What's a Traditionalist doing qt your typical Novus Ordo type First Communion catechism classes? Help!

[Melchior_1]

Maybe you haven’t noticed, but those with orthodox beliefs are, as a de facto rule, banned from teaching at Novus Ordo parishes/Churches. So teaching the class myself would never happen.

This is news to me, because I teach at my “Novus Ordo” parish. Unless you’re calling me not orthodox?

It does remind me of a somewhat crude joke.

“What do you call a female doctor?”
“…”
“A DOCTOR, YOU SEXIST FOOL!”

“What do you call a Novus Ordo parish?”
“…”
“CATHOLIC”.

 

[anruari]

No, this comes as no surprise. The program “Come Join Us at the Table” that we use for First Communion (and for Confirmation for the 9 years that we celebrated both together) preparation in our parish is a family-based process that involves the parents and the children together. The parents are expected to be there as were the Confirmation sponsors if it was possible.

That process takes into consideration the fact that the parents are the primary catechists of their children. Parents, in turn, are able to deepen their understanding of sacramental and liturgical language as they follow the rhythm of the liturgical seasons. I can’t tell you the number of times we’ve heard parents say “I never knew that!” or “Now, I understand. I never got that before.”

If done right that sounds like an excellent Idea.
So many catholics have a very poor understanding of these essential teachings. such opportunities helps those who do know to share their faith and knowledge, and gives a good opportunity to re-teach those who dont know.

 

[Mike30]

Thank you for your kind & understanding comments. Maybe you haven’t noticed, but those with orthodox beliefs are, as a de facto rule, banned from teaching at Novus Ordo parishes/Churches. So teaching the class myself would never happen.

The entire thread just became suspect.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

Well, the good teachers were driven out of my parish (Novus Ordo) for being too traditional. I don’t really find it surprising that the OP described it like he did because, honestly, sometimes we’re treated like that, again, my parish being an example. CCD became a glorified arts and crafts session. Seriously!

 

[revert_jen]

Read the works of the great Franciscan doctors and you’ll see that they all begin with feelings and after 300 pages, then they get into concepts. This is also very Teresian (Teresa of Avila).

… who was not, of course, Franciscan. But actually, I haven’t seen that pattern in her writings, of which I have read a fair quantity. Perhaps it is easier to notice if you are looking for it.

And you must understand that that method naturally does not appeal to everyone. In today’s society many people have had bad experiences, and therefore tend to be wary of people who try to manipulate their emotions. If you allow people to do that, you don’t know until too late whether they are going to move on to substance or not. It’s not that there is anything wrong with the Franciscan technique (although I don’t think it would ever have been a good one for me), just that the beginning parts of the Franciscan technique can be mimicked by people who just intend to deal with the feelings part and never get to the substance (because frequently, in politics and commerce, there is no substance to get to). Also there is the danger that people will mistakenly think that their feelings are a good way to judge doctrine.

Also, during the time in which I grew up, CCD was pretty much only ever about feelings. I never really was taught the important things about my faith. By and large, I had to teach them to myself (with a lot of help from the Holy Spirit in making me look for the information) after I reverted. I grew up in the age of felt banners, and (e.g.) a whole year of CCD focused on the 10 commandments, where students weren’t even expected to be able to list the 10 commandments from memory by the end of the year. It is not unreasonable to be a bit wary of “education” that focuses entirely on feelings and things for which there is no right answer, when children desperately need to know about the things for which there is a right answer.

Frankly, if people spent less time on the “feelings” part, they might have time after the “doctrinal” part to focus on why the Church has the teachings she has. And then we wouldn’t have mega-churches that were 50% ex-Catholic.

Don’t let the somewhat offensive way the OP was written hide the genuine, valid concern that is present there.

–Jen

 

[Julia_Mae]

The catechisis is centered around almost “feeling”. How do you “feel” about “sin”, for example. What do you think “sin” is?.

Ask; don’t tell.

“It’s really interesting to hear everyone’s opinions, and, please tell me what the definition of sin is according to the Church?”

If they start to prevaricate, interrupt as politely as possible, “Are you saying there is no definition of sin in the Catechism?”

More prevarication? You smile as if making a joke,

“I’m sorry, is the Church’s definition of sin a secret for some reason? Do you, yourself, know what it is?”

 

[CB_Catholic]

No, this comes as no surprise. The program “Come Join Us at the Table” that we use for First Communion (and for Confirmation for the 9 years that we celebrated both together) preparation in our parish is a family-based process that involves the parents and the children together. The parents are expected to be there as were the Confirmation sponsors if it was possible.

That process takes into consideration the fact that the parents are the primary catechists of their children. Parents, in turn, are able to deepen their understanding of sacramental and liturgical language as they follow the rhythm of the liturgical seasons. I can’t tell you the number of times we’ve heard parents say “I never knew that!” or “Now, I understand. I never got that before.”

