Catholicism can and must change, Francis forcefully tells Italian church gathering

[JimR-OCDS]

clem456;

Yes faith is relational.

Relational meaning, an exchange of love between the beloved and the lover.

And Jesus Christ is a real person who was incarnate into human flesh, became part of human history, lived a human life, died for us, conquered death by rising, and lives now. This is our kerygma.

Right, but this is the knowledge of who he is, but it is not relational. Even Satan knows this about Jesus.

In a relation, the lover and beloved experience each other through love. As St John of the Cross said, the lover will take on the characteristics of the beloved. When we have a relationship with Jesus, we begin to be transformed through his grace and begin to love as He loves.

“God is love, and whoever remains in love, remains in God and God in him.” 1 John 4:16

As the author of the Cloud of Unknowing wrote, “God can not be grasped, except through love.”

He is not merely a spiritual phantasm to be experienced by individuals.

Jesus is a spiritual being and without experiencing the reality of His being within your soul, there is no faith, just belief. Even Satan believes in Jesus. The experience of Jesus Christ is spiritual have no doubt about it.

He is a real person. Christ himself fulfilled the law. He did not abolish the law. Christ practiced his faith. Christ practiced religion in real and tangible ways.
He was a Jewish person born to a mother and step-father who raised him in his faith.
He prayed.
He read scripture.
He taught others.
He led people to his way, his truth, his life.
He practiced his faith.

No disagreement here, but this is the description of Jesus, not the experience of Jesus, the Christ. The apostles experienced Jesus the man, but not until the experienced Jesus the Christ, were their hearts and minds opened.

I disagree. People are not drawn because they simply see no compelling reason. There are competing interests for every person’s devotion, and the culture frequently wins. We as catechists are called to give that compelling reason for our faith. We are co-operators in passing on that gift. It doesn’t land in a person’s lap. Christ asks us to help pass it on in a compelling way.

You can give all the compelling reasons you want, but faith comes from Jesus Christ, not through convincing arguments of the intellect.

This practice of faith is not purely personal and individual, it is also communal.

True, just as salvation isn’t individual, but communal. However, each individual of the community has their relationship with Jesus Christ and they are part of the faith community. We come together in union and fellowship as people who share faith.

But this isn’t the case in the majority of Catholic parishes. Instead, its individuals going to Mass and leaving as soon as the final blessing is said and the 2nd verse of the closing hymn is sung. There is little room for fellowship and this is one of the major complaints I see from converts. Many Catholics in US parishes engage in the social activities of the parish, i.e. coffee shops, pancake breakfast’s, beer feast etc, but few in the spiritual activities.

It looks like something, it sounds like something, it smells like something. The catechist has a teaching mission (hopefully it’s a vocation) to show what this practice looks like in relation to God and others, not merely to ask a person to “feel real deeply” about God.

True, but the catechists must also know what faith is through experience, not just the tenets of religious doctrine, which young people are not interested in.

if a person does not come to faith, maybe the catechist does a poor job of relating the faith.

Not necessarily, otherwise you end up blaming the majority of catechists for the failure to bring young people into the faith.

Maybe the heart of the disciple is closed. Maybe the disciple is blind. But it is not right to claim that one who conforms to the faith, or has a deep sense of obligation is not spiritual.

I never said one who has a deep sense of obligation isn’t spiritual, but that true faith will bring both.

I don’t go to Mass on Sunday or Holy Days because the Church says its an obligation with the threat of committing mortal sin if I don’t go. I go to Mass because I love Jesus Christ and desire to grow toward union with him. It is an act of love, not an act of duty.

A good catechist will pass along that sense of obligation in a way that is appealing. A good catechist certainly does not avoid a sense of obligation. Duty is part of love. Duty, obedience, obligation, do not need to be sterile and dead.

Again, most catechist must be failing then, because it isn’t happening. The Church population in the US and Europe is growing old. Young people are rejecting religion. I’m not sure how to turn this around except to pray for God to turn people’s hearts. Unfortunately, its probably going to require great tribulations.

