|
Ceciltron posted:Felt I had to quote this because I got to sing it in a secular choir and it made me feel really good and tingly about *getting* where it is coming from. Not easy to convince my mostly atheist, protestant and jewish choirmates of its beauty though Lauridsen owns all the time always. His setting of O Nata Lux remains my single favorite setting of that poem/hymn ever. But no list of awesome sacred music would be complete without Tallis's If Ye Love Me, perhaps the most beloved piece in all of English polyphony.
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 06:03 |
|
|
JcDent posted:Some of the more nationalist minded/metalheaded or whatever folks sometimes rumble about forced Christianization of Lithuania, even though it brought literacy and stuff to Lithuanian (first book in Lithuanian is a Catechism), helping Lithuanian-ness not slip into irrelevancy too soon. although that did help cement the Poles' status as "too slavic for the west, too roman for the east" and the unfortunate military stomping ground of europe for several centuries
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
Keromaru5 posted:Now that I think about it, I think every church I've ever been to has had a kitchen. Never even heard of a Catholic church without a kitchen. Remember that many of the Catholic ethnicities in America are people for whom making shitloads of food is baseline hospitality: Poles, Italians, and Hispanics all do this to varying degrees. My people (Irish) are the exception here, but lavish church hospitality kind of went out the window when the people you were inviting in might be redcoats who'd kill you and burn the altar.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:2017 hell, my friends and i are all extremely hype for 2018 i'm hype for halloween 2017 because a bunch of catholic and protestant friends and i are gonna get drunk and yell about theology
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Today the pope, in keeping with his pattern on queer issues, doesn't budge on doctrine but really would like pastors to stop treating trans people and gays like poo poo.. Notable mainly for a pope publicly and unhesitatingly giving a particular trans man the basic dignity of being spoken of as a man, over which, as expected, the internet is already losing its poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2016 04:54
|
|
|
Worthleast posted:Catholics have a saying that when a Protestant converts you gain a Catholic but don't lose a Protestant. Okay I definitely snorted a bit at that. Learning to think like a radically different denomination is hard, though: a friend of mine is doing RCIA right now and had a lot of questions for me about how far the Seal of the Confessional extends, and I was happy to answer them but they also had me thinking that these questions just flat-out wouldn't occur to a cradle Catholic. If you're brought up in the Church, the inviolability of the confessional is as basic and absolute as gravity, and the first instinct with edge cases is probably going to be "that's above my pay grade and I'll probably never encounter it anyway." Though now that you mention that, something else occurs to me: do you think this might perhaps be related to the fact that apologetics circles are occupied overwhelmingly by formerly-Protestant converts?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
mythomanic posted:There really is something about listening to those personal narratives of faith that just makes them hit home so much harder, at least for me. Caroline Walker Bynum's Holy Feast and Holy Fast deals with medieval women's abstention from food as a mode of exercising agency in and control over their lives, and there's almost certainly stuff in there about the situation of medieval women in general; if nothing else, she'll almost certainly have an extremely comprehensive bibliography for you to ransack.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
tag urself im the toothed mitre
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2016 06:09
|
|
|
Tias posted:I don't really have any skin in the game, but I'm pretty sure you can be an ex-protestant catholic and not still think like a protestant. Humans undergo amazing paradigm transformations all the time, why should protestants be exempt. Oh sure, they totally can, it just won't happen overnight. It's like integrating into a new country that speaks the same language as you, at least on the surface, but people use some words differently and look at the world in very different ways. The part where we get annoyed (and this happens with converts to many religions, not just Protestant-to-Catholic) is when they start getting their undies in a bunch about how none of the people around them are sufficiently Catholic because they don't read the Catechism for fun. Not only is this deeply uncharitable and skirting close to mortal sin, but the breathtaking arrogance required to be a newcomer and tell people who were born and raised in a religion and have practiced it most or all of their lives that they're doing it wrong really beggars belief. It's like coming to live in Britain and telling the residents that they need to be more like the cast of Downton Abbey. But at least, like HEY GAL said, we have big enough numbers that an rear end in a top hat convert isn't going to be made a bishop: instead they just congregate on CatholicAnswers and r/Catholicism to bitch about their insufficiently-orthodox RCIA instructors.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2016 16:05
|
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:
