I've been spending more time at the Food Pantry now that I'm able to. It's been a lot of helping Sister Lynn with the organization of everything. I do get to see a lot of the families of the neighborhood who come in to get their food.
Honestly, they don't really talk that much about their lives. They mostly ask about hours, what extra food they can take, and when they should come to pick up their bags. I did hear someone talking about the free meals around Dubuque and which ones were the best (I can't remember them, so sadly I can't give a Guide to the Best Free Meals in Dubuque...), but other than that, talk is mostly oriented on the Food Pantry services.
I really like hearing about people's lives, so this makes me a little sad. We aren't really encouraged to talk with the people who come in- I assume to make them feel less awkward. I think some of the people who do come in would like to talk more, but they don't. It could be because everything is run so methodically, or it could be that they feel awkward, or it could be some other reason.
We've been taking requests for Christmas baskets, and I think the thing that surprises me the most is the large number of people who have asked for them. I've had to sort the sheets, and I always think, "This isn't just a sheet; this is a person."
I think that a lot of different kinds of people come into the Food Pantry. Many of the people who enter you would never even guess would need a food pantry. I'm curious and maybe I shouldn't, but I always wonder what's brought them there. I think that it's harder to make ends meet in this economy, and I'm sure a lot of them would have a story about that. I always think they could shatter a lot of perceptions and stereotypes people have about the lower classes with their stories. As Nussbaum points out, "Most of us have fears and blind spots that militate against the acknowledgement of some of our fellow citizens" (99). I think that if too many people are prejudiced againt the poor (e.g. they're just lazy), then there's a chance they won't get the help they need. If more of them have their stories told, people can sympathize and also be able to better help them. They will be more aware of their needs. They will also be able to see them as relatable people.
I would hate for the Food Pantry to be shut down, because it does help so many people. It won't be any time soon. Many people donate, but it would be terrible if all of the sudden everyone stopped. (Unless, of course, it was because no one required the services anymore. That would be awesome.) I know a lot of people are afraid of the Washington neighborhood. I've heard people say that they are. I think if they heard the stories they might be less afraid. They also might learn how to better help the people there and be able to respond more to their needs.
When I read the Nussbaum chapter, I formed the opinion that she thinks similarly on this issue. She pointed out that literary works could help in forming sympathy or thinking from another group's perspective. I think it can do this. She also pointed out how there are underlying prejudices in novels, and I think this is also important to keep in mind. I'm an English major, so I'm naturally going to think books are even better than sliced bread. I think starting to read to children early on, especially books that can help them understand things- like how it feels bad to be bullied, can only aide them in the future. Nussbaum agrees when she says, "As children grasp such complex facts [like fairness for being bullied] in imagination, they become capable of compassion" (90). I think Nussbaum thinks books have great value, and naturally I agree with her.
I always understand concepts the best when I hear a story about them. I think a lot of people learn similarly. When I'm trying to explain words or phrases to my friends who don't speak English, I give them the meaning, but I also always give examples of when the word or phrase is used. One of my friends told me that he liked this approach because it helped him understand way more than if I had just given him the definition. I think this is true. Sometimes a definition isn't enough. Sometimes you need more than that to truly understand something. I think it's the same way with history. I can say, "The Great Depression was bad. A lot of people lost their jobs and didn't have enough to eat." And you'll maybe think about it for a second. If I tell a tale about a specific family who had to eat the rats that lived in the sewers for food because they didn't have enough money, you'd think about it a lot more. (That's not a story I've heard, by the way... It was just dramatic-sounding.) People have been telling stories for as long as they could communicate... I think there's a reason for that.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Controversial Catholicism
First off, Liz: fabulous job. Very thorough presentation!
I always knew that Catholicism was large, but I had no idea that it was 1/6 the world’s population. I feel like that makes sense though. I can see even more why Protestants would be a bit nervous about a Catholic president. We are a rather large group to deal with... and only getting larger.
One thing I’ve always liked about the Catholic Church is its consistency with the message about life. I never thought it made sense to be ok with abortion but not capital punishment or the other way around. I like that they vote for life in both areas. I find it consistent. I like consistency.
