You have received the handout with the next writing assignment. It offers details on the Catholic understanding of sin, particularly social and structural sin. The important insight to remember in that handout of information is that any discussion of social and structural sin begins with personal, individual sin. We're all sinners.
What are the implications for members of the Church? Many people disregard the Church because it's filled with hypocrites and sinners. I just finished reading Do You Believe? Conversations on God and Religion by Antonio Monda. In his introduction he writes:
I've always found less than convincing the position of those who recognize the existence of God and the divinity of Christ but dispute (or even have contempt for) the Church. I certainly don't mean to say that the Church of Rome hasn't made mistakes, even serious ones, in the course of its long history, but I want to emphasize that the believer can't not know that Christ entrusted the keys to Peter, investing with complete authority the disciple who denied him three times during the night before the Crucifixion. In the words of G.K. Chesterton, in his book Heretics: 'When Christ at a symbolic moment was establishing His great society, He chose for its corner-stone neither the brillant Paul nor the mystic John, but a shuffler, a snob, a coward - in a word, a man. And upon this rock He has built His Church, and the gates of Hell have not prevailed against it. All the empires and the kingdoms have failed, because of this inherent and continual weakness, that they were founded by strong men and upon strong men. But this one thing, the historic Christian Church, was founded on a weak man, and for that reason it is indestructible. For no chain is stronger than its weakest link.
Later in the introduction Monda continues,
Reflecting on human fraility, one returns to Chesterton's insight about the very institution of the Church, with all its contradictions - which I don't think have impugned, even marginally, the truth of its teaching. In 1965, the theologian Karl Rahner wrote, 'The Church would be not the true people of God but a purely ideal reality, of almost mythical character, if one thought that the state of sin of its members determined it. If one realizes clearly that the earthly Church remains a church of sinners, one understands how and why it is the holy Church."
How would you relate this insight of our frail Church with the power we have to be the conduit for the Reign of God? Think about the definition of the Reign of God (the power of God active in the world challenging its structures) and the Catholic Campaign to End the Death Penalty and the Catholic Campaign for Immigration Reform (link below). How can a bunch of sinners bring about the reign of God? How does the Spirit confront apathy on the part of Church members, young Church members in particular?
Reflect away. Brendan, you judge who the top 5 power bloggers are for this entry...
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Pedagogy of Hope by Paulo Freire
Go back and look over some of the comments from the previous post. In particular, I am thinking of Nick Kasunic's, Alex LePore's and a few others. Think about what they seem to be saying or observing.
Then read chapters 2 - 4 in Enrique's Journey. As you read, underline, highlight or mark any passage that is particularly shocking, impressionable, memorable, etc.
Next, a bit of the "so what factor" for you to reflect on. Take a minute and reflect on that question: "So what?"
Then read the passage posted below. The following excerpts are taken from Pedagogy of Hope: Reliving Pedagogy of the Oppresssed (The Continuum International Publishing Group, 1995)
The idea that hope alone will transform the world, and action undertaken in that kind of naivete, is an excellent route to hopelessness, pessimism, and fatalism. But the attempt to do without hope, in the struggle to improve the world, as if that struggle could be reduced to calculated acts alone, or a purely scientific approach, is a frivolous illusion. To attempt to do without hope, which is based on the need for truth as an ethical quality of the struggle, is tantamount to denying that struggle one of its mainstays. The essential thing, as I maintain later on, is this: hope, as an ontological need, demands an anchoring in practice in order to become historically concrete. That is why there is no hope in sheer hopefulness. The hoped-for is not attained by dint of raw hoping. Just to hope is to hope in vain.
Without a minimum of hope, we cannot so much as start the struggle. But without the struggle, hope, as an ontological need, dissipates, loses its bearings, and turns into hopelessness. And hopelessness can become tragic despair. Hence the need for a kind of education in hope. Hope as it happens, is so important for our existence, individual and social, that we must take every care not to experience it in a mistaken form, and thereby allow it to slip toward hopelessness and despair. Hopelessness and despair are both the consequence and the cause of inaction or immobilism.
In limited situations, beyond which lies "untested feasibility" alone - sometimes perceivable, sometimes not - we find the why of both positions: the hopeful one and the hopeless one.
One of the tasks of the progressive educator, through a serious, correct political analysis, is to unveil opportunities for hope, no matter what the obstacles may be. After all, without hope there is little we can do. It will be hard to struggle on, and when we fight as hopeless or despairing persons, our struggle will be suicidal. Hence the need for a kind of education in hope. Hope, as it happens, is so important for our existence, individual and social, that we must take every care not to experience it in a mistaken form, and thereby allow it to slip toward hopelessness and despair. Hopelessness and despair are both the consequence and the cause of inaction and immobilism.
What are your thoughts based on Nick, Alex and other posts, chapters 2 - 4, the "so what" pondering and the excerpt from Freire?
Impress me. Due Tuesday, 3/4.
Then read chapters 2 - 4 in Enrique's Journey. As you read, underline, highlight or mark any passage that is particularly shocking, impressionable, memorable, etc.
Next, a bit of the "so what factor" for you to reflect on. Take a minute and reflect on that question: "So what?"
