A "traditional" catholic told me that the Baltimore Catechism differs from the Catechism of PJPII

[blaskoman]

He also mentioned that the new Catechism offers up a new theology. I’m guessing he alluded to certain new theology introduced during Vatican II which were incorporated into the new catechism.

Question: does JPII’s Catechism super cede the Baltimore version? Should I even read the latter?

 

[pnewton]

He also mentioned that the new Catechism offers up a new theology. I’m guessing he alluded to certain new theology introduced during Vatican II which were incorporated into the new catechism.

Question: does JPII’s Catechism super cede the Baltimore version? Should I even read the latter?

A catechism is just a teaching document. Use which one you find best. The current Catechism has been called a “sure norm” of the Catholic faith, though. There is nothing in it that should cause concern for the faithful Catholic.

 

[ialsop]

Yes, read whichever you find best. There is NO new theology, though the main difference would be the liturgical reform, but that does not affect the chatechism much or the theology at all.

Frankly, I use the PJP2 Catechism AND the Catechism of the council of trent. AND a Douay Catechism and a Catechism of Pope pius X, I dont really have a favorite.

 

[Genesis315]

What specifically does he claim is different in the Baltimore Catechism and the CCC? I’ve never seen anything myself.

There was a similar, simple question and answer catechism promulgated in Italy (although it became popular elsewhere) by Pope St. Pius X, commonly referred to as the Pius X Catechism. When asked if it was superseded by the later question and answer Compendium of the CCC, Cardinal Ratzinger (the future Benedict XVI) answered:
Cardinal Ratzinger:

The faith, as such, is always the same. Therefore, St. Pius X’s catechism always retains its value. However, the way of transmitting the contents of the faith can change.

Consequently, one can ask if St. Pius X’s catechism can in this respect be regarded as still valid today. I think that the compendium we are preparing can respond better to today’s needs. But this does not exclude the fact that there can be persons or groups that feel more comfortable with St. Pius X’s catechism.

It should not be forgotten that that Catechism stemmed from a text that was prepared by the Pope himself [Pius X] when he was bishop of Mantua. The text was the fruit of the personal catechetical experience of Giuseppe Sarto, whose characteristics were simplicity of exposition and depth of content. Also because of this, St. Pius X’s catechism might have friends in the future. But this does not make our work superfluous.

zenit.org/article-7161?l=english

I think the same can be said about the Baltimore Catechism. The only difference is the Baltimore Catechism was just a local Catechism promulgated by the bishops in the United States, whereas the CCC was promulgated by the Pope for the whole Church. That does give the CCC a greater authority, but it certainly does not make the Baltimore Catechism worthless.

 

[PaulfromIowa]

What “new theology” is supposed to be contained in the new Catechism, exactly?

 

[ialsop]

Also, I am a traditional catholic. But, if this guy rejects the newer Catechism, he is neither acting very “traditional” nor “Catholic”. He is the one with the new theology, not us, and it is not very “traditional” to reject what the magisterium says.

 

[phil19034]

The only major difference is format.

The new Catechism is written like a reference book.

The Baltimore Catechism is written as a Q&A.

As an FYI - I was at a Q&A with Archbishop Chaput last year when someone asked about the Baltimore Catechism and why the Church doesn’t push it again. His answer was pretty blunt. He said it didn’t do a good job of Evangelizing and explaining WHY the Church teaches what it teaches. So when the 60s came, parents & grandparents couldn’t answer the questions young people were asking regrading WHY the Church taught what it taught. Young people started questioning authority in the 60s and 70s and when few could actually answer the questions in a meaningful way; it lead to non-belief. Not so much the fault of the Catechism itself, but a fault with not focusing on Evangelization first, Catechesis second

 

[ProVobis]

He also mentioned that the new Catechism offers up a new theology. I’m guessing he alluded to certain new theology introduced during Vatican II which were incorporated into the new catechism.

Question: does JPII’s Catechism super cede the Baltimore version? Should I even read the latter?

