Posted on 06/27/2005 1:42:52 PM PDT by Coleus
| Parents miss Mass, kids get ax |
|
|
|
The Rev. Michael Cichon, pastor of St. Joseph/St. Thomas in Pleasant Plains, used each family's bar-coded donation envelope to track attendance. He's tossed about 300 kids from classes and told them not to reapply until next April. Without the classes, children cannot receive the sacraments, meaning some youngsters who thought they'd be making their First Communion next year will have to wait. The suspensions, legal under church doctrine, were a shock to many parents with kids enrolled in the 1,400-child program, which caters to kids who don't attend Catholic schools. "It's hurtful," said Joseph LoPizzo, 38, whose 6-year-old son was booted. "I've been a parishioner at that church for 23 years - longer than he's been the reverend." LoPizzo said he paid the $150 for his son's Thursday afternoon classes last year, but his father-in-law's illness hampered the family's church attendance. "I've just never heard of a church kicking you out," complained Lisa Nicol, 36, who got a letter saying her 7-year-old twin daughters had been barred from classes. "They should be more welcoming and sensitive." The pastor said he suspended kids from the 2005-2006 after-school program because Mass is an "essential" component of the Catholic faith. The affected families were attending church less than once a month, he said. Cichon insisted that the move has nothing to do with the lack of a donation. "There are many families who put absolutely nothing inside the envelopes they submit," he said. |
The tactics in this case sound heavy-handed and STUPID! Closet case projection of aggression most likely.
I teach religious ed also. (called PSR here) Behavior issues are separate from attending mass. In your case their appears to be some overlap, but a child who doesn't attend Mass is not necessarily a discipline problem. There are many children who do attend Mass that are also discipline problems. I am lucky, in the 6 years I have taught I have not had many behavioral problems. God has blessed me with much patience to handle the problems that I have had.
Sorry, I don't know which school. Might not even be in your archdiocese, if it's located in New Jersey.
At least it's an efficiently-run school with great discipline - Marines are very good for that!
Something about that text strike you as strange?
"Reverend?"
Pastor, maybe, or priest.
But "reverend" is a Prot term.
Oh really???
"Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to be judged before the unjust: and not before the saints? Know you not that the saints shall judge this world? And if the world shall be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know you not that we shall judge angels? How much more things of this world? If therefore you have judgments of things pertaining to this world, set them to judge who are the most despised in the church. I speak to your shame. Is it so that there is not among you any one wise man that is able to judge between his brethren?" (1 Corinthians 6.1-5)
"That you may eat and drink at my table, in my kingdom: and may sit upon thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." (St. Luke 22.30)
"For what have I to do to judge them that are without? Do not you judge them that are within?" (1 Corinthians 5.12)
"Judge not according to the appearance: but judge just judgment." (St. John 7.24)
Now how is that verse being misused in applying it to giving the Sacraments to Apostates? And you are wiser than St. Augustine in this regard?
CHAP. XX.--67. But inasmuch as the word "guileless" may mislead some who are desirous of obeying God's precepts, so that they may think it wrong, at times, to conceal the truth, just as it is wrong at times to speak a falsehood, and inasmuch as in this way,--by disclosing things which the parties to whom they are disclosed are unable to bear,--they may do more harm than if they were to conceal them altogether and always, He very rightly adds: "Give not that which is holy to the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you." For the Lord Himself, although He never told a lie, yet showed that He was concealing certain truths, when He said, "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now." And the Apostle Paul, too, says: "And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. For ye are yet carnal."68. Now, in this precept by which we are forbidden to give what is holy to the dogs, and to cast our pearls before swine, we must carefully require what is meant by holy, what by pearls, what by dogs, what by swine. A holy thing is something which it is impious to violate and to corrupt; and the very attempt and wish to commit that crime is held to be criminal, although that holy thing should remain in its nature inviolable and incorruptible. By pearls, again, are meant whatever spiritual things we ought to set a high value upon, both because they lie hid in a secret place, are as it were brought up out of the deep, and are found in wrappings of allegory, as it were in shells that have been opened. We may therefore legitimately understand that one and the same thing may be called both holy and a pearl: but it gets the name of holy for this reason, that it ought not to be corrupted; of a pearl for this reason, that it ought not to be despised. Every one, however, endeavours to corrupt what he does not wish to remain uninjured: but he despises what he thinks worthless, and reckons to be as it were beneath himself; and therefore whatever is despised is said to be trampled on. And hence, inasmuch as dogs spring at a thing in order to tear it in pieces, and do not allow what they are tearing in pieces to remain in its original condition, "Give not," says He, "that which is holy unto the dogs:" for although it cannot be torn in pieces and corrupted, and remains unharmed and inviolable, yet we must think of what is the wish of those parties who bitterly and in a most unfriendly spirit resist, and, as far as in them lies, endeavour, if it were possible, to destroy the truth. But swine, although they do not, like dogs, fall upon an object with their teeth, yet by recklessly trampling on it defile it: "Do not