I see Pope Francis giving the words which are bringing hope for young people. I’ve heard more young people say how they like this Pope, more than any other before.

His words cause them to look to God and to look for God’s mercy, but I think many are still rejecting His words once they realize they can’t do it on their own.

I pray that this year of mercy will convert hearts and not just convince people that maybe the Church is right and perhaps they should join up, just in case.

Jim

 

[clem456]

clem456;

Relational meaning, an exchange of love between the beloved and the lover.

Right, but this is the knowledge of who he is, but it is not relational. Even Satan knows this about Jesus.

A distinction without a difference,
Satan knows the Kerygma, AND, he hides it. Satan also knows that to have loving relationship with someone requires commitment to a person, not a ghost, so he would have us believe that we can know Christ without hearing who he is from others, and without committing to that person. Satan is a liar. He knows who Jesus is, but does not want *us *to know who Jesus is, and does not want us to tell others who he is.

In Genesis Satan asks “did God tell you…?”: God describes who he is to man, he relates himself to man. Satan lies to them and tells them to ignore God and experience life without his stupid and restrictive self communication!

A Christian does not come upon a relationship with Christ in a vacuum.
Love is not an idea or a feeling. It is to will the good of another for the sake of the other. If I don’t know another, how can I pretend to love them?

In a relation, the lover and beloved experience each other through love. As St John of the Cross said, the lover will take on the characteristics of the beloved. When we have a relationship with Jesus, we begin to be transformed through his grace and begin to love as He loves.

Gotta know who Christ is

“God is love, and whoever remains in love, remains in God and God in him.” 1 John 4:16

As the author of the Cloud of Unknowing wrote, “God can not be grasped, except through love.”

What is love?

Jesus is a spiritual being

Jesus is God incarnate, a divine person with full human nature. If God wanted us to merely experience his “spiritualness” , no need for him to “come down here”.

and without experiencing the reality of His being within your soul, there is no faith, just belief. Even Satan believes in Jesus.

Many people believe they know Christ through “contemplative” experiences without the practice of faith. So?

Again, how do you know Christ? What does the Church propose? What is asked of us? Contemplation is the fruit of the tree, not the farmer’s tool. It does not come first. St John of the Cross in no way proposes for Christians to seek out personal contemplative experiences out of context. In fact a good bunch of his writing is skeptical of these experiences, emphasizing the possibility they are the deceptions of the evil one.

 

[clem456]

JimR-OCDS
The experience of Jesus Christ is spiritual have no doubt about it.

Of course it is spiritual. We are a union of body and soul. A union. Our faith is spiritual, but it cannot be disconnected spirituality. Are you proposing that spirituality can be disconnected from the practice of religion?

No disagreement here, but this is the description of Jesus, not the experience of Jesus, the Christ. The apostles experienced Jesus the man, but not until the experienced Jesus the Christ, were their hearts and minds opened.

I don’t get the either/or. If you profess to know Christ, you must describe him, proclaim him, live his life. Christ is not our private spiritual comfort blanket. The Gospel is the Good News. It is communication, description, living, serving. The experience of Christ cannot be disconnected from all this.

You can give all the compelling reasons you want, but faith comes from Jesus Christ, not through convincing arguments of the intellect.

Never claimed that.

True, just as salvation isn’t individual, but communal. However, each individual of the community has their relationship with Jesus Christ and they are part of the faith community. We come together in union and fellowship as people who share faith.

True

But this isn’t the case in the majority of Catholic parishes. Instead, its individuals going to Mass and leaving as soon as the final blessing is said and the 2nd verse of the closing hymn is sung. There is little room for fellowship and this is one of the major complaints I see from converts. Many Catholics in US parishes engage in the social activities of the parish, i.e. coffee shops, pancake breakfast’s, beer feast etc, but few in the spiritual activities.

Right, They believe they can show up for private spiritual nourishment, without committing themselves fully, body and soul. It comes in different forms. There are some who are sacramentalized but not disciples, there are those who are spiritualized but not disciples.

