Free download.
Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device.
You can download and read online Ecclesiology in the Cyber Age: Young Theologians Conclave file PDF Book only if you are registered here.
And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Ecclesiology in the Cyber Age: Young Theologians Conclave book.
Happy reading Ecclesiology in the Cyber Age: Young Theologians Conclave Bookeveryone.
Download file Free Book PDF Ecclesiology in the Cyber Age: Young Theologians Conclave at Complete PDF Library.
This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats.
Here is The CompletePDF Book Library.
It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Ecclesiology in the Cyber Age: Young Theologians Conclave Pocket Guide.
The focus of Ecclesiology in Cyber Age becomes pertinent in this culture of virtuality. Virtual communication, virtual communion, Web Churches, Hitech meetings.
Table of contents
About this book Introduction This volume explores how Catholicism began and continues to open its doors to the wider world and to other confessions in embracing ecumenism, thanks to the vision and legacy of the Second Vatican Council. It explores such themes as the twentieth century context preceding the council; parallels between Vatican II and previous councils; its distinctively pastoral character; the legacy of the council in relation to issues such as church-world dynamics, as well as to ethics, social justice, economic activity.
Several chapters discuss the role of women in the church before, during, and since the council.
- Deadly Beasts: Book 2 Divine Blood;
- Detections in a Scarlet Vein; an irrelevent investigation.
- Not funny, Mr. Drake;
- Not funny, Mr. Drake - PrayTellBlog!
- Her True Nature!
Others discern inculturation in relation to Vatican II. The book also contains a wide and original range of ecumenical considerations of the council, including by and in relation to Free Church, Reformed, Orthodox, and Anglican perspectives. It is the classic straw man argument to posit what you think I might think in order to condemn it. The moderators seem to need to clear my earlier posting with its multiple references to my own blog for you to examine.
Watch here tomorrow for those links to appear. There are, for lack of a better term, factions among CMAA that line up at various points of the spectrum regarding the efficacy and future of both forms of chant.
Catholic Action -
But practical and philosophical differences among chant proponents remain as fluid and sometimes heated just as those that exist between folks like David H. I, like you, believe its use will survive into the future for time immemorial. But to what extent? We cannot foresee that.
I pray for the greater. On the other hand, the need for the truly burgeoning emergence of English vernacular chant at this very moment in time refer to musicasacra. He immediately responded that such a revision was unlikely. However he could envision the remediation of specific portions that many see as inarticulate through the emergence of a unified Roman Rite of the Mass. Personally, I- 1. Believe in the efficacy of the Usus Antiquor universally in Latin. Believe that the fulcrum of its recovery universally has tipped over and cannot be recovered.
Hence 3.
Vernacular chant is the future. Thanks for that, Charles. I believe one thrust of the liturgical reform post V2 was to get away from the low Mass culture and move towards a sung Mass being the norm, as it is in the Eastern Rite. That and the option of the vernacular makes vernacular chant a priority and Mgr Wadsworth and co.
Canada are already pushing settings in the modern i. JN Can you provide a link which explains why it is harder to read music as is modernly printed than it is to read square chant notation? Modern notation seems to me to be entirely oriented to instrumentalists. The way notes are linked are often misleading regarding the syllabification singers must use.
Why, O why.. This is not any sort of position against chant, or even against the propers.. But to push for its renewal through anger, attacks, and bashing of every other approach alas, does not serve any of us in any way worthy of our vocation. I continue to be mystified by much of this, especially when there seems to be for me, so many other things that should be arousing our passions and concern.
I prefer vernacular chant as a path to FCAP most accessible to Americans, most of us being nearly musical illiterates. Regarding Propers, I would rather have congregations sing complete Psalms, appropriately translated from the original into correct, inclusive, and formal American English with a promise that the translation will remain legal for liturgical use for fifty years.
One translation, many composers, a chant minimum. I think the arbitrary rejection of the ICEL Psalter was a major crime and imposition of the personal tastes of a few when so much work had gone into something long needed for the good of the many. What I find even more amazing is that we are talking about high and low masses. MS when using the terminology was talking about the principle of progressive solemnity. I think like any musical form chant can serve the liturgy well. I also think like all other musical forms its use should pass the musical, pastoral, and liturgical criteria.