therefore cast your pearls before swine, test they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you." We may therefore not unsuitably understand dogs as used to designate the assailants of the truth, swine the despisers of it. 69. But when He says," they turn again and rend you," He does not say, they rend the pearls themselves. For by trampling on them, just when they turn in order that they may hear something more, they yet rend him by whom the pearls have just been cast before them which they have trampled on. For you would not easily find out what pleasure the man could have who has trampled pearls under foot, i.e. has despised divine things whose discovery is the result of great labour. But in regard to him who teaches such parties, I do not see how he would escape being rent in pieces through their anger and wrathfulness. Moreover, both animals are unclean, the dog as well as the swine. We must therefore be on our guard, lest anything should be opened up to him who does not receive it: for it is better that he should seek for what is hidden, than that he should either attack or slight at what is open. Neither, in fact, is any other cause found why they do not receive those things which are manifest and of importance, except hatred and contempt, the one of which gets them the name of dogs, the other that of swine. And all this impurity is generated by the love of temporal things, i.e. by the love of this world, which we are commanded to renounce, in order that we may be able to be pure. The man, therefore, who desires to have a pure and single heart, ought not to appear to himself blameworthy, if he conceals anything from him who is unable to receive it. Nor is it to be supposed from this that it is allowable to lie: for it does not follow that when truth is concealed, falsehood is uttered. Hence, steps are to be taken first, that the hindrances which prevent his receiving it may be removed; for certainly if pollution is the reason he does not receive it, he is to be cleansed either by word or by deed, as far as we can possibly do it.
70. Then, further, when our Lord is found to have made certain statements which many who were present did not accept, but either resisted or despised, He is not to be thought to have given that which is holy to the dogs, or to have cast pearls before swine: for He did not give such things to those who were not able to receive them, but to those who were able, and were at the same time present; whom it was not meet that He should neglect on account of the impurity of others. And when tempters put questions to Him, and He answered them, so that they might have nothing to gainsay, although they might pine away from the effects of their own poisons, rather than be filled with His food, yet others, who were able to receive His teaching, heard to their profit many things in consequence of the opportunity created by these parties. I have said this, lest any one, perhaps, when he is not able to reply to one who puts a question to him, should seem to himself excused, if he should say that he is unwilling to give that which is holy to the dogs, or to cast pearls before swine. For he who knows what to answer ought to do it, even for the sake of others, in whose minds despair arises, if they believe that the question proposed cannot be answered: and this in reference to matters that are useful, and that belong to saving instruction. For many things which may be the subject of inquiry on the part of idle people are needless and vain, and often hurtful, respecting which, however, something must be said; but this very point is to be opened up and explained, viz. why such things ought not to form the subject of inquiry. In reference, therefore, to things that are useful, we ought sometimes to give a reply to what is asked of us: just as the Lord did, when the Sadducees had asked Him about the woman who had seven husbands, to which of them she would belong in the resurrection. For He answered that in the resurrection they will neither marry, nor be given in marriage, but will be as the angels in heaven. But sometimes, he who asks is to be asked something else, by telling which he would answer himself as to the matter he asked about; but if he should refuse to make a statement, it would not seem to those who are present unfair, if he himself should not hear anything as to the matter he inquired about. For those who put the question, tempting Him, whether tribute was to be paid, were asked another question, viz. whose image the money bore which was brought forward by themselves; and because they told what they had been asked, i.e. that the money bore the image of Caesar, they gave a kind of answer to themselves in reference to the question they had asked the Lord: and accordingly from their answer He drew this inference, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's." When, however, the chief priests and elders of the people had asked by what authority He was doing those things, He asked them about the baptism of John: and when they would not make a statement which they saw to be against themselves, and yet would not venture to say anything bad about John, on account of the bystanders, "Neither tell I you," says He, "by what authority I do these things;" a refusal which appeared most just to the bystanders. For they said they were ignorant of that which they really knew, but did not wish to tell. And, in truth, it was right that they who wished to have an answer to what they asked, should themselves first do what they required to be done toward them; and if they had done this, they would certainly have answered themselves. For they themselves had sent to John, asking who he was; or rather they themselves, being priests and Levites, had been sent, supposing that he was the very Christ, but he said that he was not, and gave forth a testimony concerning the Lord: a testimony respecting which if they chose to make a confession, they would teach themselves by what authority as the Christ He was doing those things; which as if ignorant of they had asked, in order that they might find an avenue for calumny. (The Sermon on the Mount, Book 2)
And wiser than St. John Chrysostom?
