Now it is my experience that many of those involved in catechetical and youth programs are parents whose children are in those self same programs. This is proper and just. The first teachers of any baptized child are his parents and God parents, who bare the responsibility for instructing the child in the faith.
Successful youth catechesis programs require others to also take an active part. The involvement of young adults, especially single young adults living their Christian vocation, is vital, especially for high school programs. The continuing interest and efforts of graduates from a youth program is one of the best indicators of its success. They provide real and visible role models for the youth.
Even the best, that is most devout and spritual, young adults are sometimes reticent to become involved. They often feel, as do older potential catechist, that they are not fimiliar enough with Church teaching, or will not relate well to their students, or lack the teaching skills necessary to do justice to those under their care.
To them I repeat what my deacon says, "God does not call the qualified, he qualifies the called."
They must teach that in deacon school.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Monday, February 2, 2009
Outside the Church
Outside the Church there is no salvation.
Is a Catholic who converts to another Christian faith damned?
As the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches CCC 818:
I would say rather that CCC 2088 and 2089 apply:
A case could also be made that a child who has been baptized, but is subsequently moved by their parents to another faith community lacks, for this purpose the ability to refuse to change denominations because they do not have the ability to exercise or withhold deliberate consent in this act.
They further point out that (CCC 847):
This is what I call the NBA clause.
Every American boy of a certain social economic class would like to believe that if they can play basketball well enough, that even though they are not stellar academic performers, nor do they have the social or political connections to become economically successful through other means, they can be the next Michael Jordan.
Of course the truth is that most will never be NBA players and they would be much better spending their time studying math than playing basketball.
So while the atheistic or agnostic equivalent of Mother Teresa might have a shot at heaven I would say that most will have as much chance as your typical inner city youth at making the NBA.
That being the case, while, as CCC says we must "entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.," it is not helpful in my opinion to sugarcoat the matter.
In the time since Vactican II (indeed since and even before the Reformation) there have been those who, guilty of the sins of Incredulity, Heresy, apostasy, and schism, have confused the faithful and besides placing their own souls in jeopardy have also placed the souls of others in peril. Some of these have been priest, some members of the laity, some even bishops or theologians. Most cannot be considered to have been "badly catechized" or to have lacked the power of deliberate consent.
Their fate lies with God alone, but I wouldn't take odds on their final destination, and I don't see how lying to others on their probable fate is in those other's spiritual best interests
Is a Catholic who converts to another Christian faith damned?
As the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches CCC 818:
However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church.Ah, but does this apply to someone who was either was baptized as a baby and raised in the faith, or converted to Catholicism at a later time and then leaves the Church?
I would say rather that CCC 2088 and 2089 apply:
2088 The first commandment requires us to nourish and protect our faith with prudence and vigilance, and to reject everything that is opposed to it. There are various ways of sinning against faith: Voluntary doubt about the faith disregards or refuses to hold as true what God has revealed and the Church proposes for belief. Involuntary doubt refers to hesitation in believing, difficulty in overcoming objections connected with the faith, or also anxiety aroused by its obscurity. If deliberately cultivated doubt can lead to spiritual blindness.This section of the CCC concerns sins against the faith. To be clear such sins are mortal sins. What is a mortal sin?
2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."
1857 For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent."What does the Catechism say about someone who dies under the burden of mortal sin? (CCC1861)
1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God's forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ's kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.Someone I know contends that many who have left the Church have done so because they were never properly catechized. That is they do not have full knowledge and so cannot be in a state of mortal sin.
A case could also be made that a child who has been baptized, but is subsequently moved by their parents to another faith community lacks, for this purpose the ability to refuse to change denominations because they do not have the ability to exercise or withhold deliberate consent in this act.
They further point out that (CCC 847):
This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.
This is what I call the NBA clause.
Every American boy of a certain social economic class would like to believe that if they can play basketball well enough, that even though they are not stellar academic performers, nor do they have the social or political connections to become economically successful through other means, they can be the next Michael Jordan.
Of course the truth is that most will never be NBA players and they would be much better spending their time studying math than playing basketball.
So while the atheistic or agnostic equivalent of Mother Teresa might have a shot at heaven I would say that most will have as much chance as your typical inner city youth at making the NBA.
That being the case, while, as CCC says we must "entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.," it is not helpful in my opinion to sugarcoat the matter.
