Posted on 06/14/2008 1:01:32 PM PDT by markomalley
These paragraphs talk about the importance of a good catechesis in the formation of the young and of the neophytes. How many things result from a poor catechesis?
The footnotes, as through the rest of the CCC, are really the key to understanding it: as one can use them to reference the actual source documents. Reading from Catechesi Tradendae was really informative for me, particularly in light of the fact that it came out right at the beginning of John Paul II's papacy.
One other thing that I noted reading this section: This work is intended primarily for those responsible for catechesis: first of all the bishops, as teachers of the faith and pastors of the Church. It is offered to them as an instrument in fulfilling their responsibility of teaching the People of God. (paragraph 12) -- The intended readership was catechists, not those to be catechized. That actually explains much in the tone and language of the document!
test run ping!
Can you throw an [ECUMENIC] tag on this thread, please?
Thanks.
An ecumenic is a person. Ecumenical is an adjective describing someone or something.
To me, (Yeah, the teacher>) this should be Ecumenical.
FWIW!
Present! :)
Quote: Ecumenic threads are closed to antagonism.
- Religion Moderator homepage
Just trying to follow the rules...
Beautifully done, with footnotes too!
It’s so refreshing just to see proper references to it as the Catechism of the Catholic Church and CCC.
Very Nice Bump
Will this be daily, weekly?
I spent two years in a program studying the Catechism. There is so much richness in the text. Does anyone know if the new (not sure what to call it) for lack of a better term, book with all the footnotes expanded is complete yet?
LOL!
I know, I know.
so wouldn’t Ecumenical threads be closed to antagonism also?
You can tag the thread “ecumenic” “ecumenical” or “ecumenism” - it will be treated the same way. No antagonism allowed.
Regarding the "Ecumenic" tag on this thread...
That contradicts your earlier intentions where you wrote the following on this thread...
"I was curious in measuring the interest of Catholic FReepers to starting a weekly discussion on the Catechism...
My inclination, as with other things, would be to make these discussions [OPEN] threads (as per the RM guidance on the subject)."
Therefore, since this is not to be an Open Thread with real discourse, please remove me from your ping list.
This is not a "CAUCUS" thread. Discourse is absolutely allowed.
From the RM homepage:To antagonize is to incur or to provoke hostility in others.Unlike the “caucus” threads, the article and reply posts of an “ecumenic” thread can discuss more than one belief, but antagonism is not tolerable.
More leeway is granted to what is acceptable in the text of the article than to the reply posts. For example, the term “gross error” in an article will not prevent an ecumenical discussion, but a poster should not use that term in his reply because it is antagonistic. As another example, the article might be a passage from the Bible which would be antagonistic to Jews. The passage should be considered historical fact and a legitimate subject for an ecumenic discussion. The reply posts however must not be antagonistic.
Contrasting of beliefs or even criticisms can be made without provoking hostilities. But when in doubt, only post what you are “for” and not what you are “against.” Or ask questions.
Ecumenical threads will be moderated on a “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” basis. When hostility has broken out on an “ecumenic” thread, I’ll be looking for the source.
Therefore “anti” posters must not try to finesse the guidelines by asking loaded questions, using inflammatory taglines, gratuitous quote mining or trying to slip in an “anti” or “ex” article under the color of the “ecumenic” tag.
Posters who try to tear down other’s beliefs or use subterfuge to accomplish the same goal are the disrupters on ecumenic threads and will be booted from the thread and/or suspended.
Was there an objection to some point in the article? Does your belief system say something different?
I am, in fact, curious if it was objectionable to you...
, please remove me from your ping list.
Done, sadly.
I don’t have any interest in it, open or ecumenical. Is kind of funny though, the faith, if genuine, should be able to withstand the “feeble fifteen” nobody wants invited, lol
See, this is the point that I am getting at. While I don't care to be the author of a 10,128 post "undead" thread, I would like to have genuine discussion.
Maybe the Ecumenic designation would provide a suitable compromise, maybe not. We'll see.
For now, approximately (piu o meno) weekly. I don't have the time during the week to dig out the footnotes.
“Catechesis aims therefore at developing understanding of the mystery of Christ in the light of God’s word, so that the whole of a person’s humanity is impregnated by that word. Changed by the working of grace into a new creature, the Christian thus sets himself to follow Christ and learns more and more within the Church to think like Him, to judge like Him, to act in conformity with His commandments, and to hope as He invites us to.”
Time. It takes time and the humility to start all over when we fall to conform yourself to Christ. Just understanding Charity can take a lifetime and Charity is the Queen of Virtues. I know it is one of my main failures.
How do we impress upon people that conforming our lives is not something that happens overnight especially since we live in a civilization that views time as a personal allotment, something they own, rather than God-given?
It would seem that we have ruined some peoples’s fun. ;)
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.