I liked that Ann (was that who Liz was talking to? Whoever Liz was talking to) mentioned that she didn’t think the abortion protestors were providing many alternatives. I think this is important. You need to have alternatives to issues. You can’t just say, “You shouldn’t do this.” And then leave it at that. Who’s going to listen to you? Really, why should they?
I also think it was interesting that she mentioned that the people of Dubuque haven’t taken that much interest in the things that don’t concern them. I think this is how most people feel. I know I often get this way. It’s probably a reason not as many Catholics are as active as they should be.
I think the Catholic Church has some very nice messages about helping the poor. I think the poor should be helped. I know charity is the most effective immediate way, but sometimes I wonder. Like I mentioned in my first entry, I’ve been working at a homeless shelters since I was seven giving out food to people who needed it. I knew that for some of the people, this was the only way they would get food. Even at seven, I knew that. But sometimes I’m not entirely sure it really is helping them. I watch these same people get food week after week, and I almost feel like I’m doing them a disservice. I’ve sometimes felt like by giving them this food every single week, year in and year out that I’m actually hindering them. I’m providing them with too much to fall back on. They don’t really need to try because I’m just handing it to them. I suppose it would be different if they didn’t come every single time, but they come so often that the nuns know them by name and they know how to get as much food out of each visit as they can. I know it sounds crazy, but I sometimes feel like I’m really making things worse for them. I know some of them really need it, but I sometimes doubt how charitable charity really is. It’s going to sound conservative, I know, but in my experience helping people TOO much actually hurts them. I’m not saying don’t help people, that would never work. I just think handing them too much has always proven to be a bad idea. I do think that the lowest should be looked at first, but I think sometimes we focus so much on the lowest that we neglect EVERYONE else. I would say look at the lowest, but if it’s hurting everyone else it’s not really for the common good.
I thought that Health Care Reform letter was one of the stupidest things I’ve read in a long time. When they wrote, “Decent health care is not a privilege, but a right and a requirement to protect the life and dignity of every person.” I wanted to say, “duh, that’s not the issue at hand.” Every single person in the United States of America, regardless of their legal status, has access to health care. It’s against the law NOT to treat people. If someone goes to the ER, they legally have to be treated. The reform is actually insurance reform. I feel like the letter completely neglected this. It was like, “Yay, flowery sentiments about everyone being treated… OH AND ABORTION IS EVIL.” That section on abortion was so long and became such a focus that it became a joke. I feel very strongly about the health care bill, but I really don’t think the main issue is abortion in this. I expected more about helping people get health care insurance that would protect them or something. I feel like the bishops really dropped the ball on that one.
Yeah, I have a feeling I’m probably going to make some people mad with this entry. Ah well, it’s how I feel.
I always knew that Catholicism was large, but I had no idea that it was 1/6 the world’s population. I feel like that makes sense though. I can see even more why Protestants would be a bit nervous about a Catholic president. We are a rather large group to deal with... and only getting larger.
One thing I’ve always liked about the Catholic Church is its consistency with the message about life. I never thought it made sense to be ok with abortion but not capital punishment or the other way around. I like that they vote for life in both areas. I find it consistent. I like consistency.
I liked that Ann (was that who Liz was talking to? Whoever Liz was talking to) mentioned that she didn’t think the abortion protestors were providing many alternatives. I think this is important. You need to have alternatives to issues. You can’t just say, “You shouldn’t do this.” And then leave it at that. Who’s going to listen to you? Really, why should they?
I also think it was interesting that she mentioned that the people of Dubuque haven’t taken that much interest in the things that don’t concern them. I think this is how most people feel. I know I often get this way. It’s probably a reason not as many Catholics are as active as they should be.
