The pope doesn’t “stand above scripture” in Catholicism (or if he does, it’s only in the same way a Bible-interpreting individual Protestant “stands above scripture” in Protestantism):

“But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office [magisterium] of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.” Dei Verbum

As for “unBiblical Marian dogmas”, Catholics would of course assert that their Marian beliefs have a rich biblical foundation but that something doesn’t need to be spelled out explicitly in scripture to be true. But of course that’s where we disagree, isn’t it?

While Evaneglicals have not been able to crank out a Catholic Encyclopedia. I’d defensively argue that the today they are publishing the best stuff out there. Check out IVP’s catalog for starters. Depth indeed. And the ESV translation. And the NICNT. I really don’t see how anyone can accuse Evangelical scholarship today of lack of depth in any way, shape, or form. The CCC is outstanding in many ways, but remember it is the first universal catechism since Trent! In between Catholicsm has managed to produce every but a middling an amount of material as we have. I final thought: Protestant hymnals in many ways act as out catechisms, it seems to me.

I like Joel W.’s idea of compare-and-contrast catechisms from different denominations, letting us find point-by-point comparisons between the branches of Christianity.

But as far as an evangelical-wide catechism, I don’t think that would be possible, at least not in the sense of something as detailed as the Catholics have. For us Methodists, we don’t even have a catechism for our own denomination. Our official doctrines are confined to only 24 points (there’s a number 25 for the [American] United Methodist Church, but it is simply an affirmation of the sovereignty of the United States, since our denomination was only formed in the wake of the Revolution, and the 39 Points of the Church of England speaks to the role of the king). We have as a characteristic of our church the idea that only the essentials of salvation need to be agreed upon, and we don’t have official stances on the rest.

So we probably wouldn’t be able to agree to anything more extensive that would be put into an evangelical catechism. If the idea behind a catechism is that it is a statement and explanation of the required beliefs of a church, then you run into the roadblock that some churches don’t take this approach at all. Or, rather, that our required beliefs make a short list. I think of a catechism as being pretty long. Isn’t it?

Still, for those denominations that do this kind of thing, it sounds like a great idea. We could have something like a Methodist Appendix, listing the subset of points we agree to.

If it wasn’t so infuriating and so opinionated in places, so Paul Zahl, I’d recommend his A Short Systematic Theology!

It is a volume that explores a massive 15,000 entries on topics, on the scope of regular encyclopedias. All of them are discussed from a Roman Catholic perspective. The topics range from the theological to the mundane, but are handled with maturity as well as faith.

I doubt any group in the Evangelical culture (or any other Christian culture for that matter) could come up with a resource with this level of depth and maturity.

Packer’s excellence is in no small part due to what an elegant stylist and wordsmith her is–that and the irenic spirit you nailed.

BTW, I believe the Reformation Study bible has all the sections from Concise theology included as topical notes.