Q U A R T E R LY J O U R N A L O F T H E O F F I C E F O R C A T E C H E S I S F E A S T O F S T. E L I Z A B E T H A N N S E T O N I S S U E 5 - J A N U A R Y, 2 0 1 1
Mission We believe that through our ministry we continue the mission of Jesus Christ by enabling the people of the Diocese of Springﬁeld in Illinois to develop the gifts given them by the Spirit. In carrying out this mission, we strive to provide resources, service and leadership to all who are part of the educational mission of the Church: religious education, early childhood, elementary and secondary schools, and adult education. We do this in the spirit of Jesus Christ.
Staff Jonathan Sullivan Director for Catechetical Ministries email@example.com Chris Malmevik Associate Director of Catechesis firstname.lastname@example.org Cynthia Callan Executive Secretary email@example.com Jean Johnson Superintendent of Catholic Schools firstname.lastname@example.org Marilyn Missel Associate Superintendent of Catholic Schools email@example.com Barbara Burris Associate Director of School Planning firstname.lastname@example.org Kyle Holtgrave Associate Director of Youth and Young Adult Ministries email@example.com Beth Schmidt Secretary for School Personnel, Youth and Young Adult Ministries firstname.lastname@example.org
Happy New Year! 2010 was a memorable year for our diocese. Fresh on the heels of the dedication of the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception we received the announcement of our new shepherd, Bishop Thomas John Paprocki, and celebrated with joy his installation in June. He has already indicated his interest in renewing evangelization in our diocese and inviting more young men and women to prayerfully consider God’s call to the priesthood and religious life. 2011 promises to be equally memorable as we implement a new edition and translation of the Roman Missal. This will be a momentous catechetical moment for the lives of our parishes requiring careful explanation, patient listening, and loving invitation. It is my hope that, armed with what we learned at last November’s Diocesan Adult Enrichment Conference and building on the materials provided by the USCCB and other publishers, our parishes will be enriched by this new translation, strengthen our participation in the Church’s liturgy, and deepen our faith in the Eucharist. These efforts will not be without struggle and setbacks. But, as St. Elizabeth Ann Seton reminds us through the example of her life, the love of Christ helps us to persevere and triumph even in the face of adversity. With her intercession and the help of all the saints we pray for the courage, strength, and wisdom to complete this task.
Holy Father, You called Elizabeth Ann Seton to educate your children. Inspire us, by her example, to ﬁnd your will in the present moment. Through her prayers, may we learn to teach others how to love like you. We ask this in the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Teacher. Amen.
Participation of the Faithful page 2
Revising the Translation
Rubrics - Not Just for Mass
Participation of the Faithful The Theological Perspective of Vatican II
hen the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium, was promulgated on December 4, 1963, many thought that its call for “full, conscious and active participation” (SC 14) on the part of the faithful was revolutionary. For, immediately prior to the Council, the experience of most members of the laity at Mass was one of apparent passivity, as though they were what the Council called “outsiders or onlookers” (SC 48) to the sacramental mysteries. Liturgy was considered to the responsibility of the ordained clergy who were set aside for sacred functions. It seemed to have been forgotten that at the beginning of the twentieth century active participation in liturgical worship was proposed by Pope St Pius X at the beginning of his pontiﬁcate with his motu proprio for the renewal of Gregorian chant. The need for active participation was stressed quite clearly by Pope Pius XII in words that preintone passages in the Conciliar Constitution: Mediator Dei 192. “so that the faithful take a more active part in divine worship, .... it is very necessary that the faithful attend the sacred ceremonies not as if they were outsiders or mute onlookers, but let them fully appreciate the beauty of the liturgy and take part in the sacred ceremonies, alternating their voices with the priest and the choir, according to the prescribed norms. If, please God, this is done, it will not happen that the congregation hardly ever or only in a low murmur answer the prayers in Latin or in the vernacular.” A congregation that
is devoutly present at the sacriﬁce, in which our Saviour together with His children redeemed with His sacred blood sings the nuptial hymn of His immense love, cannot keep silent, for “song beﬁts the lover” and, as the ancient saying has it, “he who sings well prays twice.” This full, conscious and active participation is founded on theology. It is an essential part of ecclesiology and the theology of the Christian Assembly. Active participation is both a duty and a right of every individual in consequence of baptism. One of the effects of Baptism is to make us members of the People of God, a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a redeemed people. This text of St Peter (1 Petr 2:9) is read to the newly baptized on Easter Saturday, and is further developed in the ecclesiology of Lumen Gentium nn 9-17: On the People of God. This active participation of all in the liturgical celebration is founded on the sacramental structure of the Church and on the Priesthood of Christ. It is guided by liturgical norms which have their roots in theology. In order that this participation should be seen to as a sign of unity Pope Pius XII pointed out that it is necessary: “that the clergy and people become one in mind and heart, and that the Christian people take such an active part in the liturgy that it becomes a truly sacred action of due worship to the eternal Lord in which the priest, chieﬂy responsible for the souls of his parish, and the ordinary faithful are united together”. (Mediator Dei 199).