I think the Catholic Church has some very nice messages about helping the poor. I think the poor should be helped. I know charity is the most effective immediate way, but sometimes I wonder. Like I mentioned in my first entry, I’ve been working at a homeless shelters since I was seven giving out food to people who needed it. I knew that for some of the people, this was the only way they would get food. Even at seven, I knew that. But sometimes I’m not entirely sure it really is helping them. I watch these same people get food week after week, and I almost feel like I’m doing them a disservice. I’ve sometimes felt like by giving them this food every single week, year in and year out that I’m actually hindering them. I’m providing them with too much to fall back on. They don’t really need to try because I’m just handing it to them. I suppose it would be different if they didn’t come every single time, but they come so often that the nuns know them by name and they know how to get as much food out of each visit as they can. I know it sounds crazy, but I sometimes feel like I’m really making things worse for them. I know some of them really need it, but I sometimes doubt how charitable charity really is. It’s going to sound conservative, I know, but in my experience helping people TOO much actually hurts them. I’m not saying don’t help people, that would never work. I just think handing them too much has always proven to be a bad idea. I do think that the lowest should be looked at first, but I think sometimes we focus so much on the lowest that we neglect EVERYONE else. I would say look at the lowest, but if it’s hurting everyone else it’s not really for the common good.
I thought that Health Care Reform letter was one of the stupidest things I’ve read in a long time. When they wrote, “Decent health care is not a privilege, but a right and a requirement to protect the life and dignity of every person.” I wanted to say, “duh, that’s not the issue at hand.” Every single person in the United States of America, regardless of their legal status, has access to health care. It’s against the law NOT to treat people. If someone goes to the ER, they legally have to be treated. The reform is actually insurance reform. I feel like the letter completely neglected this. It was like, “Yay, flowery sentiments about everyone being treated… OH AND ABORTION IS EVIL.” That section on abortion was so long and became such a focus that it became a joke. I feel very strongly about the health care bill, but I really don’t think the main issue is abortion in this. I expected more about helping people get health care insurance that would protect them or something. I feel like the bishops really dropped the ball on that one.
Yeah, I have a feeling I’m probably going to make some people mad with this entry. Ah well, it’s how I feel.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Adding the Presbyterians
I had to go off of the readings for this one and a little bit off of what blogs had been posted. (Sorry that I missed your presentation, Ed and Joe. I wish I could have seen it.)
The first thing that struck me was that, like the Lutherans, Presbyterians also have the faith with works following idea. I did like reading, “Many commentators have been bewildered that these theological convictions have not bred passivity in Reformed churches but instead have fostered vigorous activity and impulses toward societal transformation.” This is actually something I always expect to happen when I hear the faith thing first. I would expect that to take over and the works to get lost somewhere along the way. The reading claims that works are seen as a way to express your faith, an idea which I like. I think that because of Jesus’ ministry, the best way to show that you received the message and agree with it would be through works. I suppose I’ve never really thought about that before. I’m glad that’s one way it manifests itself.
I also think it’s interesting that the Presbyterian Church, as a whole, tend to be from more educated classes. I would think this would affect the way they view things. Educated people would be more concerned with reason and order, so it makes sense that they tend to be this way. I also find it interesting that they seem to have such a positive view about the abilities of the government. I suppose mine have always been slightly clouded, so I find it interesting when a group thinks there is a “’common grace’ available to persons to shape social institutions for the common good and not merely to restrain human sinfulness.” I suppose I agree that COULD be the case, but in my experience when someone tries to shape it for the common good, it usually ends up backfiring. But perhaps I’m a bit too cynical- I am from Chicago. We aren’t exactly known for our upstanding politicians. I’m glad they do acknowledge that this power can be corrupted, though.
I like the structure more than the UCC and Lutheran structures. I wouldn’t expect the entire church to get involved in every tiny detail, but I’m glad that they have lay people represented. It sounds like they are able to represent more of what the people from congregation to congregation want. The UCC seemed to be more just a bunch of liberal ministers deciding things. I don’t really think it was that reflective of anything in the church because so many of the churches branched off and went their own direction. I prefer a bit more stability in doctrines and ideas. It also seemed a bit more decisive than the Lutheran church.
One thing I have noticed is that not one of these churches seems to slack on human dignity. None of them seem to have an uncaring message that says, “As long as you believe in God, it doesn’t matter what you do.” I wasn’t expecting this message, but I suppose it could have existed. The churches focusing on faith before works could have fallen into this trap, but I’m very glad to see they haven’t. All in all, I think they all have a very similar message when it comes to social justice.
