Guys 25th Birthday Invite

Is it a sin to miss Mass on Sunday?

The answer to this question could be very short:

Yes, miss Mass, without a serious reason to justify it-is a grave sin.

may be of interest to dwell for a moment to analyze why this is so.

Why miss Mass on Sunday is a sin?

leaving

Because we failed to attend voluntarily a serious obligation we have. And the serious breach of duty is a serious fault.

So the starting point of this issue is the consideration of the law of the Church that sends attend Mass on Sundays and holidays.

Why might be a sin, if he misses Mass not hurt anyone?

The gravity of sins is not measured by how bad does to others, but for the offense that represents God. So, for example, blasphemy is a serious sin, but no one else will listen.

On the other side who miss Mass on Sunday is hurt yourself and the ecclesial community to which he belongs. The lack of God is a dangerous lack: it hurts the soul.

What are the obligations of Catholic?

Catholics, in addition to the Ten Commandments that summarize the natural law and are valid for all men-not only for Christians, we have other specific obligations to be: are the five commandments of the Church.

These are some duties to regulate and channel concrete form to be Catholic, how we love God and we worship in the Church. Among them is the obligation to attend Mass on Sundays and holy days of obligation.

is one of the most basic obligations of Catholics.

Surprisingly some Catholics are unaware of their obligations. And others just do not believe that there are real duties that require them. They think that to be the supreme law of Christian love, love everything should be spontaneous, with no obligations. But this is not true, because love is demanding: how much more love, more manifest requirement and avoid anything that offends.

Is it a board or a law?

is important to distinguish the advice and the law. One thing for recommendations of good things that give us to help us be better, "seeks to help others," "I try to pray the Rosary ", etc. In this case we will as we deem appropriate, but not bound in conscience to follow such advice. Obviously not sin, if we decide not to follow advice.

quite another are the laws that bind in conscience, the laws establish strict duties.

So the failure of the law is sin?

We must distinguish between the divine law that comes directly from God, and ecclesiastical law, issued by the Church to specify ways to serve and honor God.

divine law regulates basic life issues, so no exception: its failure is always bad, there can be no sin. This is the case of the Ten Commandments.

Instead, the church law is minimal concretions of the Church to help us live the Christian life and does not intend to oblige whenever there is a serious difficulty to comply. Therefore I do not ecclesiastical law when compliance requires me represents a serious inconvenience, if a Sunday I am sick or I have another problem that makes it very difficult to me I have no obligation to go to church.

But

in normal forces so that their failure is sin.

Because the lawlessness of the Church can not be good. And do not give importance to comply voluntarily leaving without just cause, is in fact a contempt.

Since it is a matter of personal opinions, but established by the Church, who established the ecclesiastical laws.

us see now what the Catechism of the Catholic Church about these commandments (I have highlighted in bold specific parts on this topic.)

THE COMMANDMENTS OF THE CHURCH

2041 The precepts of the Church are in this line of a moral life bound to the liturgical life that feeds it. The mandatory nature of these positive laws enacted by the ecclesiastical authority seeks to ensure the faithful the indispensable minimum in the spirit of prayer and moral effort, in the growth of love of God and neighbor . The more general commands of Holy Mother Church are five:

2042 The First Commandment (whole and hear Mass on Sundays and other holy days of obligation and make no menial jobs ") requires the faithful to sanctify the day which commemorates the Resurrection of the Lord and the principal liturgical feasts honoring the mysteries the Lord, the Blessed Virgin Mary and the saints, first participating in the Eucharistic celebration, and rest of those jobs and occupations that can prevent this sanctification of these days (cf. CIC can. 1246-1248; CCEO, can. 880, § 3; 881, § § 1 2.. 4).

The Second Commandment ("confess your sins at least once a year") ensures preparation for the Eucharist by receiving the Sacrament of Reconciliation, which continues the work of conversion and forgiveness of Baptism (cf. CIC can. 989; CCEO can.719).

The third commandment ("receive the sacrament of the Eucharist at least at Easter") guarantees a minimum in the reception of the Body and Blood of the Lord through time Easter, origin and center of Christian worship (cf. CIC can. 920; CCEO can. 708. 881, § 3).

2043 The fourth commandment (to abstain from meat and fasting on the days established by the Church) says the days of asceticism and penance which prepare us for the liturgical feasts and to acquire the mastery over our instincts and freedom of the heart (cf. CIC can. 1249-51; CCEO can. 882).

The fifth commandment (to help the needs of the Church) states that the faithful are also obliged to help, each according to his ability, to the material needs of the Church (Cf. CIC can. 222, CCEO, can. 25. The Episcopal Conference may also establish other ecclesiastical precepts for their own territory. Cf. CIC, can. 455).

And in particular, on the Sunday Mass, said:

2177 The Day Sunday celebration of the Eucharist and the Lord has a paramount role in life of the Church. "On Sunday, which celebrates the paschal mystery, the apostolic tradition has been observed in the whole Church as the foremost holy day of obligation" (CIC, can. 1246.1).

"Also to be observed on Christmas Day, Epiphany, Ascension, Corpus Christ, Holy Mary Mother of God, Immaculate Conception and Assumption, Saint Joseph, Saints Peter and Paul and finally, All Saints "(CIC, can. 1246.1).