Active participation on the part of the faithful in the liturgy must be understood as far more that the distribution of functions and community and responsorial singing. There are a variety of gifts in the Church and it has to be recognized that not all are able to fulﬁll certain functions no matter how willing they may be. The active participation desired by the Church is not just a matter of roles in a liturgical celebration, but rather a fundamental disposition which ﬂows into a way of life; those who take an active part in the liturgy should go from the assembly conscious of their responsibility to proclaim the message which they have celebrated. The heart and mind must be in harmony with what is proclaimed with the lips. Exterior and interior participation cannot be separated both need to be nourished and developed by reﬂection and meditation upon the sacred texts which the Church has given us.
The Teaching of the Council on “Active participation This understanding of active participation was the mind of the Council Fathers. Working from the Church’s ancient understanding of baptism, whereby those who are baptized into Christ are thereby called to his table (SC 9) and made his children, entitled to eat and drink with the family of the Lord, the Fathers insisted that the purpose of baptized life is participation in the sacriﬁce of Christ himself (SC 10). In effect, all who are baptized are made priests, able to offer themselves “as a living sacriﬁce, holy and pleasing to God” (Rom. 12.1). As a notion both in Judaism and the ancient world generally, self-offering as a “living sacriﬁce” was unheard of. Christianity was indeed revolutionary in proposing that an entire people, and every member of it, could become priestly through assimilation to Christ in baptism. As a result, the Christian faithful are shown in the liturgy how “to offer the divine victim to God the Father in the sacriﬁce of the Mass, and to make the offering of their [own] lives with him” (De Presb Min 5). Such a grasp of the priesthood of the faithful -- and hence of the sacriﬁce of the faithful, as it were -- had been lost to the liturgical understanding of many before the Second Vatican Council. With
the issuance of Sacrosanctum Concilium, it has been restored to us, and with it, a way of understanding the all-important phrase “full, conscious and active participation” (SC 14). There are several key passages in Sacrosanctum Concilium from which we discover the Council’s meaning in this seminal phrase. The most succinct may be at SC 48 which tells us what both what this participation is not as well as what it is: And so the church devotes careful efforts to prevent Christian believers from attending this mystery of faith as though they were outsiders or silent onlookers: rather, having a good understanding of this mystery, through the ritual and the prayers, they should share in the worshipping event, aware of what is happening and devoutly involved. They should be formed by God’s word, and refreshed at the table of the Lord’s body; they should give thanks to God; they should learn to offer themselves as they offer the immaculate victim -- not just through the hands of the priest, but also they themselves making the offering together with him; and, as each day goes by, they should be led towards their ﬁnal goal of unity with God and among themselves through the mediation of Christ, so that ﬁnally God may be all in all.
