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?
Double nonsense, but I will give you partial credit for acknowledging Mary's perpetual virginity and that Jesus' brothers were the product of the marriage of Joseph and his first wife.
Peace be to you
The Catholic laity actually look pretty darned literate on the Catholic faith when compared to the non-Catholic laity on FR.
Peace be with you
Except, that isn't what that passage says. Who is doing the ignoring when this is what God really said:
Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter 2:20,21)
The meaning is pretty easy to understand when the verse is interpreted correctly.
Weren’t cousins sometimes referred to as siblings? That could be another explanation for Jesus’s “brothers”.
James the Less or James the Great because neither one was a son of the Blessed Virgin Mary?
St. James was the brother of St. John and they were the sons of Zebedee and Salome.
"And going on from thence a little farther, He saw James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, who also were mending their nets in the ship:" Mark 1:19
"And James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and he named them Boanerges, which is, The sons of thunder:" Mark 3:17
"And James and John the sons of Zebedee, come to Him, saying: Master, we desire that whatsoever we shall ask, thou wouldst do it for us:" Mark 10:35
"And there were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalen, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joseph, and Salome:" Mark 15:40
"AND when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalen, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought sweet spices, that coming, they might anoint Jesus." Mark 16:1
"And so were also James and John the sons of Zebedee, who were Simon's partners. And Jesus saith to Simon: Fear not: from henceforth thou shalt catch men." Luke 5:10
Zebedee & Salome begat James (the great) and John
Cleophas-(Alphaeus) & Mary (the other Mary, Mt 27:56,61, 28:1, Jn 19:25) begat James (the less), Jo'ses, and Jude
Sure it does.
When you rely on a corrupted text, as you are doing, you end up with a corrupted argument.
The meaning is pretty easy to understand when the verse is interpreted correctly.
A moot argument when you rely on a corrupted text in a futile attempt to make your point.
It certainly isn't any less credible than the conversion stories of Scott Hahn and Tim Staples, is it?
I would caution everyone from extrapolating private experiences to universal truths.
In addition, you need to do a better job of proofing your post. The following is actually 2 Peter 2:20-21 not what you erroneously posted as 2 Peter 2:20-21.
"For if, flying from the pollutions of the world, through the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they be again entangled in them and overcome: their latter state is become unto them worse than the former. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of justice, than after they have known it, to turn back from that holy commandment which was delivered to them." 2 Peter 2:20-21
Actually, it is:
"Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." - 2 Peter 1:20-21 (New American Bible)
On the other hand, 2 Peter 2:20-21, which you stated is completely unrelated.
"For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overpowered, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than, after knowing it, to turn back from the holy commandment that was passed on to them."
Peace be with you
Read his own words.
SCOTT HAHN: Pope Benedict had a profound effect on this former Presbyterian minister
Why a Protestant Pastor Became Catholic - Dr. Scott Hahn [Catholic Caucus]
Contraception is contrary to God's law: Why the Hahn's became Roman Catholic
Scott Hahn appointed to endowed chair in theology, evangelization
Eucharist, Holy Meal
Scott Hahn on Our Lady
The found soul of Scott Hahn
The Lost Soul of Scott Hahn
Eucharist in the Pontificate of Benedict XVI (Commentary by Scott Hahn)
Do the Fathers Support Scott Hahn’s Theory?
Do the Father’s Support Scott Hahn's "Dragon" Theory?
The Scott Hahn Conversion Story
Our Father - In Heaven (Dr. Scott Hahn)
An Urgent Note >From Scott Hahn
Editor-Surveyor did not say "brothers", he said "half-brother".
Peace be with you
Did Hahn and Staples violate their vows too?
Peace be with you
WoW...It’s only been a week for those poor people...
Perhaps you should say "one of the newest Bibles in Spanish." A Catholic version of the Bible in Spanish was produced in 1780. Later versions were produced in 1825, 1944, 1947, 1967, 1972, 1975, 1978, 1992, 1993, 1994 and 2006.
Yes, i was confirmed when i was 15...
How do you know??? You guys don't believe much of the rest of Genesis, why do you believe that part???
In advance, they saw Mary — remember there is no time with God — and she was picked as the mother of God the Son when he would become human.
So Mary was just a tool...And she couldn't have said NO...Glad you finally figured that out...
She was protected from original sin at that time.
You must have gotten that off an Ouija board because you certainly didn't get it from God...
So I'm a Catholic, eh??? I'd show up but you wouldn't like me in your Church...
Thus making the Holy Spirit a rapist. You have a really warped theology.
"And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven." Matthew 16:19
So hey, Carnac, explain this verse to us simpletons...A quick look appears that whatever Peter comes up with, good or bad, God has no choice but to accept it as being bound, the rule of law...And what Peter doesn't want bound, he can loose or remove...Is that the Catholic understanding of this verse???
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.