Daily Archives: July 11, 2007

Church

Catholics: “We’re still the only true church”

15 Comments

This just in from the Vatican: the Pope says the Catholic Church is still the only “true” church. In a document released yesterday, he answered a few questions about the Catholic Church’s teaching, including this one:

Fifth Question: Why do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of “Church” with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?

Response: According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called “Churches” in the proper sense.

Protestants, naturally, have a different view (see also the Westminster Larger Catechism, questions 62-65).

The only ones really upset about this paper are those devoted to ecumenism (unity among all Christian churches), who apparently don’t mind if the Pope believes the Roman church is the only true church as long as he doesn’t talk about it (a rather postmodern sentiment).

Many (mostly conservative) Protestant denominations are not surprised or especially bothered by the Pope’s declaration because it’s nothing new or surprising; he’s simply reiterating Catholic dogma that’s been around for centuries.

Nation/World

The War in Iraq

40 Comments

Now for something completely different.

What do you all think of the U.S. war policy in Iraq? What is the root cause of our seeming inability to “win” the war (or “win the peace,” if you will)? And what action should the U.S. take to remedy the situation?

City Council, City of Peoria, Museum Block

Council Roundup: Museum bits

4 Comments

PRM LogoJim Richerson, President and CEO of Lakeview and Project Leader for Museum Square, gave a presentation to the City Council at last night’s meeting formally requesting a one-year extension of time on their agreement with the city a smaller-sized museum.

The reason for the extension is because fundraising efforts have not gone as planned, and now they’re putting a lot of their hope for funding in the New Market Tax Credit program. However, they won’t hear whether they’re approved for that funding until October, which is after one of their contract deadlines.

The size change is because construction costs have escalated significantly. Richerson said when they started this project, they were projecting construction costs rising at a rate of 4% annually based on historical data. What they’ve found is that costs are actually rising at a rate of 2-4% quarterly instead. They’ve decided to stay within their $65 million overall budget and instead reduce the size of the building.

However, Richerson went to great lengths to show that this reduction only minimally impacts the programming of the museum itself. He points out that while the total square footage is being reduced from 96,562 to 80,784 square feet (15,778, or 16%), the usable space is only being reduced from 64,400 to 57,955 square feet (6,445, or 10%). Auxiliary space (which includes offices, classrooms, store, lobby, support areas, etc.) is being cut from 32,162 to 22,829 square feet (9,333, or 29%).

It was also pointed out that when you look at the block as a whole — that is, including Caterpillar’s visitor center and their monetary commitment — you’re looking at a $130 million project that is 63% funded. From Lakeview’s standpoint, this “puts things in perspective.” However, the reality is that only 37% of the museum’s funding has been raised ($24.5 million out of $65 million), and Caterpillar’s contribution is contingent on the museum officials raising their funds.

The council received the report and then immediately started debating when it would vote on the issue. The original motion was to vote on it at the July 24 meeting, but Councilman Sandberg is going to be out of town. Normally just having one councilman be out of town would not necessarily be sufficient reason to delay a vote, but Gary’s been very involved in this issue and essentially asked for the courtesy of a deferral. After much wrangling, the council decided to discuss it at their August 14 meeting. That’s in five weeks.