It was a joke about one of the major doctrinal differences between Western and Eastern Christianity. The original Nicene Creed states that the Holy Spirit "proceeds" from the Father, and later the Latin Church added "and from the Son" to that statement. We often joke that this is the root of the Great Schism, although it's pretty obvious that it had as much or more to do with the politics of the time than with theological differences. The Gospels each have different emphases, and they don't need to be read in a particular order, although people usually advise reading the Matthew, Mark, and Luke first: they're called the Synoptic Gospels, because they take a pretty similar view of Christ: a man who did extraordinary things, claimed He was the Son of God, and then showed this to be true when He rose from the dead. The Gospel of John is far more explicitly mystical, and from the very beginning emphasizes Christ's nature as the self-existent Word through Whom all things were made. It's also the most explicitly antisemitic of the four, which one should bear in mind before reading it. After the Gospels you have the Acts of the Apostles, which describes what the Apostles did after the resurrected Christ ascended into heaven: highlights include the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, deciding whether Gentiles could be baptized (and, when it was decided that they could, to what extent the Mosaic Law still bound Christians), and the conversions of various Gentile peoples to Christianity. Then pretty much all the Apostles get martyred. After Acts, you get the Epistles, which are divided into the Pauline Epistles (letters thought to be written by St. Paul and titled after their audience) and the General Epistles (traditionally ascribed to other Apostles and titled after their authors). These are letters, supposedly written by Paul and other Apostles, to various Christian communities or to Christians generally. They expound on the beliefs of the early Church, and many of them deal with issues faced by Christians interacting with a non-Christian world. The important thing to note is that none of these books is more canonical than any other: all, along with the Tanakh, are part of the Bible and regarded as the inspired and inerrant* word of God. Liturgically, the Gospels are given special prominence: a typical Western liturgy will have an Old Testament reading, a psalm, an Epistle (which can be Acts, one of the epistles, or Revelation), and then the book of the Gospels will be brought out with special reverence and part of one of the Gospels will be read. In the Catholic Church it's traditional to sit for the first two readings but to stand for the Gospel. *The definition and scope of "inerrant" is one of the most hotly-contested points in the entirety of Christian theology, particularly among American Protestants, whose views range from "the core message is holy but you have to throw out a lot" to "every word and comma of the King James Bible is completely true and without any error whatsoever, please come visit the Creation Science Museum."
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
SirPhoebos posted:Can you elaborate on what the differences between Matthew, Mark, and Luke are? The differences between the Synoptic Gospels are usually put in terms of their Christological emphases: what does each one emphasize about who Jesus was? Mark emphasizes his status as Messiah and One Who will judge all things, and a recurring theme is that the major disciples don't understand who He is, but many minor characters do: the Messiah has come in secret and gradually reveals Himself to those who believe. Matthew is big on Jesus being the Son of David, King of the Jews, and a successor to Moses and giver of a new Law. This is about His fulfillment of the prophecies in the Old Testament. Luke positions Jesus Himself as a prophet, transgressing ecclesiastical authority and preaching the forgiveness of sins and the salvation of all people, but especially of the poor and marginalized; for this reason Luke is often called the "social Gospel." And for completeness, John is, as I said before, deeply mystical. It emphasizes Jesus as the Word Made Flesh, the origin of all things, the One sent from the Father, and the Passover Lamb Whose sacrifice effects the redemption of the entire world. John is also the primary Gospel from which the more fleshy doctrines of the Eucharist are derived (mostly Orthodox, Catholics, Lutherans, and some Anglicans).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
my students are reading genesis and exodus for class right now, and their next assignment is to write a sermon. i sent them some samples, and made sure to include some jonathan edwards for the sake of good american fire and brimstone. that was a really good sermon though, thanks for sharing it
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2016 01:52
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:In my experience Orthodox sermons try to link the Gospel reading to explaining an element of doctrine. John Chrysostom's Pascal address is the apex of this of course, and imo the only sermon you ever need. literally that should be the only thing any minister reads on Easter ever
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
The Phlegmatist posted:Thanks for the responses. Yeah wow, that's messed up from my perspective. The teaching in both Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy is that anyone can validly baptize as long as the elements of the sacrament are present and properly employed, though my understanding is that Orthodox will only consider a baptism definitely effective once a person has been chrismated and formally received into the Orthodox Church; there's debate over whether it's effective before then. Catholics consider all valid baptisms fully effective and all baptized Christians to some degree united to the Catholic Church, although the degree of that unity depends on things like apostolic succession and valid sacraments.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:I'm genuinely curious how many Catholics would give the same answer. It's obviously not official Church doctrine, but the Trinity trips up a lot of laymen. Maybe, but given that we say the words "begotten, not made" during the Credo every Sunday, I'd be willing to bet that the numbers would be lower.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2016 03:12
|
|
|
