Catholic Teaching

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Jul 12 2004, 04:39 AM']

Although that makes you wonder, where did their love for the Church come from? [/quote]
The Holy Spirit is moving and stirring hearts, making St Augustines words again ring true:

"Our hearts are restless O Lord, until they rest in you."

[qfnol31]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Jul 12 2004, 02:42 AM'] The Holy Spirit is moving and stirring hearts, making St Augustines words again ring true:

"Our hearts are restless O Lord, until they rest in you." [/quote]
So true.

[StColette]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Jul 12 2004, 02:42 AM'] The Holy Spirit is moving and stirring hearts, making St Augustines words again ring true:

"Our hearts are restless O Lord, until they rest in you." [/quote]

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

My CCD class told me not to use drugs and to love my parents. That was about it. I had read maybe one page in the Bible, and never heard of a "Catechism" by the time of Confirmation. In high school, they tell me Jesus has siblings and hinted things about Jesus' nature that were almost Arian. So yes, I agree, something needs to change.

Edited July 12, 2004 by thedude

[St. Catherine]

Some styles are force feeding religion (both teachers and parents.) I don't think that should be done, especially at time of confirmation. If someone doesn't want to be there the parents should not make them go. Why make someone make a commitment to the church when they are not really ready? I think it is something that should be taken seriously and I think the majority don't. They can always go through RCIA later to be confirmed when they are ready for that commitment.

This force of religion could even lead to resentment of the religion.

During confirmation there needs to be a deep understanding of the Catholic faith. Definitely more indepth than the two pages that the books covers. I mean the students should understand or at least be told about the who, when, where, and why; not just the what (belief) of the faith.

Edited July 12, 2004 by St. Catherine

[Guest JeffCR07]

I very much agree with what everyone is saying. In the case of education, this is where I think the laity needs to step up. I am not talking about "empowering" the laity by handing over to us the unique role of the priests and clergy, but rather, I am talking about standing up to the call that we all have to know our faith. Once we have a firm, orthodox grasp of what the Church teaches, only then will we be able to teach kids (and adults) the Truth of the Church.

Like I said before, we, the laity just need to step it up a notch and teach our faith with a greater depth than the "Jesus loves me" CCD classes that I had in elementary school.

In order to do this, in my opinion, we need to get good, qualified, orthodox people teaching both CCD and RCIA classes. Thats part of the reason that I want to get a Doctorate of Theology when I get out of college (and the reason why I'm trying so hard to find an Orthodox school that has them).

The best plan is to educate ourselves on what the Church teaches so that we can teach our kids the Truth, and to encourage those in teaching positions already to constantly seek more knowledge on the teachings of the Magisterium.

- Your Brother In Christ, Jeff

[daugher-of-Mary]

Amen! I agree with what everyone has said so far. I think a great deal of care needs to go into who is permitted to teach to begin with. My highschool religion teachers have been known to teach nothing short of heresy. Forget the fun and games, and begin with the basics. If even just the Sacraments are taught with the reverence and respect that is due them, kids will come away knowing the profound love of God in a much deeper way than if they are just told "Jesus loves you, end of story."

[p0lar_bear]

[quote name='Crusader_4' date='Jul 12 2004, 02:34 AM']I am putting this up for debate curious on your thoughts that the current Catholic teaching system both School system, and Catechism classes within parishes are not sufficent to teaching our Children about the faith anymore.  I  think that our parishs should focus more on a socratic method allowing Children to ask questions and introduce the faith as more hands on rather then simple doctrinal beliefs.  I have always found that its easier to teach when the student is willing and wants to explore rather then being forced to learn.  So i think there needs to be mroe innovation (not nessciarly more fun and games) but create an atmosphere of discovery where it gives youth a chance to build good consciences and learn how to become docile.  Also they have a chance to question teachings and get solid answers rather then evertyhing often being fed to them with little or no choice in exploring the material.  Also i think we need better qualified teachers and the whole catechims has to be different then normal teaching style the last thing children want is to go to a cathechims monday night or on the weekend that is exactly like regular school the whole program in my eyes needs a good refreshing.[/quote]
Crusader,

The problem is that the socratic method is based on the supposition that the student merely needs to be lead to discover truth that is available to all or already exists in his subconscious. This doesn't work with religion because it is based on revelation, things we cannot know aside from being told. The problem with experience-based catechesis is that it often fails to recognize this and fails to lead students to the absolute truths of the Faith. It doesn't matter how you "feel" about the Eucharist, it is still Jesus.

