Posted on 05/31/2013 2:44:05 PM PDT by NYer
Do our Catholic children and most adults know what these images teach?
All of us know one of the elephants in the room of the Catholic Church. Our religious education programs are not handing on the essence of our Catholic Faith, our parents are befuddled about their role in handing on the faith and the materials we use are vapid or if good do not make an impression on young minds. We are afraid of asking for memorization and thus most don't remember anything they've learned about God and Church other than some niceties and feel good emotions.
I teach each class of our grades 1-6 (we don't have 7th or 8th) each Thursday, rotating classes from week to week. For the last two years I have used Baltimore Catechism #1 as my text book. It is wonderful to use with children and it is so simple yet has so much content. If Catholics, all Catholics, simply studied Baltimore Catechism #1, we would have very knowledgeable Catholics.
These past two years I've used Baltimore Catechism #2 with our adult religious program which we call Coffee and Conversation following our 9:30 AM Sunday Mass, which coincides with our CCD program which we call PREP (Parish Religious Education Program).
This #2 book has more content and is for middle school, but upper elementary school children must have been more capable of more serious content back when this book was formulated and used through the mid 1960's because it is a great book to use with adults and not childish at all. We all use this same book as a supplemental book for the RCIA because it is so clear, nobly simple and chocked full of content!
Yes, there are some adjustments that need to be made to some chapters, but not that many, in light of Vatican II and the new emphasis we have on certain aspects of Church that are not present in the Baltimore Catechism. But these are really minor.
What is more important though is that when the Baltimore Catechism was used through the mid 1960's it was basically the only book that was used for children in elementary and junior high school. It was used across the board in the USA thus uniting all Catholics in learning the same content. There was not, in other words, a cottage industry of competing publishing houses selling new books and different content each year.
The same thing has occurred with liturgical music, a cottage industry of big bucks has developed around the sale of new hymnals, missalettes and new music put on the open market for parishes to purchase. It is a money making scheme.
Why do our bishop allow this to happen in both liturgical music and parish catechesis? The business of selling stuff to parishes and making mega bucks off of it is a scandal that has not be addressed.
In the meantime, our liturgies suffer and become fragmented because every parish uses a different resource for liturgical music and the same is true of religious formation, everyone uses something different of differing quality or no quality at all.
Isn't it time to wake up and move forward with tried and true practices that were tossed out in favor of a consumerist's approach to our faith that has weakened our liturgies, our parishes and our individual Catholics?
“The authority, or the ability?”
Authority.
Answer the question please.
Who do you believe has the authority to interpret scripture?
“But if we’re going to continue with that argument, when did the Magisterium conclude that the Church Fathers were more authoritative than the apostles’ inspired writings?”
The magisterium claims Apostolic succession - that the Apostles handed down their authority to the bishops who came later.
“Earlier on this thread, you claimed to have formerly been a Mennonite.”
I was a Mennonite.
“When you were Mennonite, did you consider Mennonites to be a product of the Reformation”
I was a believer in the ‘three pillars’. It had Anabaptists in one. Zwingli, Luther, Calvin, and Cranmer in the other.
“I’m guessing that you believed the latter”
I believed that Anabaptists were a product of the reformation. They were founded by Menno Simons. However, I also believed that they were an entirely different branch from Zwingli, Luther, Calvin and Cranmer. Tradition and history bears this out - they never were a part of the same structure. There were significant differences in theology from Menno Simons and the rest.
So, yes, I believed I was a protestant. Some did believe that they were the remnent, but there’s no historical evidence for this. Mennonites date to the reformation, but unlike many churches today (Methodists, etc), they go all the way back.
Look up Balthazar Hubmeier. He was the first ‘anabaptist’ who developed the doctrine of what would become believer’s baptism.
However, he like Luther revered the Theotokos.
“It does seem rather odd that a protestant King would commission a translation for the commoners”
Couple things here.
Back then, the official church of England was the self named, CoE. You could be executed (and many were) for practicing Catholicism.
Folks have said that the Emperor Constantine perverted Christianity by making it an official religion, but that’s precisely what King Henry VIII did. He established the official church in England.
Are you saying that you regard the KJV as the expression of God when it comes from the same root as King Henry VIII as being the ‘official’ bible of the CoE?
You don’t see a problem with this? A King - taking the bible and publishing it and then forcing people to use it? An earthly King telling you what to do and believe?
I have yet to find a book of King Henry VIII included in the KJV. The 'king's' first duty was and is protector of the faith. The old testament is filled with derelict kings, nothing new there. Did King Henry VII ever claim one had to go through him to find Jesus? Why a certain man made that whooper of a claim just this year.
He removed some that were there before... That ok with you?
“The ‘king’s’ first duty was and is protector of the faith.”
Your faith? You’re ok with the King as the pope of your church?
“Did King Henry VIII ever claim one had to go through him to find Jesus?”
