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?
Call it sexist all you want. God tells us that the husband is the head of the wife like Christ is the head of the church.
God gave Adam instructions about the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil BEFORE Eve was created. It was clearly then Adam's responsibility to tell Eve. Either he didn't pass the message along correctly, or Eve didn't get it right.
Either way, when Adam heard Eve talking with the serpent, he didn't intervene, nor did he correct her error in what God Himself told Adam.
Furthermore, he WATCHED her eat and then when nothing obvious happened to her, he ate as well.
Scripture also tells us that Eve was deceived. Adam was not. He ate KNOWING.
So, yes, sin entered through Adam and corrupted the whole human race and it is HIS responsibility.
Do you not understand WHY Jesus did not have a sin nature?
Really? So I guess that's why everyone agrees with you on all matters of interpretation. So tell me, why do you need to participate on these threads if that were true?
Intellectual dishonesty? How interesting. Which part did you consider “intellectual dishonesty”? Was it 2 Kings 18:4 or Deuteronomy 12:30? Other than that I simply asked you a couple of questions. Surely you weren’t using that “intellectual dishonesty” line because you were stumped were you? That seems to be a pattern with your responses.
Show me where scripture says this, please.
Your post only confirms what so many of us non-Catholics have known for centuries, at least since the Bible was made available to the common man, Romanists care not a whit for truth.
A simple glance at a concordance, looking up the word “Mary,” for instance. One mention of her in the entire 28 chapters of the Acts of the Apostles. And, in that singular passage she is included with the apostles, “the women,” and “with his brethren (Jesus’ brothers),” Acts 1:13, 14, all “continuing with one accord in prayer and supplication.”
Obviously, she is no different from the rest of us, she has to seek God like the rest of us. She needed the Holy Spirit like the rest of us. Moreover, with all the importance placed on her by Romanists, why is she not listed first?
The apostles are listed in importance before her, even “the women” are. Romanists consider Mary the greatest among women, here womankind precedes her.
This, the ONLY mention of her in Acts. Where’s the Mariolatry in Acts?
So you don’t believe that Eve sinned?
Don’t see many having any problem but you and a small handful of Maryolators
So man's sin was in permitting a woman to sin. Can you imagine the treatment some poor guy would get if he tried to tell some of the women on this thread what was and was not acceptable behavior? The term "hell to pay" doesn't come close to what I imagine it would be.
So how does Metmom's hypothesis comport with ones Jewishness coming through the mother.
Peace be with you
How long have you been a shut in?
“Obviously, she is no different from the rest of us”
Funny, I did a keyword search and she comes up 52 times
Jesus comes up 1310 times.
David comes up 974 times.
Jacob comes up 363 times.
Solomon comes up 272 times.
Both Josephs come up 248 times.
Paul comes up 239 times
Abraham comes up 235 times.
Peter comes up 178 times
All the Johns come up 121 times.
Elijah comes up 105 times
Elisha comes up 103 times.
Mary comes up 52 times.
That’s it. That’s the entire list of names that come up more frequently than Mary.
Are you telling me this list is just ‘ordinary’ people?
Feminism revives a discredited bit of stupidity and the Self Alone crowd hop right on it.
You’re then presuming that it will be a human being.
Isn’t that sweet?
And stupid.
They insist anti-Christ Pharisees are more authoritative than Christ and the Apostles but claim they're Christians?
What's throwing a huge portion of the Scriptures based on the authority of anti-Christ Pharisees rather than on anything Christ or the Apostles say in Scripture, then swearing they believe in "Scripture Alone", if it's not a delusion?
Sola WHAT???
I was thinking more of Tea in China prices.
Often claimed;
rarely shown.
You'll have to ask the author.
Perhaps; but not by anything the posters in this thread have shown so far.
Perhaps; but I've seen no evidence to DISprove it.
"What MUST we do..."
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.