Baltimore Catechism vs. CCC?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Quackers
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree completely with the priest. The new Catechism has some great information, but it is also very vague and even misleading at times. I have had discussions with Catholics who outrightly rejected dogmas of the faith based on their reading of the new Catechism.

I find it very interesting that the bishops come down on Priest who are on the “right” while they leave those on the “left” alone. If Priests molest altar boys or teach heresy that’s one thing, but they better not use the Baltimore catechism.

We need to open our eyes so we can spot the wolves in sheeps clothing.

The USCCB’s adult catechism teaches explicit heresy. It teaches that the old Covenant was never revoked and is still salvific.

Personally, I consider the US bishops (as a body of Bishops) to be in heresy. I’m sure there are some good Bishops in the bunch, but as a body of bishops, they are heretics. This is proven by the catechism they released which teaches explicit heresy, as well as the document from 2002 that teaches “it is no longer theologically appropriate to attempt to conver the Jews” since they have their own valid covenant that will save them. All of the Bishops might not have signed that heretical document that caused such a stir, but, as far as I know, not one of them objected to it, or spoke out against it. I think the US Bishops (as a body) are doing all that can get away with to destroy the faith. Why else would they seek to forbid kneeling, of all things?

In our diocese, the books used for religious instuction are completely heretical. Even our liberal hierarchy has spoken out against many of these books (whcih were written by an ex-nun), yet they are used none-the-less. The wolves are in charge of the sheep, and the sooner the sheep realize it the better.

I think your priest realizes this and cares enough about his faithful to do what is necessary to teach them the indiluted faith. His reward probably won’t be in this world, but he will receive it in the next.

In normal times disobeying the bishops would certainly be wrong, but during the great apostasy - when the Bishops are doing all they can get away with to destroy the faith - it is often necessary, since faith, which is a theological virtue, is much greater than obedience, which is merely a moral virtue.

Moral virtues are not absolutes. They are a balance between two extremes: the extreme of excess (obeying when we should not), and defect (not obeying when we should). The theological virtues of Faith, Hope, and Charity are the highest virtues, and are not to be violated either through an excess or a defect in a moral virtue. That is what MANY Catholics today do not understand, and why people such as St. Athanasius were justified in what they did.

In our day obedience is often used by the wolves to destroy the faith of the sheep. But if you notice, obedience is only required of those who are teaching the true faith, and not of the liberals who are left alone to deceive. How many stories have we heard of faithful who write letters to the Bishop, or to Rome, about a liberal priest who is teaching heresy, or committing some kind of horrible sacrilege, and nothing ever happens? Yet if a faithful priest uses the Baltimore Catechism because the new catechism is often too vague, the wrath of the Bishop will come down on him, and he will be deemed “disobedient”, while the priest at the Church down the street has been molesting the altar boys since 1979, while the Bishop moved him from parish to parish to protect him. Again, the wolves are in charge and the sooner the sheep realize this the better.
 
How many stories have we heard of faithful who write letters to the Bishop, or to Rome, about a liberal priest who is teaching heresy, or committing some kind of horrible sacrilege, and nothing ever happens? Yet if a faithful priest uses the Baltimore Catechism because the new catechism is often too vague, the wrath of the Bishop will come down on him, and he will be deemed "disobedient
The devil will just as much prefer to have the faithful leave “on the left” as he does “on the right”.

The fact is, favouring the Baltimore Catechism, in direct defiance of the bishop, is but one step from rejecting the Vatican II Council. This is where we get onto the slipperly slope.
 
The devil will just as much prefer to have the faithful leave “on the left” as he does “on the right”.

The fact is, favouring the Baltimore Catechism, in direct defiance of the bishop, is but one step from rejecting the Vatican II Council. This is where we get onto the slipperly slope.
I have two questions:

1.) Explain how prefering the Baltimore Catechism to the new catechism is one step from rejecting Vatican II.

2.) What new teachings did Vatican II give us?
 
When all is said and done the CCC and even the CCCC are too dense in terms of language. The benefit of the Baltimore Catechism, Catechism of St Pius X and like My Catholic Faith, is that the language if direct and simple. In general, the style of the CCC especially sends one spinning in circles and not understanding what the Catholic Faith is about.

How simple can it get? For example the one sentence of the Catechism of St Pius X already explains what one article in the Apostles Creed is.
 