It is worth noting here that the positive expressions of participation which we ﬁnd elsewhere in Sacrosanctum Concilium are contrasted with the phrase “as though they were outsiders or silent onlookers.” who would not be participating either interiorly nor exteriorly, which means that a lack of engagement by the worshipper in the liturgy is the opposite of “active participation.” What the Council sought was to restore to the baptized their rightful role in the liturgical assembly, whether through song or silence; kneeling or standing; processing or sitting; reading or responding. As a result, there is no one activity which in itself can be deﬁned as “active participation.” Instead, such participation is a constellation of skilled worship acts through which every believer must develop a full engagement with the liturgical action. Two further essential ideas which illuminate the notion of “active participation” urged by the Council are given in Sacrosanctum Concilium nn. 11 and 14. The ﬁrst is that such participation is never successful unless it is prepared for “with the dispositions of
a suitable heart and mind. What [worshippers] think and feel must be at one with what they say; they must do their part in the working of grace that comes from above if they are not to have received it in vain” (SC 11). But how is this preparation to be guided and promoted? By those “whose responsibility it is to lead worship” (SC 11), who must take care that all celebrations are validly and licitly observed, and that participation is knowing (scienter), active (actuose) and fruitful (fructose).” These are immense duties for both the faithful and those charged with the diverse leadership of the liturgy -- the bishop, priest - celebrant, deacon, lector, acolyte, cantor and others. The counterpart to this is also sobering: that a failure in the leadership of the liturgy can just as surely impede the “full, conscious and active participation” of all in the liturgical assembly. To guard the importance of this responsibility, all are charged with a reminder unlike most in the Conciliar documents: “This full and active sharing on the part of the people is of paramount concern in the process of renewing the liturgy and helping it to grow, because such sharing is
the ﬁrst, and necessary, source from which believers can imbibe the true Christian spirit” (SC 14).
How this is enﬂeshed in the GIRM In the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, this notion of participation taken from the Council is evident in many places as the undergirding of ritual action. Often, when the GIRM mentions the participation of the faithful, it does so by linking a ritual action to the baptismal theology which grounds it, as in the offering of the general intercessions (69), in which “the people respond in some way to the Word of God which they have welcomed in faith, and exercise the ofﬁce of their baptismal priesthood, offering prayers to God for the salvation of all.” The same can be true even of the smallest rubric, in which lay, baptismal participation is clearly understood and respected, as in the act of incensation (75) at the preparation of the gifts: “Next, the priest, on account of his sacred ministry, and the people because of their baptismal dignity, may be incensed by the deacon or another lay minister.” But more broadly, the GIRM often speaks of full participation by the faithful as the motive and goal for the revision of various parts of the Roman rite. For example, the GIRM (5) insists that certain parts of the eucharistic celebration
which have fallen into disuse or neglect should be restored, since these belong to the laity “in virtue of the name of each within the People of God.” The use of the vernacular itself (GIRM, 12), the reception of communion under both kinds (GIRM, 13-14), the introduction of Masses for various needs and occasions (GIRM 15), the involvement of the laity in the planning of liturgical celebrations (GIRM 18), the adaptation of gestures within the rites (GIRM 24), and the renewed forms speciﬁcally of celebrating the penitential rites, the profession of faith, the general intercessions and the Lord’s Prayer (GIRM 36) are all to be understood as fostering increased participation, demanded by “the nature of the celebration...and for the Christian people, [they are] a right and duty they have
by reason of their baptism” (GIRM 19). Perhaps nowhere is this theology of participation more dramatically stated than in GIRM 78, describing the eucharistic prayer: “The meaning of the prayer is that the entire congregation of the faithful should join itself with Christ in confessing the great deed God has done and in the offering of sacriﬁce.”
texts and rites “more clearly express the holy things which they represent, and so that thus the Christian people, in so far as this is possible, will be able to understand these things easily, and to enter into them through a celebration that is expressive of their full meaning, is effective, involving, and the community’s own” (SC 21).