The first thing that struck me was that, like the Lutherans, Presbyterians also have the faith with works following idea. I did like reading, “Many commentators have been bewildered that these theological convictions have not bred passivity in Reformed churches but instead have fostered vigorous activity and impulses toward societal transformation.” This is actually something I always expect to happen when I hear the faith thing first. I would expect that to take over and the works to get lost somewhere along the way. The reading claims that works are seen as a way to express your faith, an idea which I like. I think that because of Jesus’ ministry, the best way to show that you received the message and agree with it would be through works. I suppose I’ve never really thought about that before. I’m glad that’s one way it manifests itself.
I also think it’s interesting that the Presbyterian Church, as a whole, tend to be from more educated classes. I would think this would affect the way they view things. Educated people would be more concerned with reason and order, so it makes sense that they tend to be this way. I also find it interesting that they seem to have such a positive view about the abilities of the government. I suppose mine have always been slightly clouded, so I find it interesting when a group thinks there is a “’common grace’ available to persons to shape social institutions for the common good and not merely to restrain human sinfulness.” I suppose I agree that COULD be the case, but in my experience when someone tries to shape it for the common good, it usually ends up backfiring. But perhaps I’m a bit too cynical- I am from Chicago. We aren’t exactly known for our upstanding politicians. I’m glad they do acknowledge that this power can be corrupted, though.
I like the structure more than the UCC and Lutheran structures. I wouldn’t expect the entire church to get involved in every tiny detail, but I’m glad that they have lay people represented. It sounds like they are able to represent more of what the people from congregation to congregation want. The UCC seemed to be more just a bunch of liberal ministers deciding things. I don’t really think it was that reflective of anything in the church because so many of the churches branched off and went their own direction. I prefer a bit more stability in doctrines and ideas. It also seemed a bit more decisive than the Lutheran church.
One thing I have noticed is that not one of these churches seems to slack on human dignity. None of them seem to have an uncaring message that says, “As long as you believe in God, it doesn’t matter what you do.” I wasn’t expecting this message, but I suppose it could have existed. The churches focusing on faith before works could have fallen into this trap, but I’m very glad to see they haven’t. All in all, I think they all have a very similar message when it comes to social justice.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
The Lutherans: A Rant Against Reconciliation and Priests
There are a lot of things about Lutheran Social Teaching that I like. I think that there are a lot of “however” clauses in their teachings makes sense. After all, most cases aren’t cut and dry. I don’t think the world is always as black and white as Catholic social teaching seems to imply sometimes.
I like their stance on abortion, especially because sometimes it is necessary to protect the mother. I don’t think people should use it as a form of birth control, but if your life is in danger, then I don’t think it should be forbidden. I also think cases of rape are difficult enough without having to deal with a pregnancy, and though I don’t know how I would personally act in that situation, I think the option should be there for women in a way that they won’t feel like they’re going to hell afterwards. I liked that Lutheran social teaching allowed for this.
I also think that they points that they make about the world being imperfect are true. We don’t live in a perfect world. I think Catholic social teaching sometimes relies too much on perfection and doesn’t allow for the gray areas.
I’ve had some issues with corrupt priests in the past within the Catholic church and my experiences have made me uneasy with the Catholic view of priests. When a priest confides in you that he’s been stealing money from the church for his own purposes, you’re less likely to see him as a mediator from God and more as a human being full of sin. I think seeing a pastor as a person who has just studied more than you on a certain subject and might interpret it a different way from you is a great way to think.
I also think Martin Luther was right about the Catholic church’s sacraments making people feel like they’re not forgiven. I stopped going to church every Sunday because I was tired of being made to feel guilty. I don’t see how feeling guilty all the time is going to help anyone. I’ve also disliked reconciliation for a long time because of this. I think it’s good to say “I’ve done something wrong, I shouldn’t do that,” but I don’t see how a lot of things that priests have prescribed to me help. Praying 50 “Hail Marys” is rather unproductive. I have had a few that have given helpful penitence, but most of the time it’s pointless to me. I suppose this also has to do with my distrust of priests really being mediators for God. I have trouble with the fact that I just can’t directly say these things to God. Also, because I never do anything REALLY bad, I feel like bringing up tiny things that I’ve done doesn’t help me. One time I even had the priest laughing through my entire confession because I was trying to think of “sinful” things that I’d done. Sometimes it does help to say, “I do this and it’s mean or hurtful, I shouldn’t,” but “I fought with my sister” is one that I constantly have. This is so normal and neither of us gets hurt by it- sometimes it helps us move past things and have a stronger relationship- and yet these are the kinds of things I have to “confess” and feel guilty for. I think constantly bringing things up only allows for people to feel badly about themselves.