True, but the catechists must also know what faith is through experience, not just the tenets of religious doctrine, which young people are not interested in.

Right, sort of. Young people can be passionately interested in learning and experiencing the faith, IF the catechist puts meat on the bones, so to speak. And does it with love.

I don’t go to Mass on Sunday or Holy Days because the Church says its an obligation with the threat of committing mortal sin if I don’t go. I go to Mass because I love Jesus Christ and desire to grow toward union with him. It is an act of love, not an act of duty.

So it’s either/or then. Obligation and love are separate? This is not what the Church proposes. You never go to Mass out of a sense of obligation? Do you equate a sense of obligation with slavery? This is not the Church’s proposal for what obedience, obligation, duty, are. They serve love, and are liberating, not enslaving.

Again, most catechist must be failing then, because it isn’t happening. The Church population in the US and Europe is growing old. Young people are rejecting religion. I’m not sure how to turn this around except to pray for God to turn people’s hearts. Unfortunately, its probably going to require great tribulations.

I see Pope Francis giving the words which are bringing hope for young people. I’ve heard more young people say how they like this Pope, more than any other before.

His words cause them to look to God and to look for God’s mercy, but I think many are still rejecting His words once they realize they can’t do it on their own.

I pray that this year of mercy will convert hearts and not just convince people that maybe the Church is right and perhaps they should join up, just in case.

Jim

I do as well Jim, but don’t see how it can happen disconnected from the virtue and practice of religion. The young people I see thriving in the faith are hearing about Christ from parents and catechists who are passionate and knowledgeable and loving, and they are practicing their faith in a real and substantial way, in “church” and out.
I’m with John of the Cross on a proper perspective regarding contemplative experiences.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

clem

Of course it is spiritual. We are a union of body and soul. A union. Our faith is spiritual, but it cannot be disconnected spirituality. Are you proposing that spirituality can be disconnected from the practice of religion?

You’re not following what I’ve said before. Religion is the response to faith.

You can have religion without faith, but faith moves one toward religion for God wants us to be united in faith with others.

I don’t get the either/or. If you profess to know Christ, you must describe him, proclaim him, live his life. Christ is not our private spiritual comfort blanket. The Gospel is the Good News. It is communication, description, living, serving. The experience of Christ cannot be disconnected from all this.

And I’m not disagreeing with this. But to know Christ is more than knowing about him, which was my point.

I can tell you about Jesus, who he was, what he did, etc, but you won’t know him until you get into a relationship with him and this requires faith.

Right, sort of. Young people can be passionately interested in learning and experiencing the faith, IF the catechist puts meat on the bones, so to speak. And does it with love.

But the catechist must have the experience of faith, not just the practice of religion and even then, it is God who calls a person to faith, in this case the young person, not the catechist.

So it’s either/or then. Obligation and love are separate?

Yeah they often are. If you go to Mass because you feel you have to to avoid hell, that is not love, its not done freely. Love must be given freely.

This is not what the Church proposes. You never go to Mass out of a sense of obligation?

I did before I had faith, but not anymore. I go to Mass because I love God and have a desire to grow deeper spiritually through his divine love.

Do you equate a sense of obligation with slavery?

Of course its not slavery. But doing something out of fear is not love.

This is not the Church’s proposal for what obedience, obligation, duty, are. They serve love, and are liberating, not enslaving.

That depends on the reason. If done out of fear of committing mortal sin because the Church said so, then its not love.

There are some 37 holy days of obligation which the Church put on people centuries back, which were removed. The purpose was to prop up the Church coffers.

Was this out of love ?

I do as well Jim, but don’t see how it can happen disconnected from the virtue and practice of religion.

The practice of religion out of faith and following a religious institution out of an ego-identity attachment is the difference.

There are people who join a religion in order to feel part of a group. They take on an ego-identity attachment to the religion. When anyone questions the teachings of that religion, they become offended and respond offensively. Its not the religion they’re defending, but their own ego.

Religion must always be a response to faith.