My daughter’s parish has a program for parents also in sacramental preparation like the one above. It has actually produced some amazing fruits in my daughter’s life. She began to take her faith more seriously, and then began to have family Bible study sessions with her girls on Sundays. During Advent they did wonderful things and made a lovely Jesse tree. Now she has begun to volunteer at church helping out with the “Catholicism” series by Father Barron. In all of her endeavors, she has had to further her study of her faith.

Parental involvement in sacramental preparation is very important, and can really aid in the evangelization of nominal Catholics. All of my daughter’s “church” friends became involved in their church because of the involvement with their children’s religious education, which also involved adult education. I think it is the way to go. Far better than the way I was prepared.

 

[Rich_C]

Ask; don’t tell.

“It’s really interesting to hear everyone’s opinions, and, please tell me what the definition of sin is according to the Church?”

If they start to prevaricate, interrupt as politely as possible, “Are you saying there is no definition of sin in the Catechism?”

More prevarication? You smile as if making a joke,

“I’m sorry, is the Church’s definition of sin a secret for some reason? Do you, yourself, know what it is?”

Nice post, JM. Don’t become the teacher, make the teacher teach.

 

[JReducation]

… who was not, of course, Franciscan.

No, she was not. But the two greatest influence in her spiritual life were Franciscans: Francisco de Osuna and Peter of Alcantara.

And you must understand that that method naturally does not appeal to everyone.

You would be surprised to how many it does appeal. It’s not the largest religious family because it does not appeal. But that’s another story.

In today’s society many people have had bad experiences, and therefore tend to be wary of people who try to manipulate their emotions. If you allow people to do that, you don’t know until too late whether they are going to move on to substance or not. It’s not that there is anything wrong with the Franciscan technique (although I don’t think it would ever have been a good one for me), just that the beginning parts of the Franciscan technique can be mimicked by people who just intend to deal with the feelings part and never get to the substance (because frequently, in politics and commerce, there is no substance to get to). Also there is the danger that people will mistakenly think that their feelings are a good way to judge doctrine.

Also, during the time in which I grew up, CCD was pretty much only ever about feelings. I never really was taught the important things about my faith. By and large, I had to teach them to myself (with a lot of help from the Holy Spirit in making me look for the information) after I reverted. I grew up in the age of felt banners, and (e.g.) a whole year of CCD focused on the 10 commandments, where students weren’t even expected to be able to list the 10 commandments from memory by the end of the year. It is not unreasonable to be a bit wary of “education” that focuses entirely on feelings and things for which there is no right answer, when children desperately need to know about the things for which there is a right answer.

That’s why I suggested that one ask if the program is going to take a turn toward the head as we call it. It should not stay in the affect.

Frankly, if people spent less time on the “feelings” part, they might have time after the “doctrinal” part to focus on why the Church has the teachings she has. And then we wouldn’t have mega-churches that were 50% ex-Catholic.

There, I’m going to have to disagree. We have a good track record for 800 years.

Don’t let the somewhat offensive way the OP was written hide the genuine, valid concern that is present there.

–Jen

Good gravy! It takes a lot more to rattle me. Don’t worry about it.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Cristiano]

Well, the good teachers were driven out of my parish (Novus Ordo) for being too traditional. I don’t really find it surprising that the OP described it like he did because, honestly, sometimes we’re treated like that, again, my parish being an example. CCD became a glorified arts and crafts session. Seriously!

First glorified arts and crafts sessions do not make a catechism class heterodox, I do not like arts and crafts after a certain age but that is a different story. Second Teachers sometimes are driven out because they are too rigid and they do not know how to share the faith they just want to lecture and make their points, they loose students during the year. Third I am a catechist and as a member of a so called “Novus Ordo” parish I am asked to go back every year to teach high school students because I strive to be as orthodox as I can, and that is why I would never teach false information like existence “Novus Ordo” parishes and “Traditionalist” parishes.

 

[Cristiano]

… …Frankly, if people spent less time on the “feelings” part, they might have time after the “doctrinal” part to focus on why the Church has the teachings she has. And then we wouldn’t have mega-churches that were 50% ex-Catholic…

Feelings are part of the human nature and I think that it is extremely naive to discount them especially with children, we do not want to raise psychopaths. A properly formed conscience will trigger the feelings in the appropriate manner, just look at the “gut feeling”, that it is an unconscious reaction to a mind trained by experience. The problem I observe is that discounting feelings will not allow the healthy coordination between them and a properly formed conscience, just look how commercials on television where they try to build a relationship between feelings and behaviors. If you see a behavior it will trigger a specific feeling, and when you have a specific feeling then you will react with an expected behavior, that it is the way advertising works because that is the way the human mind works.