In the time since Vactican II (indeed since and even before the Reformation) there have been those who, guilty of the sins of Incredulity, Heresy, apostasy, and schism, have confused the faithful and besides placing their own souls in jeopardy have also placed the souls of others in peril. Some of these have been priest, some members of the laity, some even bishops or theologians. Most cannot be considered to have been "badly catechized" or to have lacked the power of deliberate consent.
Their fate lies with God alone, but I wouldn't take odds on their final destination, and I don't see how lying to others on their probable fate is in those other's spiritual best interests
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Precious Blood
Most Catholics know that when someone is ill and unable to attend Mass that they may receive Eucharist. When they are in danger of death and it is likely to be their last time it is also called the Viaticum. This is usually in the form of the Precious Body.
What is not generally realized is that in cases of special need, for example for a person who cannot swallow, it is permitted for them to receive the Precious Blood. This requires special preparation on the part of the consecrating priest, because it is generally not allowed to retain the Precious Blood, and then only for a very short time. Unlike in the case of the consecrated Host there is not an equivalent to the pyx for transporting the Precious Blood. In most cases only a few drops are really necessary. Except in the case of Celiac disease, most who can't receive the Body of the Lord will only be able to take as much Precious Blood as can be absorbed in the mouth, since they cannot swallow.
If you know someone in this situation discuss the option with their priest. Many believe that there is no option that will allow them to receive the Lord if they are unable to swallow the Host.
What is not generally realized is that in cases of special need, for example for a person who cannot swallow, it is permitted for them to receive the Precious Blood. This requires special preparation on the part of the consecrating priest, because it is generally not allowed to retain the Precious Blood, and then only for a very short time. Unlike in the case of the consecrated Host there is not an equivalent to the pyx for transporting the Precious Blood. In most cases only a few drops are really necessary. Except in the case of Celiac disease, most who can't receive the Body of the Lord will only be able to take as much Precious Blood as can be absorbed in the mouth, since they cannot swallow.
If you know someone in this situation discuss the option with their priest. Many believe that there is no option that will allow them to receive the Lord if they are unable to swallow the Host.
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Sometimes the numbers tell...
Last year the Knights of Columbus asked the Marist Collage Institute for Public Opinion to conduct a nationwide survey on the subject of abortion. The survey showed that 65% of the Catholic population attend Mass at least once or twice a month. Of that group 59% describe themselves as "pro-life." Of the rest only a small percent of those who consider themselves "pro-choice" would allow abortion in all circumstances, the stand of Roe v. Wade. More telling to me is the fact that of those non-practicing Catholics fully 46% also support same-sex marriage.
Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson said:
At least most of these folks aren't pretending be practicing Catholics while publicly disagreeing with Catholic moral teaching. That act is reserved for politicians and some heretical theologians.
So how does that impact the lowly parish catechist?
One statement that every catechumate makes at his Baptism or Rite of Acceptance is that they accept without reservation the full teaching of the Catholic Church. That means more than accepting the articles of the Creed. That means accepting the Church's stance on Contraception, and Abortion. It mean accepting the Church's stance against the ordination of women. It means accepting the practice of the discipline of celibacy for priests of the Roman Rite. It means accepting the Church's stance on the disorderliness of acts of homosexuality and against same-sex marriage. Most of this comes under the heading of sanctity of life issues.
If we expect our candidates to be able to honestly answer to accepting what the Church holds we must insure they understand what the Church believes. More they must understand the issue of dogma, the Magisterium and the laity's place in the Church. We must also expect to perhaps have to defend the Church's position, and have to explain, to the best extent possible why the Church holds these positions.
Don't expect to be able to defend contraception if you haven't read Humanae Vitae. Don't expect to be able to discuss why the Church doesn't ordain women if you haven't read Ordinatio Sacerdotalis.
In other words be prepared. But don't be afraid to say," I'm not prepared to discuss that tonight. We'll talk about it next week." Then run to the CCC or Vatican web site to get doctrined up.
Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson said:
It seems clear that Catholics who are no longer practicing their faith hold positions that are far outside the mainstream of Catholicism and have significant disagreements with the moral teachings of the Church on Fundamental issues.This would seem to indicate to me that the reason many, if not , most, of these non-practicing Catholics are non-practicing is precisely because they have significant disagreements with the moral teachings of the Church on Fundamental issues.
At least most of these folks aren't pretending be practicing Catholics while publicly disagreeing with Catholic moral teaching. That act is reserved for politicians and some heretical theologians.
So how does that impact the lowly parish catechist?