The young people I see thriving in the faith are hearing about Christ from parents and catechists who are passionate and knowledgeable and loving, and they are practicing their faith in a real and substantial way, in “church” and out.

I’ve seen all sorts. Some young people are conformist who do what pleases their parents. Others are rebels who do the opposite of what they’re parents want. Some of the worse Catholics I’ve met are young converts who become Catholic as a rebellion against their parents who never like the Catholic Church in the first place. Again, the ego-identity attachment was in play here. Most come across as rigid and cold. They eventually give up on the Catholic religion as something else replaces their ego attachment.

I’m with John of the Cross on a proper perspective regarding contemplative experiences.

And if you have proper contemplative experiences, what John of the Cross wrote will easily understood. If not, it will be difficult to understand at all.

Jim

 

[clem456]

clem

You’re not following what I’ve said before. Jim

Yea I am. We are just going in circles now and I honestly do not think it productive.

Can you address this poster’s question regarding the sentence he bolded? I would be curious how this works as well.

Originally Posted by JimR-OCDS View Post

I taught Confirmation Classes to 11th graders for years.

Most came because their parents made them come to class and made them receive their Confirmation.

When you have a class room full of people who were forced there, getting through on matters of faith are very difficult.

So, I decided that what they needed most was to understand that there is a difference between living a spiritual life and just going to Church out of a sense of obligation.

I opened their hearts and minds to contemplative prayer. Some didn’t get it, but many did and I was amazed how well they received it. If anything, it made them see that Jesus Christ dwells within, and they could turn to Him anytime they wanted at any place they were in.

How well this sunk in, I have no idea, but I had kids who were more attentive than when I first began teaching, when the focus was religion alone.

Jim

Hi Jim,

Do you have any links/tips etc regarding this?

I’d like to learn more if not too much trouble.

 

[guanophore]

Yea I am. We are just going in circles now and I honestly do not think it productive.

Can you address this poster’s question regarding the sentence he bolded? I would be curious how this works as well.

I can’t speak for Jim, but this is what I was taught that was transformative for me.

centeringprayer.com/

 

[Kelly77]

I new on this forum. Im amazed how a thread can get sidetracked!

 

[clem456]

I can’t speak for Jim, but this is what I was taught that was transformative for me.

centeringprayer.com/

I get it.
I don’t look for contemplation. I believe God occasionally draws me into it but I never go looking for it. If God draws me deeper after reading the psalms and the daily Gospel, great.
What I don’t get is Jim’s incongruity between religious practice, obligations, and contemplating the person of Christ, as if one is opposed to the other, as if one is “spiritual” and the other is not. As if coming to “class” out of a sense of obligation leads one to some kind of slavery, or to a dead faith. As if avoiding those obligations and going off into contemplation will lead more directly to love and freedom. Are these all not part of the same continuum?

The Church does not speak this way about religion. Never has. The testimony of the saints does not speak this way about religion. A good catechist must learn now to make these lives and this faith come alive, not avoid the challenges it presents and leap ahead into spiritual practices which honestly, 11th graders (let alone most adults) are almost certainly not mature enough for.

St John of the Cross was invoked here, and this “jumping ahead” approach into spiritual experiences is not what he is about. Anyone who has read him knows of his healthy skepticism in regard to spiritual experience. There is a journey to be taken, and it is not taken by leaping ahead and searching for lofty experiences. The problem is, the person who searches for lofty experiences will almost certainly not find them. They come by God’s grace, and by the steady and patient cooperation with God’s grace in virtue. Virtue is -the practice of- whatever it is.

1807… Justice toward God is called the “virtue of religion.”

The faith is built with a foundation, step by step, and a good catechist will inspire disciples to begin patiently building a life of faith, including instilling a sense of obligation, or justice, towards loving God and his people. You cannot have one without the other. Our people will not recognize the obligation to love one another, let alone find contemplative prayer, if we do not recognize our obligations before God. That cannot ever work.