The revised GIRM can be seen to have embraced and even more, developed thoroughly the implications of the Conciliar restoration of a theology of lay participation in the liturgy. In turn, this theology is based upon a retrieval of the best of the Christian tradition on the meaning of sacriﬁce as a function of the baptized. As with the entire renewal of the liturgy, this re-emphasis has been introduced in order that the
Copyright 2010, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Based upon Roman Missal Formational Materials provided by the Secretariat for the Liturgy of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Video Resource: How to Create a Facebook Page Last November the Ofﬁce for Catechesis, in cooperation with the National Conference for Catechetical Leadership, offered a free webinar exploring why parishes should have a presence on Facebook, how to set up a Facebook page, and how parishes can connect with their parishioners through their page. A video of the webinar is now available at www.vimeo.com/16951134. Please feel free to pass it on to anyone interested in using this important tool for their ministry! P.5
Revising the Translation, Renewing the Mass – Part I Fr. Paul Turner [This past November Fr. Turner addressed the 2010 Diocesan Adult Enrichment Center on the upcoming revisions to the Mass. The ﬁrst half of his address follows; the second half will appear in the next issue of COREnotes.] I don’t mean to shock you, but in case you haven’t heard, not everyone is looking forward to the new English translation of the mass. In this talk I will explain why we are getting a new translation and what to expect from it. Mainly, I will address some of the principal objections to the project. I hope to help you understand the signiﬁcance of this moment in the life of our Church, and to sort through the advantages and challenges of the path that lies before us. The Vatican recently published a revised edition of the Roman Missal; this is the third edition since the Second Vatican Council. All three editions were published ﬁrst in Latin, intended to be translated into the vernacular. Each new edition became necessary for logical reasons: the rubrics were clariﬁed, and the contents were expanded. In the United States, we have called the ﬁrst two translations the Sacramentary. It is the book from which the priest reads his prayers, but it is also the place where you ﬁnd all the responses the people make, as well as the instructions, or rubrics, for how mass is supposed to go. If you were to consult the Latin originals of these three editions, you would ﬁnd that only a small percentage of the post-Vatican II missal has changed from one book to the next. There is virtually no controversy over getting a third edition of the missal. It’s as sensible as upgrading a computer program from 2.0 to 3.0, or getting the latest revision of a favorite textbook for the classroom. The missal has been updated, and we need the new contents.
However, what has become controversial is that the Vatican has changed its rules for how vernacular translations are to be made. The original guidelines appeared in 1969 under the title Comme le prévoit. Paragraph 6 says this: “[I]t is not sufﬁcient that a liturgical translation merely reproduce the expressions and ideas of the original text. Rather it must faithfully communicate to a given people, and in their own language, that which the Church by means of this given text originally intended to communicate to another people in another time. A faithful translation, therefore, cannot be judged on the basis of individual words: the total context of this speciﬁc act of communication must be kept in mind, as well as the literary form proper to the respective language.” This gave translators a free hand to employ language that favored the way we use English. In fact, the English translators did more creative work than translators of many other languages, in harmony with the freedom given them at the time. In the year 2001, the Vatican issued new guidelines for translation under the title Liturgiam authenticam. Paragraph 20 says this: “[T]he translation of the liturgical texts of the Roman Liturgy is not so much a work of creative innovation as it is of rendering the original texts faithfully and accurately into the vernacular language. While it is permissible to arrange the wording, the syntax and the style in such a way as to prepare a ﬂowing vernacular text suitable to the rhythm of popular prayer, the
original text, insofar as possible, must be translated integrally and in the most exact manner, without omissions or additions in terms of their content, and without paraphrases or glosses. Any adaptation to the characteristics or the nature of the various vernacular languages is to be sober and discreet.” This change in translation theory is going to make the entire mass sound different. However, let me state this clearly: The words you will hear are still the voice of the Second Vatican Council. It is a new translation of all the work performed after Vatican II. The best liturgists of the 1960s built a revised order of mass and a new sequence of prayers and rubrics. All their work is still with us. They completed their work in Latin. We are expecting a revised translation of that post-Vatican II work. That is why some of the parts of the mass with which you are most familiar will be changing. From “And also