2178 This practice of the Christian assembly dates from the early age of the Apostles (cf. Acts 2.42-46, 1 Co 11.17). The letter to the Hebrews says: "Do not abandon your Assembly, as habit of some, rather, encourage one another "(Hebrews 10:25).

Tradition preserves the memory of a timeless exhortation:" Come early to church, come the Lord and confess their sins, repent in prayer ... Going to the sacred and divine liturgy, conclude its prayer and do not leave before the dismissal ... I've often said, this day is given for prayer and rest. It is the day that the Lord has made. It exult and we rejoice (Unattributed, Serm. Sun.)

The obligation of Sunday

2180 The commandment of the Church and accurately determines the law of the Lord: "On Sundays and other holy days of obligation the faithful are obliged to participate in Mass "(CIC, can. 1247). "It fulfills the obligation of participating at Mass who attends it, wherever they are held in a Catholic rite, either on the day of the party as yesterday afternoon" (CIC, can. 1248.1)

2181 Eucharist Sunday bases and ratifies all Christian practice. For this reason the faithful are obliged to participate in the Eucharist on days of obligation, unless they are excused for a serious reason (eg illness, caring for young children) or dispensed by their own pastor (cf. CIC, can. 1245). Those who deliberately fail in this obligation commit a grave sin.

2182 Participation in the common celebration of the Sunday Eucharist is a testimony of belonging and loyalty to Christ and his Church. The faithful claim and his fellowship in faith and charity. Witness both the holiness of God and the hope of salvation. It is comforting each other, guided by the Holy Spirit.

2183 "When absence of a priest or other grave cause is impossible to assist in the Eucharistic celebration is strongly recommended that the faithful participate in the liturgy of the word, if it held in the parish church or other sacred place as prescribed by the diocesan bishop, or remain in prayer for an appropriate time, alone or in groups, or, if appropriate, in family groups "(CIC, can. 1248.2).

* * *

As the Catechism is no room for doubt. Everything that comes out of this, it is a personal opinion outside the established by the Church.

Eduardo Maria Volpacchio
20/11/2007

My Roots Are Lighter Than The Rest Of My Hair

What's that for morality? Where does?

brief explanation of the meaning of moral
moral life as a path to personal fulfillment

What is Christianity?
a saving encounter with God in Christ, who redeems us to lead a fully human and supernatural for which we were created.

Is Christianity a doctrine?
is much more than that, is a Person-Jesus Christ-who is God and salvation. This obviously involves a number of truths: who Jesus is, what he said, and so on., But it would be absurd to reduce the wonder Christian dogmas: they render the same content dogmas.

Is Christianity a moral?
is much more than that is a path to wholeness: "sed perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect "(Mt 5.48). Obviously this means that there are some other behaviors consistent and inconsistent with that way. But Christianity is not a "rule", a list of moral laws.

What is a Christian?
Jesus summed up his law in love. In this is everything. There are no more: everything else is a condition or consequence of this love.

What is love?
Man has been made in the image of God because God created it to lead to the fullness of life in God. And San Juan know that God is love (cf. 1 Jn 4.8). So, they treated us to God and, in some way, we deify is love. Do

specific behaviors have any importance?
Yes, lots. Because through them we "do" for ourselves. Our "way of being"-that each one of us in fact, is the result of genetic inheritance, cultural factors and our own actions.
Our actions will "model": its main effect is given in ourselves.
Why? Due to our freedom.
When I decide to do an action and do, I will adhere to the "project" that this action entails. When you want something good or bad, I will freely identify with good or evil that action entails. And by identifying with the good or evil, is itself good or bad. That is why he steals, not only taking something apart, but becomes a thief himself. The same goes for a lie and all sins. And also for the good stuff.

Love is demanding
precisely because it is a question of love, Christianity is demanding: it could not be otherwise. Does not exist, or is possibly a higher moral ideal that the Christian. By definition
Love wants the best for the beloved, and this is gloriously demanding: only love is able to get the best out of ourselves. Why

what God may demand so high? Because
gives grace. In the Old Testament the law was only a guide pointing the way, but not give the strength to follow it. The great "novelty" of the New Testament is that the New Law of Love, communicates the grace that enables compliance.

An obvious and basic principle
The good is good, bad is bad.
is precisely what defines good and evil. It spreads the good, the bad, bad. Well as the rich people, poor impoverished and corrupt.
define what is good and what bad is not arbitrary, nor is relative: good and evil of man is as real as the man himself. How

Where does the distinction between good and evil?
is in reality itself: the good is good, the bad, bad. There are behaviors that enhance, other than corrupt. Events leading to the end, others depart.
and is on the rational nature of man. His work on practical understanding "coordinates" of good and evil (everything practical is considered good or bad according to some aspect).

What we call "natural law"?
moral law is the "guide" human life to its fullness. It's called "natural" because it is written on paper, but inscribed in the very being of the person: is the "ought" that corresponds to their nature (what man is).
metaphorical So say it is written in the heart of man to say that it can "read" within.
With this image we mean the ability of the human intellect to discover the good and evil (the moral dimension) of their behavior, actions, lifestyles, etc.
The man does not determine its content, but simply "see" with their intelligence, you can find out what is good and what bad.
That the "right reason" is the natural law view.