MAN’S CAPACITY FOR GOD

I. THE DESIRE FOR GOD

27 The desire for God is written in the human heart, because man is created by God and for God; and God never ceases to draw man to himself. Only in God will he find the truth and happiness he never stops searching for:

The dignity of man rests above all on the fact that he is called to communion with God. This invitation to converse with God is addressed to man as soon as he comes into being. For if man exists it is because God has created him through love, and through love continues to hold him in existence. He cannot live fully according to truth unless he freely acknowledges that love and entrusts himself to his creator.1
28 In many ways, throughout history down to the present day, men have given expression to their quest for God in their religious beliefs and behavior: in their prayers, sacrifices, rituals, meditations, and so forth. These forms of religious expression, despite the ambiguities they often bring with them, are so universal that one may well call man a religious being:
…
29 But this “intimate and vital bond of man to God” (GS 19 § 1) can be forgotten,
…

30 "Let the hearts of those who seek the LORD rejoice."5 Although man can forget God or reject him, He never ceases to call every man to seek him, so as to find life and happiness. But this search for God demands of man every effort of intellect, a sound will, “an upright heart”, as well as the witness of others who teach him to seek God.
…
II. WAYS OF COMING TO KNOW GOD
31 Created in God’s image and called to know and love him, the person who seeks God discovers certain ways of coming to know him. These are also called proofs for the existence of God, not in the sense of proofs in the natural sciences, but rather in the sense of “converging and convincing arguments”, which allow us to attain certainty about the truth. These “ways” of approaching God from creation have a twofold point of departure: the physical world, and the human person.
…
35 Man’s faculties make him capable of coming to a knowledge of the existence of a personal God. But for man to be able to enter into real intimacy with him, God willed both to reveal himself to man and to give him the grace of being able to welcome this revelation in faith. (Faith is God’s gift of a relationship that asks for a response. That response includes recognizing obligations done out of love which must go beyond feelings and experiences.)The proofs of God’s existence, however, can predispose one to faith and help one to see that faith is not opposed to reason.

 

[clem456]

When my son was about 15 he was into Lord of the Rings, the books and the movies. Made a big impression. We talked about it. The epic struggle, good vs evil. The love of friends and the deep commitment (obligation?) they had to one another. The love. The various cool ways the story was told. The trappings of the story. The ring. The wizard. The battles. The journey.

He didn’t know anything about JRR Tolkien. He intuitively was drawn to this story of a great quest.

I wanted him to learn one thing about these stories. Not just the great feelings that Sam and Frodo had for one another, not just the fact that love won in the end. All these are very key.

But what I really wanted him to know is:
this story is not accidental on JRR Tolkien’s part, rather it is intentional. It is not just a creative whim on his part, not just a random product of his creative genius. In relation to our discussion here, his story is not just a neat experience to be had. It is an intentional call to action, to commitment, to a sense of justice, to live the sacrificial love these characters have for one another. A man thought this subject matter was important enough to communicate it in a direct and powerful way. I have to wonder, why is it we cannot communicate the drama of our faith (thank you JP2) in a powerful way like this?

Tolkien intentionally relayed powerful truths of the Christian faith. All the contributing factors or “adornments” of the story, what we might call religion here, serve the higher purpose of relating and hearing a true story. None of it is “throw-away”.

 

[Thomas_White]

Hi Jim,

Do you have any links/tips etc regarding this?

I’d like to learn more if not too much trouble.

The writings of Thomas Merton would be a good contemporary source. One of his books is entitled “Contemplative Prayer” and another “New Seeds of Contemplation”.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Yea I am. We are just going in circles now and I honestly do not think it productive.

Can you address this poster’s question regarding the sentence he bolded? I would be curious how this works as well.

I did address the poster’s question in a PM.