if we're posting music, wanna know how to make gregorian chant even more catholic? set it all polyphonic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wZud4MT3uw
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
WerrWaaa posted:Where, when, and how is Christ present in the liturgy? For Catholics, Christ is present in spirit as He is whenever Christians gather together in HIs name. He's also symbolically present in visual representation, since there's always a crucifix involved. He's symbolically present in the priest as well, who acts in persona Christi during the Liturgy of the Eucharist. Finally and most importantly, of course, He's fully and literally present, with His Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity, in the Blessed Sacrament. Note that Catholics hold Christ to be fully present under both species of the Eucharist: I have a friend who has celiac disease and therefore can only receive under the form of wine, but we hold that he fully receives the Body of Christ as well when he does so. The same would hold true for somebody who, perhaps because of past struggles with alcohol, only wants to receive under the form of bread: that person would still receive the Blood of Christ, even though Latin Rite Catholics don't practice communion by intinction.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
The Phlegmatist posted:Is there a historical reason why Catholics don't practice intinction? My guess would that it seems irreverent for the laity to handle the Host in such a manner, but it seems like intinction would be fine if you're letting the parishioners take communion in the hand now in some places. mostly because you have to be way more careful about it and that's very time-consuming, as you can see from the rubrics that metternich posted. you'll notice that communion by intinction requires receiving on the tongue, and even the very modern parish where i go most sundays would probably abide by that: they're happy to have people handle the host because it's a discrete unit, but they'd majorly wig out at the idea that somebody might get the Most Precious Blood on their fingers and have to lick it off, or that they might not lick it off and might wipe it on their seat, which would be a major sacrilege.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
That's really interesting: I always understood "restorationist" as sort of a catch-all for groups who don't view the Church as a continuing community, but rather who aimed in some way to restore a church that had disappeared.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:He's really here talking about putting yourself before god, you may be focusing a little strongly on the word. I think a lot of people here "contempt for self" and immediately think of full-time denunciation of your own sins and your own wickedness. It's true that there are a number of very holy people who were famous for this, but it's also a practice that's only suitable for people in very advanced stages of monastic life or another spiritual discipline, to counteract the increasing danger of spiritual pride, which is among the worst of sins.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2016 13:26
|
|
|
hey everyone, if i could get some prayers for my brother, that would be really awesome. he just took the really courageous step of checking into an intensive depression treatment program. it looks like it'll do great things for him, but it's also probably not going to be easy.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2016 06:08
|
|
|
so remember the sermon assignment my students did that i talked about earlier? i'm marking them and i told them that they're free to speak from a sectarian perspective if that's the kind of sermon they'd like to write. this marking has been a fascinating foray through a whole world of inadvertent heresies. who knew pelagianism was so alive and well in american undergraduates?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:Can't say I'm surprised. You could look at it as an expression of human pride, but you could also look at it as faith in God's workmanship; he couldn't possibly have made human beings that defective. the explicit pelagianist one was also one that was clearly attempting to "shock" his commie liberal instructor (i.e. me) with uncompromising Conservative Christian Truths, so i'm doubly amused here.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2016 08:05
|
|
|
one of my friends just had the greatest halloween costume idea: red dress, orange beehive, glitter-blue drag makeup, and a gun. she's going to be Chalcedonian Christology: fully human, fully Divine
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
Worthleast posted:Jack Chick is dead. jesuit/illuminati/masonic conspiracy confirmed
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2016 21:16
|
|
|
Apocron posted:On another note, over the past few years there's been a bit of a move in Bible publishing to put out "Reader's Bibles." Essentially the idea is to strip the text of chapters, verses, footnotes, headings, etc. to actually present the bible in a format like most other books we read (and also to make it closer to the original manuscripts since verses etc are a scribal tradition/addition). In fact I think one of the main catalysts of this was a kickstarter for a bible without verses and chapters called Biblioteca which will be out toward the end of the year. However Crossway Publishers of the ESV also jumped on board and are releasing a six volume set at the end of this month which this bible design blogger has reviewed (in multiple part). I've got a beautiful Cambridge Paragraph Bible that's essentially a happy medium between the two: the text is arranged in reader-friendly paragraph form, and the chapter and verse numbers are in superscript. That "Biblioteca" project looks like it could be an absolutely fabulous Christmas gift for my parents, but it looks as if the pre-order is the only way to get it; I'm not sure mine would arrive by Christmastime.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
