Hristo's FI Journal

[Hristo Botev]

Participants were warned early on that Catholic tenets weren't just there to be memorized to pass the course.

I think "just" is the important word there. Memorization is a good place to start. That's one thing I like about the Baltimore Catechism approach; memorization is the foundation. You're dealing with elementary school kids; so it's the "grammar" phase of the trivium. Rote memorization isn't the only focus, but it's the primary focus. Then, once you finish the Baltimore Catechism and the basic tenets of the faith are committed to memory, you move on to the Fr. Laux books where memory work is abandoned and analytical thinking and clear reasoning to form a worldview is the focus. Makes sense to me. From there, perhaps you try and go toe-to-toe with Aquinas.

[Hristo Botev]

Forgive my ignorance... But what's the deal with banners?

Just indicative of a watered-down Christianity that doesn't really take itself seriously or ask much of believers. Felt banners have become a symbol of modernity inside the Catholic Church. Felt banners are the anti "smells and bells" liturgy.

Per a quick Google search it appears this book https://www.amazon.com/Environment-Cath ... 1555865631 may have been sort of the genesis of the felt banner thing. From some redditor quoting some passage from this book:

98/ Images in painting or sculpture, as well as tapestries, cloth hangings, banners and other permanent or seasonal decorations, should be introduced into the liturgical space upon consultation with an art consultant. Like the furniture and other objects used in worship, they become part of the environment and are subject to its criteria of quality and appropriateness. In addition, their appropriateness must take into account the current renewed emphasis on the action of the assembly. If instead of serving and aiding that action, they threaten it or compete with it, then they are unsuitable.

99/ In a period of Church and liturgical renewal, the attempt to recover a solid grasp of Church and faith and rites involves the rejection of certain embellishments which have in the course of history become hindrances. In many cases of religious practice, this means a simplifying and refocusing on primary symbols. In building, this effort has resulted in more austere interiors, with fewer objects on the walls and in the corners

DECORATIONS

100/ Many new or renovated liturgical spaces, therefore, invite temporary decoration for particular celebrations, feasts and seasons. Banners and hangings of various sorts are both popular and appropriate, as long as the nature of these art forms is respected. They are creations of forms, colors, and textures, rather than signboards to which words must be attached. Their purpose is to appeal to the senses and thereby create an atmosphere and a mood, rather than to impress a slogan upon the minds of observers or deliver a verbal message.

Personally, I love walking into a pre Vatican II cruciform church and seeing the various saint statues along the wall, the detailed stained glass, the elaborate stations of the cross imagery. The kids love it to; how could they not. That sort of atmosphere naturally draws you outside of yourself; it literally causes you to look up, to let good artwork do what good artwork is supposed to do.

[suomalainen]

ETA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxgw6pbW59E

What. The. Fuck.

[suomalainen]

Personally, I love walking into a pre Vatican II cruciform church and seeing the various saint statues along the wall, the detailed stained glass, the elaborate stations of the cross imagery. The kids love it to; how could they not. That sort of atmosphere naturally draws you outside of yourself; it literally causes you to look up, to let good artwork do what good artwork is supposed to do.

I had a slightly different reaction going to see the Notre Dame in Paris. I'll keep those thoughts to myself, as religious devotion is personal and my experience has no bearing on any one else's.

In any event, I skimmed the last couple of pages of your journal, having mostly been on hiatus from this forum for several years now, and I too am very pleased with how far you've come in these last two years. Wishing you and your family the best of luck in the big move/change, and know that you and DW have the desire and skills to make adjustments as the inevitable little unexpected bumps come up.

[Hristo Botev]

Thanks; it's good to hear from you @Suo.

[jacob]

@chenda - Insofar I might be opening a giant can of worms ...

Compare to "team spirit", fandom, wearing a uniform, sacrificing yourself for a symbol that represents the community or an ideal, hooliganism is the dark side...

A banner, whether it's religious, a national flag, or Manchester United is a concrete symbolic representation of something "greater than yourself" and with humans being a herdy species, well, that's just innately attractive to us. The resulting "hygge" feels safe and comfortable. Belief is where humans make their stand.

Ideally following the concrete felt banner would lead to a more formal understanding of the thinking or sentiment that the concrete banner represents, thus "going beyond the felt". If you ever felt differently from a simple clothes change, putting on a uniform, or being part of a group, you've experienced the human emotion of what a banner does. (Conversely, banners, uniforms, etc. are intended to make you feel and behave in exactly that way. They're part of Plato's Cave.)

The majority of humanity feels this emotion quite strongly. On the flip side, a banner also removes nuance. It promotes sociocentric behavior. Us vs Them. Our banner vs Their banner. It makes humans capable of atrocities. And so it can sacrifice quality of depth of understanding for quantity of allegiance. History is almost like a wave sloshing back and forth between those two extremes depending on how well things are going. It's easier to be magnanimous from a position of strength. Way easier!