Does the reason so important?
Yes, because the alternative is chaos or reason. The Logos or irrationality.
God has not imposed an arbitrary law, has created the reality "directed" towards its fulfillment. Man must discover and "perform" their existence. Relativism waiver
drive human behavior rationally. And this necessarily has tragic consequences for the same man.

How can you find out?
Man is a being trend: it is done in such a way that tends to the purpose for which it was created-one that is fulfilled and, therefore, happiness.

Every faculty and power tends to his own good (in this While particular meaning and purpose are identified: the purpose for which it is addressed, it is as well for her.) In this they fail (obviously except in cases of illness). At this stage we are not talking about the overall good of the person, but a private good of a power.

In some cases, this particular right of a faculty or power given, can be a real bad for the person. The satisfaction of a particular trend can be healthy for the person or not. Meets ice cream taste. You can feed the man, full of joy, etc. But it might haunt, it dangerously fat, etc.
words, no particular trend in itself the criterion regulator to ensure what it will be enriching for the person, needs to be regulated by "outside" of itself.

This is because when a spiritual man, not merely material, its actions have a meaning: they are not mere physical actions, but an expression of his person. It is the task of reason to capture this meaning.

What, then, the moral regulator of human behavior?
Reason. The function of reason is known. Before man can know the assets of each trend and put them in perspective with the good of the whole person. In this way leads to the fullness where you will find the happiness. And this trend precisely because of the nature of man, we are talking about, and the stronger tendency of man is to behave reasonably. The reason does not "create" the moral, but discover what is good for man.

How can the right to direct human behavior?
is made for this. It has what we call the first practical principles. Are similar to the first speculative principles that underlie all theoretical reasoning.
The synderesis is the habit of first principles studies. The first is "Do good and avoid evil." We all have.
also part of good judgment, the purpose of virtue, expressed in its most general: prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance.

the level of first principles, considering and reasoning, we turn to the level of moral science.

A third level is the practical, concrete actions, which are regulated by the virtue of prudence is who "choose" actions that can perform under here and now, in these circumstances.

What is consciousness?
is the view of the practical intellect that judges the morality of an act done, or I'm doing, that particular act is morally right or morally wrong.
This trial is not arbitrary, nor is a mere opinion (if something looks good or I would not be bad) is a rational view, the intelligence before God judged on the moral reality of action.
Intelligence is not capricious. And hitting is very interested in this trial. Because the moral life of the person depends on the conscience judge righteously. Obviously

judged as moral science: science without conscience there.
Hence the importance of creating awareness to judge correctly. This is not surprising, because all human capacities need training: the ability to speak, math, sport, art, etc., Untrained frustrated.

Consciousness does not determine the goodness or badness of an act, merely "declare" what you see in reality. In this view, intelligence as in any trial that could go wrong, and this would be inconvenient to the person, would lead him to believe that doing good does good, or vice versa.
This error could be guilty conscience (through neglect in the formation of conscience, judging by precipitation, etc.) Or blameless, as the person is guilty or not of the same.
error-and therefore blameless involuntary-awareness (in which case consciousness is called "invincible wrong") before God excuses sin.
But we must keep in mind that evil leads to the fullness, even that may be blameless. So guess we are very interested, have a conscience, that leads us along the path of true good.

What are the virtues?
habits Aristotle defined as elective, ie an improvement in operating power for the person who makes good choices in that area. So who is generous, has the "ability" to choose the actions they take a generous life.
often reduced virtue of its scale operations: an improvement of a power-result of the repetition of acts "that gives the facility to do well, as if a purely "mechanical" (a habituation).
But virtue is much more. Has three dimensions: cognitive, affective and other third operational.
The cognitive dimension works by naturality: who is generous, easily understood and known issues that relate to this virtue. This is the most important dimension. In addition it will be nice and easy to act on that knowledge.
So you see that to live a good life (ie "made") the virtues are essential.

There are four main virtues are called "cardinal" because all other dependent virtues or otherwise included in them.

justice: each one his own, what belongs and what, therefore, is entitled. The virtuoso is not just a "gauge" of interest, but has to live according to Rights: is straight, not interested or wants more than just for himself, he would offend anyone to think I want to keep more profit . Fraud is not attracted. It is just the heart. But a heart is somehow unfair corrupt.

Temperance: Drive to enjoy the delectable goods in their measure, to the extent necessary and desirable for the life of man. To prevent these goods do not become a problem, bad for oneself, not to enslave us. Given dominion, balance.

strength: it gives the ability to not give up either by the effort required and the difficulties that arise in their implementation. It is courage, patience in adversity, strength of will.

Prudence: The first and most important human virtues (1). Ability to discover and choose actions that make a good life: how to perform under particular in each case. Discern, decide and prevails.

Can or can not?
Acting right is not a question of whether " can or can not, but how do justice (or temperance, or fortitude) here and now in our lives (to make life fair, honest, etc..). Why not make sense to consider the moral life in the key of "permissions": what is allowed and what is prohibited. We are free and as such we can do many things. A time to act should ask a question: Is this good or bad? Do I want to do good (and so "me" good) or evil (and "me" bad), how to do good here and now? It is not asking permission to do something, but to decide on my life.

The moral law
A moral law is nothing other than a brief statement about the morality of certain actions, such as the expression "take something apart, against the reasonable will of the owner is unlawful."
The moral law is primarily a pedagogical function: to teach, in a concise and clear, what is good and what is bad.