That being said, there are some things I’m not entirely sure I understand. This whole “faith first, works will follow”… I’m not sure I like that. I like works to be the emphasis. I don’t think people will go to hell just because they don’t have faith if they were a person who helped others throughout their life. I’ve always considered the works to be the most important thing. I know we’re supposed to love God above all things, but I’ve always thought the best way to show this was through helping others.
I do think the emphasis on human dignity and helping the poor is a good part. The second document we read was very well written and explained things well. I agreed with the points it brought up, and the fact that it was so well written probably helped this. I kind of want to force the Catholics to read it and say, “THIS is what clarity looks like… please follow it.” Of course, I’m an English major, so I suppose I’m slightly over critical.
I haven’t started at the Food Pantry yet (I start Friday), so I’m not quite able to apply what I learned to there yet, but I will be helping those who can’t afford to get food, so I think the Lutherans would approve.
I like their stance on abortion, especially because sometimes it is necessary to protect the mother. I don’t think people should use it as a form of birth control, but if your life is in danger, then I don’t think it should be forbidden. I also think cases of rape are difficult enough without having to deal with a pregnancy, and though I don’t know how I would personally act in that situation, I think the option should be there for women in a way that they won’t feel like they’re going to hell afterwards. I liked that Lutheran social teaching allowed for this.
I also think that they points that they make about the world being imperfect are true. We don’t live in a perfect world. I think Catholic social teaching sometimes relies too much on perfection and doesn’t allow for the gray areas.
I’ve had some issues with corrupt priests in the past within the Catholic church and my experiences have made me uneasy with the Catholic view of priests. When a priest confides in you that he’s been stealing money from the church for his own purposes, you’re less likely to see him as a mediator from God and more as a human being full of sin. I think seeing a pastor as a person who has just studied more than you on a certain subject and might interpret it a different way from you is a great way to think.
I also think Martin Luther was right about the Catholic church’s sacraments making people feel like they’re not forgiven. I stopped going to church every Sunday because I was tired of being made to feel guilty. I don’t see how feeling guilty all the time is going to help anyone. I’ve also disliked reconciliation for a long time because of this. I think it’s good to say “I’ve done something wrong, I shouldn’t do that,” but I don’t see how a lot of things that priests have prescribed to me help. Praying 50 “Hail Marys” is rather unproductive. I have had a few that have given helpful penitence, but most of the time it’s pointless to me. I suppose this also has to do with my distrust of priests really being mediators for God. I have trouble with the fact that I just can’t directly say these things to God. Also, because I never do anything REALLY bad, I feel like bringing up tiny things that I’ve done doesn’t help me. One time I even had the priest laughing through my entire confession because I was trying to think of “sinful” things that I’d done. Sometimes it does help to say, “I do this and it’s mean or hurtful, I shouldn’t,” but “I fought with my sister” is one that I constantly have. This is so normal and neither of us gets hurt by it- sometimes it helps us move past things and have a stronger relationship- and yet these are the kinds of things I have to “confess” and feel guilty for. I think constantly bringing things up only allows for people to feel badly about themselves.
That being said, there are some things I’m not entirely sure I understand. This whole “faith first, works will follow”… I’m not sure I like that. I like works to be the emphasis. I don’t think people will go to hell just because they don’t have faith if they were a person who helped others throughout their life. I’ve always considered the works to be the most important thing. I know we’re supposed to love God above all things, but I’ve always thought the best way to show this was through helping others.
I do think the emphasis on human dignity and helping the poor is a good part. The second document we read was very well written and explained things well. I agreed with the points it brought up, and the fact that it was so well written probably helped this. I kind of want to force the Catholics to read it and say, “THIS is what clarity looks like… please follow it.” Of course, I’m an English major, so I suppose I’m slightly over critical.
