This is something that Catholics in N. America should be proud of.
#11
Awesome picture indeed, didi, and I do not use the epithet lightly.

By the way, Laszlo, are you sure that inculturation was condemned as such? I am pretty certain that it was a constant practice of the Jesuits even after the papacy of Clement XI, and have, in particular, Pius XII's Summi Pontificatus in mind.
Reply
#12
(06-06-2009, 10:33 AM)veritatem_dilexisti Wrote: Awesome picture indeed, didi, and I do not use the epithet lightly.

By the way, Laszlo, are you sure that inculturation was condemned as such? I am pretty certain that it was a constant practice of the Jesuits even after the papacy of Clement XI, and have, in particular, Pius XII's Summi Pontificatus in mind.

As far as I know the Church never condemned anything 'as such', always detailed doctrines, in that Chinese inculturation the images for God, what the Jesuits adapted (if my memory works; I did not found the text). Shortly after that condemnation the Jesuits were suspended

As I said one of the motives for Vatican II was the idea to adapt for the changing world. The condemnation was not infallible and irrevocable. Pius XII relaxed many previous rules. When I learned Church history in the fifties the idea of the inculturation was considered something as part of the balanced word. Still the caution is necessary, and many  Jesuits today proves this caution by their doctrines and practice. We need balance, not one sided theories.

Reply
#13
(06-06-2009, 08:30 AM)glgas Wrote: The name of this practice is inculturation. The Jesuits used this everywhere. Related to China Clement XI condemned it in the Encyclical Ex illa die. (1715).

The inculturation certainly has some merits, and was one of the principles of Vatican II. Our tradition is 'inculturated' into the abcient Greco-Roman and Jewish civilizations, so why not extend it to other civilizations. Due to the condemnation and the possibility of abuses certain caution is needed.

Absolutely.

The one place where inculturation is clearly wrong, in my opinion, is in the liturgies.  All cultures are pleasing to God, for sure, because they all contain elements of beauty, art, etc.  Building a church with cultural symbols, having cultural devotions, etc. is a great thing - outside of the Mass and other functions that belong to the Universal Church.

Anything in a culture that is not offensive to Catholic teaching and morals should certainly be retained whenever possible.  Things that are offensive need to be rejected, and they will be by members of the culture that want to become good Catholics.  The failure in modern days is certain authorities within the Church don't say "this is unCatholic and needs to discontinue".
Reply
#14
Cool.  ;D
Reply
#15
"The Catholic Church has done far more for American Indians than any Casino operation.

In the areas that were colonized by Spain and Portugal (Catholic nations) natives were, for the most part, treated far better than in areas settled by the British and Dutch colonists, with intermarriage taking place far more often, too."

That is an interesting observation Crusader King. I came to the same conclusion comparing Portuguese colonial practice as compared to the British, which was the thesis I wrote as an undergraduate in history. The Portuguese seemed to mix Catholic idealism with the natural harshness that always comes about in a colonial endeavor. The British were usually better administrators, yet they were initially less interested in Christianizing their subjects than the Portuguese.

However, about the intermarriage, that is a bit deceptive because Spain and Portugal did not bring their women along with them and the crowns of both these nations thought that by sharing Spanish/Portuguse blood with their colonial subjects, they would make them more loyal and perhaps easier to Catholicize. I think this was actually a very shrewd move on the part of both Iberian crowns rather than any sort of racial idealism.   
Reply
#16
great pic didi!
Reply
#17
Was not just the Jesuits but also the Franciscans that were very good at inculturation. The Franciscans who converted the Mayans let them retain a lot of their local customs (besides for the blood sacrificing of course, which the Mayans understood to not be necessary due the Mass's offering of Divine Blood every day). The idea of using a seasonal calendar that matched the stars and honored revered saints made perfect sense to them as well.

And for another form inculturation just look up information about the Tlaxcalans (pronounced: "TLAWSH-cah-lawns"), an ally of Cortés against Tenochtitlán (the Aztecs). They lived in the hills and for a few generations after the conquest retained their way of life, while having their royalty marry in with Spanish nobility. As far as the Spanish were concerned, as long as they did not cause problems (like human sacrifice) and left everyone else alone than everything was fine.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)