Where does the moral law?
moral law is born of virtue. From these reason are compatible or incompatible behaviors with them, which made the human ideal or destroy it.

why laws often have a negative syntax?
Many of the laws express moral prohibitions: no killing, no stealing, etc.. This is because it is more accessible and defining concrete behaviors incompatible with virtue, than those prescribed positive virtue.
actions may determine that it is never licit to engage. Instead, it is not possible to identify positive actions constituted infringement of which is always a sin. Therefore the negative commandments oblige always, while in the case of positive could be that it is impossible to meet them, through no fault of their own. Ie the positive precepts can not always be met, there are good things in certain circumstances I can not do, even I can keep the right, "while there things I never do and nobody can force me to do them.
addition, the extent of positive precepts, far obligation is difficult to measure. Thus, for example, who can determine how much I have obligation to give alms? In contrast negatives refer to actions that I should not do, like taking the life of an innocent person.

Role of negative precepts
negative precepts seem negative but are actually very positive, and that protect key assets, which must be met: family, marriage, life, honor, justice in social life, truth , privacy, etc..
law could compare to a line minimum, below which it is impossible to love.

The aim of the moral life is not no sin, but to grow in virtue, doing good, living in love, to the best of ourselves. The moral horizon of a moral person whose goal was to avoid sin would be very poor.


Freedom and Freedom law gives us the opportunity to be architects of our personal fulfillment. We are free because we are determined to act in a fixed manner. Herein lies the greatness of man: to accede freely to God's plan.
I do "good" for identification with the good: freely adhere to good and it makes me good.
We are free to choose good, to the path that makes us, makes us better. The roads of good are greatly expanded so that the requirement to do good to perform, does not restrict my freedom, but it is a condition of perfection. True freedom of choice is not between good and evil, but from a huge variety of goods.
The choice of evil is a personal failure, sin is like a spiritual and existential catastrophe beyond what you can feel at one point: sin is very damaging to the person.
no sense to consider freedom as a state of uncertainty with regard to good and evil, as two paths equally eligible. I am free to choose good, to love. Freedom is not an end in itself. We are free, yes, but the key question would be: free for what? To carry out a full and fulfilling life. It would be sheer madness to use freedom to destroy.
In this sense the law is a guide to freedom: in general teaches you where the good and evil, and so makes it easy to distinguish. This is what the compass to the mariner. Not determine the way-the options are almost infinite-personal accomplishment, simply tells the blind alleys: the actions that lead nowhere and that are harmful.

"The most important thing is to fulfill the law?
No, the most important thing is to love. The law does not sanctify the love itself.
An example clarifies a lot of question: Who is the best husband? Who was faithful to his wife for fear of going to hell, it was love for his wife, or one who was unfaithful? Not a question of "if you can or can not" imagine "a husband asking his wife to allow him to be unfaithful?
The law enforcement is the first step, it is not possible to love if not followed the law. Jesus says: "If ye love me, will be fulfilling my commandments" (Jn 14,15).
The issue is enforcing the law sanctifies love.

love is more than not
sin also love goes far beyond the obligatory. And in Christianity that we are "rules" is to love. And love is terribly positive. It is a journey of personal growth. Amar
no "straightjacket" to the person, engage life, reduce freedom. Instead it opens many possible avenues.

How can we know the fundamental precepts of natural law?
These precepts-in itself accessible to human reason, God wanted to reveal to all men had access to them, completely, without error and with certainty. God gave to Moses on Mount Sinai when established his covenant with the People of Israel. Are the Ten Commandments

morally obligated "other laws?
addition to the natural law, there are laws "sanctioned" by God and laws enacted by man. They are called positive laws.
A law, in general, is a rational management aimed at the common good.
civil society needs an authority in your life and order. That authority, in the legitimate exercise of power, sanctions laws. If these laws are fair-which is presumed to bind in conscience-citizens: There is a moral duty to obey.
the Church to facilitate living the Christian life also sanctions laws (in this case ecclesiastical laws), which bind in conscience. Such is the case of the commandments of the Church and other laws (such as the Eucharistic fast, the governing sacraments, etc.).. Also these ecclesiastical laws bind in conscience.

What is sin?
A willful disobedience to God's law. Its main evil is that the rejection of his law, is rebellion against God Himself.
From the human point of view, is contrary to reason (remember that right reason is the "measure" of good and evil, all sin is unreasonable).
And personally, contrary to the good of mankind. By going after an apparent good is waived the true good. It is a great delusion, a trap. Sin is a failure in the way of personal fulfillment.

How serious is sin?
being an offense against God, the gravity of sin depends on subjective questions (how to bother me or how bad I feel after committing the crime), but of which constitutes an offense against God and sinning goods contrary .
According to the consequences that sin brings into the soul of who commits it is important to distinguish between mortal and venial sin, according to deprive us or not of the divine life (sanctifying grace).
venial sin is a misdemeanor, not a separation God's radical. Despite being minor, we should not despise them, and that cool the charity and, if they are not combat-are like an inclined plane that leads to mortal sin.
Mortal sin is a serious offense that radically departs from God, by sanctifying grace lost. With it you lose the merits achieved in life so far. Once committed, the soul is in a situation of deprivation guilty of grace, which is called "state of mortal sin." While in this state can not lawfully receive sacraments (committing a sacrilege if I did), performing good deeds without merit (because the merit principle is grace) stand to lose eternal life (if he died without repentance).
To be able to recognize if one is in a state of grace is very important to distinguish the venial and mortal sins.