with you” to “And with your spirit.” From “We believe” to “I believe.” From “It is right to give him thanks and praise” to “It is right and just.” And so on. This is also why the prayers that the priest says are changing considerably. They were all translated under a different theory. Some people have said that the new words resemble what they found in their handheld missals back in the days when every mass was in Latin. This is not a return to the pre-Vatican II mass. Those popular personal missals 40 years ago used a different theory of translation than the one that came into force immediately after the Council. So if the forthcoming translation sounds like a very old translation, it has to do with language theory, but not with the content of the missal. This will still be the same familiar mass of Vatican II that has formed a generation of Catholics praying in their own language for the ﬁrst time in history. The changes that the Second Vatican Council introduced were extremely difﬁcult for a small percentage of Catholics. In recent years, Pope Benedict XVI has made the pre-Vatican II mass more available. He did so hoping to reconcile
those who were struggling with the revised liturgy. The new English translation is not directly related to that effort. There may be some who preferred the pre-Vatican II mass because they did not like the present English translation, and if so, they will have another chance to discover the beauty of the post- Vatican II mass. But more likely, those who preferred the pre-Vatican II mass had concerns about the authority of the Council, and these individuals will probably remain unaffected by matters of translation. In the end, the revised translation is not about reaching out to people who did not accept the Council, but reaching to those who did, to honor the liturgical tradition that has become a part of their lives, and to enhance it with renewed attention to its words. Here are twelve concerns I’ve heard about the work, along with some remarks about each of them: 1. “The sentences are longer.” It is true that the Latin language enjoys longer sentences than we do in written English. The ﬁrst translation broke up these sentences into smaller ones, notably in the opening prayer of the mass. For example, for the past many years, here is a prayer we have heard on the Thirty-Second Sunday in Ordinary Time: “God of power and mercy, / protect us from all harm. / Give us freedom of spirit / and health in mind and body / to do your work on earth.” The original Latin prayer is all in one sentence. The proposed revision for this prayer goes like this: “Almighty and merciful God, / graciously banish all that would harm us, / so that, unhindered in mind and body alike, / we may pursue with minds set free / the things that are yours.” Some people fear that Catholics will not understand such a long sentence, but other language groups, including Spanish, did translate the single Latin sentence into a single vernacular sentence. So if you say that English-speakers cannot understand long sentences, you have to explain how Spanish-speakers have done it for P.7
the past 40 years. Some people are objecting that the revised translation is dense and harder to understand. It is harder to understand at ﬁrst, but I believe that the words have become richer in their allusions to the bible and the tradition of our Church. Even with longer sentences, the prayers will hold up well under repetition, study and meditation. 2. “The vocabulary is strange.” Well, the vocabulary is broader, and it will introduce some words we have not heard much in the Sacramentary. To take just one example, the revised translation of Eucharistic Prayer III includes the word “oblation”. The difﬁculty is that Latin often uses a variety of words that are nearly synonyms; in this case, oblatio, sacriﬁcium, offerenda, victima, and hostia, for example. The inclusion of a word such as “oblation” in the English vocabulary aims to give the ﬁnished prayer a vocabulary as diverse as it is in Latin.
the presider knew to sing a cadence before the words “Through Christ our Lord.” Personally, I think it would look better in English if we joined this phrase to the previous sentence with a comma at the end of that one, and a lower case letter at the start of this one, but I understand the desire to honor a long tradition. People are not going to hear a capital letter anyway. The priest can still pronounce the entire prayer as a unit.
And let’s not forget that for many decades we have been singing these words in the third verse of the hymn “To Jesus Christ Our Sovereign King”: “To you and to your Church, great king, we pledge our heart’s oblation.” It is a word in our vocabulary.
4. “There are grammatical errors.” I honestly don’t know what people mean when they say this, but I think they are reacting to the way that the prayers now sound. For example, one postcommunion prayer in Advent has been prepared this way: “O God, who have shown forth your salvation to all the ends of the earth.” I suspect some people think it should be, “O God, who has shown forth,” as if we were describing something God has done, instead of making a direct address to God, “you who have shown forth.” It does sound confusing at ﬁrst. But ICEL has been meticulous in applying rules of grammar, and if there are any errors in the ﬁnal product, they probably happened after the text left the hands of ICEL.
