From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Subject: Re: Some questions
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 19:14:14 GMT

In article <Bw68xH.FL0@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> wwarf@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Wayne J. Warf) writes:
>Current situation:
>
>I'm a doctoral student and engaged to be married next June. My fiancee,
>born a Methodist, has decided to convert to the RCC. We've started
>attending Mass and RCIA together at the campus Newman center. This is
>where the questions come in. I'd like to know if certain practices are
>common that I've seen here. I've never seen them elsewhere.

   For those of you familiar with me in this list/group, Wayne is
speaking of the very parish of which I am a member.  Bob and others,
now maybe you know better where I'm coming from 8-).

>For example, the last Mass we attended:

   If this was 9:30 Sunday, I was there.

>-the penitential rite was omitted

   Actually, I think there actually was a Penitential Rite.  It's just
that it is so heavily euphemized (i.e. no mention of sin), that it's
confusing to try to figure out what's going on there.

>-the creed was omitted

   I don't remember the Creed being omitted, at least not at the Mass
I attended.

>-the gospel reading was an "adaptation" that I can only describe as a
> skit or caricature; it was done with Christ and the Apostles doing
> street talk. It was very uncomfortable to me and felt almost like a
> personal violation. 

   I agree.  I remember thinking that "this should have been done as
the homily" (if at all).

   Other things that make me very uncomfortable are changing of the
liturgical text and being told not to kneel during the Eucharistic
Prayer.

>In RCIA last night on a discussion of the sacraments:

   I just happened to drop in at RCIA last night.

>-It was stated as a matter of fact that the RCC has never taught that
> intentionally and habitually missing Mass was a serious enough sin
> <or a sin at all, was the implication> to disable one from receiving
> Holy Communion without first receiving absolutionThe statement
> made was that even if someone decides not to go to Mass for 20 years,
> they could receive Communion without seeking rReconciliation first.

   Yes, the lady in charge gave the parable of the Prodigal Son.  It
kind of threw me, but then I thought that that is more relevent to the
Sacrament of Reconciliation.

>-One participant related how an acquaitance's husband was denied 
> Communion by a pastor who knew he had not attended Mass for a 
> number of years and had not received absolution. The speaker
> accused the pastor of being a "bad priest".

   Yes, I didn't agree with her saying that.  Maybe the priest in
question just had the courage to take seriously his responsibility to
withhold the Eucharist from someone who had rejected the Catholic
Faith.

>-It was stated that the precept requiring receiving of the Eucharist
> during Easter time was, "to encourage people to show up at least
> once a year," but was not binding.
>
>Everyone there is apparently comfortable with these teachings except
>me. Is my catechism out of date? Am I just a victim of my background?

   "Everyone" seemed comfortable with those teachings because most of
them are either a) catechumens at present, or b) former catechumens at
that very parish.  I know this from personal experience.

   I was not totally comfortable with some things taught there last
night, but I believe it is an improvement over last year at least.  I
suppose I'll have to show up there more often.

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU