it here.

As the evening sky darkened and grew black the Cardinal read over the casket
words that Teddy penned as he lay dying to the pope.

We may never know just how unuusal this was and we do not know if everything was
revealed in the correspondence between TK and Rome. Curiously, the Vatican
scrambled for two weeks but the pope surely… with curial advice… chose not to respond
in his own hand. So much for a “minor” U.S. senator who endorsed freedom of choice
for women.

Kennedy and the Church in effect were asking for the right to “define” health care in
the United States.

A future headline might thus read:

“U.S. Supreme Court Justices Vote 6 to 3″

Washington

“Today the court handed down its decision in Father Fitzpatrick vs
the AMA that a moral definition of correct health care procedures
is both logical and in keeping with Western tradition.

Thus, all 194 diocesan offices of the Catholic Church in the U.S.
will advise hospitals and healthcare professionals as to which
procedure may be performed so that Roman Catholic medical
professionals will not be religiously compromised in practicing
medicine”.

OR

American Medical Care A Patchwork Quilt

Washington

“With the recent Supreme Court decision favoring Roman
Catholic teachings as to morally acceptable
medical procedures further rulings are expected.

The Jehovah Witnesses have demanded that no blood
transfusions will be administered to anyone under age 25.
Muslims had requested certain halalic rulings…once the Immans
finish their rulings… in Alleppo. Mormons are also insisting
that the ancient…according to the Angel Moroni…LDS rite
of spilling blood as “steam rising from the earth”
(for heinous crimes) be honored as well. Seventh Day Adventists
are also insisting that neither wine nor coffee be served in U.S.
hospitals to patients or guests in keeping with the teachings
of Mary Ellen white.

Most interesting will be the details of expected rulings with regard
to the Appalachian International Church of God and Holy Jesus
which it is reported insists that all hospitals and emergency care
facilities within 500 miles of mountainous communities have a
6 day (the Lord rested on the seventh) supply of anti-venom for
common rattler and copperhead snakes (coral snakes excepted).

At this time it is not known whether the 'Homasmookala Society
of the Sacred Black Widow' and its American Church Wing will
make similar demands”.

One observer noted that “the Americans while pretending to
seek universal health care for all citizens has arrived at a
healthcare plan that had been created at an old fashioned
quilting bee.”

All of these provisions are now being called affectionately
across the U. S. “TeddyBenedict Plans.” LDS people will just have
to live with it (multiple wives included).

“Therefore, I ask the Church's Pastors and the Christian faithful to receive this catechism in a spirit of communion and to use it assiduously in fulfilling their mission of proclaiming the faith and calling people to the Gospel life. This catechism is given to them that it may be a sure and authentic reference text for teaching Catholic doctrine and particularly for preparing local catechisms.” John Paul II, 1992.

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/...

Yes, I was referring to an argument that Benedict made when he was still Ratzinger. I'm not implying he still believes it.

Your right. I misspoke. It's the center of mass- what I meant was that American Catholics don't always like to see it as the center of theology, as you've expressed here.

Don't know what was written in the press in 2007, but yes, many Catholic theologians and laity have made that claim, that Protestants are not saved.

I liked what Jean Paul said, that Protestants are lost sheep who will one day return to the fold. (I'd like to think he included the Quakers too in that, if he even thought of us.)

Huh. I certainly don't believe that salvation comes through faith alone.

Catholic doctrine has certainly evolved. You should read the Early Church Fathers. Good reading. And personally I believe instructive to us all today, still. That of course, is originally an argument of the Roman Church.

My statements were about the present and the past. Again, as I said, you brought up the past with your quote about the past.

I believe you are confusing Purgatory with Limbo. See the “Catechism of the Catholic Church” paragraphs 1030-1032 http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chp...

The current pope has written nothing that is on the fringes of Catholic doctrine – check the Imprimi Potest of the Catechism: http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/copyright.s...

One of the reasons Benedict has been criticized is that he has unapologetically reaffirmed Catholic doctrine.

“It is quite clear that the sacrament is the center of both mass and theology, and this not only for the Roman Church but for all the Eastern Churches too, up until this day. I know American Catholics don't like to see it that way…”

The Eucharist is absolutely the center of the mass. My wife is the daughter of a Baptist pastor. Out of respect for her, she and I go to a Baptist church. I always left those services feeling empty and spiritually unfed. Now I get up and hour earlier so I can go to mass before attending church with my wife. I’ve come to realize how central the Eucharist is to my life in Christ.

“Without the sacraments of baptism and the eucharist, one can not be saved.”

That would mean that Catholics believe that Protestants are not saved – and that is not true, contrary to what was written in the press in July 2007.

Being married to a non-Catholic, I was very disturbed by the report that the pope had said that Protestant churches ‘lack the means to salvation.” When I read the document to which that report referred, I found that the pope had said exactly the opposite – that Christ most certainly uses non-Catholic churches as “instruments of salvation.”

“Salvation comes from God alone; but because we receive the life of faith through the Church, she is our mother: “We believe the Church as the mother of our new birth, and not in the Church as if she were the author of our salvation.” CCC 169

“The purpose of the sacraments is to sanctify men, to build up the Body of Christ and, finally, to give worship to God. Because they are signs they also instruct.” CCC 1123

I can’t find anywhere in the Catechism that salvation is conferred through anything but faith.

I haven’t read the Early Church Fathers. Whether or not Catholic doctrine has evolved really isn’t relevant to my objections to your statements about Catholic doctrine and beliefs.

Your statements about Catholic teaching have been in the present tense. If you want to discuss what the Church may or may not have taught in the past, please make that clear.

I cringe when I hear the way some kids talk back to their parents now. If I had spoken to mine that way, I would have gotten knocked upside the head!

________________________________

In any case, classic Fundamentalism had to do Specifically with the fundamentalist/modernist controversy in the early 1900s. A series of works were put out defending “fundamental” doctrines of historic Christianity, or at least protestantism, such as the virgin birth, the deity of Christ, authority of scripture, etc. You were a fundamentalist if you held to these. Nothing more, nothing less. Since then the meaning of the term has morphed and, in my opinion, become functionally useless.

By the way, if you mean that Driscoll is a Fundamentalist in the classic sense, then I'm sure you're right. Any other sense, maybe. In any case, I wasn't saying he wasn't a fundamentalist. I was saying that he wasn't a member of the Religious Right. Although there is significant overlap, you can be one and not the other.

________________________________

My point is that she make incendiary statements without considering their ramifications.

Personally (based on my own research into the issue) I'm pretty well convinced that Mark Driscoll does in fact fit the academic description of Fundamentalism.

That's good advice for many of us; occasionally for all of us (myself included).

I don't know that Julie is more guilty of that than some others around here, though, and she's less guilty than some.

But there is a movement, in earnest, that would criminalize spanking children. Literally make the act a prosecutable offense. Julie supports that movement, on the basis that some parents are physically abusive to the point of murdering their children. You can Google her arguments on this issue if you wish. Since you are a reasonable person, you will probably agree that they are, well, unpersuasive.

But that's not my point. My point is that many Christians, including myself, see a biblical command to physically discipline children. Most Americans find those who wish to ban spanking to be hysterical ninnies.

But if the majority wants to advocate for the cause, we are the butt of jokes. We become the ones unduly obsessed with something that has, absurdly, taken on sexual connotations. This is, potentially, a very powerful political tool for those who literally wish to ban spanking, as they are able to cast their opponents as possessing a prurient interest in the issue.

My comments weren't condescending; they were patronizing. Julie Clawson should think before she writes, and she doesn't.