King Henry VIII executed people for disagreeing with his decision to divorce his lawfully wedded wife. So, yes, he was willing to excommunicate and kill those who disagreed with him.
The King James wasn’t the only English version, not even back then. It wasn’t even the first widely used English version either. What it was - is the bible of the state - backed by the King and that is why it became popular.
He removed some? He? King James is the one who commissioned the KJV in 1611. I think you have your kings mixed up. What exactly is missing that is not covered by the books that were included? See I can and have those books, while they give insight there is no big mystery in them. I mean really now given the evolution from the KJV taken by Rome it is impossible to find out who is actually in charge and does the saving. Why I hear St. Augustine or some other church deemed saint, quoted more often then Christ Himself as 'gospel' by some in the Catholic denomination.
“The ‘king’s’ first duty was and is protector of the faith.”
Your faith? You’re ok with the King as the pope of your church?
Ah, kinda like that gal that testified before Congress recently I am a free born American and my faith does not reside in a man/woman living or returned to the Maker.
“Did King Henry VIII ever claim one had to go through him to find Jesus?”
King Henry VIII executed people for disagreeing with his decision to divorce his lawfully wedded wife. So, yes, he was willing to excommunicate and kill those who disagreed with him.
Kings tend to be sovereign rightly or wrongly. Which is why our Protestant founders formed a representative republic. NOT a church. And they allowed only the Creator could give or take unalienable rights of 'life', 'liberty', and the pursuit of happiness. Why I surely imagine a few of them had read the King James Version as to what it was that God said would bring forth life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It sure does seem that so long as we as a people remembered our beginning we have surely been blessed above all other peoples on this earth.
The King James wasn’t the only English version, not even back then. It wasn’t even the first widely used English version either. What it was - is the bible of the state - backed by the King and that is why it became popular.
I suppose there is a point in these words?
“Kings tend to be sovereign rightly or wrongly. Which is why our Protestant founders formed a representative republic.”
So why would you follow a book printed by a King, if you believed this to be true? There are other versions, not the KJV that are as good or better.
“Why I surely imagine a few of them had read the King James Version”
Question, who was the first and second presidents to swear on a King James Bible?
as to what it was that God said would bring forth life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It sure does seem that so long as we as a people remembered our beginning we have surely been blessed above all other peoples on this earth.
The other versions do not have a study tool like the Strong's that allows me to verify that what is Written did not get messed with by the busy fingers down through the ages. AS the example of 'easter' instead of Passover. I make no contributions to the 'king', he passes no plate and had no say as to how many hail marys I am required to chant. Sorry if that might offend but that is a tradition of man that simply is NOT required to demonstrate my faith.
“Why I surely imagine a few of them had read the King James Version”
Question, who was the first and second presidents to swear on a King James Bible?
I do not know. I would guess George Washington and Madison, but I really do not know.
as to what it was that God said would bring forth life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It sure does seem that so long as we as a people remembered our beginning we have surely been blessed above all other peoples on this
“The other versions do not have a study tool like the Strong’s that allows me to verify that what is Written did not get messed with by the busy fingers down through the ages.”
This is not so. I can read concurrences with Latin, Greek, and the passages today right at my fingertips. Strong’s is unnecessary when you have access to the originals.
“Sorry if that might offend but that is a tradition of man that simply is NOT required to demonstrate my faith.”
Your usage of Strong’s is a tradition of men. Clearly there’s nothing wrong with tradition when you agree with it. Tradition is only wrong if you disagree.
My KJV does not have the path to salvation going through Rome. It does not make Mary a goddess of heaven and man's rituals as prerequisite to finding Jesus. My KJV is nondenominational and leaves the Creator in charge. This conversation reminds me of when God set up His government (Judges) with the newly freed peoples out of Egypt and they demanded to have a king, just like their neighbors. History does tend to repeat itself and we in the flesh sure like to have flesh masters we can worship.
“Sorry if that might offend but that is a tradition of man that simply is NOT required to demonstrate my faith.”
Your usage of Strong’s is a tradition of men. Clearly there’s nothing wrong with tradition when you agree with it. Tradition is only wrong if you disagree.
There is a mass difference in the 'tradition' established by the Creator and those that men in religious robes establish and claim they came from god. There is not one hint that any of us gain anything by hailing Mary, or worshiping an object like a church denomination no matter how old the object is.
“My KJV does not have the path to salvation going through Rome.”
Instead yours goes through Canterbury. Is that better to go through Canterbury than Rome?
“It does not make Mary a goddess of heaven”
Something the Catholic church does not teach.
“and man’s rituals as prerequisite to finding Jesus.”
Yet you elevate Strongs = scripture. Do you not see this?
“My KJV is nondenominational”
Then you are ignorant of history.