The fact is, favouring the Baltimore Catechism, in direct defiance of the bishop, is but one step from rejecting the Vatican II Council. This is where we get onto the slipperly slope.
I’m no fan of disobedience, and the priest is quite wrong to go against his bishop.

But you are also quite wrong to state that any part of the Baltimore Catechism was revoked by Vatican II.

The Church’s teachings are immutable. What was said in the BC is just as true today and it was when the Plenary Council of Baltimore commisioned it.
 
The first post did say that the Compendium isn’t any better than the CCC and the Priests would still rather use the Baltimore…
Yes, you’re correct. In my first post I did state that my priest has shared his view of the Compendium with us. He doesn’t like the Compendium any better than he likes the CCC. He strongly opposes them both, and told us that they’re useless for teaching converts. He believes he is justified in using the BC against the bishop’s wishes because he told us that Pope Benedict XVI recently endorsed the BC and stated that the CCC is to be used as a reference only, and not as a teaching tool.
 
Since the faith doesn’t contradict itself both Catechisms both teach the faith. The Baltimore catechism is more concise and better suited to teach the faith, but the new CCC is much larger and is better suited for reflection\discussion. This can be very bad in a setting where the person teaching RCIA is not 100% faithful to the Magisterium, and this is what the Pastor probably has seen as a problem

I see no problem if he is involved in the RCIA process as it seems he is very concerned about preserving the Holy Faith. This is more important than obeying the Bishop, if the Bishop is teaching against the faith, but it seems that the Bishop is just showing a preference for the newer Catechism. Your pastor should respect that and just supplement the ambiguities of the text with the Baltimore Catechism, since the faith is the same.

I would suggest to your pastor, as a solution, to use both Catechisms, The newer one for discussion and the older one to resolve any questions or supposed conflicts. Talk with him and see what he thinks.

Your pastor should respect the Bishops wishes, and the Bishop is not endorsing anything bad.(as opposed to my Bishop who my parish still try’s to obey, even if it is questionable)
It is commendable that your pastor is that adament about preserving the Catholic faith, but he should use prudence in his decisions in regards to preserving the faith.
(it is not like the Bishop is inviting an Erie Benedictine nun to talk at the parish to mislead everyone)

We are subject to the Bishop, regardless if he is faithful or unfaithful, we are to be faithful to matters which do not contradict the faith. The CCC does not contradict the faith, and can easily be clarified if there are questions.

In Christ
Scylla
I’m not Catholic yet, I’m just taking catechism classes. Would it be proper for me to speak to the priest about this? Do I have that right? I would like to state, however, that both the priests at my parish are extremely critical of the CCC. They’ve made clear their hostility towards it. (I say this because they both become noticeably hostile when they discuss the CCC. I spoke to another man in the class, and he has the same impression that I have.) I honestly don’t think he would incorporate it into our classes even if I did speak to him about it.

Honestly, I don’t know anything about the bishop. My priest told us that the diocese is in a terrible condition spiritually, with the teaching of heresy being rampant. It’s his claim that the bishop knows about all this heresy and is allowing it to continue unchecked. He’s been candid about sharing his views with us. In fact, there was a woman in our class who stopped coming and started RCIA at a nearby NO parish. My priest expressed his displeasure to us and told us that he was upset because she would now be “taught heresy.”

I do beleive that my priest is passionate about winning souls, and I believe that he’s sincerely interested in teaching the orthodox Catholic faith. I’m just unsure about his disobeying the bishop. Also, I have to confess that I find it a little difficult to believe that the entire diocese has fallen into heresy without anyone having taken any action. But then again, I’m not an expert on the Catholic faith, nor am I an expert regarding the spiritual condition of the diocese either.
 
I agree completely with the priest. The new Catechism has some great information, but it is also very vague and even misleading at times. I have had discussions with Catholics who outrightly rejected dogmas of the faith based on their reading of the new Catechism.

I find it very interesting that the bishops come down on Priest who are on the “right” while they leave those on the “left” alone. If Priests molest altar boys or teach heresy that’s one thing, but they better not use the Baltimore catechism.

We need to open our eyes so we can spot the wolves in sheeps clothing.

The USCCB’s adult catechism teaches explicit heresy. It teaches that the old Covenant was never revoked and is still salvific.

