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?
No, some people I never believe, but I always believe the Magisterium.
"Are you saying then, that Catholicism doesn't appeal to Scripture to support any of it's doctrines?"
No, I'm saying that Catholicism doesn't appeal exclusively to Scripture.
Peace be with you.
I'm afraid not. Although you cite Scripture you do so incompletely. That is analogous to you reading the old saying that; 'if you want to make an omelet you have to break a few eggs', and then standing before a counter top covered in broken eggs and shells declaring it an omelet.
Peace be with you
What's the penalty for NOT 'believing' them?
Then it should behoove you to fill in the blanks; or you're an accomplice to inaccuracy.
Although I often enjoy your wit, I wish that more often you would use more than half of it. ;o)
I don’t want you to be overwhelmed.
LOL!
“You’re wrong.”
No, you’re wrong here. I’m sorry. Are you saying that Eve did not disobey God?
Are you saying it wasn’t sin when she disobeyed God and then ate of the fruit of the tree of life?
This is the frustrating part of it. You don’t understand how the magisterium works. It has to do with the corpus, the body as a whole, not of the part.
“Would you please show from posts by non Catholics that they have stated that belief please.”
Now if you can’t show where someone made the claim that “They consider themselves double 0 - naught. Licence to sin” then you need to admit that you are either making a false statement or injecting meaning into their words that aren’t there. I have never seen anyone even come close to making that claim and if I ever did I would understand that they are definitely not saved nor do they understand what salvation is. For you to publicly say they did make that claim demands proof.
That is a part of it, not the whole thing. The OSAS crowd assumes that is particularly about them.
What do you think comes from the belief that one cannot lose one’s salvation no matter what he does? You have seen as much as I have here and elsewhere from individuals who essentially feel free to do what they want whenever they want to, to the extent that they want to, simply because they believe themselves saved.
Oh yeah? Post numbers please.......
On the contrary, anyone who really thinks that way is not saved because nobody who is saved will take that salvation so lightly. It's not fire insurance or a get out of hell free card.
Are you kidding. Look at your own posts. How many times have you posted that you are saved and that exactly nobody and nothing can stop your own personal salvation. I have no idea of what you truly believe, so I can only go on your actual postings.
Let me ask you this a little more formally: do you believe that you are saved and that exactly nobody and nothing (not even God) can change that?
Excellent analogy. Here's another.
A cat has four legs. My dog has four legs. Therefore my dog is a cat.
What's the penalty for NOT 'believing' them?
Whatever God says it is. At everyone's Judgement by God.
There were many throughout scripture that were faithful to God. The Catholic church has chosen Mary partly because they could incorporate the pagan “queen of heaven” belief to attract pagans into the church. If the myth the RCC perpetuates about Mary being assumed into heaven why isn’t there any record of it like there is of Elijah?
Anyone who truly wants to follow Christ needs to leave the bonds of the RCC and it’s pagan ways.
>>However, the Church has beliefs in parallel with Scripture, for example, the Didache, that did not make it into final Scripture, that is still held to be true.<<
Do you realize how weak that sounds? “The Church has beliefs in parallel with Scripture”? No kidding? I’d get out of that pagan cult as fast as I could.
You have gotten answers many times. We can’t be held responsible if you don’t choose to believe what scripture says or try to change what the words in scripture mean.
Hey! That’s the rationale for the belief in the assumption of Mary! Finally!
On the few times there was a response it was an obfuscation usually around 2 Timothy 3:16. Not once has anyone ever answered the question. I do admit that it is a trick question, though because the answer is not in Scripture.
Catholics should head the scripture.
Matthew 15:9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
2 Timothy 3:16,17 - All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching & furnishing to all good works.
Not so tradition.
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.