so apparently the ICK has established an oratory in Detroit about 45 minutes from me, and they're offering a full Solemn Requiem Mass with the Fauré Requiem this Wednesday to cap off Hallowtide. i am practically giddy at the thought of spending a gazillion hours in church this week.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2016 21:57
|
|
|
Samuel Clemens posted:I suppose this discussion is as good a time as any to mention that Calvary is a great film and that you should watch it if you haven't already. Seconding this. It's pretty harrowing, but it's a fantastic movie.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
don't wanna change the topic, please carry on, but i feel the need to gush because i just sat through the most fabulous seminar with David Halperin, of all people (a pretty major figure in gay studies) that started with gay bathhouses and Aristotle's Prior Analytics and ended with positing an inescapably trinitarian (though obviously i'd say Trinitarian) character to erotic desire, and in the course of it we also spent twenty minutes arguing about the implications of an articular infinitive as a verbal object. it was like all my nerdy interests converged at once and we're doing it again in two weeks
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
i love von balthasar but his bits about the gendered petrine (leading) and marian (submitting) aspects of the Church lead straight into theology of the body and we all know how that turned out. that said, i think a lot of his stuff is fantastic and Dare We Hope "That All Men Be Saved"? is probably one of the best treatments of the doctrine of judgment ever published. "we don't get to know that everyone is saved, but we're morally bound to hope so" is a position i can very much get on board with. also he's a cranky german who's pretty clearly much smarter than many of his detractors and knows it and doesn't hesitate to administer bitchy academic footnotes, and bitchy academic footnotes are the primal tongue of my soul
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:the Queen of Heaven, Tower of Ivory (etc), lord and patron of the armies of several nations? that mary? are you sure he didn't mean another mary? i mean i said it was bad theology
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
Mo Tzu posted:i hate languages look at how wrong this post is
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
The Phlegmatist posted:nah koine's pretty easy koine is in fact easy. attic is hard. homeric is only slightly harder. aeolic makes me want to gouge my own eyes out
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2016 02:34
|
|
|
Commie NedFlanders posted:some uh...stuff i'm gonna assume you're posting in good faith here, but fyi you are probably very unlikely to find a sympathetic audience here for what you just wrote. your post paints a deeply stereotypical and ignorant picture of Judaism that flat-out ignores the enormous variety in Jewish observance and practice, and it flatly ignores the fact that the single largest group of Christians in the world (over half , in fact) doesn't give two shits about "getting saved" in the sense that you're using it. both religions are far more diverse than you give them credit for, and while i do think that they can be enriched by one another, that enrichment is best done in authentic ecumenical dialogue between people steeped in the respective traditions, not through 1960s syncretism.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2016 07:08
|
|
|
The Phlegmatist posted:What's the problem with Messianic Judaism, exactly? the problem isn't with Messianic Judaism per se, it's with the dumb stereotypes in that post, where Judaism is only Orthodox (who are definitely a minority) and Christianity is only American Protestants (also definitely a minority). those are raw nerves for both Catholics (and, i imagine, Orthodox) and Jews, where huge chunks of us get erased from our own communities in favor of what's most palatable to American television
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
there are things that human eyes were never meant to gaze on, and GBS is one of them
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Jaramin posted:That really depends on your individual church. Most are just like "well, you said the prayer and signed this card saying you said it with Deacon X, you're God's problem now! Seeya at the rapture!" which may have cost more souls than it saved due to its attitude of apathy and appearance of hypocrisy. A congregation that actually cares will have discipleship programs you can go to at the church, or they'll have someone come to your home if your schedule doesn't permit regular attendance. This must be how Cythereal feels when Catholics and Orthodox start gooning out over liturgy and sacraments.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
It looks like a series of verses taken from Romans that outline the "steps" to protestant-style salvation. they're not actually in any real order so it seems to be just pulled together out of convenience
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2016 04:41
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Come to think, why don't they revive heresies? Surely there should be people interested in, dunno, Cathars or Arianism today! There are plenty of Arianists: the largest group is headquartered in Salt Lake City. Neo-Calvinists who believe in the eternal subordination of the Son are, I would argue, also Arianists, since they implicitly deny the unity of the Divine Will. Arianism turns up a lot because it offers a simplification of one of the greatest and most difficult Mysteries.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 06:03 |
|
|
HEY GAL posted:please notify the nearest available parish i will be picking up my silly robes in the morning; greek lessons start on thursday in the words of a funny tumblr post: "alright naughty children, it's participle time"
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2016 22:06
|
|