Poor catechesis?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dovekin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Dovekin

Guest

After reading the above article, please answer this question from the recent Pew study of religious knowledge:
Which is the Catholic teaching about bread and wine in Communion?
They become actual body and blood of Christ ,
they are symbols of the body and blood of Christ
Click to expand...
Do you agree that we can distinguish who believes in the Eucharist by using this question?

Can we tell by this if there is poor catechesis on the Eucharist in the Church?
 
The term “actual” makes the question difficult. It seems the question was phrased in a way that would guarantee an outrage-worthy response.

The term that every 2nd grader on up is taught is “real” and they are taught about the accidents of wine and bread.
 
I think another issue is that basic philosophy is no longer taught in most schools. So “reality”, “substance”, “accidents”, etc are just words that mean different things to different people versus being understood clearly be many people. It seems to me like trying to describe the vastness of space to someone who doesn’t know what a light-year is.
 
Despite catechism class as a kid, and being a good student. I didn’t know about the real presence until I was handed a Jack Chick(sp?) tract calling Catholics cannibals when I lived down south.
 
Guest1 said:
Were your teachers too vague in their teachings regarding the Eucharist during Catechism?
Click to expand...
Yes. I personally think it should be highlighted. I suspect it was avoided because it is a tough teaching. I mean, some of Jesus’ own followers left him when he taught it.
 
Dovekin said:
Do you agree that we can distinguish who believes in the Eucharist by using this question?
Click to expand...
Even though the question isn’t worded or structured correctly, I would guess that people still understood the point of the question.
Dovekin said:
Can we tell by this if there is poor catechesis on the Eucharist in the Church?
Click to expand...
I would say no because it’s too much of a leap to take something from a poll and then make sweeping generalizations.
 
Last edited:
Brian_K said:
I think another issue is that basic philosophy is no longer taught in most schools. So “reality”, “substance”, “accidents”, etc are just words that mean different things to different people versus being understood clearly be many people. It seems to me like trying to describe the vastness of space to someone who doesn’t know what a light-year is.
Click to expand...
I would read it the opposite way. In the modern world, symbol has developed into semiotics. People spend large parts of their days, and their lives, looking at symbols that represent what is happening far away. Or happening in another time, the time of Big Bang Theorists or the Good Place. People know what symbols are, and they recognize that the Eucharist is a symbol as well as being a reality. And faced with the choice, this advanced knowledge of symbols leads them to assert correctly that the bread and wine are a symbol.

Catechesis often lags, and tries to force archaic philosophy on people who have already developed an alternative. That is poor catechesis. Good catechesis is helping them to understand how the symbol makes the reality present in their symbol dense world. (=effects what it signifies, if you want the ancient words)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top