Regarding the importance of systematic catechesis, the Holy Father stated in [color=blue][url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_16101979_catechesi-tradendae_en.html"]Catechesi Tradendae[/url][/color], no. 21:

[quote]In view of practical difficulties, attention must be drawn to some of the characteristics of this instruction:

It must be systematic, not improvised but programmed to reach a precise goal;

It must deal with essentials, without any claim to tackle all disputed questions or to transform itself into theological research or scientific exegesis;

It must nevertheless be sufficiently complete, not stopping short at the initial proclamation of the Christian mystery such as we have in the kerygma;

It must be an integral Christian initiation, open to all the other factors of Christian life [/quote]

While catechesis should be systematic, to a degree, it should not be viewed as merely the imparting of so many truths. The Deposit of Faith should be taught as an organic whole. It should also be a teaching of Christ Himself.

[quote]Accordingly, the definitive aim of catechesis is to put people not only in touch but in communion, in intimacy, with Jesus Christ: only He can lead us to the love of the Father in the Spirit and make us share in the life of the Holy Trinity (CT, no. 5).[/quote]

[Guest JeffCR07]

I agree. In all honesty, if we could just get people to teach the fundamentals of what being a catholic is we would be in a whole lot better shape. My CCD teachers taught heresy as well. If I was gonna teach RCIA to people, these are what I would focus on in depth (I kinda think it would have to be like a 10 or 11 month course ):

Nicean Creed
Baptism
Holy Communion
Confession
Confirmation
Marriage
Holy Orders
Anointing of the Sick
Mary & the Communion of Saints
The Universal Church (intro to the Rites, Canon Law, Councils, Catechism, etc)
Common Prayers (Rosary, Angelus, St. Michael, Divine Mercy Chaplet, Liturgy of the Hours, O my Jesus, Hail Holy Queen, etc)

I kinda think if everyone got at least basic understanding of that stuff, we would be in way better shape.

- Your Brother In Christ, Jeff

[qfnol31]

[quote name='St. Catherine' date='Jul 12 2004, 08:00 AM'] Some styles are force feeding religion (both teachers and parents.) I don't think that should be done, especially at time of confirmation. If someone doesn't want to be there the parents should not make them go. Why make someone make a commitment to the church when they are not really ready? I think it is something that should be taken seriously and I think the majority don't. They can always go through RCIA later to be confirmed when they are ready for that commitment.

This force of religion could even lead to resentment of the religion.

During confirmation there needs to be a deep understanding of the Catholic faith. Definitely more indepth than the two pages that the books covers. I mean the students should understand or at least be told about the who, when, where, and why; not just the what (belief) of the faith. [/quote]
In some ways I agree with this, but I also have some experience personally. My brother does not want to get Confirmed and personally I think he needs to be. However, because it would be my parents who would have him get Confirmed, I only occassionally mention it to them out of obedience.

It isn't so much the education that I think needs to be something that they can force him to do, but I do think that is a necessity that goes along with Confirmation. I wish my parents had made me get Confirmed earlier, first Communion, and first Reconciliation (which I think actually happened after my first Holy Communion) sooner. I missed out on many graces earlier on in my life that I think I needed.

And St. Augustine felt the same way. If ever you read his [i]Confessions[/i], you see that he wasn't the best person in the world. Actually, he was terrible in the way he acted! He definately was not open to the Catholic Church or Baptism. And his parents, one of whom is canonized today, gave into his whims and didn't have him Baptized (for many reasons). They let him be who he wanted and didn't force him into anything, which of course became more difficult as he got older. Well, Augustine finally had his conversion and gets Baptized and everything, and after being concecrated a Bishop, he starts writing [i]Confessions[/i]. In the book, he recalls how his parents didn't make him get Baptized and how, though he loves them, he wishes they had because of the graces he could have gotten, just like the graces you get from any Sacrament.

I dunno if this is really a disagreement really, or more of a lament that I was always a few years behind. Oh well, but I do believe that parents have the right to force their child into a Sacrament, because even if the child is closed to it, he will still receive graces from it.


By the way, my parish has an awesome Confirmation class for us! We go on two or three different retreats and now the children and parents must come for classes. I learned so much from the Catechism that year!

[Apotheoun]

In the Eastern Catholic Churches a baby is baptized, chrismated, and receives first communion, all at the same time. Thus, all the sacramental graces that can be received by being fully initiated into God's Holy Catholic Church are given while a person is still a baby.

Edited July 12, 2004 by Apotheoun

[qfnol31]

I remember a story on that, where a couple's child couldn't receive in the Roman rite or something like that.

[Guest JeffCR07]

I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that the child should be able to receive, and that denying him the Blessed Sacrament is wrong, perhaps even a grave sin.

[qfnol31]

I think that's what they said in the end, but it took a Bishop to do so. I'm not sure, I haven't read this story in almost two years.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Jul 12 2004, 03:29 PM'] I remember a story on that, where a couple's child couldn't receive in the Roman rite or something like that. [/quote]
While a baby in the Eastern rite does recieve Baptism, Holy Communion and Confirmation all at once, the child does not recieve Communion again until the reach the age of reason.

Confirmation should be adminstered aground age 7 or 8. In is not a rite of passage but simply the last past of the scraments of Initiation.