How to measure the varying severity of sin?
The gravity of sin depends on your "stuff", ie their moral species (theft, slander, lies, etc.).
There are matters in which any violation of the moral law is a serious sin. In these cases there is no possibility of talking about little faults. This applies, for example, of blasphemy: any insult to God is a serious fault. Idolatry: worship of any creature, is missing serious. Of these materials is said that "no paucity of material support." Other themes support
paucity of material, ie, sin will be mild if the subject is small, and will be severe if the matter is serious. This is different from lying about a phone call to a brother to lie in court, stealing 2 pesos will be a venial sin, but if you steal the value of a weekly wage, will be deadly.

If I do not hurt anyone, what's wrong?
is not true that the only "test" of good and evil is justice. An action that do not harm anyone, can do me much harm to myself, and that can not be good. Remember the obvious: it makes good and bad is bad.
The aim of the moral law is not to avoid the damage of another, but to lead the person to their fullest. So the question we should ask before you act is as follows: Does it enriches me as a person? How

recovers grace?
The means established by God to obtain grace is baptism. And to recover the lost grace by mortal sin after Baptism, the sacrament of confession.

Sin, conscience and prudence
Sin is a result of free choice, contrary to moral law. It is not due to an error of conscience: the conscience judges "this action is bad ", but my freedom want to do it.
But sin is always wrong advice (who "choose" the action that should be done.) The person decides that this action should do, even knowing that it is a sin.
"force" the conscience to judge as good an evil act with the intention of staying calm is very bad business. Because consciousness is something "sacred", the meeting place of the soul with God. Corrupt the conscience is really bad. It's much better to do wrong, knowing it worked out badly, that convinced themselves that this is not bad.

P. Eduardo Maria Volpacchio
10/02/2007

(1) Obviously the theological virtues are important because they allow access to God are faith, hope and charity. And among them, the more perfect charity.

Pokemon For Nnkia N70

Does it make sense to study the Catechism memory?

Every year when meetings become parents of children preparing for First Communion raises the same question, the result of a culture anti-memoirs. Even in some cases, pose a tone Inquisitor for what they are studying by heart the Catechism Questions? Almost like saying, do you still continue with these prehistoric methods of learning? Do not you learned that memory is now frowned upon and that their use has become passé?

To show the current memory and the Catechism, we could use the argument of authority and show how recent documents of the Magisterium of the Church refer to it (collect the two major texts on the subject at the end). But we preferred to explain in some detail his rationale.

A clarification: these pages are not intended to defend the memory by memory, but something very concrete: the centrality of the rote learning of the Catechism.
As it is rote learning, not just anything, but the Catechism, we must begin by explaining its meaning and importance.

What is a Catechism?

Parties consider the obvious usefulness of the summaries. Who wants to know the most important-what matters an issue, "find a good summary of what you need to know about the issue.
In the realm of faith, something similar happens. From the beginning, the time of the Apostles came Symbols of Faith: The list of basic truths that a Christian should believe. Symbol of the Apostles' Creed we pray at Mass on Sundays in Argentina is a list of the twelve fundamental articles of faith, is attributed to the Apostles themselves. There is the most basic low expression of our faith. The truth is that the summary is great: it is everything and nothing is missing, everything else could be referred to these twelve articles is amazing. And things much easier. Then one can go deeper and considering what they know about each of them and has a guide to improve your knowledge of the faith.
Admittedly, this basic list of faith is very useful.

A second step is to put faith in questions and answers. It's ancient. And look if it's practical for the computing world has also adopted as usual system. In all Internet sites to find a section on "Help" (Help) with tons of questions. They teach you to use programs to do things, etc., Based on questions and answers. They have sections like "FAQ" (frequently asked questions and answers) or "Top questions". You could say that those sections "Help" is a "catechism" of such or such other thing.
That's what has the Church ever since. Teaching the faith-based questions and answers. Questions are very specific. And he responds very precise.
So everyone has to reach, in summary fashion, specifically, the most basic contents of faith. So
and accurate summary, the Pope explains the purpose of the Compendium Catechism (he was one of his first acts magisterial, fulfilling a request of John Paul II that he had done):

The Digest, which I now present to the Universal Church, is a faithful and sure synthesis of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Contains, in concise form, all the essential and fundamental elements of the faith of the Church, so that is, as my Predecessor had wished, a kind of vade mecum, through which people, believers or not, may include a single glance of entire panorama of the Catholic faith.

Benedict XVI, Motu Proprio for approval and publication of Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (28/06/2005)

Other Shorter Catechisms, which presents in summary fashion the major mysteries of the Christian believes, prays, and lives which it feeds. The study of these catechisms in the preparation of First Communion and Confirmation is to regard this paper.

The meaning and the value of memory

Why memory? Because it is fundamental in the process of human knowledge.
What is memory? To "store" experience, knowledge, people ... Remember something is to make use of the "deposit" (Database) that we carry with us. Study-in-fund is to record data, facts, ideas ... And we talked of studying memory when the "recorded" verbatim in our mind.

