Catholicism and Evangelical Christianity--Extremist Religious Groups?

Well, that's staggering. Excerpts:

...The Archdiocese for the Military Services and Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty recently became aware of a U.S. Army Reserve Equal Opportunity training brief that expressly listed “Catholicism,” “Evangelical Christianity” and other religious groups as examples of “religious extremism” alongside groups such as “Al Qaeda”, “Hamas” and the “KKK.”

The Archdiocese is astounded that Catholics were listed alongside groups that are, by their very mission and nature, violent and extremist.

According to an investigation and reply from the Army Chief of Chaplains office, the training in question appears to have been an isolated incident not condoned by the Department of the Army. The Archdiocese and the Chaplain Alliance explained that the Army can and should take steps to prevent such incidents in the future...

From the presentation itself:

Supremacist: Any person(s) maintaining the ideology, quality, state of being, or position of being superior to all others in something. (pg. 7)

A definition so broad as to appear to include the US military, Olympic medalists, and the Gonzaga Bulldogs in the WCC.

Ideologies justify, legitimize and rationalize one particular version of reality despite other explanations and ideas. (pg. 8)

Like a physics textbook, or this presentation?

Religious Extremism:...Evangelical Christianity (U.S./Christian)...Catholicism (U.S./Christian)...

Extremism is a complex phenomenon; it is defined as beliefs, attitudes, feelings, actions, or strategies of a character far removed from the “ordinary.” Because ordinary” is subjective, no religious group would label itself extreme or its doctrine extremism.” However, religious extremism is not limited to any single religion, ethnic group, or region of the world; every religion has some followers that believe that their beliefs, customs and traditions are the only “right way” and that all others are practicing their faith the “wrong way,” seeing and believing that their faith/religion siperior to all others. (pg. 24)

And we're on a list with the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda, Hamas, the KKK, Sunni Muslims (Iraq/Islam), the Nation of Islam, Fundamentalist Mormons, and Islamophobia. Oh, ye scholars of religion and religious folk, to me! Is this a slightly incoherent, incredibly broad list, or what? Behold, the dictatorship of relativism in full bloom!

Mary and the True Glory of God

Thomas Howard explains in Evangelical is Not Enough: Worship of God in Liturgy and Sacrament.  Excerpts:

...There came an end to those gory altars and all that slaughter. But it was not a tissue of elevated thoughts that replaced them. Rather, an angel appeared to a woman and said, “Hail!” What we now had, far from the summons away from the physical realm that high-minded men might have wished, was gynecology, obstetrics, and a birth. Whatever we may imagine about the spiritual rhapsody that might have attended this angelic visitation to the Virgin, the one thing we know to have occurred was a conception. The Virgin’s womb teemed.

It was embarrassing to the religious mind. It proved a scandal. The whole ensuing story bothered and even enraged religious men, and it has continued to do so.

An Evangelical on the Edge

Here's an interesting take on the current Protestant/Catholic situation in America, coming from an Evangelical who sounds like he's being drawn towards Rome:

I know that personally, the more I study and grow the less impressed I am by evangelicalism. Yes, RC has some major issues in faith and practice, but if you take Evangelicalism as a whole I think evangelicals are making it pretty easy to convert. Like a lot of issues, this one goes a lot deeper, and requires far more argumentation, than many are prepared to deal with.

As far as I am concerned the base issue is authority. When an Evangelical Protestant (Independent/Baptist/Pentecostal/etc.) makes a false claim there is no higher authority to pronounce judgment on it. Everyone “does what is right in his own eyes” so-to-speak. On the other hand, accepting Rome’s doctrines is not enough – one must accept the papacy no matter what happens in the future. This flies in the face of sola Scriptura, and Protestants can’t bend on this one. As RC’s are quick to point out though, sola Scriptura hasn’t saved Protestantism from going bad in many areas. We can say we base our beliefs on the Bible all day long, but that’s what homosexuals say (and are now ordained in several major denominations), that’s what abortionists say (and are accepted as church members), that’s what adulterers say (in their special home groups), etc. From crazed fundamentalists to goofball seeker churches, we just have to say, “Oh well – that’s just how they do it.” It gets VERY frustrating.

Meanwhile the RC Church is infiltrating culture and turning the tide on abortion, upholding biblical marriage, etc. and not embarrassing Christianity in the process (pedophile priests notwithstanding . . . ). Then I read Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, the Church Fathers, even Luther, and I see how many of our main problems with RC are really just what the Church believed for nearly 1500 years. The creeds that determine orthodoxy are all pre-Reformation. The doctrines of God are being challenged by Open Theists, Process Theologians, etc., who are pretty much all what? Protestants! Add in the beauty of the liturgy compared to rock concert worship and juice-and-crackers “communion,” and the case for evangelicalism starts being more and more difficult to sustain!

There's more--do read the whole thing. He has some good recommendations at the end for Protestants looking to understand Catholic teaching (at least from the Catholic side--I haven't read the non-Catholic ones, but judging from the even-handed tenor of the post, I'd be willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.)