“Soon after Elizabeth I took the throne in 1558, the flaws of both the Great Bible and the Geneva Bible (namely, that the Geneva Bible did not “conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its beliefs about an ordained clergy”) became painfully apparent”.
“and leaves the Creator in charge.”
Only if the Creator is Henry VIII!
“This conversation reminds me of when God set up His government (Judges) with the newly freed peoples out of Egypt and they demanded to have a king”
And you are one of the ones demanding a King! Absolutely, I agree with this statement.
“History does tend to repeat itself and we in the flesh sure like to have flesh masters we can worship.”
Which is why you’ve submitted to one already.
Instead yours goes through Canterbury. Is that better to go through Canterbury than Rome?
Surely you are joking? Canterbury?
“It does not make Mary a goddess of heaven”
Something the Catholic church does not teach.
Next time I see the reference made I will make sure I ping you to Mary being the goddess of heaven.
“and man’s rituals as prerequisite to finding Jesus.”
Yet you elevate Strongs = scripture. Do you not see this?
Elevate? It is a tool - to show me words used from the original languages and their possible more than one meaning, wherein the translator either in ignorance or means to deceive chose their own word. I was not there when the writing occurred so I have no way to discern motive. But making Passover to be easter did NOT come from God. And yet the majority of Christians practice the ancient festival of easter as if that makes it Christian.
“My KJV is nondenominational”
Then you are ignorant of history.
Whose history? There is so much history revised and extended it is laughable.
“Soon after Elizabeth I took the throne in 1558, the flaws of both the Great Bible and the Geneva Bible (namely, that the Geneva Bible did not “conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its beliefs about an ordained clergy”) became painfully apparent”.
Ah, and the majority of Christians would not have chosen/elected the holy prophets that God chose. See I am not affixed to a denomination. What seems to get missed through all the chatter is that Paul said in ICorinthians 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples (examples): and they are written for our admonition (warning, upon whom the ends of the world (age) are come...
Denominations come and go and evolve and devolve, but, what has happened is in the process of happening again. Seems to me that to be aware of what happened so one can observed the recurrence as it repeats is the purpose of the instruction book. Christ said let no man deceive you... so what is the deception? Christ spoke plainly, He even explained His parables in private to His disciples.
“and leaves the Creator in charge.”
Only if the Creator is Henry VIII!
I guess you have not had the "Luther" is the devil class yet.
“This conversation reminds me of when God set up His government (Judges) with the newly freed peoples out of Egypt and they demanded to have a king”
And you are one of the ones demanding a King! Absolutely, I agree with this statement.
Why my KJV says without doubt there is but one King of Kings and Lord of Lords... What is to demand?
“History does tend to repeat itself and we in the flesh sure like to have flesh masters we can worship.”
Which is why you’ve submitted to one already.
I do not believe we speak the same language....
Only in time, which is of no import. Time is not a relevant factor in ascertaining truth as error was creeping into the church from the very beginning.
Spiritual discernment is and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is in guiding us into the knowledge of the truth.
What makes your beliefs so superior considering this?
Did I say that?
If what someone writes is not clearly supported by Scripture, no one is obligated to believe it or accept it as truth, no matter how old it is.
Imagine that. You guys can disagree and it's not a problem.
That said, I will put both JCBreckenridge and my posting accuracies up against any of the Sola crowd.
When Catholics disagree on theology and doctrine it's *Big deal*.
When non-Catholics disagree on theology and doctrine it's *every man is his own pope* and proof of the inherent flaws of people being able to interpret Scripture for themselves.
The hypocrisy abounds.
If they're being led by the same Holy Spirit, then how can they have any differences of interpretation?
At least that's the reasoning when non-Catholics are not in total, lockstep agreement on EVERYTHING.
Oh, but when it's the magisterium, well, then, consensus is good enough, even though the fact that there's disagreement (according to Catholic standards applied to others) it's *proof* that the people are not being led by the Holy Spirit.
It's that old double standard thing. Rules for thee but not for me.
Hypocrisy abounds.
That has been addressed before and has shown to NOT be the case. The amount of Scripture that is actually used is limited to a very small amount.
Pinging others because I am not sure who has that information.
Protestants have told me protestant services have a much smaller percentage of their services from the Bible.
So? Maybe that's because believers actually read Scripture outside of church services and aren't going to church to get their weekly dose of Scripture?
People should be getting into it every day of the week on their own. Anyone who depends on what they get in church to be enough is more than mistaken.
Maybe someone isn’t telling you the truth about Catholics.
Yeah, that's true.....
If you make an assertion that something exists, it’s not anyone else’s responsibility to back it up. It’s YOURS.
If you won’t back up your own assertions, which you make as statement of fact, not a soul on the planet is obligated to take you at your word and believe you.
However, such a mentality is very representative of Catholicism. Don’t believe us because we can back it up, believe us because we said so cause we’ve declared ourselves infallible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.