Ignorance, ideas confused, vague, precise knowledge
Learning is a process that leads to knowing something.
one thing to have a vague idea of \u200b\u200bsomething and another to know it properly. Do not talk about being an expert, but I know with any precision, so basic, what it is. Sometimes
handle words that have a vague idea, but do not really know what they mean exactly what they mean, what is the scope. But if we ask we explained that we would put in a bind, because we could not do it. Some examples: "global warming", "ozone layer", "evolution", "atomic energy." These are things that "sound", of which you have a general super idea ... sometimes so confusing that it is not true.

knowledge. Know precisely. With the right words.

If you were to ask what is a refrigerator? Would fit responses to different levels, some more accurate than others. "One thing that serves to cool" (could also be the radiator of a car or air conditioning). "A kind of closet where it's cold." "A machine for storing items that need to be kept cold." What is a human being? "One thing up and hair on legs" Well, yes ... but it would be better to say that a "rational animal." It is quite clear and precise.
kids at schools often ask, "What I can say with my words?" (Meaning they do not know what exact words, they can express different ones). Should respond: of course yes, if they respond to reality. If your words mean something different ... not serve to explain why not explain anything ...
sciences use technical terms that are meaningful. For example in mathematics: number (not "top" could be the roof ...), denominator integral, polygon ... Each of these words means something very concrete and its use facilitates understanding, avoids confusion and lengthy explanations.
In the realm of faith is the same. We use technical terms that mean something very specific. Some examples are the words nature, person, sacraments chrism, transubstantiation, the real presence, infallibility, etc.
To think and to speak of Christian realities need of these words. And to use them, we must first learn them.

When it comes to learning that are mysteries of faith (which do not have access to the senses), the precision of terms and definitions is essential.

Christians need to know well our faith to live. Understand what we believe, what good are the things that we pray, we do, practice, etc. Otherwise our religious life would be a ritualism devoid of content.
We reached a vague idea of \u200b\u200bwho is Jesus Christ, what are the sacraments, heaven or purgatory. The vague ideas easily distorted, because they lack precision. By the very fact of being generic, as soon as is practical, or it is done carefully, can be finished in statements that are not true.
it is necessary to outline, outline, clearly define the different realities.
dogmas, for example, do this: define a mystery of faith as expressed in words precise and concise. A different word would not facilitate the understanding but instead it will darken. Poor confused words.
not try to learn formulas by heart without understanding what it is as if it were magic words, but to know the supernatural realities they define. The dogmas of faith are needed, a small difference of words with ease would be a mistake (Because they express a different reality). Thus, it is the same as saying that the Blessed Trinity is one true God "in three distinct persons," which means "with three distinct persons" (as if "formed" by the sum of three). And who made the sign of the cross "in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit" would be pantheistic (would worship three gods ...).
When you forget what you know by heart, the idea of \u200b\u200bthe matter remains
But if we only had an idea of \u200b\u200bthe matter is forgotten, forgot all

or may not know, that is the question

Ultimately it comes down to the following question: I know what it is or not I know? "I understand but I can not explain it" means I have a vague idea of \u200b\u200bthe case, that "sounds" but do not know. Leading to levels of caricature to exemplify the issue, we can say that the Eucharist is not "a thing that eats at Mass," but "a sacrament that has really, truly and substantially the body, blood, soul and divinity "Jesus. The Mass is not a meeting to pray, but the "bloodless renewal of the sacrifice of Calvary."
For the central aspects of our faith we have the help of short and precise formulas Catechisms. Those who did made up in order to learn from memory, hence to facilitate the short and make certain rhyme.
If you ask what is a sacrament, no need to think about: a "sensible and effective sign of grace instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ to sanctify" (what I learned for my first Communion!). Then I have to explain what that definition, but the basic idea is there expressed.
We are keen to know the main facts of the faith. And to know what the Mass, what are the Angels, etc. I have not that develop large and complex explanations, because I have a simple formula, specific and accurate that I taught the Catechism. It is easy to realize that when you do not know the definition of the Catechism, it is much harder to express those mysteries.
memory is not everything. It is a starting point. Firm ground upon which to build knowledge of the faith. There is a machine learning words in a recording. Of course, so you can talk about knowledge have to understand, to the extent permitted by the mystery-the meaning of words.

By their fruits (Mt 7:16)

Finally, for verify the need for memory in learning the Catechism we can use recent experience and considering the bitter fruit that has produced its abandonment (of both the Catechism and memory), the generalization of a catechesis that despises Report " able "than their intended beneficiaries end up with a great ignorance of Catholic doctrine. That is, without memory, the result has been the religious ignorance.

Texts from the Holy See on memory in learning the Catechism

John Paul II in Ex.Ap. Catechesis tradendae (16/10/1979), No. 55 (the title of "memory" belongs to the document underlines is ours):