The Baltimore Catechism was specifically written for the U.S. Actually other English-speaking countries, like the U.K., used it as well. It was in easy-to-memorize Q/A format and those learning English as a second-language could use it as well. The new Catechism was written in French, I believe, but it’s been translated into many languages. BTW, I’d look for a new English version pretty soon. Some at the recent synod didn’t like the use of the word “disordered,” among other things. It is, as someone noted, more of a reference book.

I think some of the BC has been updated to reflect one hour fast before communion and things of that nature, so it’s not like we can’t use it.

I highly recommend the Trent Catechism. There’s quite a lot that seems to have been forgotten, such as spiritual communion among other things.

Different catechisms cover different areas, so there must be some value in each.

 

[DebChris]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which you referred to as Pope John Paul II’s Catechism is the first official catechism since the Council of Trent. Yes, Pope John Paul II commissioned then Cardinal Radziner (Pope Benedict XVI) to head the committee that wrote the CCC. In his forward to the CCC, Pope John Paul II refers to Pope John XXIII and the principal task entrusted to the Second Vatican Council, “to guard and present better the precious deposit of Christian doctrine in order to make it more accessible to the Christian faithful and to all people of goodwill.” It received Pope John Paul II’s papal approval as " a statement of the Church’s faith and of catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition, and the Church’s Magisterium."
This catechism is not intended to replace the local catechisms duly approved by the ecclesiastical authorities, the diocesan Bishops and the Episcopal Conferences, especially if they have been approved by the Apostolic See. It is meant to encourage and assist in the writing of new local catechisms, which take into account various situations and cultures, while carefully preserving the unity of faith and fidelity to catholic doctrine.

The Baltimore Catechism was written at a time when there was a great influx of Catholic immigrants into the United States. It was never an official catechism. However, it did serve a faithful community that wanted to preserve and pass on their faith and heritage. The question answer format re-enforced what was already being taught at home. You will find in Catholic bookstores, updated versions of the Baltimore Catechism that reference the CCC. It still has the same questions and answers as the original Baltimore Catechism. It simply shows the continuous teaching of the Catholic Church.

As for new catechisms, you can find the Catholic Catechism of the United States for Adults, approved and written by the bishops of the United States.

 

[edwest2]

The only major difference is format.

The new Catechism is written like a reference book.

The Baltimore Catechism is written as a Q&A.

As an FYI - I was at a Q&A with Archbishop Chaput last year when someone asked about the Baltimore Catechism and why the Church doesn’t push it again. His answer was pretty blunt. He said it didn’t do a good job of Evangelizing and explaining WHY the Church teaches what it teaches. So when the 60s came, parents & grandparents couldn’t answer the questions young people were asking regrading WHY the Church taught what it taught. Young people started questioning authority in the 60s and 70s and when few could actually answer the questions in a meaningful way; it lead to non-belief. Not so much the fault of the Catechism itself, but a fault with not focusing on Evangelization first, Catechesis second

I was there in the 1960s. The Catechism had nothing to do with it. Whether it was the Baltimore Catechism or not. I went to Catholic school and we had Religion class. All of our questions were answered. The non-belief aspect of the 60s and 70s was solely the fault of dissidents inside and outside the Church. And all they wanted to promote was anarchy, “Don’t trust anyone over 30!” mom, dad, nuns, the Church. Live with your girlfriend and have sex with her, illegal drugs were cool, smoke a lot of dope, fornicate, and dress in full conformity to the standards of Hippies. You had to have the regulation length hair, the regulation clothes, and had to use Hippie-speak. And love porn. Because slavery to the flesh was what mostly mattered.

Those outside their tribe were squares and conformists, but they missed the fact that their tribe required a high degree of conformity. I heard “You Catholics think sex is dirty.” No. Most of us got married and had kids.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Corki]

The Baltimore Catechism was written at a time when there was a great influx of Catholic immigrants into the United States. **It was never an official catechism. **However, it did serve a faithful community that wanted to preserve and pass on their faith and heritage. The question answer format re-enforced what was already being taught at home.

To the bolded. That is not quite true. It was (and is) an approved, official catechism for use in the US (and possibly some other English speaking countries). It was approved by the Holy See and even recommended as a model by the Congregation of the Propagation of the Faith. It was never a *universal *catechism.

