Bookmark and Share
My Photo


    Opinions expressed on the Insight Scoop weblog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Ignatius Press. Links on this weblog to articles do not necessarily imply agreement by the author or by Ignatius Press with the contents of the articles. Links are provided to foster discussion of important issues. Readers should make their own evaluations of the contents of such articles.


« Palin the Post-Denominationalist? | Main | Authority and Dissent in the Catholic Church »

Sunday, August 31, 2008


Ed Peters

"God didn't make denominations." That's not far from right. God made a People, then a Church, but denominations are human spin-offs from the Church. Eh?


This silly woman's statements are so chock-full of rote aphorisms that I can barely read without wanting to throttle an invisible neck in front of me.

"...religion too often equates compassion with weakness... religions often manipulate real justice into a justice its members can tolerate... religions too often try to "correct" that view and use the Bible or other sacred texts to justify classifying people, some as worthy of good treatment, and others as subhumans, not worthy of consideration... Some religions teach that God intended for everyone to be wealthy..."

All of these can be met with a simple counter-question: "What religions are you talking about?"

Furthermore: "God would urge people to see the status quo and work against it, not for the sake of enmity, but for the sake of change..." Erm, campaign-writer for Barack Obama, LOL!?

Finally, is anyone else sick of people quoting Ghandi? I mean, I'm sure he was a nice guy and everything, but people only quote him because he is an "other," not "polluted" by Western, Christian, Indo-European cultural strains. Otherwise, his oft-quoted statements can be heard coming from the mouth of any un-reflective freethinker from time in memoriam: "whatever floats yer boat, chum!"

Don Schindler

Great post Carl, as usual...

Post-modern 'religionists' - (they have no church or dogma- what else can they be called?) should be given copies of Chesterton's Orthodoxy and, using formal logic, be able to refute it.

IMHO, if not -they should be ignored - at least on matters of faith.

"There are those who hate Christianity and call their hatred an all-embracing love for all religions." - G. K. Chesterton, ILN, 1/13/06

Cristina A. Montes

Telemachus wrote: "All of these can be met with a simple counter-question: "What religions are you talking about?" "

This, too, is what came to my mind. When Smith said that God intended people to be wealthy, my reaction was, "Um...not MY religion. Christ became poor Himself, and then you have the countless examples Catholics who embraced voluntary poverty for Christ's sake."


Those who claim to be spiritual without a spiritual base (the church) are like crewmen who throw the captain overboard because they believe they know better than he to chart the course of their lives. They prefer to float along because it's easier than following someone in authority who claims to know more than they. Self-determination or stubborn pride?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Ignatius Insight


Ignatius Press

Catholic World Report


Blogs & Sites We Like

June 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Blog powered by Typepad