C
Caesar
Guest
I am relieved then.
- Status
R
rwoehmke
Guest
Caesar, your posts tell me that although you are still a student, you are educated beyond what I would call the average Catholic.You may lack time in grade(an Army term for experience) but you are smart. I am in a bible study with several catholics who are accountants, dental technicians, etc. when it is time to read they stumble all over the text, mispronounce words, and have difficulty with meanings. Yes some 6th graders are no doubt sharp enough, but I would submit only a very limited number. I know the dictionary meaning of all those words above but when I graduated 8th Grade and then University, I was essentially off the chart on vocabulary and nearly so on comprehension. I think that you may well excell above me on both counts, but ordinary people today ijn the US are not nearly as facile with reading, hearing, and understanding as many past generations. In short schools have been dumbed down so no one feels bad. The Bishop has a point.
B
Brendan
Guest
No, the Bishop doesn’t have a point.
Sure, most people could READ the words “One in Being with the Father” in the Creed.
But how many could describe what they read in a way that isn’t heretical WITHOUT using the word “Consubstantial”?
I would rather the faithful stumble over the words enough that they then need to ask what the word means and have the theology correctly explained to them.
As opposed to ‘thinking’ they know what it means and getting it wrong.
Precise terms should be used when precise theology is being referenced.
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
The Church is a monarchy; always has been, always will be. “Power,” though, is an ambiguous term, because in many ways a bishop obviously has “power” a bishops’ conference can’t possibly have (like the power to confer grace in the sacraments) while in a limited amount of circumstances the conference has sorts of “power” (like petitioning to change particular law for a whole region) that bishops can’t do.
You’re concern seems to be with the fact that Rome has supreme, ordinary, and immediate jurisdiction, which shouldn’t come as any sort of surprise since 1870.
C
Caesar
Guest
I thank you for the compliment, and I do agree with you that the Catholic laity in North America is no longer as educated on the faith as in generations past, but I do not believe the laity is incapable of understanding a more refined translation of the Mass. If there is an issue of comprehension of the texts here, I certainly do not think that dumbing-down the texts is the correct solution to this problem. The average layman has the intellectual capacity to understand the concepts being presented to him in the texts of the Mass, so it is not unreasonable to think that with some proper catechis we can all be on the same page, so to speak, at Mass.
In addition, understanding is not necessary to faith. One need not necessarily fully understand the concept of transubstantiation to know that Christ is made present in the Eucharist at Mass. That being said though, it is interesting to note that in past times when the percentage of the laity who had formal education was far below what is it today (in North America), more were able to grasp fairly complex theological concepts. This is why I believe that the problem lies with poor catechis, not a stupid laity.
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
To illustrate your point, my previous job involved running confirmation retreats and one of the classes for whom I conducted a retreat had to be reminded about proper behavior during Mass. In other words, at a time when they’re supposed to be really keying in in preparation for a great sacrament, the bar they were expected to reach was, “Don’t hit your neighbor, don’t talk, don’t chew gum.” These 14-year-olds should certainly have been able to get more out of Mass than simply managing to behave, but because nothing more had ever been expected of them, that was the level they were at. If Americans are incapable of understanding the new translation, a very large part of that is going to be because no one has ever asked them to try.
O
otjm
Guest
You seem to be of the opinion that because someone has been named to a dicastery, they have become omnipotent and graced from all failures and mistakes?
The last I recall, while Rome does have the final say if it so chooses, the Pope does not micromanage the work of the various dicasteries on a daily basis, or for that matter, at all; and I don’t recall that being named a Monsignor has anything to do with apostolic succession; but I do seem to think that being ordained a bishop does cfonstitute some authority with the position.
Or do you just see the bishops as mid level managers and the Pope as the CEO?
O
otjm
Guest
And you don’t believe at all in collegiality, hunh?
C
Caesar
Guest
The Pope and the Bishops are only in College during an Ecumenical Council. Read the Nota Praevia to Lumen Gentium of the Second Vatican Council, among other documents.
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
Wouldn’t they also be in college when exercising their ordinary magisterium? The ordinary magisterium is, after all, the teaching of the whole Church, so when a single bishop condemns contraception he, by teaching within that ordinary magisterium, is technically teaching in union with the head and the rest of the college/choir of apostles.
Furthermore, a head doesn’t speak without the rest of its body, so even the extraordinary papal magisterium is, in a certain sense, collegial.
A
Andreas_Hofer
Guest
Bishops are the princes of their sees (which are principalities). It just so happens, though, that since 1570 liturgical change can only be authorized at the level of the empire (approbation of the Holy See). If Bp. Trautman lived in the 1400s he would be relatively free to ruin the liturgy in his own diocese, but luckily for everyone, that ship has sailed. And despite the authority that comes with episcopal orders, Bp. Trautman does not speak for the bishops of the world.
In fact, Anglophone bishops have been speaking out on translation with directly contrary positions. When two bishops from different regions disagree, the court of appeals is at the level of the church’s principal see. Now let’s see, Erie and Melbourne are both sees in the… ah yes, Roman (or Latin) Catholic Church, so let’s consult the opinion of the Bishop of Rome. Now that we’ve gone through a much more collegial process, we get the very same result: Roma locuta est, causa finita est.
D
dympnha
Guest
I think very little of Bishop Trautman. However, he has a point. Judging by conversations I’ve had with Catholics of all ages it’s clear to me that a lot of us have no clue about our faith and probably wouldn’t understand anything beyond the kindergarten pap that we have now.
C
Caesar
Guest
So that leaves us with two options:
a) Keep dumbing down the Mass, as Bishop Trautman suggests
or
b) Introduce some proper catechis
S
scylla
Guest
No Caeser you have it all wrong… we don’t need any catechesis…
Here is the plan,
It goes like this, don’t teach the people, make everything easier, reduce piety then wait… Get rid of Latin as it is too Catholic…
Now that people don’t understand, state that they don’t understand so we need to dumb down everything.
Oops, no one understands Latin, no need to bring it back.
Oops, everyone is doing whatever they want, lets loosen the rules to make them more comfortable, since they are breaking them anyways.
Oh no people have left the Church lets minimize truth so they will come back… You don’t want to offend anyone.
Now we are at the year 2007, now what is going to happen?
Maybe that is wrong, sorry.
The language of our worship should be special to reflect the sacredness and truth of our worship. And we should help those that don’t understand to understand the faith. To think that people are too dumb to understand is to be elitist, to think that you are better than the people. With proper teaching even children can understand sound doctrine and precise words.
God Bless
Scylla
Here is the plan,
It goes like this, don’t teach the people, make everything easier, reduce piety then wait… Get rid of Latin as it is too Catholic…
Now that people don’t understand, state that they don’t understand so we need to dumb down everything.
Oops, no one understands Latin, no need to bring it back.
Oops, everyone is doing whatever they want, lets loosen the rules to make them more comfortable, since they are breaking them anyways.
Oh no people have left the Church lets minimize truth so they will come back… You don’t want to offend anyone.
Now we are at the year 2007, now what is going to happen?
Maybe that is wrong, sorry.
Should we continue down this road or should we seek to maintain truth?
The language of our worship should be special to reflect the sacredness and truth of our worship. And we should help those that don’t understand to understand the faith. To think that people are too dumb to understand is to be elitist, to think that you are better than the people. With proper teaching even children can understand sound doctrine and precise words.God Bless
Scylla
B
BobP123
Guest
Just goes to show that Vatican II was right in trying to preserve the Latin in the Mass. All this bickering about translations…for what? Job security for the ICEL?
- Status