I haven’t started at the Food Pantry yet (I start Friday), so I’m not quite able to apply what I learned to there yet, but I will be helping those who can’t afford to get food, so I think the Lutherans would approve.
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Rewriting Goals
The Dubuque Food Pantry (hopefully my new service site) was started by Immanuel Congregational United Church of Christ. When it expanded, it moved to a larger location, and is now only a block away from the church. I’m going to be going to there on Friday to talk to Sister Lynn and hopefully start working there. I have no idea what she’ll have me doing there, but hopefully some human interaction will be involved. The food pantry provides for people within the community by giving food that has been donated to those who need it. They give food only to people who have been recommended to them. Many people will call Immanuel Congregational United Church of Christ so that the church can recommend them to the food pantry. They also collect food items for the pantry each week. They have an event that gathers even more food around the time of the Superbowl. In this way, they have managed to stay connected with the pantry and the community.
Looking back at my goals from a month ago, I think I can achieve most of them, though probably not all of them.
They were:
1. Learn about the community
2. Learn about the church.
3. Grow in communicating with other people.
4. Start something with the church that could turn into something more.
I am still learning about the community. I think this will increase with my exposure to the food pantry (regardless of what I do there), and also with the history of the church Carla and I have been doing. I’ve already learned more about it, so I’m well on my way to reaching this goal. Bob has been a great resource for this, and I’ve learned a lot about the community from him.
I also am learning about the church. Carla and I will be meeting with Pastor Sue to learn more about the doctrines. I’m interested to hear how it differs from Catholicism, especially because I’m not as well versed on my Protestant religions as I’d like to be. We’ll also be reading a lot of information about it, so this should help us as well. The church has provided us with a lot of documents to shift through, and we’re learning more about how it’s involved itself in the community.
So far, I’ve only been communicating with Sister Lynn, Pastor Sue, and Bob, but I expect this to change. I know I’ll meet more people on Friday at the food pantry. Carla and I have also realized that the church documents will not be sufficient enough to help us with the church’s history of participation in the community. The newspapers we’ve found haven’t really been enough either. We think the best approach will be to go talk to the older parishioners. We’re hoping they’ll be able to tell us more about the church’s community involvement. I’ll have plenty of opportunities to speak with people I don’t know very well.
I don’t know that I’ll be able to start a sustainable project that the church can use indefinitely. I think they’ve done well on their own with their food pantry- it’s come a long way, especially if it’s become its own entity. I think I want to change this one to helping the churches with intercommunication, because they don’t seem to have a strong of a connection to each other. I think they could connect better to the community if they did. Carla and I will be talking to Pastor Sue and Bob about the group that Joe has mentioned in class several times. I think this will help them with the connection. Through Bob, the church already has a strong relationship with the community and its decisions. I think helping them connect with other churches will be beneficial in getting more churches to connect with the community. Bob and Pastor Sue would like something like this to happen. I think our class can use the group Joe has talked about to make this a reality.
Looking back at my goals from a month ago, I think I can achieve most of them, though probably not all of them.
They were:
1. Learn about the community
2. Learn about the church.
3. Grow in communicating with other people.
4. Start something with the church that could turn into something more.
I am still learning about the community. I think this will increase with my exposure to the food pantry (regardless of what I do there), and also with the history of the church Carla and I have been doing. I’ve already learned more about it, so I’m well on my way to reaching this goal. Bob has been a great resource for this, and I’ve learned a lot about the community from him.
I also am learning about the church. Carla and I will be meeting with Pastor Sue to learn more about the doctrines. I’m interested to hear how it differs from Catholicism, especially because I’m not as well versed on my Protestant religions as I’d like to be. We’ll also be reading a lot of information about it, so this should help us as well. The church has provided us with a lot of documents to shift through, and we’re learning more about how it’s involved itself in the community.