3. “Sentences are incomplete.” I think this refers to the custom of concluding prayers with the words “Through Christ our Lord,” with a capital T on the ﬁrst word and a period at the end of the previous sentence. You sometimes hear people complain about the translators, “They didn’t even put a verb in there. Don’t they know what a verb is?” Well, yes, they know what a verb is.
5. “The revised texts have never been tested in the pew.” This is true, but the grassroots movement to experiment with the texts in select parishes started rather late in the process. ICEL had ﬁnished its work before thousands of people asked for a new preparatory step. In fact, there were opportunities to get feedback from ordinary churchgoers at earlier stages; any bishop could have consulted as broadly as he wished.
The rules for capitalization are established by the Vatican, not by ICEL (the International Commission on English in the Liturgy) or the bishops of a conference. The Vatican wanted the capitalization and punctuation in a phrase like this to imitate the centuries-old custom in Latin. The period that concludes the preceding sentence probably served as a musical cue so that
The most popular suggestion over the past year or so has been to appoint a couple of parishes in each diocese to use the revised texts for a year, gather feedback, and then revise them again. As a pastor, I love the idea of consultation, but I ﬁnd this particular proposal impractical. I don’t want to change the texts of the mass in my parish for one year, go back to the ones we were us-
ing before, and then change again to the revised texts a year or two later. And if we did this, how would we make the experimental texts available to our people? Who would publish them? Which composers would write temporary settings of the Gloria for us to sing? How would our children’s religion textbooks be amended? What do we do at weddings and funerals during that year when we have lots of visitors in our churches? There is always merit in getting feedback from people who will use the texts, but I’m not convinced that a one-year experiment is the best idea on the table. It has also been argued that we should give the bishops some credit. They are the ones working on the translation, and it’s not like they are unfamiliar with how these sound in actual practice. In fact, nobody celebrates mass in more situations than a bishop does. He visits every parish in the diocese. He celebrates the Eucharist at nursing homes, schools, and prisons. He holds an especially competent position to feel the pulse of the people at prayer.
other Eucharistic prayers – all of them – were composed after the council. Now, in truth, a few of them were composed in modern languages such as French or German, and then translated into Latin so that they could be translated back out again. But Latin continues to serve as the source language in which the Catholic Church can say more precisely what we intend to say. Encyclicals from the pope, instructions from the Curia, and even the Catechism of the Catholic Church all have a Latin original where the voice of the Church ﬁnds its source. Many of the other prayers you hear the priest at mass say come from the sixth, seventh and eighth centuries. They have been carefully handed down in Latin from one generation to the next. They are like any other treasure in our churches: our statues, our stained-glass windows, our paintings, hymns and frescoes. They deserve to be preserved and polished in translation so that future generations can appreciate them too. Latin is also important for study in ﬁelds such as medicine, art, philosophy, and music. If you know Latin, it opens doors.
Still, it should be acknowledged that the desire to hear from the people in the pew is part of a much larger issue in the Catholic Church, an issue that goes far beyond the Roman Missal; many people, especially women, feel that they are never consulted on issues that affect them deeply. As a Church we need to ﬁnd better ways to open the mouths of the faithful and the ears of the hierarchy. 6. “Latin is dead.” Some are asking why we are so obsessed with this old language. Why is it so important to know what these prayers say in Latin? Almost all the prayers of the mass were composed in Latin, even the brand new ones. Eucharistic Prayer I dates at least to the fourth century; Eucharistic Prayer II has origins even earlier. But all the
Practical Tips for Catechists I’m a big believer in rubrics. Both of the “Say the black, do the red” variety, and in the classroom. What’s a rubric, you ask? Sit back as I explain how you can overcome your hesitation and ﬁnally build up the courage to cross the Rubric...con.
ric b u R
ass M for e t s Ju mor d t o That seemed like it was building up to be an awesome N Any pee S pun, didn’t it? Sorry about that. n a i r Do Okay, basically, a rubric is a terriﬁc time-saver for teachers and a
way for students to know your expectations very clearly before they begin an assignment. Rubrics are great for essay portions of tests, evaluating projects, rating students’ behavior or class participation - pretty much anything you can evaluate, you can evaluate via a rubric. Score 3
Includes at least four saints and discusses their spiritual works of mercy in detail.