David, whose post provoked your confusion? I hope not mine, as then you would have greatly misinterpreted its intent and thrust. Flynn a one rite fits all agenda. This is all documented here and elsewhere that I frequent online. If I misread your objective, mea culpa. Tom Poelker : JNCan you provide a link which explains why it is harder to read music as is modernly printed than it is to read square chant notation?
Square notes and round notes. I agree very much with David Haas. The extensive collection of CDs that supports my daily praise of God is about evenly divided among Latin chant and polyphony, Eastern chant and polyphony, Anglican chant and polyphony, and contemporary music e. Haas, Haugen, etc. While the last my not endure as long as the rest, it is what most of my brothers and sisters in the USA sing. The essential problem is that we have only the Mass and not a Divine Office, and we have a Mass that is only an hour long. So everybody fights so that they get to sing and hear only what they want to sing and hear.
The discovery of the Divine Office at an early age basically freed me from clerical domination. If a plague wiped them out tomorrow, I would not be concerned. It also has given me a center of peace in my pursuit of a weekly Mass that will truly be the psychological apex and not the nadir of my liturgical week. While I feel very blessed with many beautiful Eucharists, they are very much out numbered by the many dull and boring ones.
But that is life in community, and change is not easy. The Divine Office in all the traditions has always been more flexible and able to meet a great diversity of prayer needs.
The Mass is never going to be able to meet that need for flexibility and diversity inherent in contemporary life. The Mass is only a hour a week. The Divine Office can be any where from fifteen minutes to a couple of hours a day. It can be done one day a week, many days or every day. The Divine Office can be done anywhere, any time with any one. No church building or clergy needed.
Faith & Culture
Even if you limit yourself to the current Roman LOH you still have a lot of flexibility. If you are willing to use of the many past and present versions across traditions to build a future Office it will be very flexible indeed. Tom on July 4, — am requested textual proof for my concerns about his writings on the nature of the Eucharist. How much more accurate to refer to the Eucharistic bread or the Body of Jesus! The question what to call the Eucharist is, I suspect, at the heart of the scuffles between traditional and progressive Catholics.
Ecclesiology in the Cyber Age : Sweety Helen Chukka :
This does not explain what to call the Eucharist. Those who call It the Hostia, or Victim, might cite:. New York: Devin-Adair Company, CCC , A rejection of dogma through an erroneous relabeling does not effect a democratization or equalization of the assembly and presider.
- Report of YOUNG THEOLOGIANS CONCLAVE "Ecclesiology in the Cyber Age".
- The Remnant Newspaper - The Cybernetic Church;
- The Dangerous Bridge;
- Satellite Signal Propagation, Impairments and Mitigation.
- Larry A. Witham - Where Darwin meets the bible ( Oxford University Press USA).pdf.
- Robert D. Cornwall’s books on Goodreads (2, books);
Rejection of dogma is not equality, but rather a denigration of Mass itself. I only fear that, in a rush to bring the priest-celebrant-presider and the assembly-congregation together, doctrinal orthodoxy will part ways. I do wonder if this has already come to pass in some respects. JZ, Are you denying that your host is a Eucharistic bread or that other forms of bread can be used for the Eucharist other than pre-cut and ultra thin and purely white hosts?
It seems you are denying the definitions of the matter of the sacrament. If you want to refer to the victim, why not say victim instead of the anglicized Latin word for victim? By insisting on referring to hosts, are you intending to denigrate the Eucharistic Banquet? Is it heresy to insist on only the sacrifice and its terminology instead of referring correctly to the fact that the Eucharist is both a banquet and a sacrifice? You seem intent on drawing the worst possible and most accusatory conclusions about others instead of seeking to understand or discuss the content of liturgical matters on this list.
In his first two chapters he argues for the possibility of such things. In the rest of the book he speaks of them as if they were proven facts because the possibilities are discussed by himself earlier in the book. The lacunae are big enough for transporting multi-genrational, cryogenic, colony vessels. Discussing A does not prove A. Until A is proven, it may not be used as an argument in any other deduction without specifying that it is mere speculation.
Until A is proven to be what another holds, drawing conclusions about what such holdings may imply is wildly inappropriate and uncharitable. Perhaps these fixations, compulsions, and scrupulosities would best be discussed with a close friend rather than aired on this public list.