Personally, I consider the US bishops (as a body of Bishops) to be in heresy. I’m sure there are some good Bishops in the bunch, but as a body of bishops, they are heretics. This is proven by the catechism they released which teaches explicit heresy, as well as the document from 2002 that teaches “it is no longer theologically appropriate to attempt to conver the Jews” since they have their own valid covenant that will save them. All of the Bishops might not have signed that heretical document that caused such a stir, but, as far as I know, not one of them objected to it, or spoke out against it. I think the US Bishops (as a body) are doing all that can get away with to destroy the faith. Why else would they seek to forbid kneeling, of all things?

In our diocese, the books used for religious instuction are completely heretical. Even our liberal hierarchy has spoken out against many of these books (whcih were written by an ex-nun), yet they are used none-the-less. The wolves are in charge of the sheep, and the sooner the sheep realize it the better.

I think your priest realizes this and cares enough about his faithful to do what is necessary to teach them the indiluted faith. His reward probably won’t be in this world, but he will receive it in the next.

In normal times disobeying the bishops would certainly be wrong, but during the great apostasy - when the Bishops are doing all they can get away with to destroy the faith - it is often necessary, since faith, which is a theological virtue, is much greater than obedience, which is merely a moral virtue.

Moral virtues are not absolutes. They are a balance between two extremes: the extreme of excess (obeying when we should not), and defect (not obeying when we should). The theological virtues of Faith, Hope, and Charity are the highest virtues, and are not to be violated either through an excess or a defect in a moral virtue. That is what MANY Catholics today do not understand, and why people such as St. Athanasius were justified in what they did.

In our day obedience is often used by the wolves to destroy the faith of the sheep. But if you notice, obedience is only required of those who are teaching the true faith, and not of the liberals who are left alone to deceive. How many stories have we heard of faithful who write letters to the Bishop, or to Rome, about a liberal priest who is teaching heresy, or committing some kind of horrible sacrilege, and nothing ever happens? Yet if a faithful priest uses the Baltimore Catechism because the new catechism is often too vague, the wrath of the Bishop will come down on him, and he will be deemed “disobedient”, while the priest at the Church down the street has been molesting the altar boys since 1979, while the Bishop moved him from parish to parish to protect him. Again, the wolves are in charge and the sooner the sheep realize this the better.
Thank you for your post. My priest did tell us during the last class session that he believes the Church is experiencing the great apostasy that’s mentioned in the New Testament. He also doesn’t have a good opinion of the American bishops.

As for the announcement regarding the Jews, I was told that the American bishops rescinded that. Was I misinformed?
 
I’m no fan of disobedience, and the priest is quite wrong to go against his bishop.

But you are also quite wrong to state that any part of the Baltimore Catechism was revoked by Vatican II.

The Church’s teachings are immutable. What was said in the BC is just as true today and it was when the Plenary Council of Baltimore commisioned it.
Has the Pope called for a renewed use of the BC?
 
I’m not Catholic yet, I’m just taking catechism classes. Would it be proper for me to speak to the priest about this? Do I have that right? I would like to state, however, that both the priests at my parish are extremely critical of the CCC. They’ve made clear their hostility towards it. (I say this because they both become noticeably hostile when they discuss the CCC. I spoke to another man in the class, and he has the same impression that I have.) I honestly don’t think he would incorporate it into our classes even if I did speak to him about it.

Honestly, I don’t know anything about the bishop. My priest told us that the diocese is in a terrible condition spiritually, with the teaching of heresy being rampant. It’s his claim that the bishop knows about all this heresy and is allowing it to continue unchecked. He’s been candid about sharing his views with us. In fact, there was a woman in our class who stopped coming and started RCIA at a nearby NO parish. My priest expressed his displeasure to us and told us that he was upset because she would now be “taught heresy.”

I do beleive that my priest is passionate about winning souls, and I believe that he’s sincerely interested in teaching the orthodox Catholic faith. I’m just unsure about his disobeying the bishop. Also, I have to confess that I find it a little difficult to believe that the entire diocese has fallen into heresy without anyone having taken any action. But then again, I’m not an expert on the Catholic faith, nor am I an expert regarding the spiritual condition of the diocese either.
You should feel very lucky to have a Priest who works so hard to give you the orthodox Faith. Nothing has changed in the last 100 years so if the Baltimore was good then, than it is good now. There is not a better teaching catechism out there, and I only wish my RCIA class would use it too. Maybe it would stamp out some of the rampant and blantant heretical remarks that have been made.
 
As for the announcement regarding the Jews, I was told that the American bishops rescinded that. Was I misinformed?
Yes, the USCCB document was rescinded, but somehow almost the same heretical teaching made it into the USCCB’s Catechism for Adults.
 
Yes, the USCCB document was rescinded, but somehow almost the same heretical teaching made it into the USCCB’s Catechism for Adults.
Forgive me if this is a silly question, but how did it make its way into the Catechism? Won’t the Vatican make the bishops remove it? I’m not an expert on Catholic doctrine, but I do know that the Church wants everyone, including Jews, to be evangelized.
 
You should feel very lucky to have a Priest who works so hard to give you the orthodox Faith. Nothing has changed in the last 100 years so if the Baltimore was good then, than it is good now. There is not a better teaching catechism out there, and I only wish my RCIA class would use it too. Maybe it would stamp out some of the rampant and blantant heretical remarks that have been made.
I take it that heresy is a problem where you live? Is heresy in the Church as blatant as my priest says? Are there any resources where I can learn more about this?
 
I’m no fan of disobedience, and the priest is quite wrong to go against his bishop.

But you are also quite wrong to state that any part of the Baltimore Catechism was revoked by Vatican II.

The Church’s teachings are immutable. What was said in the BC is just as true today and it was when the Plenary Council of Baltimore commisioned it.
You are misunderstanding me. The reason I say this is because this aforementioned priest - as well as all traditionalists - reject the New Catechism for the same reason it rejects Vatican II: it is “watered down”, “vague”, “beats around the bush” rather than going straight to the point, is more devotional rather than doctrinal, etc. etc.

I don’t think Vatican II changed a SINGLE doctrine of the Church. I was not saying that!
 
The USCC has recently published an Adult Catechism based on the CCC but more user freindy. It has stories of saints and is in a question answer format.
The CCC is the first Vatican approved Catechism in 500 years. If you look in the front you may find that Cardinal Ratzinger is the imprematur. I don’t have my copy with me to verify the accuracy of my statement.
The Balitimore Catechism was simply written to help barely literate immigrants maintain their Catholic roots. It does not provide the traditional or scriptural sources of the information contained within. The CCC conpendium is written in the same question and answer style.
I have read the CCC from cover to cover although many simply use it as a reference for looking up specific magisterial teachings. One of the aims of the CCC, based on the introduction, was for bishops to develop a cathecism to be used for instructional purposes. This has been done with the United States Catholic Cathecism for Adults. This new cathecism is restates and references what the CCC teaches. It references the CCC and has questions for reflection at the end of each chapter. It also profiles various saints and others who have lived their Catholic faith. This new cathecism involves more than merely memorizing the answers to specific questions.
The United States Cathecism for Adults was written by the United States Council of Catholic Bishops which means it is written by the members of the magisterium, the teaching authority of the Church.
For children, Ignatius press has an excellent faith formation series that does the same thing. Each chapter has traditional art and provides CCC references for the catechist. The seventh grade book introduces students to St. Thomas Aquinas’s five proofs for the existence of God.
Does the Baltimore Catechism do that?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quackers
As for the announcement regarding the Jews, I was told that the American bishops rescinded that. Was I misinformed?

Yes, the USCCB document was rescinded, but somehow almost the same heretical teaching made it into the USCCB’s Catechism for Adults.

If I remember right — there was a thread a few months back-- in which the US Catechism for Adults and I believe even the CCC were being used to backup and promote the ideology of the Old Covenant still being valid.
 
The CCC is the first Vatican approved Catechism in 500 years. If you look in the front you may find that Cardinal Ratzinger is the imprematur. I don’t have my copy with me to verify the accuracy of my statement.
You are correct on the imprematur. In fact, he was also one of the authors of a book called the Introduction to the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
 
The CCC is the first Vatican approved Catechism in 500 years.
I do believe the Catechism of Pope Saint Pius X was approved by the Vatican, especially since the Pope himself approved it, hence why it has his name on it.
 
Does the Baltimore Catechism do that?
The Baltimore Catechism is patterned against the Catechism of Trent, which does provide that kind of source referencing.

Ultimately, I see the CCC as a companion edition to the Catechism of Trent, as both are directed more at the instructor than the student, presenting the same teachings while drawing form different eras of source materials. IMO, because of the unusual number of “clarity issues” raised about documents produced by the USCCB over the past several decades, the Baltimore #4 is still the best Church-endorsed guide for presenting teachings to adults, though that presentation should certainly be fleshed out with source material citations drawn from the Catechism of Trent and the CCC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top