Beyond formally realizing that the banner only representative of a group, there's the growing realizing that the group is ultimately governed by a belief in a shared principle. Think banner->group->principles. Like with Wheaton levels, there tends to be some dismissiveness if the gap is too large. It's either "everyone who don't respect our banner have to go away somehow" or "these heretics who think it's about more than our banner are too extreme". Typical Overton stuff.

This is not to say that bannerism or flag waving is terrible. It has a role. In particular, it inculcates the idea of something greater than personal selfish desires. After getting people to rally around the flag, however, the "work" is in realizing that "the flag" is not "the thing". It's just a means and a milestone on the path going forwards beyond the felt.

[chenda]

That sort of atmosphere naturally draws you outside of yourself; it literally causes you to look up, to let good artwork do what good artwork is supposed to do.

I've long had an aesthetic draw to Catholic-esq paraphernalia; the crosses, holy water, shrines, statutes, murals, beads, incense etc. I particularly like the little road side shrines you get in Catholic countries.

@jacob yeah that's interesting. My approach has always tended towards taking a buffet style approach to most things. I don't really identify with a labelled group, in either religion or anything really [edited]

[Hristo Botev]

Perhaps I misunderstood @chenda's question. I don't have any strong feelings one way or the other about banners, in the abstract. I was just using "felt banner-y" in the manner it is sometimes used within Catholic circles as a shorthand for watered-down beige Catholicism stuff that Vatican II often gets blamed for, probably mostly unfairly. Think electric guitars at the youth Mass and generally campy church music that makes you want to vomit, and youth group ministers with earrings and pony tails who will throw out the "blind men and an elephant" parable to some gullible teenager with legit questions about the faith because he is too lazy and ignorant to actually do the hard work of aplogetics and catechization.

I don't think banners in that context--the context of the US bishops purposely replacing more traditional and in your face Catholic symbols with less offensive, pastel colored, felt banners with images of sheep and doves, etc., that could be hung up and later removed depending on the liturgical year--have anything to do with "Ra Ra" team stuff.

[chenda]

Perhaps I misunderstood @chenda's question.

I don't think you did, I assumed the reference to banners was not really literal but euphemistic. Just not heard the term before in that context. I was probably rambling on too much above : )

[macg]

I don't mean to be offensive to anyone, so if this comes across as that or skirts the edge, please let me know and I will delete and learn for next time.

Redacted as it was made clear to me that my comments were taken as offensive. My apologies.

[chenda]

@macg - I'd be wary of making those assumptions about religion in general. See https://youtu.be/K2GxRSW8DAE

Don't want to hijack Hristo's journal though.

[macg]

Redacted as it was made clear to me that my comments were taken as offensive. My apologies.

[chenda]

@macg - fair enough, perhaps assumptions was the wrong choice of word. I don't necessarily disagree with what you said, just there is a widespread tendency to assume all religions are essentially the same, static and regressive. Although you have clearly studied this to a high level so I'm probably teaching you to suck eggs, to use that weird expression.

[jennypenny]

but that doesn't negate the history, nor the fact that (most? all?) organized religions are always very slow to change and evolve.

For some, I think that's part of the appeal.

I understand Hristo's frustration. I don't think it has anything to do with what you, or jacob, are describing re: banners. I think the point was more that the reduction of Catholicism to milquetoast expressions on easily digested 'banners' -- what I would call bumper sticker religion -- is demeaning and disrespectful to the intellectual history of Church (and to its most studied members). I'm not arguing that the Church doesn't have ugliness in its past and present -- most of humanity does. What I don't like, and I think what was HB's point, is that reducing Catholicism to statements like "God is Love" diminishes the Church. It's like saying "water is wet" ... it's factually correct but doesn't tell you anything about the ocean or even hint at the breadth and depth of it.

Our family was lucky that our diocese is old school and we were all taught more along the lines of what HB is taking about. OTOH, 'old school' also means that they are still trying to duck their responsibility regarding the sexual abuse scandal. It's complicated. Still, I feel for HB trying to educate his kids in a way that's challenging without the support of his Church. It's heavy lifting.

[Hristo Botev]

. There's always going to be examples of "change" and "progress", but that doesn't negate the history, nor the fact that (most? all?) organized religions are always very slow to change and evolve.

Why do you think change/progress/evolve is the benchmark?

[macg]

Redacted as it was made clear to me that my comments were taken as offensive. My apologies.

[Hristo Botev]

As someone educated by the Jesuits, what does/would change/progress/evolution for Catholicism look like for you?

[macg]

Redacted as it was made clear to me that my comments were taken as offensive. My apologies.

[Hristo Botev]

Besides the example of equality amongst the sexes I used as an example?

What does equality amongst the sexes look like?

Why would you go to a Jesuit college and study theology if you are not religious? I don’t know where you went but my guess is the school’s stated purpose for existence is evangelization.

[macg]

I am going to bow out of this discussion, because I didn't want this to become a big religious discussion.