3. Having then put away all these things, by this His excellent legislation, He added yet another charge, saying,"Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine."
"Yet surely further on," it will be said, "He commanded, "What ye have heard in the ear, that preach ye upon the housetops." But this is in no wise contrary to the former. For neither in that place did He simply command to tell all men, but to whom it should be spoken, to them He bade speak with freedom. And by "dogs" here He figuratively described them that are living in incurable ungodliness, and affording no hope of change for the better; and by "swine," them that abide continually in an unchaste life, all of whom He hath pronounced unworthy of hearing such things. Paul also, it may be observed, declared this when He said, "But a natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit, for they are foolishness unto him." And in many other places too He saith that corruption of life is the cause of men's not receiving the more perfect doctrines. Wherefore He commands not to open the doors to them; for indeed they become more insolent after learning. For as to the well-disposed and intelligent, things appear venerable when revealed, so to the insensible, when they are unknown rather. "Since then from their nature, they are not able to learn them, "let the thing be hidden," saith He, "that at least for ignorance they may reverence them. For neither doth the swine know at all what a pearl is. Therefore since he knows not, neither let him see it, lest he trample under foot what he knows not."
For nothing results, beyond greater mischief to them that are so disposed when they hear; for both the holy things are profaned by them, not knowing what they are; and they are the more lifted up and armed against us. For this is meant by, "lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you."
Nay, "surely," saith one, "they ought to be so strong as to remain equally impregnable after men's learning them, and not to yield to other people occasions against us." But it is not the things that yield it, but that these men are swine; even as when the pearl is trampled under foot, it is not so trampled, because it is really contemptible, but because it fell among swine.
And full well did He say, "turn again and rend you" for they feign gentleness, so as to be taught: then after they have learnt, quite changing from one sort to another, they jeer, mock and deride us, as deceived persons. Therefore Paul also said to Timothy, "Of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly withstood our words;" and again in another place, "From such turn away," and, "A man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject."
It is not, you see, that those truths furnish them with armor, but they become fools in this way of their own accord, being filled with more willfulness. On this account it is no small gain for them to abide in ignorance, for so they are not such entire scorners. But if they learn, the mischief is twofold. For neither will they themselves be at all profited thereby, but rather the more damaged, and to thee they will cause endless difficulties.
Let them hearken, who shamelessly associate with all, and make the awful things contemptible. For the mysteries we too therefore celebrate with closed doors, and keep out the uninitiated, not for any weakness of which we have convicted our rites, but because the many are as yet imperfectly prepared for them. For this very reason He Himself also discoursed much unto the Jews in parables, "because they seeing saw not." For this, Paul likewise commanded "to know how we ought to answer every man." (Homilies in Matthew, 23)
These people are dogs and swine, and you are casting holy things and pearls before them. And if you don't like those terms and their application to these people, take it up with Jesus and the Holy Fathers of the Church.
Just so, by compulsion itself.
And the servant "who had been sent," brought answer, "Lord, it is done as Thou hast commanded, and yet there is room." "Go out," saith He," into the highways and hedges, and compel those whom thou shall find to come in." Whom thou shall find wait not till they choose to come, compel them to come in. I have prepared a great supper, a great house, I cannot suffer any place to be vacant in it. The Gentiles came from the streets and lanes: let the heretics come from the hedges, here they shall find peace. For those who make hedges, their object is to make divisions. Let them be drawn away from the hedges, let them be plucked up from among the thorns. They have stuck fast in the hedges, they are unwilling to be compelled. Let us come in, they says of our own good will. This is not the Lord's order, "Compel them," saith he, "to come in." Let compulsion be found outside, the will arise within. (St. Augustine, Homilies on the New Testament, 62.8)
Yes, the youths in this article are not infants. And the verse "suffer the little children come unto me" refers to infants, not youths.