Saving
The last methodological issue that should at least emphasize, more than once alluded to her in the Synod is memorizing. The beginnings of Christian catechesis, which coincided with a civilization essentially oral, very widely resorted to memorization. And the catechesis has known a long tradition of learning by memory of the main truths. We all know that this method can present certain disadvantages: it is not the least of which lend themselves to poor assimilation, sometimes almost zero, reducing all knowledge to formulas that are repeated without draft in them. These drawbacks, together with the various characteristics of our civilization, have been here or there to the almost total elimination-final, unfortunately, according to some of memorization in catechesis. And yet, during the Fourth General Assembly of the Synod, have been authorized to hear voices very wisely rebalance the reflection and spontaneity, dialogue and silence, writing assignments and memory . Moreover, certain cultures have a great appreciation of memorization. Why, while secular education in some countries increasing criticism raised against the appalling number of consequences that follow from the contempt of that human right is the memory, why not try to revalue in catechesis smart and original even more so as the conclusion or "memory" of the great events of salvation history requires having an accurate knowledge? Some memorize the words of Jesus, of important Bible passages, the Ten Commandments, the formula of profession of faith, liturgical texts, some essential prayers, of key concepts of the doctrine ... Far from being contrary the dignity of young Christians, or constituting an obstacle to personal dialogue with the Lord, is a real need, as has been forcefully reminded the Synod Fathers.
have to be realistic. These flowers, as it were, of faith and piety do not grow in the desert places of a catechism memory. It is essential that these are stored EXTS and gradually understood in depth, to be a source of personal and communal Christian life. The plurality of methods in contemporary catechesis can be a sign of vitality and ingenuity. In any case, the method chosen should relate in the end to a fundamental law for the entire life of the Church's faithfulness to God and fidelity to man in an attitude of love.

From Introduction of the Compendium (whose questions are quite long and is not intended primarily for storage, but to be the basis for the development of shorter catechisms that can be studied):

A second feature of the Compendium is its dialogical , reflecting the ancient genre catechetical questions and answers. This is again proposing a dialogue between master and disciple, through a series of incisive questions, which involve the reader, inviting him to continue in the discovery of ever new aspects of the truth of their faith.
This genus also helps to shorten the text considerably, reducing to the essential, and thus favoring eventual assimilation and memorization of content.

Joseph Ratzinger, Introduction to the Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (03/20/1905), No. 4.

In conclusion
just wanted to highlight the importance of two fundamental texts for a Catholic.

If you ask me what are the three most important books for a Catholic, should not miss on any home and we should all read and reread often do not need to think about the answer. The first is absolute: the Holy Scripture. Containing the word of God, its importance is beyond doubt and is the staple food of our souls.

For the other two, would you say are the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Compendium of it.
After Vatican II was felt the lack of a Universal Catechism, containing the same faith as always, expressed in current mode, according to modern needs, and that would reflect the teachings of the Council. It's what the bishops asked Pope John Paul II at the Synod meeting
occasion of the commemoration of the 20 th anniversary of the closing of Vatican II. For almost five hundred years since he published a universal Catechism (the former was made by St. Pius V in the sixteenth century). Thus wrote the Catechism of the Catholic Church in 1992. The idea is to serve as a basis and guide for the preparation of catechisms regional, national, etc.
The great utility and dissemination of the Catechism raised the practical need to have a summary. Then John Paul II commissioned a committee chaired by the Card. Ratzinger processing. And was he himself turned Benedict XVI, who passed two months after being elected pope, delivering the Church
this synthesis of faith. For this is as recommended reading to keep fresh the memory of the faith, how to query and as inspiration for meditation of the chief mysteries of our faith. Eduardo María Volpacchio


04/20/2007

Prayer Before Thesis Defense

Where does religion?

Man is an intelligent being, and therefore raises the ultimate explanation of all things and the meaning of life.

Deep down, he realizes that he is not, nor can it be, the maximum being in perfection (I'm not God!) And he does not explain its existence (my own existence can not be explained by myself), or your life (I am and how I am not due to my decision).
also experience an irresistible force to happiness, and make sure that nothing or no one can meet in this world.

All this makes it a religious being.

Find someone bigger, fuller, more perfect ... and when it is recognized as the supreme being, who alone can bring happiness to the given account has been created, and longs with all his being. And so it is open to Him

Now what is all this a mere invention intended to satisfy desires of grandeur and dreams of human happiness?

Is it reasonable to be a believer? Let's start

planning to fund alternative, God or chance, or divine logic of irrationality, the divine causality (an intelligent cause) or arbitrary chance. Here lies everything. This is explained Benedict
XVI in Regensburg:

"We believe in God. This is our fundamental option. But we ask again: Is this still possible today? Is it reasonable? Since the Enlightenment, at least part of science is dedicated to aggressively seek an explanation of the world in which God would be superfluous. And if that were so, he would be useless for our life also. But every time it seemed that this attempt had succeeded, it was evident that inevitably do not add up. The accounts about the man, not God, do not add up, and the accounts of the world, the universe, without it not add up. In short, there are two alternatives: What is at the origin? Creative Reason, the Creator Spirit who makes all things and gives them growth, or Unreason, which, lacking any meaning, yet somehow brings forth a mathematician so ordered cosmos, as man and his reason. This, however, not be more than a chance result of evolution and, therefore, at bottom, also irrational.
Christians say: "I believe in God, Creator of heaven and earth", I believe in the Creator Spirit. We believe that the origin is the Eternal Word, Reason and not Unreason. With this faith we do not have to hide, should not be afraid of ending up in a dead end. We are happy to know God. And try to see also other rationality of faith, like St. Peter exhorted explicitly, in his first letter (cf. 1 Pt 3, 15), the Christians of his time, and us.
believe in God. The main parties say the Creed and emphasizes especially the first part. But now the second question immediately arises: what God? Well, just believe in the God who is Creator Spirit, creative Reason, the source of everything that exists, including us. " (Homily at Regensburg, 12.09.2006).