 

[JReducation]

First glorified arts and crafts sessions do not make a catechism class heterodox. Second Teachers sometimes are driven out because they are too rigid and they do not know how to share the faith they just want to lecture and make their points, they loose students during the year. Third I am a catechist and as a member of a so called “Novus Ordo” parish I am asked to go back every year to teach high school students because I strive to be as orthodox as I can, and that is why** I would never teach false information like existence “Novus Ordo” parishes and “Traditionalist” parishes**.

The bold is mine.

You are correct. This can create a problem, because the speaker is working out of a mental construct that does not fit into the Catholic Church. For example, were I live, we have several Catholic parishes. We may distinguish them as the Roman Catholic parish, the Melkite Catholic parish and the Chaldean Catholic parish. Those are legitimate distinctions, because they are different Churches.

The moment that you take any of these Churches and you break them down into categories that do not exist, you can be headed for trouble. You’re unintentionally creating a new Catholic Church. There is only one Latin Church.

The best way to speak about the diffences is to descibe them rather than attribute false labels to them. I can’t even say a Dominican parish or a Salesian parish. There is no such thing. There are Latin parishes run by Dominican Friars (not Fathers) and by the Salesian Fathers; but to say Dominican parish is also a false label.

If we want teach our children to live in the Church, we must present the Church as she sees herself, not as we see her and define her as she defines herself, not add definitions that the Church does not accept. We risk inadvertently creeating a schismatic way of thinking. That’s not what we want to do.

As to the rest, avoid public confrontations with the instructor. Just privately ask the question “when are we gong to see this or that?” If he says that it’s not covered in this class, just ask him for a good resource, if you ned one and thank him. Then you can visit the DRE and ask why it’s not covered and if it can be covered.

There are very polite and fraternal ways to deal with others. We must remember that we are the Church Militant, not the Church Belligerant. Anyone who suggests that you confront and do anything that may embarass the teacher is really more interested in proving his point than he is in the faith. The faith does not require that we put people on the spot, especially volunteers who are doing what many of us do not do.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Cristiano]

… We must remember that we are the Church Militant, not the Church Belligerant…

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Dang! I did not get that memo, now I have to change my attitude. :blush:

Honestly I think that it is a great point that we should remind ourselves more often, thanks for expressing it that way, it surely hits home.

 

[april32010]

The entire thread just became suspect.

yep,and the insistence on using " Novus Ordo "

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

First glorified arts and crafts sessions do not make a catechism class heterodox, I do not like arts and crafts after a certain age but that is a different story. Second Teachers sometimes are driven out because they are too rigid and they do not know how to share the faith they just want to lecture and make their points, they loose students during the year. Third I am a catechist and as a member of a so called “Novus Ordo” parish I am asked to go back every year to teach high school students because I strive to be as orthodox as I can, and that is why I would never teach false information like existence “Novus Ordo” parishes and “Traditionalist” parishes.

The use of “Novus Ordo Parish” has been explained many times. It’s not that hard to get what people mean by it. Apparently some people just like to intentionally be dense so they can take offense. Get over it. It’s not an insult to describe a parish as one that has solely the Novus Ordo Mass, nor is it an insult to refer to the Novus Ordo as such (that, too, has been explained countless times).

In regard to catechism, when the kids spend their time drawing on altar cloths with markers and making cardboard cutouts of trees and grapes when they are in first communion class… well, seems like a waste of time, doesn’t it? The prior teachers (the ones driven out) would spend that time teaching catechism, prayers, etc. And they were popular with the kids, too.

 

[Cristiano]

The use of “Novus Ordo Parish” has been explained many times. It’s not that hard to get what people mean by it. Apparently some people just like to intentionally be dense so they can take offense. Get over it. It’s not an insult to describe a parish as one that has solely the Novus Ordo Mass, nor is it an insult to refer to the Novus Ordo as such (that, too, has been explained countless times).

Only dense people pretend to claim orthodoxy while being heterodox. People here have thick skins and they do not get offended easily but they also try to stick to the correct disciplines of the Church, here I am not talking about insults I am talking about orthodoxy and respecting the clearly expressed intentions of the Pope. That is what Catholics do.

In regard to catechism, when the kids spend their time drawing on altar cloths with markers and making cardboard cutouts of trees and grapes when they are in first communion class… well, seems like a waste of time, doesn’t it? The prior teachers (the ones driven out) would spend that time teaching catechism, prayers, etc. And they were popular with the kids, too.

