I have great hope for this Middle East peace process, and its developments. If indeed great people can indeed have an impact, if they can change the course of history, then I place a great deal of hope and trust in the President of the United States. In these moments, he has great opportunity to use his great power (and will) for the benefit of all. Peace through strength, he says. Well, Mr. President, the strength you need now is not from bombs or cruise missiles, but the strength of character, and of resolve. As others in the blogosphere have noted, the US is the prime mover. Short of the Israelis and Palestinians, no other party will act so decisively one way or another, as will the United States, and its leader.
Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con
Comments