Re-issued in honour of Mel Gibson:
[not all of these are mine]
ANTINOMIANISM MEANS NEVER HAVING TO SAY YOU’RE SORRY
BUDDHISM IS GETTING THERE SLOWLY
CATHOLICISM: GOD'S WAY OF SAYING "DO I HAVE TO PUT THAT IN WRITING?!"
CATHOLICISM: MORE FAITH THAN THE ATHEISTS, MORE REASON THAN THE FUNDOES
CATHOLIC POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY: IS IT ALL JUST PIUS/ KANT?
DISPENSATIONALISM WAS FINE WHILE IT LASTED
DO I BELIEVE IN TRANSUBSTANTIATION? IT MAKES NO VISIBLE DIFFERENCE
DON'T JOIN THE KNIGHTS TEMPLAR IF YOU REFUSE TO KISS BUTT
DOUBLE PREDESTINATION WAS DOOMED FROM THE START
FUNDAMENTALISM: A VALID OPTION FOR YOU AMONG THE WORLD’S GREAT LIVING RELIGIONS?
GIVE TRADITIONALIST CATHOLICS A FAIR CRACK OF THE WHIP
GNOSTICISM ISN’T ALL ON THE LEVEL
GREGORIANISM: POSTPONE YOUR Y2K CRISIS UNTIL 3972 AD
GREGORIANISM: WE DON’T WORSHIP MAMMON, HELL NO – WE JUST VENERATE HIM
GREGORIANISM: WE STILL KEEP TEN COMMANDMENTS IN TOTAL
HOLZMANNISM – IT’S NOT LIKE YOU’RE MAKING OUT
IF YOU CAN READ THIS, THANK WILLIAM TYNDALE
LUTHERANISM DON’T ACCEPT NO BULL
MARITAINISM: THIS TIME - IT'S PERSONAL
ME, A SEDEVACANTIST? IS THE POPE CATHOLIC?
MILLENIALISM: NO GOOD FOR EITHER MAN OR BEAST
MORMONISM’S NO FAKE – HONEST INDIAN!
NEITHER ROME NOR GENEVA - BUT INTERNATIONAL GREGORIANISM
PENTECOSTALISM: COUNT YOUR BLESSINGS
PIETISM IS NO LAUGHING MATTER
PRE-MILLENIALISM’S DAYS ARE NUMBERED
PROCESS THEOLOGY IS EVOLVING DAY BY DAY
AMILLENIALISM: GOD'S WAY OF SAYING "DON'T MAKE ME COME DOWN THERE!"
SEMI-PELAGIANISM DOES HAVE SOME MERIT
SO WHAT IF IT’S NOT RATIONAL TO DERIVE AN “OUGHT” FROM AN “IS”? THAT DOESN’T MEAN I HAVE TO STOP DOING IT
UNIATE CATHOLICISM: NICE PAIR OF LUNGS
WELCOME TO THE WAITERS’ UNION! HELP US STAMP OUT EVEN THE TINIEST REMAINING VESTIGES OF LEGALISM!
WHO ARE YOU TO TELL ME TO QUESTION AUTHORITY?
WHY DO YOU WANT TO EXCLUDE MY MODERNIST MASTER-NARRATIVE FROM CONSIDERATION?
YOU’RE A MONERGIST? GOD HELP YOU!
Monday, August 07, 2006
Theological bumper stickers
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Tom
I read the Mark Shea article you cited at
http://www.catholicexchange.com/vm/index.asp?vm_id=2&art_id=29866
and came away less impressed by Mr Shea than I have previously been.
Why? I think he does a good job of the humanist "Clarence" but really sets up a "straw man" when talking about the fundie he calls "Greg".
Protestant objections to Mary worship, Transubstantiation and Papal infallability aren't historically tracable to the 1st or even the 10th century.
These become issues during the Reformation - which sees a hardening of BOTH catholic and Protestant views (e.g. the Council of Trent 1545-1563).
To assert the Fundamentalists eschew Catholics because of differing interpretations of the embyronic church is to miss the point entirely
I have always enjoyed reading Mark's stuff, but forced myself to go cold-turkey on "C&EI" 3 or 4 months ago (as for some other websites) because the urge to post comments became too overwhelming and time-consuming.
Unfortunately, my interactions with Sheazer Augustus and his posse had come to fall into a very predictable and (NPI) sterile pattern:
1. Mark would post something like "Yesterday President Bush said 'Happy Christmas'. The fact that he acknowledges the Mass shows that deep down inside, Dubya recognises that Catholicism is the One True Church."
2. 500 or so ex-Baptist Catholics would fill the combox with "yeah, that's so true! My stupid Methodist brother-in-law thinks that Catholics worship saints even though we just venerate them and that's totally different! Plus, he doesn't realise that 'the Bible alone' really amounts in practice to setting yourself up as an infallible Pope of your own church!"
3. I would then post something in reply that would score highly on the ironymeter but low on the Christian charity meter.
4. Mark would berate me for theological point-scoring and dragging denominational disputes into unrelated discussions.
5. Next day Mark would post something like "The Reformation's Chickens Come Home to Roost: Swedish Lutherans Ordain Practising Lesbian Atheist Priestesses", followed by a piece on gay couples divorcing in Spain.
And so the cycle would continue. It was just too time- and energy-consuming. So I got out.
I guess like attracts like: I enjoy Mark's sarcastic style when directed at infidels, but not when directed at Evangelicals, and he doesn't like sarcasm directed at Catholicism.
Post a Comment