sacramental catechesis is mandated...

What I'm hearing from you all is that sacramental catechesis is not de rigueur in many places. I've been told that I 'live in a cave', and suppose it must be true, because this news is surprising and dismaying to me.

Call me a hard-a## but I think that any annulment that is granted because of the ignorance of the couple should be placed squarely in the lap of the diocese and parish in which it occurred. The relevant church officials there have some explaining to do.

I homeschooled my kids and so was more or less entirely in control of their religious education. I am blissfully ignorant, I suppose, of what goes on in those 'religious ed' classes.

But regardless of the reasons behind poor formation, if persons seek the sacrament of marriage in the Church it is the responsibility of the parish (and diocese) not to administer the sacrament to those who are not prepared for it. (Technically, according to canon law, I believe it is the responsibility of bishops.) If the parish is itself responsible (in part -- the parents are probably ultimately to blame, I'm afraid) for that poor formation, so much the greater is its responsibility to right that wrong before conferring marriage.

Anyway, that's quite a digression. Apparently Rush has considerable experience in the area of marriage... (Oh, my.)

Anyway, that's quite a digression. Apparently Rush has considerable experience in the area of marriage... (Oh, my.)

tee-hee-hee ;-)

It's kind of like that county clerk in KY who wont issue marriage licenses to gays. If she had not been married 4 times herself - FOUR TIMES!!! - I could take her religious beliefs much more seriously.

Just remember that, for the Catholic Church, even "Cultural Catholics" are still considered to be Catholics. They may be "bad Catholics" but the Church still considers them/us her own. Any temptation to disown them is not the attitude of the Church itself.

I thought you understood I was talking about the EARLY church,

Charles,

Those of us who are fossilized young ones look to your example -- the example of the EARLY Church, when everything was perfect and you were the leading example of good theology and praxis.

@MichaelDickson. I also homeschool. It is a requirement in our diocese that the children attend religious education classes in order to receive the sacraments. Which is not a requirement that I disagree with in general, however, I have had the experience of having a religious education teacher directly contradict something that we taught our children.

Being the confrontational person that I am, we went to the parish priest when this happened and it was resolved. For the record, what my husband taught them at home was the teaching of the church and the priest did correct the religious ed teacher. Nonetheless it was exasperating to us and confusing to our child.

This is a problem in the United States (can't speak for other places, I don't live there). It is a problem that desperately needs to be addressed, and until it is addressed we will continue to have poorly catechized Catholics with malformed consciences.

Again...the Holy Father is looking at the wrong end of the problem.

the example of the EARLY Church, when everything was perfect and you were the leading example of good theology and praxis.

You've got to be kidding. The Church was never perfect and its often convoluted theologies (not doctrine, but theological speculation) probably helped the spread of a simpler religion, Islam. Now if you are talking about liturgy, there have been periods of degradation that accompanied the collapse of culture and civilization in the west. Even in more stable (at the time) eastern areas, there were iconoclasts and other nuts running around loose. No wonder the holy ones moved to the desert to get away from it all.

I figure that if you can accuse some of us of being the Amish contingent and wonder how we (youngsters) can be "nostalgic" for a non-existent past, I can, at least, make reference to your perfection and your age.

Never having met you, I don't know your age. I do think too many in the TLM community are obsessed with externals not essential to anyone's faith. I don't have to look on this forum for that, since the TLM community here provides plenty of examples. Granted, I have no love for Latin, but do appreciate the consistency of the theology behind the TLM. Too many, I believe, get caught up in the externals and loose the theology. Not a good thing. There is also a tendency to idealize a past that wasn't really so great.

You can always do what some have done. Just write "purple text" or "PURPLE TEXT" if agitated.

For those initiated into the sacred rites and who know the secret handshake, we write purple text.

Actually, I think the Pope's instincts here are not ruddered by PTSD with preconciliar Catholics or Catholicism. They are ruddered by seeing what happens when people deal with the world primarily through ideas and expectations rather than people and reality - across the spectrum.

Isn't it interesting that people opposed to Christian doctrine use "opposition research" to dig up painful family histories, including failures that happened years ago during someone's life before he or she became a Christian, and use them to hurt a person's reputation?

If you've ever done wrong, folks, and dare to speak out or act about a public issue, you may as well expect people to dig up the dirt and put it on the internet.

FWIW, I wasn't in favor of the later changes, which for us happened initially around 1965. They turned the altar around and used English for everything except the canon. A little change, but not so much. The "Calvinism" you refer to came in 1979 or so, if I remember correctly. That was a major change. It doesn't always fit together as cohesively as the liturgy from Trent - and that's about how "ancient" that liturgy is. However, the sacrificial theology is stronger in the older liturgy - a good thing. The "pomp and circumstance" of the Tridentine liturgy are fine when the intent and focus are kept firmly in mind. If the focus is only on the "pomp and circumstance," then it is all empty ritual. Piety, righteousness, and holiness are not dependent on vestments and incense. Those are internal qualities, not external practices.

A small addition. I have a friend who loves going to Tridentine masses and High Anglican liturgies. She says she doesn't believe any of the teachings, but finds the rituals familiar and comforting. I guess the comforting part could be considered as good, but I find it disturbing. I am running into those views too often for my comfort level.

I suspect that the phenomenon of cold hearts and hypocrisy camouflaged by fine vestments and lace mantillas isn't exclusive to the EF and no doubt exists in other forms in all rites and denominations. Even the Puritans, the most spartan of religions, had their Arthur Dimmesdales, but what is the remedy?

Education and formation. Since the law of worship and prayer depends on the law of belief and praxis, what one believes and how emotionally connected one is to that belief will certainly in most cases affect how one prays at Mass.