One statement that every catechumate makes at his Baptism or Rite of Acceptance is that they accept without reservation the full teaching of the Catholic Church. That means more than accepting the articles of the Creed. That means accepting the Church's stance on Contraception, and Abortion. It mean accepting the Church's stance against the ordination of women. It means accepting the practice of the discipline of celibacy for priests of the Roman Rite. It means accepting the Church's stance on the disorderliness of acts of homosexuality and against same-sex marriage. Most of this comes under the heading of sanctity of life issues.
If we expect our candidates to be able to honestly answer to accepting what the Church holds we must insure they understand what the Church believes. More they must understand the issue of dogma, the Magisterium and the laity's place in the Church. We must also expect to perhaps have to defend the Church's position, and have to explain, to the best extent possible why the Church holds these positions.
Don't expect to be able to defend contraception if you haven't read Humanae Vitae. Don't expect to be able to discuss why the Church doesn't ordain women if you haven't read Ordinatio Sacerdotalis.
In other words be prepared. But don't be afraid to say," I'm not prepared to discuss that tonight. We'll talk about it next week." Then run to the CCC or Vatican web site to get doctrined up.
Monday, January 5, 2009
New translation of the liturgy
While someone who hangs around St. Blog might think you'd have to be living under a rock not to know it, most people in the pews in the United States are completely unaware that a new translation of the Roman Missal has been in the works.
Prior to Vatican II the Mass, in the Latin Churches, at any rate, was always said in Latin. Vatican II's Sacrosanctum Concilium said that while the use of Latin was to be preserved in the Latin rites that it was permissible to use the Vernacular where ever approved by the particular Ordinaries, that is, the bishops, for the purpose of pastoral sensitivity. It also provided that translations into the various vernaculars should be accomplished over the greater regions where each language was used.
The text of the Mass is always published by the Vatican in Latin. International organizations have been formed by the various Nation Bishop's Conferences to carry out the actual translations to the various vernaculars, Italian, French, Spanish, English, etc. The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments is the Vatican department which handles affairs relating to liturgical practices. They issue the Latin version of the Missal. The International Commission on English in the Liturgy(ICEL) is responsible for the actual translation of the Missal into English. This translation is then approved by the National Bishop Conferences and then sent to Rome for final approval. This review by the bishop's conferences has just been completed and the results sent to Rome. It should be remembered that Latin is the official language of the Mass, and that Rome has verified that any Priest anywhere in the world has the right to say Mass in Latin. He also has the right to combine Latin and the vernacular in pretty much any way that he wants, provided that the respective parts are faithful to the respective translations of the applicable editions.
The most recent official text of the Mass was promulgated in the year of Our Lord 2000, and officially published in Latin in 2002. English translations of that edition are in production. The English translation used in the United States is of the 1970 version of the Missal, which was published in 1972. This is one of the reasons, but not the only one, that there will soon be a new translation of the English version of the liturgy used in the celebration of the Mass.
As I've already stated this translation has been approved by the USCCB and the Vatican, who has reserved the right to decide exactly when that version will start to be used.
Meanwhile the bishops are suppose to be preparing the faithful to use the new translation, through catechesis. In my own diocese the bishop's official house organ (the newspaper not the instrument) has announce the new translation is coming.
That probably means about one percent of those in the diocese actually know there is a new translation coming.If the DREs at the various parishes really push they might reach another couple of dozen adults per parish. It is likely that most of the teens and middle school students will have a better idea that this is coming than their parents, provided this information is included in the religious education program.
Eventually a note will be put in the parish bulletins and a larger number of people will get the message. Still I expect that many people will never hear about it before they stumble in to a Mass where to their surpise the words will be different.
My point is that last time a very poor job was done catechizing the faithful about changes to the liturgy. This new translation promises to be more faithful to the actual meaning of the Latin. Some people will not understand why prayers and responses are now different.
It will be the job of the catechist not only to transmit information about the specific changes, but also to explain why the new translation is better.For those who themselves want a better understanding of why this is so click the link for What Does the Prayer Really Say and look at some of the archived blog posts on what the Latin really says.
Prior to Vatican II the Mass, in the Latin Churches, at any rate, was always said in Latin. Vatican II's Sacrosanctum Concilium said that while the use of Latin was to be preserved in the Latin rites that it was permissible to use the Vernacular where ever approved by the particular Ordinaries, that is, the bishops, for the purpose of pastoral sensitivity. It also provided that translations into the various vernaculars should be accomplished over the greater regions where each language was used.