Finding God involves finding the source itself, and therefore the ratio of own existence.

What is religion?

Every religion is a concrete way to reach God: an access road to the divine, the Creator of the universe (and ourselves).
All of them involve a concept of God and the world, which are few ways of relating to them, to worship (Worship) and living (a moral).

Basically this consists of all religions: Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, etc.

In general, one could say that there are two ways to consider religion:

1. Ascending pathways to man seeks his Creator: strives to reach is "stretched" to reach God: to know, to please, honor.

2. Descending: God addresses man and reveals himself, saves him and shows him the way of salvation.

The first way that man is the inner impulse that leads him to seek his Creator and the fullness thereof. Is commendable and shows excellent intention. But this road may go as far as you can ... it will always be little. The human ascent to God is clearly insufficient to meet God so full. No matter how valuable it is-and is-its result can not be a human religion, ie man-made. With many real elements, some inventions of the imagination human errors and also the inevitable reflection of man's limitations.

A religion to the "measure of man" is a religion only human.

regard to its origin, it is clear that true religion can only come from the top: "top" of God. It can not be creation of man from God only if God will.

The true religion must necessarily be superior to us, beyond us precisely because it is divine. God is bigger than man. Its being and its truth can not not do better. What comes from Him, than our abilities. Human concepts are "kids" to contain the truth divine and human word can not express.
So a religion that comes from God necessarily must include elements that do not fully understand because it's beyond my ability to understand, is what we call mysteries. Its acceptance requires faith.

This is a clear starting point: it takes faith, by definition! My arguments fall short of the divine. I accept what God reveals, not on human approaches, but for her divine origin. It's good to be this: if religion fit into our reason ... would be too small.
Therefore, I am not the referee, do not decide: accept a reality that comes from above and which exists independently of me. A really great, far from humble, made me great.

A religion that comes from God is a human production. This is obvious. On the other hand if it comes from God, is divine. A religion that God is not no good!

divine religion is not an imposition, is a gift. The greatest gift possible: the key to God.
Let us see an example, a teacher at his school could simply look at the work of their students, their efforts to learn how to count, write, etc.. If there is no prior teaching, more notable were the efforts of the boys, would not make it very clear that to achieve satisfactory results. Perhaps some more smart to bring a little truth, but always so low: much time and effort needed to reach the knowledge that has her master, who in turn received from their own teachers .... All need-need-a guide. And trust in teacher education (especially as the "Maestro" is God himself.)

So we might conclude that the divine religion is not "built" according to human opinions. Men do not. Religion comes from above. It can only come from above. All human religions are a very worthy effort, but can not get very far.
Reality is not "decides" majority. Neither the worldly and the divine. Issues of religion does not depend on sociological statistics. They are not mere personal opinion: they refer to the supernatural reality: the Creator, the sense of creation, the divine plan for the world and man, personal fulfillment, access to God, life after death, etc.

addition not all opinions are equal: some are true and false, more or less justified, reasonable or sustainable. Torture is not the same to feed the hungry, you're more convinced that who torture and makes him an asset to humanity.
relativism makes no sense. Non-stop anywhere. In fact, can not 'work' in relativistic key in any specific area of \u200b\u200blife: not to eat, work, loved ones try to make investments, using a computer, you travel ... Modern culture limited
relativism ("all the same", "no better or worse options," all religions lead to God ", etc.) Only to field the most important issues of existence which make the meaning of life, religion and morality. It's not really rational choice, which is meaningless. It would only make sense if God did not exist and religion was a children's story. But there

a world greater than ourselves. It can be difficult to find him, but give up his search is sensible.
in this area is obvious that we need faith. Without faith you can access God. Without faith no one can recognize the true religion.
By the same token, those who lack faith, far from being a privileged, has a serious problem: it lacks allowing it access to crucial truths of his life. Know the deeper truth about himself: where he came from, where it goes, how to make your life, what happens after death, etc. More important to know what is outside their field of vision.
have to find the meaning of life, could live otherwise "entertaining" with the things of earth, but will lack the key to understanding of their existence. If you are looking with sincerity, will find that God goes out to meet and receive the faith, because God gives is a gift received.

Christianity is a revealed religion. God conveys to us the truth about himself and his plan for us, and also communicates Himself. It's a matter of faith. The faith you have or do not. It's like a treasure hidden in a field: it was found or not found.
In matters of faith can not convince anyone, everyone has to meet God personally.
not be forced to believe, freely to accept God and His revelation.
can pray for those who do not believe to find it. And help you search.

crazy But would a God who seeks to impose their own tastes and fashions. And, even more, who was elevated as judge of the Creator, demanding explanations about what makes or permits.
No, we do not make religion, happily for us from above, and this is the best thing that could have happened.

But there's more ...

Religion teaches only one set of truths about God, ourselves and the world, especially communicates a divine life on lifts man to insert himself in the divine world. And lead us to eternal life. This is the most important: through religion, life, comes to us.

religion-if true-not only provides comfort for this life but mainly leads to eternal happiness: this is their raison d'etre.

Thus, religion does not diminishes the life, full of prohibitions, but broadens their horizons, enlarging the life chances. Fill out the existence and opens up in unexpected ways. And most of us into the divine happiness.
For his greatness can not be picky. And this is part of its beauty.

Eduardo Maria Volpacchio

http://algunasrespuestas.blogspot.com/