As you know, it was the goal of the original Liturgical Movement to educate the people so they could better understand the symbolism of the rites and understand the lessons and prayers so it wasn't just an empty ceremony and more apt to be filled with a defective spirituality, but unfortunately that movement was "hijacked". (cf. Cardinal Ratzinger)

Fascinating story about your friend. I've seen the same reaction time after time from people who attend the TLM for the first time. Just recently we had a High Mass with our children's schola and a visiting organist and there were some people who hadn't attended a Latin Mass for decades who were so moved and captivated by it that they didn't want to leave the church after Mass and just sat in the pews almost in tears (happy tears, that is!) One lady hadn't been to church in a long time since she thought the OF was so "cheap" ---her words, not mine.

How long the enchantment lasts, I don't know, but the fact that the EF has the power to affect people profoundly on every level ought to be acknowledged. If it could be combined with a comprehensive catechetical formation, if, in other words, the original goals of the LIturgical Movement were ever actually realized, we'd really be cookin'.

The object is true worship and adoration of God. The externals can contribute to that, or become an end in themselves.

Umnnhhh...maybe "the externals" are there, like a fence, to protect the 'internals.' Or, perhaps, to point towards the internals. IIRC, the Easterns close a gate during the Canon of the Mass. That would be verboten--even shocking--to the OF mind. But there's a point to that which, on reflection, is valid.

That 'protection' thought is analagous to why women should wear ENOUGH clothes; and at the same time it 'points to' their status.

what is the remedy? Education and formation.

Nope. It is actuosa participatio, classically defined as 'conforming oneself to Christ in self-sacrifice to the Father.'

I actually think the theology of the OF offertory and Eucharistic Prayer is more coherent. That is, after all, why it was reformed so dramatically.

In practice, the sacrificial nature in the OF gets downplayed somewhat in favor of a community meal. As I mentioned in my previous post, the liturgical books are not always followed which creates these problems. Then the row-by-row communion takes place, although I have read condemnations of that practice. It all turns into a social event where a good time is had by all and everyone leaves with warm and fuzzy feelings.

You're absolutely right of course, Dad 29. Education can only go so far, and you might just end up with "smart devils" instead of the product you're looking for. So how is actuosa participatio cultivated in a congregation?

Personally, I don't see that much shock, horror, scorn, ridicule.

You may be right - I'm not sure what human emotion is expressed by this letter to the iditor, (it's certainly not calm, approval, encouragement or even tolerance) --

For about two years or so, quite a number of churches have started using Latin for the "Holy, Holy" and "The Lamb of God" in their Sunday liturgies. Why?

Even the election of Pope Francis has not stopped this trend. Is any group watching the liturgy and addressing apparent attempt to bring back Latin?

(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

Gregory DiPippo showed in a series of articles how offertory prayers anticipating the anaphora predate scholasticism and have counterparts in Eastern liturgies.
G.G. Willis showed how the prayers of the Canon, while seemingly piecemeal, in fact have a logical flow, and present a complete thought.

Row by row communion antedated Vatican II.

Interesting, I had never heard this.
Was it common, do you know, or are you just recounting childhood memories?
I remember a hub-bub at my parish, would have been '74 or so, when the bishop attended and scolded our pastor for the "higgledy-piggledy" way communicants chose for themselves when and if to present for communion.
We were commanded to come up with a plan to do it in an orderly a regimented fashion. It may have been combined with the order, (and that is the word,) that from now on we were to receive in the hand.
There was a great deal of variation from parish to parish in the northeast, I find.

(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

I understand.
As Catholics, though, most of the rest of us on the forum probably believe in stuff like redemption and repentance and conversion.
(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)

Yes, but...Is it possible she may run for a higher office? All the local publicity can't do her any harm. She has built a support base if she does decide to run.

It just seems to me that anyone who has been married four times doesn't understand matrimony in any sense that Catholics (should) understand. Granted, Catholics are not always much better in practice.

It's popularly believed in EF circles that the Old Testament was never read in Rome. But that's based purely on the absence of early evidence for or against. That it was read widely outside Rome is not in dispute and it's at least reasonable to believe that it may have been in Rome. Never mind the fact that importing from other liturgies is part of how we got the EF in the first place.

EP2 is based on that of Hippolytus (to at least attributed to him). Yes, it was edited in light of our more developed theology but the notion that it was invented from whole cloth is mostly based on trivial differences.

Of course any collection of disparate ideas can be forced into a coherent whole if you supply enough ad hoc mental gymnastics. My father is good at this, or rather, suffers from this. It makes sense to him and limited sense to some others but to most of us it's too forced to be taken too seriously.

I don't know as much about recent scholarship in other areas but I wonder if it's similarly defective. I.e., absence of evidence being used as evidence of absence, making too much of trivial differences, and ad hoc justifications.

So how is actuosa participatio cultivated in a congregation?

Well, at the local Jesuit high school a few years ago, it was cultivated by having faculty proctors watching the congregant-high schoolers. For most, knowing that their behavior was on display, that was sufficient.

For some, a tap on the head with a baseball bat was necessary.

Will that work again?

Seriously, we agree that catechesis is necessary--but it is not sufficient, no matter EF/OF/Eastern, etc. Some souls will not be saved. Oh, well.

Despite the admonitions of our self-appointed nanny, who probably means well, I am greatly enjoying the discussions on the canon, scholarship, and etc. Granted, I never gave a rat's behind about Rush Limbaugh to begin with. It's the later material, although off topic, that is interesting. Melo, isn't there a water shortage or something serious you can worry about? LOL.

Understand. I am actually learning a few things on the canon development. Interesting!

I think Pope Francis would be proud of us for our little zone of parrhesia;

Not to mention haganning plenty of lio...
(Save the Liturgy, Save the World)