Everyone can use instruction in Christianity all the days of their life. But those who treat it as mere Pedagogy are not worthy of it.
The Christian faith is not brought to people by sitting in classrooms only.
I strongly agree with most of that (not sure about the last part.) Many Protestant churches (perhaps the majority) are way ahead of the Catholic Church in the Christian education of both children and adults. They have Sunday School for every age group, not just kids, and not just during the public school session. They have prayer groups or additional study on Wednesdays. Many of them have morning and evening Sunday services; even Episcopals have Sunday Vespers or Evensong.
I'm very happy with my decision to become Catholic (12 years ago, now), but sometimes it seems like the Catholic Church isn't trying very hard.
You do realize not everybody understands (as evidenced by the question) what these classes were.
How is 'eat the cracker prep' not descriptive and accurate?
You could just of easily omitted that bigoted phrase and you would have gotten your point across. But no, you had to take a bigoted shot at the Catholic Faith by spreading lies and offending. Very big of you.
If you want to have a discussion regarding the Eucharist and the Catholic Faith in a civil manner just do it. There is no need to resort to bigotry.
It is, but you know, in the end, I support it. I call these types "Sacrament Catholics." We have some cousins who recently had a baby and are rushing to get the Baptism done. They had to change the date to the following month with the Church because it didn't coincide with the date with the restaurant for the party afterward. It became quite the dilemma and the mother was rushing and scrambling to make sure all dates were going to work. Why all of this work and stress? The couple haven't set foot in a Church since the day they were married three years ago.
From Wikipedia
Among Roman Catholics, a priest or deacon is the Reverend, various prelates below bishop along with Chaplains of His Holiness are the Reverend Monsignor, and any bishop is the Most Reverend. However, none of these are ever addressed as reverend alone. Instead, priests are addressed as "Father", prelates as "Monsignor", and bishops as "Excellency", though "Reverend" or "Most Reverend" may be appended to either where appropriate.
"If I ever saw good reports from the MSM on anything christian, I'd look for something amiss, or wait for the other shoe to drop."
I've noticed this too. We (being general here as I'm not interested in pointing fingers) spend a great deal of virtual ink on how the MSM is biased and then take their words at face value when one of their reports pushes a hotbutton.
Yesterday I read three pages of posts about how the police were out of control because a van with a hidden compartment holding $120k was stopped and was confiscated. However the reporting was entirely shoddy and left more to the imagination, leading readers to get the impression that the cops were randomly stopping people and taking their stuff.
This is one of the MSM's cute tricks; omit enough (known) detail so that the reader jumps to the desired conclusion without the reporter having to actually say "evil police" or "bad Catholics."
You have elevated yourself to the position of CCD-Master-Teacher?
HermCher's argumentation is not only cogent and persuasive, it's masterful.
You confuse membership in the Catholic Church with some "voluntary organization"--membership DOES have obligations.
By the way, that dialogue about "sins of the father...being visited on the sons..." is not meaningless.
That being the case, it supports the position of the priest even more IMHO.
Dearest, that's $250 per donation, per spouse, not in the aggregate.
When the wife and I hit $26,000 total per year donations, I'll worry.
The Keys were given to Peter and his successors, with the explicit authority to 'bind and loose.'
The authority was given for a REASON--Christ expected them to use it.
In the case at hand, it's clear that externally, the parents do NOT have the Faith.
Further, there is no "right" to the Faith, any more than there is a "right" to Ordination, or to "having children."
You are aware of the "grace" teachings of Trent, no? Grace MUST precede the gift of Faith--that grace was won by the Sacrifice of Calvary. But it is also true that "grace" without "works" is insufficient. Even infants have "worked," (vicariously, through their parents) to be Baptized.
I think the idea of requiring Mass attendance is a good one. I hope however, there is some sort of appeal available to parishioners who just weren't using envelopes. I know when our kids were small we sometimes had a tough time finding the envelope before rushing out to Mass. (We always did, however, because it was required back then). Today, I'm not so sure we'd bother, unless it was once again made very clear we needed to be using the envelope.
"But "reverend" is a Prot term."
For some reason, I thought "Rt. Rev." (Right Reverend) was a proper formal address for a priest.
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.