 

[Megan7]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which you referred to as Pope John Paul II’s Catechism is the first official catechism since the Council of Trent. Yes, Pope John Paul II commissioned then Cardinal Radziner (Pope Benedict XVI) to head the committee that wrote the CCC. In his forward to the CCC, Pope John Paul II refers to Pope John XXIII and the principal task entrusted to the Second Vatican Council, “to guard and present better the precious deposit of Christian doctrine in order to make it more accessible to the Christian faithful and to all people of goodwill.” It received Pope John Paul II’s papal approval as " a statement of the Church’s faith and of catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition, and the Church’s Magisterium."
This catechism is not intended to replace the local catechisms duly approved by the ecclesiastical authorities, the diocesan Bishops and the Episcopal Conferences, especially if they have been approved by the Apostolic See. It is meant to encourage and assist in the writing of new local catechisms, which take into account various situations and cultures, while carefully preserving the unity of faith and fidelity to catholic doctrine.

The Baltimore Catechism was written at a time when there was a great influx of Catholic immigrants into the United States. It was never an official catechism. However, it did serve a faithful community that wanted to preserve and pass on their faith and heritage. The question answer format re-enforced what was already being taught at home. You will find in Catholic bookstores, updated versions of the Baltimore Catechism that reference the CCC. It still has the same questions and answers as the original Baltimore Catechism. It simply shows the continuous teaching of the Catholic Church.

As for new catechisms, you can find the Catholic Catechism of the United States for Adults, approved and written by the bishops of the United States.

I did not realize we had so many different catechisms available to us. Thanks for the thread & informative posts.

God bless.

 

[commenter]

When I was a child (late 50s, early 60s) we used the Baltimore Catechism. When I read it today, I am amazed at how much crucial content is communicated in very few words. People who say the Catechism was ineffective forget how parochial schools sometimes were then - sisters or lay teachers who rarely had a B. A. degree, with 45 or 50 children in a class, often in old, overcrowded buildings that lacked ventilation. There were almost no breaks in the school day for the teacher, and no special help for children who needed it.
CCD had its own problems, not caused by the use of the Baltimore Catechism. The Catechism got blamed for everything.

The Baltimore Catechism was used as a textbook, but really it was more of a syllabus, a guide to the student and teacher of the skeleton of Catholic doctrine, which would then be fleshed out and personalized with the student. Sometimes it was, in the baby boom era it wasn’t.

When my own children attended parochial school years later, the class sizes, building and available supports for teacher and student were much better, but the religion texts were - were - {I can’t complete this sentence without getting banned from CAF}.

Suffice it to say that every child, and adult, should know the content of what is in the Baltimore Catechism. The Catechism of the Catholic Church does not contradict it, but builds on it, incorporating material from the Magisterium of recent years. Just as the Baltimore Catechism had done. The Baltimore incorporated new ideas in later editions - such as St. Pius X emphasis on “Catholic Action” and Pius XII liturgical changes. Same theology, same Magisterium. No discontinuity.

 

[KS_Housewife]

I was there in the 1960s. The Catechism had nothing to do with it. Whether it was the Baltimore Catechism or not. I went to Catholic school and we had Religion class. All of our questions were answered. The non-belief aspect of the 60s and 70s was solely the fault of dissidents inside and outside the Church. And all they wanted to promote was anarchy, “Don’t trust anyone over 30!” mom, dad, nuns, the Church. Live with your girlfriend and have sex with her, illegal drugs were cool, smoke a lot of dope, fornicate, and dress in full conformity to the standards of Hippies. You had to have the regulation length hair, the regulation clothes, and had to use Hippie-speak. And love porn. Because slavery to the flesh was what mostly mattered.

Those outside their tribe were squares and conformists, but they missed the fact that their tribe required a high degree of conformity. I heard “You Catholics think sex is dirty.” No. Most of us got married and had kids.