Jim

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I can’t speak for Jim, but this is what I was taught that was transformative for me.

centeringprayer.com/

Jim

 

[Thomas_White]

I get it.
I don’t look for contemplation. I believe God occasionally draws me into it but I never go looking for it. If God draws me deeper after reading the psalms and the daily Gospel, great.
What I don’t get is Jim’s incongruity between religious practice, obligations, and contemplating the person of Christ, as if one is opposed to the other, as if one is “spiritual” and the other is not. As if coming to “class” out of a sense of obligation leads one to some kind of slavery, or to a dead faith. As if avoiding those obligations and going off into contemplation will lead more directly to love and freedom. Are these all not part of the same continuum?

The Church does not speak this way about religion. Never has. The testimony of the saints does not speak this way about religion.

Of course it does. There is a very long tradition of mysticism among Catholic Saints, but this approach is decidedly not ascendant in our era. Spirituality is an experience. It is not found externally by reading documents or from a sense of obligation but can be experienced through religious practice. Too often religion teachers are not themselves spiritual persons, and this is easily sensed at least intuitively from their rigid perspective.

 

[clem456]

Of course it does. There is a very long tradition of mysticism among Catholic Saints, but this approach is decidedly not ascendant in our era. Spirituality is an experience. It is not found externally by reading documents or from a sense of obligation but can be experienced through religious practice. Too often religion teachers are not themselves spiritual persons, and this is easily sensed at least intuitively from their rigid perspective.

You missed the point entirely. I did not say the Church does not have a long tradition of mysticism.
But bless you Thomas for knowing the hearts of “religious teachers” so well.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

clem4

What I don’t get is Jim’s incongruity between religious practice, obligations, and contemplating the person of Christ, as if one is opposed to the other, as if one is “spiritual” and the other is not.

The term you used here, “contemplating the person of Christ,” is not what Contemplation is.

Contemplation is the spiritual marriage of the Christ with the soul. It is the loving awakening of Jesus Christ dwelling within.

Religion practice alone can not do this and there are people who have religion who will never experience contemplation.

For people who have faith, i.e. Christ revealed and experienced, will engage with religion as its meant to be.

As Fr Rohr expressed it today in his meditation;

Religion is meant to teach us how to see and be present to reality.

And this;

Prayer is not primarily saying words or thinking thoughts. It is, rather, a stance. It’s a way of living in the Presence, living in awareness of the Presence, and even of enjoying the Presence. The contemplative is not just aware of God’s Loving Presence, but trusts, allows, and delights in it.

As if coming to “class” out of a sense of obligation leads one to some kind of slavery, or to a dead faith. As if avoiding those obligations and going off into contemplation will lead more directly to love and freedom. Are these all not part of the same continuum?

Pope Francis said,

Catechism, yoga, Zen cannot open people’s hearts to God, pope says.

Only the Holy Spirit can “move the heart” and make it “docile to the Lord, docile to the freedom of love,” the pope said Friday at Mass in the Domus Sanctae Marthae.

The Church does not speak this way about religion. Never has.

It has and often does, which is the topic of this thread which Pope Francis is addressing.

Without faith, which is the revelation of God to us, we will not grow in love, but merely become rigid followers of religion. We’ll live in a dualistic world where we see ourselves separated from others who are the damned, while we who follow church doctrine to the letter, might be saved.

Jim

 

[Louie1983]

The writings of Thomas Merton would be a good contemporary source. One of his books is entitled “Contemplative Prayer” and another “New Seeds of Contemplation”.

Will look into, thanks!

Hope you had a good Christmas.

 

[Louie1983]

I did address the poster’s question in a PM.

Jim

Indeed you did, thanks.

Sorry if I take a little while to respond, I currently only have access to the net at work…

 

[Louie1983]

I can’t speak for Jim, but this is what I was taught that was transformative for me.

centeringprayer.com/

Thanks for these links!

I’m going to buy a copy of that book!

Sounds helpful!

 

[guanophore]

I new on this forum. Im amazed how a thread can get sidetracked!

Yep.

We do have a tendency to run rabbit trails.

I get it.

What I don’t get is Jim’s incongruity between religious practice, obligations, and contemplating the person of Christ, as if one is opposed to the other, as if one is “spiritual” and the other is not.