Then read the passage posted below. The following excerpts are taken from Pedagogy of Hope: Reliving Pedagogy of the Oppresssed (The Continuum International Publishing Group, 1995)
The idea that hope alone will transform the world, and action undertaken in that kind of naivete, is an excellent route to hopelessness, pessimism, and fatalism. But the attempt to do without hope, in the struggle to improve the world, as if that struggle could be reduced to calculated acts alone, or a purely scientific approach, is a frivolous illusion. To attempt to do without hope, which is based on the need for truth as an ethical quality of the struggle, is tantamount to denying that struggle one of its mainstays. The essential thing, as I maintain later on, is this: hope, as an ontological need, demands an anchoring in practice in order to become historically concrete. That is why there is no hope in sheer hopefulness. The hoped-for is not attained by dint of raw hoping. Just to hope is to hope in vain.
Without a minimum of hope, we cannot so much as start the struggle. But without the struggle, hope, as an ontological need, dissipates, loses its bearings, and turns into hopelessness. And hopelessness can become tragic despair. Hence the need for a kind of education in hope. Hope as it happens, is so important for our existence, individual and social, that we must take every care not to experience it in a mistaken form, and thereby allow it to slip toward hopelessness and despair. Hopelessness and despair are both the consequence and the cause of inaction or immobilism.
In limited situations, beyond which lies "untested feasibility" alone - sometimes perceivable, sometimes not - we find the why of both positions: the hopeful one and the hopeless one.
One of the tasks of the progressive educator, through a serious, correct political analysis, is to unveil opportunities for hope, no matter what the obstacles may be. After all, without hope there is little we can do. It will be hard to struggle on, and when we fight as hopeless or despairing persons, our struggle will be suicidal. Hence the need for a kind of education in hope. Hope, as it happens, is so important for our existence, individual and social, that we must take every care not to experience it in a mistaken form, and thereby allow it to slip toward hopelessness and despair. Hopelessness and despair are both the consequence and the cause of inaction and immobilism.
What are your thoughts based on Nick, Alex and other posts, chapters 2 - 4, the "so what" pondering and the excerpt from Freire?
Impress me. Due Tuesday, 3/4.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Assignment Weds - Friday
Since there will not be class Weds., Thurs., Friday of this week, the following is the assignment:
Go to the LINKS below. Go to the "Compendium of the Social Doctrine" link.
Find Section III, part c, articles 41-44.
Read these articles closely.
Read the first chapter of Enrique's Journey.
Write a reflection on the connection between the two pieces of writing.
How does one inform the other and vice versa?
Make your entry as meaningful and intelligent as your first postings.
They were excellent!
See you on Monday.
Go to the LINKS below. Go to the "Compendium of the Social Doctrine" link.
Find Section III, part c, articles 41-44.
Read these articles closely.
Read the first chapter of Enrique's Journey.
Write a reflection on the connection between the two pieces of writing.
How does one inform the other and vice versa?
Make your entry as meaningful and intelligent as your first postings.
They were excellent!
See you on Monday.
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
The social message of the Gospel must not be considered a theory, but above all else a basis and a motivation for action... Today more than ever, the Church is aware that her social message will gain credibility more immediately from the witness of actions than as a result of its internal logic and consistency.
The theological dimension is needed both for interpreting and for solving present day problems in human society.
(John Paul II, Centesimus Annus)
Reading the Signs of the Times
Excerpts from CATHOLIC SOCIAL TEACHING: OUR BEST KEPT SECRET (DeBerri, E. Orbis Books, 2003 Maryknoll, NY)
The theological dimension is needed both for interpreting and for solving present day problems in human society.
(John Paul II, Centesimus Annus)
Reading the Signs of the Times
Excerpts from CATHOLIC SOCIAL TEACHING: OUR BEST KEPT SECRET (DeBerri, E. Orbis Books, 2003 Maryknoll, NY)
A foundational conviction underlying Catholic social teaching is that God is at work in human history. This was true in biblical times; it is true today. It is true in places and mong people who have never heard of the gospel or of Jesus Christ. God is at work healing and redeeming human history and inviting all people to participate in that work. Perceiving the historical action of God and discerning God's will are often now referred to as 'reading the signs of the times.'
The term 'signs of the times' in contemporary Catholic social thought is a term based upon Jesus' statement to the Pharisees and Sadduccees in Matthew 16:4: 'You know how to read the face of the sky, but you cannot read the signs of the times.' Pope John XXIII made the first use of the term in modern Catholic Social teaching to refer to the principal characteristics of the age that are emerging from the collective consciousness of the human community in the form of shared understandings and social movements.
The Second Vatican Council embraced the notion, bringing it to the heart of the Church's mission:
the church seeks but a solitary goal: to carry forward the work of Christ Himself under the lead of the befriending Spirit. And Christ entered this world to give witness to the truth, to rescue and not to sit in judgment, to serve and not to be served. To carry out such a task, the church has always had the duty of scrutinizing the signs of the times and of interpreting them in light of the gospel. (Gaudium et Spes)
The 'signs of the times', then, embody and reflect the movement of the Holy Spirit in human history working to bring about the redemption of peoples and the fuller realization of the Reign of God. Interpreting the 'signs of the times' requires prayerful discernment within the Christian community and in dialogue with all people of good will. The criteria for this discernment involve the coherence of the contemporary 'signs of the times' with the gospels, the Christian understanding of human nature and the common good.
_____________________________________________________________
We become aware and conscious of the signs of the times by our knowledge and understanding of contemporary issues that affect human lives both individually and as a society.
Enrique's Journey is an accounting of the "signs of the times". It tells the story of a family caught up in the social phenomenon of immigration and migration at the southern border of the United States.
Nowadays, everyone seems to be talking about the issue of immgration, particularly the situation of undocumented people entering the United States. As a preview to your reading Enrique's Journey post what you're thoughts and opinions are on the issue of immigration. Your entry should be coherent and organized. There is no right answer - it is just a pre-reading activity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