Peace,
Ed

*QUOTE=edwest2;12439428]I was there in the 1960s. The Catechism had nothing to do with it. Whether it was the Baltimore Catechism or not. I went to Catholic school and we had Religion class. All of our questions were answered. The non-belief aspect of the 60s and 70s was solely the fault of dissidents inside and outside the Church. And all they wanted to promote was anarchy, “Don’t trust anyone over 30!” mom, dad, nuns, the Church. Live with your girlfriend and have sex with her, illegal drugs were cool, smoke a lot of dope, fornicate, and dress in full conformity to the standards of Hippies. You had to have the regulation length hair, the regulation clothes, and had to use Hippie-speak. And love porn. Because slavery to the flesh was what mostly mattered.

Those outside their tribe were squares and conformists, but they missed the fact that their tribe required a high degree of conformity. I heard “You Catholics think sex is dirty.” No. Most of us got married and had kids.*

Right on! It was a dissident spirit that ate away at the church during that time frame, demoralizing its confidence and bewildering the congregation. I was born in the 1960s, and when we switched to the more “modern” religious ed" materials in CCD, in the 70s, the information conveyed in CCD classes just wasn’t very clear. My dad would ask me what we’d learned in class and I had a really hard time telling him anything more than the barest of generalities. I just remember early in life learning about a faith and church that was worthwhile and confident and good, and by the time I was a teenager, so much of the confidence of church teaching and the beauty of churches had been taken away. It was like being born in a gorgeous, fine sturdy mansion and having it stripped down while still living in it.

I have a BIG JP II catechism on my shelf, along with my dictionary and thesaurus. I have referred to it often and it’s a wonderful resource.

That being said…

My husband and I decided to convert our family into the Catholic church last year. (He’s protestant and I’m a returned Cathollic.) I went to a catholic bookstore and bought a few versions of catechism manuals. Some were very positive and cheerful, but too simplistic. However, I ended up using the updated Baltimore Catechism, elementary and middle grade editions.

The choice had to do with our kids’ ages and our social climate. The Baltimore Catechism we found to be a bit more direct concerning the nature of SIN. We see too much characterization around us of sins committed as mere “mistakes made”, and we felt the Baltimore Catechism ably assisted us in teaching our children that sin is more than just a mistake, along with its resulting consequences.

It also does a very good job explaining the concept of original sin, the basis for the belief in purgatory and its purpose, explaining transubstantiation and even the modern-day-taboo subject of indulgences. (This was a subject glossed over with embarrassment when I was in school, and I understand it much better after using the BC to teach our kids.)

For a clear cut no frills refresher course in the basics of the Catholic faith, even an adult could benefit from the Baltimore Catechism.

 

[garyo49]

When I was a child (late 50s, early 60s) we used the Baltimore Catechism. When I read it today, I am amazed at how much crucial content is communicated in very few words. People who say the Catechism was ineffective forget how parochial schools sometimes were then - sisters or lay teachers who rarely had a B. A. degree, with 45 or 50 children in a class, often in old, overcrowded buildings that lacked ventilation. There were almost no breaks in the school day for the teacher, and no special help for children who needed it.
CCD had its own problems, not caused by the use of the Baltimore Catechism. The Catechism got blamed for everything.

The Baltimore Catechism was used as a textbook, but really it was more of a syllabus, a guide to the student and teacher of the skeleton of Catholic doctrine, which would then be fleshed out and personalized with the student. Sometimes it was, in the baby boom era it wasn’t.

When my own children attended parochial school years later, the class sizes, building and available supports for teacher and student were much better, but the religion texts were - were - {I can’t complete this sentence without getting banned from CAF}.

Suffice it to say that every child, and adult, should know the content of what is in the Baltimore Catechism. The Catechism of the Catholic Church does not contradict it, but builds on it, incorporating material from the Magisterium of recent years. Just as the Baltimore Catechism had done. The Baltimore incorporated new ideas in later editions - such as St. Pius X emphasis on “Catholic Action” and Pius XII liturgical changes. Same theology, same Magisterium. No discontinuity.