So far, I’ve only been communicating with Sister Lynn, Pastor Sue, and Bob, but I expect this to change. I know I’ll meet more people on Friday at the food pantry. Carla and I have also realized that the church documents will not be sufficient enough to help us with the church’s history of participation in the community. The newspapers we’ve found haven’t really been enough either. We think the best approach will be to go talk to the older parishioners. We’re hoping they’ll be able to tell us more about the church’s community involvement. I’ll have plenty of opportunities to speak with people I don’t know very well.
I don’t know that I’ll be able to start a sustainable project that the church can use indefinitely. I think they’ve done well on their own with their food pantry- it’s come a long way, especially if it’s become its own entity. I think I want to change this one to helping the churches with intercommunication, because they don’t seem to have a strong of a connection to each other. I think they could connect better to the community if they did. Carla and I will be talking to Pastor Sue and Bob about the group that Joe has mentioned in class several times. I think this will help them with the connection. Through Bob, the church already has a strong relationship with the community and its decisions. I think helping them connect with other churches will be beneficial in getting more churches to connect with the community. Bob and Pastor Sue would like something like this to happen. I think our class can use the group Joe has talked about to make this a reality.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Meghan's Attempt at CST
If I had to talk about Catholic Social teaching at Immanuel Congregational United Church of Christ, I would start by directly quoting from Gaudium et Spes. “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.”
I think it’s important to show that Catholics very strongly support human lives and believe that no one person is more worthy or important than another person. I believe this is the very foundation of CST, so I think a great deal of emphasis would go to it. Chapter 2 of Gaudium et Spes heavily focuses on the importance of community, and I think this would be a wonderful thing for those who didn’t know about CST to read. It portrays the ties that each person has with one another. It also shows the responsibility we have towards each other.
I’m actually most curious to see what they would think of this idea of strong community. I think it’s perhaps easier for Catholics to have a larger sense of community because the Catholic religion is so much more widespread than many Protestant religions. (It is the largest Christian church...) I would be curious to see the other side of this, and believe this would be where the most interesting insights would come from.
I was excited to read about “preferential option for the poor” in the 3rd chapter of Himes, mainly because it’s one of my favorite parts of CST. Every class I’ve ever taken about Catholicism talks about preferential option for the poor. It’s a great idea to consider topics as how they affect the poorest/ least privileged members before the more privileged ones. I think this was a very prominent point in all of Jesus’ sermons and teachings. He was always trying to help the underdogs, and I’m glad that the church has integrated this into their social teachings. I think it’s one of the strongest points of the Catholic church. I would definitely make sure to take some time to mention this.
I wasn’t a fan of John XXIII’s Mater et Magistra. Though he did make some points about the importance of equality for workers and they were all an important part of the companies they worked for, I believe this was covered first in Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum. (I do like this part in Rerum Novarum, and would have them read that specific passage. It marks the modern social teaching that every person has inherent worth.) Other than that, John XXIII gives very vague descriptions of being a good Christian without ever really explaining what that entails. It does make some nice statements about how the wealth in countries is unevenly distributed, but I doubt this would be news to the people learning about Catholic Social teachings. Mainly, he makes a lot of good points, but takes forever to make him (or maybe I was just impatient with him). His points can be summarized without anyone needing to actually read the document.
I would just hope that by the end of my talk, everyone would have a more informed view of CST.
I think it’s important to show that Catholics very strongly support human lives and believe that no one person is more worthy or important than another person. I believe this is the very foundation of CST, so I think a great deal of emphasis would go to it. Chapter 2 of Gaudium et Spes heavily focuses on the importance of community, and I think this would be a wonderful thing for those who didn’t know about CST to read. It portrays the ties that each person has with one another. It also shows the responsibility we have towards each other.
I’m actually most curious to see what they would think of this idea of strong community. I think it’s perhaps easier for Catholics to have a larger sense of community because the Catholic religion is so much more widespread than many Protestant religions. (It is the largest Christian church...) I would be curious to see the other side of this, and believe this would be where the most interesting insights would come from.
