[Maximilian]

The article I posted here was published for general Joe-six-pack in the pews Catholics, who are not well grounded in the systematic philosophical terminology she used in the talk I attended.

This hypothesis seems highly unlikely. I notice that your post contains a copyright from Homiletic and Pastoral Review. If there is any audience in the US that could be considered "well grounded in the systematic philosophical terminology" it would be the readers of HPR. Much more so than doctors.

Nor does "terminology" make one's ideas systematic. Either you are able to think clearly or you are not. Adding "philosophical jargon" to a muddled talk only makes it more unintelligible.

[Polycarp IV]

The article I posted here was published for general Joe-six-pack in the pews Catholics, who are not well grounded in the systematic philosophical terminology she used in the talk I attended.

This hypothesis seems highly unlikely. I notice that your post contains a copyright from Homiletic and Pastoral Review. If there is any audience in the US that could be considered "well grounded in the systematic philosophical terminology" it would be the readers of HPR. Much more so than doctors.

Good point. I stand corrected. Thank you.