Thank you for your great comment. I am a convert and I love my Baltimore Catechism. I love the format and it is so concise and to the point. When I was in RCIA I looked at the CCC and I decided with all of the other Catholic reading I wanted to get at, I needed something like the Baltimore Catechism to help me understand Church teachings. I take it with me to daily Mass and read one or two chapters before Mass begins.

 

[DebChris]

When I was a child (late 50s, early 60s) we used the Baltimore Catechism. When I read it today, I am amazed at how much crucial content is communicated in very few words. People who say the Catechism was ineffective forget how parochial schools sometimes were then - sisters or lay teachers who rarely had a B. A. degree, with 45 or 50 children in a class, often in old, overcrowded buildings that lacked ventilation. There were almost no breaks in the school day for the teacher, and no special help for children who needed it.
CCD had its own problems, not caused by the use of the Baltimore Catechism. The Catechism got blamed for everything.

The Baltimore Catechism was used as a textbook, but really it was more of a syllabus, a guide to the student and teacher of the skeleton of Catholic doctrine, which would then be fleshed out and personalized with the student. Sometimes it was, in the baby boom era it wasn’t.

When my own children attended parochial school years later, the class sizes, building and available supports for teacher and student were much better, but the religion texts were - were - {I can’t complete this sentence without getting banned from CAF}.

Suffice it to say that every child, and adult, should know the content of what is in the Baltimore Catechism. The Catechism of the Catholic Church does not contradict it, but builds on it, incorporating material from the Magisterium of recent years. Just as the Baltimore Catechism had done. The Baltimore incorporated new ideas in later editions - such as St. Pius X emphasis on “Catholic Action” and Pius XII liturgical changes. Same theology, same Magisterium. No discontinuity.

There are much better catechisms available for catechists to now choose from than some of those used in the past. Of course the choice is made at the parish level. The teacher’s books will generally reference both the relevant Scripture and CCC.
Although it was not used by my parish when I taught, I like the catechism from Ignatius press with its traditional Catholic art work and the story of a Saint at the beginning of each lesson.
Expectations from students have also changed through the years. As a child of the 60’s, I remember catechism homework. By the time my daughter was school aged, only attendance was required to move from one level to the next. I do like the idea that Confirmation now generally requires at least an overnight retreat.
As for my own catechism, I received First Communion at the end of First grade, putting me one year ahead in catechism classes [We didn’t call them CCD]. Third grade Catechism was the last time I used the Baltimore Catechism. Fourth grade was the brown Bible Story books.Fifth grade was preparation for Confirmation. Sixth through Eighth grade was an excellent series of books, each concentrating on a different aspect of the Catholic Faith. One year was parts of the Mass, another was the Sacraments, etc. High Schoolers belonged to the CYO (Catholic Youth Organization). In other words, formal catechism stopped at grade 8.
We also received comic books (I don’t remember the name) that were a kind of “applied Catholicism” as part of catechism classes to read on our own.

The world today is different than it was in the 1960’s. My family prayed the rosary daily. It is because I knew my prayers that I could receive First Communion with one week’s preparation. We generally lived among non-Catholics who asked me where I was headed as I waited for the bus Wednesday afternoons. Today’s youth are bombarded by secular media and other messages that contradict what is being taught by the Catholic Church.

 

[commenter]

There are much better catechisms available for catechists to now choose from than some of those used in the past. Of course the choice is made at the parish level. The teacher’s books will generally reference both the relevant Scripture and CCC.
Although it was not used by my parish when I taught, I like the catechism from Ignatius press with its traditional Catholic art work and the story of a Saint at the beginning of each lesson.
Expectations from students have also changed through the years. As a child of the 60’s, I remember catechism homework. By the time my daughter was school aged, only attendance was required to move from one level to the next. I do like the idea that Confirmation now generally requires at least an overnight retreat.
As for my own catechism, I received First Communion at the end of First grade, putting me one year ahead in catechism classes [We didn’t call them CCD]. Third grade Catechism was the last time I used the Baltimore Catechism. Fourth grade was the brown Bible Story books.Fifth grade was preparation for Confirmation. Sixth through Eighth grade was an excellent series of books, each concentrating on a different aspect of the Catholic Faith. One year was parts of the Mass, another was the Sacraments, etc. High Schoolers belonged to the CYO (Catholic Youth Organization). In other words, formal catechism stopped at grade 8.
We also received comic books (I don’t remember the name) that were a kind of “applied Catholicism” as part of catechism classes to read on our own.