I was excited to read about “preferential option for the poor” in the 3rd chapter of Himes, mainly because it’s one of my favorite parts of CST. Every class I’ve ever taken about Catholicism talks about preferential option for the poor. It’s a great idea to consider topics as how they affect the poorest/ least privileged members before the more privileged ones. I think this was a very prominent point in all of Jesus’ sermons and teachings. He was always trying to help the underdogs, and I’m glad that the church has integrated this into their social teachings. I think it’s one of the strongest points of the Catholic church. I would definitely make sure to take some time to mention this.
I wasn’t a fan of John XXIII’s Mater et Magistra. Though he did make some points about the importance of equality for workers and they were all an important part of the companies they worked for, I believe this was covered first in Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum. (I do like this part in Rerum Novarum, and would have them read that specific passage. It marks the modern social teaching that every person has inherent worth.) Other than that, John XXIII gives very vague descriptions of being a good Christian without ever really explaining what that entails. It does make some nice statements about how the wealth in countries is unevenly distributed, but I doubt this would be news to the people learning about Catholic Social teachings. Mainly, he makes a lot of good points, but takes forever to make him (or maybe I was just impatient with him). His points can be summarized without anyone needing to actually read the document.
I would just hope that by the end of my talk, everyone would have a more informed view of CST.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Mainline Protestants and Catholics
I think it’s important to note that by the start of the 20th century, Catholics made up the largest denomination in the United States. Although mainline Protestants do not agree on several main ideological points, they formed an alliance together so that they would not lose power in the United States.
Catholics seemed to have a more prominent role in social change than did the Protestants. Personally, I think this might have been because so many of the church’s supporters were in the working class. This class was in major need of social reforms during the early part of the 20th century, especially in concerns to the conditions for workers. While different Catholics had different ways of approaching things, nothing seemed to divide the church to the part where different sects had to be formed. Church leaders would occasionally speak out against certain individuals who they felt had crossed a line, but no major spilts occured within the church itself.
In contrast the Protestants seemed to have more structural concerns within themselves. Though they were able to ban together to form several groups, certain religions, such as the Methodists and Baptists, split into different organizations. This made it undoubtedly harder to be an effective voice in confronting social problems.
One major difference in the two groups is also their way of thinking. Dorothy O’Day started the Catholic Worker’s movement to directly feed and shelter the homeless. This is in direct contrast to the mainline Protestants, who seemed to believe that institutions like the government would be able to best provide aid. They heavily supported bureaucracy.
Today, the mainline Protestant churches still seem to have problems with their splits over ethical questions. The Catholic Church also seems spilt on ethical questions. Although the Pope is the main figure of the church, many Catholics do not necessarily hold the same views. Though I think this hinders both groups, I think both have been able to reach out to the homeless and less fortunate in a direct way (through soup kitchens and clothing drives, etc) that the government is not as able to do. Though I still take issues with the anti feminism in the Catholic Church, I believe more strives have been made in the last century for social reform and equality.
Catholics seemed to have a more prominent role in social change than did the Protestants. Personally, I think this might have been because so many of the church’s supporters were in the working class. This class was in major need of social reforms during the early part of the 20th century, especially in concerns to the conditions for workers. While different Catholics had different ways of approaching things, nothing seemed to divide the church to the part where different sects had to be formed. Church leaders would occasionally speak out against certain individuals who they felt had crossed a line, but no major spilts occured within the church itself.
In contrast the Protestants seemed to have more structural concerns within themselves. Though they were able to ban together to form several groups, certain religions, such as the Methodists and Baptists, split into different organizations. This made it undoubtedly harder to be an effective voice in confronting social problems.
One major difference in the two groups is also their way of thinking. Dorothy O’Day started the Catholic Worker’s movement to directly feed and shelter the homeless. This is in direct contrast to the mainline Protestants, who seemed to believe that institutions like the government would be able to best provide aid. They heavily supported bureaucracy.
Today, the mainline Protestant churches still seem to have problems with their splits over ethical questions. The Catholic Church also seems spilt on ethical questions. Although the Pope is the main figure of the church, many Catholics do not necessarily hold the same views. Though I think this hinders both groups, I think both have been able to reach out to the homeless and less fortunate in a direct way (through soup kitchens and clothing drives, etc) that the government is not as able to do. Though I still take issues with the anti feminism in the Catholic Church, I believe more strives have been made in the last century for social reform and equality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