It is not a waste of time at all if the system works, do you want the children to memorize the catechism or do you want the children to grow spiritually as true followers of Christ? Just be careful of what you wish for, just remember what Benedict XVI said last week.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

Only dense people pretend to claim orthodoxy while being heterodox. People here have thick skins and they do not get offended easily but they also try to stick to the correct disciplines of the Church, here I am not talking about insults I am talking about orthodoxy and respecting the clearly expressed intentions of the Pope. That is what Catholics do.

It is not a waste of time at all if the system works, do you want the children to memorize the catechism or do you want the children to grow spiritually as true followers of Christ? Just be careful of what you wish for, just remember what Benedict XVI said last week.

First, I did not call you or anyone else dense. No insult or anything. I did say that it seems like people pretend it because I can’t really see any other reason why “Novus Ordo” would be found insulting when it’s been made perfectly clear that the poster has no such intention (yes, I’ve had numerous people insist that I’m lying).

Second, it is NOT a discipline of the Church that we must refer to the Ordinary Form as such or that Novus Ordo is forbidden (again, there’s the incident of that Vatican document post SP that called it the Novus Ordo). Judging by the reactions of some people, you’d think we were committing some heinous crime or a mortal since to use the “forbidden” two words. Guess what? After a lifetime of referring to something as one, you don’t just switch automatically and many people don’t even recognize Ordinary Form/Extraordinary form when mentioned that way. For instance, I know of a bishop (not SPXX or anything like that) who didn’t know what a person was talking about when using those two terms, but he instantly understood when Tridentine/Novus Ordo were used.

Third, in my parish, the “system” didn’t work. Since the new system has been in place, there’s been a marked change. I’m not talking Novus Ordo/Traditionalist here (I work at a very orthodox “Ordinary Form Church”) but just plain lousy teaching on the part of this one particular church. I was referring specifically to MY parish and made no generalizations about any others (or you, for that matter). My experience was related just to show that, yes, stuff like that happens and people can’t just jump on a poster when he’s expressing his frustrations.

A lot of us do sound frustrated… you tend to get that way when you’re kicked in the teeth over and over again because you’re trying to be a good Catholic in a mad world.

 

[TrueLight]

The use of “Novus Ordo Parish” has been explained many times. It’s not that hard to get what people mean by it. Apparently some people just like to intentionally be dense so they can take offense. Get over it. It’s not an insult to describe a parish as one that has solely the Novus Ordo Mass, nor is it an insult to refer to the Novus Ordo as such (that, too, has been explained countless times).

You know I do understand not using the term “Novus Ordo Parish” or “Novus Ordo Catholic” because one may not want to be defined that way.

However, I wholeheartedly disagree that one can’t sue the term “Novus Ordo”. There is no Church document that says that just because we can speak of the Extraordinary and Ordinary forms of the Roman rite, that we cannot also refer to the Ordinary form as the “Novus Ordo” or the EF as the TLM. I only see this insisted upon on CAF.

In fact, Archbishop DiNoia himself used the term recently.

The traditionalists that are now in the Church, such as the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, have brought what the Pope has insisted upon: that in the solemnity of the way in which they celebrate the liturgy, especially in the area of the liturgy, they are a testimony to the continuing liveliness of liturgical tradition previous to the Council, which is the message of Summorum Pontificum. The thing is: They can’t say that the Novus Ordo is invalid, but their celebration of the 1962 Missal is something that remains attractive and nourishes faith, even of those who have no experience of it. So that’s a very important fact.
ncregister.com/daily-news/archbishop-dinoia-ecclesia-dei-and-the-society-of-st.-pius-x/#ixzz25ngNHYcN

So can we stop jumping on anyone who uses the term “Novus Ordo”?

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

Thanks for the quote because I never did bookmark the link to the document I was referring to. People probably thought I was lying about that, too!

 

[Cristiano]

…My experience was related just to show that, yes, stuff like that happens and people can’t just jump on a poster when he’s expressing his frustrations.

A lot of us do sound frustrated… you tend to get that way when you’re kicked in the teeth over and over again because you’re trying to be a good Catholic in a mad world.

I understand your frustration, the same kind of frustration that got me into teaching catechism because my son was being taught falsities by good but very ignorant people.

I feel that I still get kicked in the teeth from time to time. My choice is to shut up and to look at the bigger picture, I am more concerned with the future of the children that come from ignorant feel good families because I know that probably I am the largest source of religious education for them. I expect the children of good Catholics to get the bulk of their education at home and the catechism class is the communal aspect of their spiritual growth.

Please remember that a catechist as about 15 hours of real work in a year and that a lot of the families send their kids to class only for the year of sacramental preparation. I hate arts and crafts, I do not like to spend too much time on talking just about feelings but in the case of children those actions are of the essence. I prefer to work with high school kids because you can intellectualize things much more but I can do that simply because they are a different audience. The bottom line is that catholic education in the parishes is in bad shape because of the majority of the parents and not simply because of few people with control issues.