The world today is different than it was in the 1960’s. My family prayed the rosary daily. It is because I knew my prayers that I could receive First Communion with one week’s preparation. We generally lived among non-Catholics who asked me where I was headed as I waited for the bus Wednesday afternoons. Today’s youth are bombarded by secular media and other messages that contradict what is being taught by the Catholic Church.

You are right, there are some good religion texts recently. When my kids were in school, I used Ignatius’ Faith and Life series with them, since the school’s religion texts were empty of any specific doctrinal content. They basically taught Jesus is our friend, everyone else is our friend too, I am my own friend so I need to feel good about myself, pollution is not my friend, other religions ARE my friend, rainbows, butterflies, la la la, etc, using lot and lots and LOTS of words to say nothing but ambiguity.

The value of the Baltimore Catechism is that it tells you, in a very few words, the gist of Christian belief on a topic. Much later, after I read some of Thomas Aquinas, I can see better where they were coming from. Like all good summaries, it is incomplete. But a good start.

 

[phil19034]

I was there in the 1960s. The Catechism had nothing to do with it. Whether it was the Baltimore Catechism or not. I went to Catholic school and we had Religion class. All of our questions were answered. The non-belief aspect of the 60s and 70s was solely the fault of dissidents inside and outside the Church. And all they wanted to promote was anarchy, “Don’t trust anyone over 30!” mom, dad, nuns, the Church. Live with your girlfriend and have sex with her, illegal drugs were cool, smoke a lot of dope, fornicate, and dress in full conformity to the standards of Hippies. You had to have the regulation length hair, the regulation clothes, and had to use Hippie-speak. And love porn. Because slavery to the flesh was what mostly mattered.

Those outside their tribe were squares and conformists, but they missed the fact that their tribe required a high degree of conformity. I heard “You Catholics think sex is dirty.” No. Most of us got married and had kids.

Peace,
Ed

Understood and I agree with you.

Note, I didn’t say that the Catechism was at fault. What I meant (and same with the Archbishop) was that the Catholics growing up in the 20s, 30s and 40s were not strong enough in their knowledge of the Faith to explain WHY the Church teaches what it teaches. So they could not effectively combat the immorality and did not evangelize the generation so they could withstand the evil that happened during the 60s. At least that’s one of the theories.

I also believe that World War I and World War II played a major part to leading to the immorality of the 60s and 70s.

 

[DebChris]

Understood and I agree with you.

Note, I didn’t say that the Catechism was at fault. What I meant (and same with the Archbishop) was that the Catholics growing up in the 20s, 30s and 40s were not strong enough in their knowledge of the Faith to explain WHY the Church teaches what it teaches. So they could not effectively combat the immorality and did not evangelize the generation so they could withstand the evil that happened during the 60s. At least that’s one of the theories.

I also believe that World War I and World War II played a major part to leading to the immorality of the 60s and 70s.

The Baltimore Catechism was written for a primarily Catholic community. I mostly lived surrounded by non-Catholics. The pat answers of the Baltimore Catechism were not enough to respond to the questions I was asked. Of course, I was still very young.
WWI & WWII did reveal a need within the Church for its people to better understand the Faith.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

He also mentioned that the new Catechism offers up a new theology. I’m guessing he alluded to certain new theology introduced during Vatican II which were incorporated into the new catechism.

Question: does JPII’s Catechism super cede the Baltimore version? Should I even read the latter?

Of course you should read the latter! Both are exremely good. But they can be used for different things. We use the Baltimore Catechism almost exclusively for our homeschool lessons. You will have to ask you friend to be specific with examples and then realize that he is interpreting it wrong. Perhaps you can help him.

Personally I prefer the Baltimore. But the CCC is wonderful too. I use the CCC when getting more in depth in discussions.