Can you add whatever you want to scripture

[Lrning]

and still conclude with “The Word of the Lord”?

Our parish is rolling out a new plan for formation called Generations of Faith. They started the program out with a “bible reading” where they added about 30% of the content to presumably make it more relevant to the children present. But what I felt was absolutely WRONG was they concluded the “scripture” reading with “The Word of the Lord.” But it wasn’t. They’d added a lot of non-scripture to the reading.

Then in the breakout groups with the elementary school children they had us open up our bibles to a passage in Acts. Then they proceeded to do a skit loosely based on this passage. Again, they concluded with “The Word of the Lord”. Helloooo, it wasn’t even close!

Am I overreacting or is this truly wrong?

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

It would depend on what they are adding. For example, adding historical information, and jewish cultural information of the time that a book of the bible was written is aceptable because it puts the text in its historical-cultural context.

 

[Franciscan]

To me that is awkward at best and reckless at worst.

At least it’s NOT in the context of Sacred Litrurgy. But do the kids appreciate the difference that’s the question.

The kids may come away with a lack of appreciation of what it means to say the Scriptures are Inspired.

Why don’t you make it a learning moment and spell out the difference for them. Use that gift of Fortitude that you were given in Confirmation:thumbsup:

 

[quasimodo]

and still conclude with “The Word of the Lord”?

Our parish is rolling out a new plan for formation called Generations of Faith. They started the program out with a “bible reading” where they added about 30% of the content to presumably make it more relevant to the children present. But what I felt was absolutely WRONG was they concluded the “scripture” reading with “The Word of the Lord.” But it wasn’t. They’d added a lot of non-scripture to the reading.

Then in the breakout groups with the elementary school children they had us open up our bibles to a passage in Acts. Then they proceeded to do a skit loosely based on this passage. Again, they concluded with “The Word of the Lord”. Helloooo, it wasn’t even close!

Am I overreacting or is this truly wrong?

An example might help

 

[rwoehmke]

It sounds to me like something well meaning teachers or volunteers might do to lend a religous atmosphere to the event. Maybe a little on the dumb side, but hardly worth writing to Rome about. Take a deep breath, sigh and get on with life.

 

[John_Hiner]

and still conclude with “The Word of the Lord”?

Our parish is rolling out a new plan for formation called Generations of Faith. They started the program out with a “bible reading” where they added about 30% of the content to presumably make it more relevant to the children present. But what I felt was absolutely WRONG was they concluded the “scripture” reading with “The Word of the Lord.” But it wasn’t. They’d added a lot of non-scripture to the reading.

Then in the breakout groups with the elementary school children they had us open up our bibles to a passage in Acts. Then they proceeded to do a skit loosely based on this passage. Again, they concluded with “The Word of the Lord”. Helloooo, it wasn’t even close!

Am I overreacting or is this truly wrong?

This is the sort of thing that is likely to lead children to feel confused and betrayed later, when they become more critical in their understanding of the Faith. It is also rife with the danger of substituting a watered-down notion of “being nice” for the Gospel. When a child reaches the age of reason and then the age of critical engagement that precedes a mature faith, this sort of memory can be enough to turn him away from the Church, to explore more “serious” intellectual undertakings.

It is difficult to convince a child of the seriousness or truth of religion, when one is careless with its details. It is even difficult for a child to believe that an adult believes what he says, when he is careless about the details or seems to backtrack and make revisions, when a question is asked or a point tested with critical reason.

If one is interested in improving catechesis, this sort of thing should be corrected firmly and the sacredness of Scripture should be honored, both in word and deed. The skill and circumspection needed to test any purported paraphrase of the Gospel message should be modeled for students, since this is the central skill needed to keep the true Faith, in the face of so many competing schemes and ideas which masquerade as the Gospel or even as plans of life superior to the Gospel.

If children are going to be exposed to Protestant and secular theories of life, they need to learn and practice care and critical skills in discerning orthodoxy. They cannot learn these, unless they are modeled for them.

Spiritus Sapientiae nobiscum.

John Hiner

 

[Hellisreal]

It sounds to me like something well meaning teachers or volunteers might do to lend a religous atmosphere to the event. Maybe a little on the dumb side, but hardly worth writing to Rome about. Take a deep breath, sigh and get on with life.

I strongly disagree. Confusion at youth breeds more confusion later, and possibly alienation and mistrust. Children have long memories and trust us.
If we do things haphazzardly with them, they will loose trust. They are not experimental guinea pigs for adults to “test” a new bible study.

 

[jmcrae]

Our parish is rolling out a new plan for formation called Generations of Faith. They started the program out with a “bible reading” where they added about 30% of the content to presumably make it more relevant to the children present. But what I felt was absolutely WRONG was they concluded the “scripture” reading with “The Word of the Lord.” But it wasn’t. They’d added a lot of non-scripture to the reading.

Then in the breakout groups with the elementary school children they had us open up our bibles to a passage in Acts. Then they proceeded to do a skit loosely based on this passage. Again, they concluded with “The Word of the Lord”. Helloooo, it wasn’t even close!

Am I overreacting or is this truly wrong?

If it’s not an actual liturgy, but just a Sunday School class, then they should not be using the phrase “The Word of the Lord” in any case. This will only end up confusing them into thinking that Sunday School is something like the Mass or the Divine Office - it isn’t.

It’s fine to do Sunday School - I think Sunday School is really important - but it should not take on the appearance of a liturgical action. It’s a bunch of kids messing with ideas from the Bible, and learning about their faith. Irreverent stuff is going to happen, so you really need to be careful not to make it look like it’s something that it most definitely is not - not because Sunday School shouldn’t be elevated, but because when they see the liturgical actions and hear the liturgical phrases later, they may think, “Oh, this is like Sunday School,” and they might want to do things that one is free to do in Sunday School, but not free to do during a liturgy. (Like put on skits, etc.)