Oh I agree with you! It is just that our youth are coming for Confirmation preparation so poorly prepared sometimes we have to go to great lengths to compensate for a lack of balance. Kids who have just be going through the motions with no inner connection need to encounter Christ first.

As if coming to “class” out of a sense of obligation leads one to some kind of slavery, or to a dead faith. As if avoiding those obligations and going off into contemplation will lead more directly to love and freedom. Are these all not part of the same continuum?

It was very demoralizing for me to have the kids coming because they are coerced by parents who are not forming their faith at home, and are just trying to fulfill their obligation to have their child raised in the faith. Many of them did not even come to Mass regular. The kids were anxious to “get it over with” so they could be “done”.

I would say their faith is dead, or may never have been nurtured much since baptism. I agree that it is a continuum but these kids need to be evangelized, they need to know Jesus.

The Church does not speak this way about religion. Never has. The testimony of the saints does not speak this way about religion. A good catechist must learn now to make these lives and this faith come alive, not avoid the challenges it presents and leap ahead into spiritual practices which honestly, 11th graders (let alone most adults) are almost certainly not mature enough for.

I think a good catechist can do both. We see in the NT that people who were converted did so because they had a profound spiritual experience. This is what we must facilitate for them. We must take them by the hand, and place their hand in Jesus’ hand.

One need not be “mature” to have a spiritual transformation/conversion experience. In fact, ,this should be seen as a starting point for catechesis.

St John of the Cross was invoked here, and this “jumping ahead” approach into spiritual experiences is not what he is about. Anyone who has read him knows of his healthy skepticism in regard to spiritual experience. There is a journey to be taken, and it is not taken by leaping ahead and searching for lofty experiences. The problem is, the person who searches for lofty experiences will almost certainly not find them. They come by God’s grace, and by the steady and patient cooperation with God’s grace in virtue. Virtue is -the practice of- whatever it is.

You are right of course, and we should not seek the gift, but the Giver. The problem is that many of these kids have never been taught how to seek the Giver. They did not come up in families that prayed together or even talked about God. They don’t know how to have a conversation with God. This is not something “lofty” but a basic foundation for beginning.

The faith is built with a foundation, step by step, and a good catechist will inspire disciples to begin patiently building a life of faith, including instilling a sense of obligation, or justice, towards loving God and his people. You cannot have one without the other. Our people will not recognize the obligation to love one another, let alone find contemplative prayer, if we do not recognize our obligations before God. That cannot ever work.

I agree with you, and if these kids were getting this from the beginning then by the time we got to Confirmation it would be just putting the icing on the cake. But we have teen agers leaving the Holy Eucharist in their pews! We need to do first grade education when we should be launching them into being responsible for their own faith formation.

 

[guanophore]

When my son was about 15 he was into Lord of the Rings, the books and the movies. Made a big impression. We talked about it. The epic struggle, good vs evil. The love of friends and the deep commitment (obligation?) they had to one another. The love. The various cool ways the story was told. The trappings of the story. The ring. The wizard. The battles. The journey.

He didn’t know anything about JRR Tolkien. He intuitively was drawn to this story of a great quest.

I wanted him to learn one thing about these stories. Not just the great feelings that Sam and Frodo had for one another, not just the fact that love won in the end. All these are very key.

But what I really wanted him to know is:
this story is not accidental on JRR Tolkien’s part, rather it is intentional. It is not just a creative whim on his part, not just a random product of his creative genius. In relation to our discussion here, his story is not just a neat experience to be had. It is an intentional call to action, to commitment, to a sense of justice, to live the sacrificial love these characters have for one another. A man thought this subject matter was important enough to communicate it in a direct and powerful way. I have to wonder, why is it we cannot communicate the drama of our faith (thank you JP2) in a powerful way like this?

Tolkien intentionally relayed powerful truths of the Christian faith. All the contributing factors or “adornments” of the story, what we might call religion here, serve the higher purpose of relating and hearing a true story. None of it is “throw-away”.

Few people actually learn that Tolkien was Catholic. I love the Elves waybread - one cake can sustain you for a whole day.