The text of the Mass is always published by the Vatican in Latin. International organizations have been formed by the various Nation Bishop's Conferences to carry out the actual translations to the various vernaculars, Italian, French, Spanish, English, etc. The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments is the Vatican department which handles affairs relating to liturgical practices. They issue the Latin version of the Missal. The International Commission on English in the Liturgy(ICEL) is responsible for the actual translation of the Missal into English. This translation is then approved by the National Bishop Conferences and then sent to Rome for final approval. This review by the bishop's conferences has just been completed and the results sent to Rome. It should be remembered that Latin is the official language of the Mass, and that Rome has verified that any Priest anywhere in the world has the right to say Mass in Latin. He also has the right to combine Latin and the vernacular in pretty much any way that he wants, provided that the respective parts are faithful to the respective translations of the applicable editions.
The most recent official text of the Mass was promulgated in the year of Our Lord 2000, and officially published in Latin in 2002. English translations of that edition are in production. The English translation used in the United States is of the 1970 version of the Missal, which was published in 1972. This is one of the reasons, but not the only one, that there will soon be a new translation of the English version of the liturgy used in the celebration of the Mass.
As I've already stated this translation has been approved by the USCCB and the Vatican, who has reserved the right to decide exactly when that version will start to be used.
Meanwhile the bishops are suppose to be preparing the faithful to use the new translation, through catechesis. In my own diocese the bishop's official house organ (the newspaper not the instrument) has announce the new translation is coming.
That probably means about one percent of those in the diocese actually know there is a new translation coming.If the DREs at the various parishes really push they might reach another couple of dozen adults per parish. It is likely that most of the teens and middle school students will have a better idea that this is coming than their parents, provided this information is included in the religious education program.
Eventually a note will be put in the parish bulletins and a larger number of people will get the message. Still I expect that many people will never hear about it before they stumble in to a Mass where to their surpise the words will be different.
My point is that last time a very poor job was done catechizing the faithful about changes to the liturgy. This new translation promises to be more faithful to the actual meaning of the Latin. Some people will not understand why prayers and responses are now different.
It will be the job of the catechist not only to transmit information about the specific changes, but also to explain why the new translation is better.For those who themselves want a better understanding of why this is so click the link for What Does the Prayer Really Say and look at some of the archived blog posts on what the Latin really says.
What we did.
The next time anyone asks you what the Catholic Church has ever done for them, point them to this video from Catholics Come Home
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Liturgy of the Hours in the Octave of Christmas
Saying the Liturgy of the Hours, the Church's prayer, during many seasons can be complicated and challenging to the novice. Use of a liturgical calendar can be very helpful.
In the past it seemed that just about every household displayed a calendar upon which were listed all of the saint's feast days as well as the Solemnities and Holy Days of obligations,as well as the national holidays and more mundane fare. In the present time, it seems that many Catholic households do not follow this practice, and it is few and far between the student who can name the particular saint's feast of any given day.
The Octave of Christmas is rather unique in the Liturgy in that the Invivatory, the Morning prayer, and other readings are taken from the feast days, but the Evening Prayer is taken from the seasons. The antiphons and psalms for the evening are taken from Evening Prayer II on Christmas day, while Night Prayer is taken from Sunday Prayer II.
So except for Holy Family Sunday, which has its own readings, during the Christmas Octave, for the Church, time effectively stops. In our joy we repeat the Evening Prayers, or at least parts of them through the whole Octave. Our joy at the birth of Our Lord, His Incarnation into human flesh is so great it cannot be constrained to single day or even a single week.
And so one must keep in mind the day, the date and the position of Christmas and Holy Family Sunday in the rythm of the Calendar.
In the past it seemed that just about every household displayed a calendar upon which were listed all of the saint's feast days as well as the Solemnities and Holy Days of obligations,as well as the national holidays and more mundane fare. In the present time, it seems that many Catholic households do not follow this practice, and it is few and far between the student who can name the particular saint's feast of any given day.
The Octave of Christmas is rather unique in the Liturgy in that the Invivatory, the Morning prayer, and other readings are taken from the feast days, but the Evening Prayer is taken from the seasons. The antiphons and psalms for the evening are taken from Evening Prayer II on Christmas day, while Night Prayer is taken from Sunday Prayer II.
So except for Holy Family Sunday, which has its own readings, during the Christmas Octave, for the Church, time effectively stops. In our joy we repeat the Evening Prayers, or at least parts of them through the whole Octave. Our joy at the birth of Our Lord, His Incarnation into human flesh is so great it cannot be constrained to single day or even a single week.
And so one must keep in mind the day, the date and the position of Christmas and Holy Family Sunday in the rythm of the Calendar.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)