Includes at least three saints and discusses their spiritual works of mercy with some detail.
Includes at least two saints and discusses their spiritual works of mercy with some detail.
Not enough saints chosen or inadequate details about each saint.
Audience and Purpose
Demonstrates highly effective word choice; clearly focuses on persuasive task.
Demonstrates good word choice; states focus on persuasive task.
Shows some good word choices; minimally states focus on persuasive task.
Shows lack of attention to persuasive task.
Uses clear, consistent organizational strategy.
Uses clear organizational strategy with occasional inconsistencies.
Uses inconsitent organizational strategy; presentation is not logical.
Demonstrates lack of organizational strategy.
Provides convincing, well-elaborated reasons to support the position.
Provides two or more moderately elaborated reasons to support the writer’s position.
Provides several reasons buut few are elaborated; only one elaborated reason.
Provides no speciﬁc reasons or does not elaborate.
Use of Language
Incorporates many transitions to create clarity of epression; includes very few mechanical errors.
Incorporates some transitions to help ﬂow of ideas; has few mechanical errors.
Incorporates few transitions; does not connect ideas well; includes many mechanical errors.
Does not connect ideas; includes many mechanical errors.
Total Points for Question 1: ____________
Rubrics4Teachers.com has tons of examples; I usually make my own, so that they’re tailored to the assignment. Decide how many aspects of an assignment you want to evaluate, come up with a “4-3-2-1” description in each category, and then give the rubric to the kids before they start the assignment, so that they know what they should be doing to complete it. Then, you just need to circle the box in each category that best ﬁts the student’s performance. Here are some sample rubrics you’re welcome to use and/or modify (click on the link to view them in PDF form). • Saints Essay Question: Choose four saints whose lives we have discussed in class and explain how they practiced the corporal and/or spiritual works of mercy. • Sacraments Essay Question: Choose four of the seven Sacraments. For each Sacrament, explain how it was instituted by Jesus, how it serves to provide us with grace, and how a person should prepare to receive the Sacrament. • Scripture Class - General Essay: Choose at least three Biblical ﬁgures whose lives we have discussed in class, and explain what people can learn from their example. You may include details about how each person either chose to do God’s will or disobeyed God, and what resulted from those decisions. Dorian Speed is a homeschooling mom and parish catechist from Texas. This article was originally posted on her blog: www.scrutinies.net.
Upcoming Events January 8
March for Life Rally (St. Elizabeth, Granite City)
CORE Meeting (Catholic Pastoral Center)
Diocesan Men’s Retreat (Villa Maria)
Presentation: “So You Want to Raise Your Kids Catholic, Do You?” (Sacred Heart, Efﬁngham)
Pueri Cantores Festival (Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception, Springﬁeld)
CORE Retreat (Villa Maria)
Reflection “Do not become utterly absorbed in activism! There would be so much to do that one could be working on it constantly. And that is precisely the wrong thing. Not becoming totally absorbed in activism means maintaining consideratio -- discretion, deeper examination, contemplation, time for interior pondering, vision, and dealing with things, remaining with God and meditating about God. One should not feel obliged to work ceaselessly; this in itself is important for everyone, too, for instance, every manager, too, and even more so for a Pope. He has to leave many things to others so as to maintain his inner view of the whole, his interior recollection, from which the view of what is essential can proceed.” --Pope Benedict XVI Light of the World, with Peter Seewald
This work is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
COREnotes JANUARY, 2011 - ISSUE 5
F E A S T O F S T. E L I Z A B E T H A N N S E T O N
Office for Catechesis 1615 W. Washington • P.O. Box 3187• Springfield, IL 62708-3187 217.698.8500 ph • 217.698.8620 fax • dio.org/catechesis