Baltimore Catechism

[cam100]

In 1998 President Bill Clinton was given communion by a Catholic priest in Africa and at the funeral of Pope John Paul Protestant Roger Schultz waas given communion by Cardinal Ratzinger.

I’m not sure if these are good examples of people following the current regulations. I don’t know anything about the first example, but you can find priests who will do just about anything, so it’s not necessarily an example of correct procedure. With regard to the second example, I’ve heard various explanations such as Schultz actually expressed a change of heart before this event, or that Cardnial Ratzinger didn’t realize who he was until it was too late.

I just want to mention this before someone tries to use the examples to claim that the new Catechism promotes something that it does not.

 

[stmaria]

Nothings changed in our beliefs, this is the big misunderstanding of Vatican II promoted by those who want to change the faith’s beliefs.

In this example provided above it was considered a denial of faith to cremate and still is when it is done out of a denial of faith. In both instances it is denying God and evil.

As an opening up of the faith there are people who cremate out of financial necessity or other reasons and not out of a denial of faith. As this is more common it is permitted in line with the non-changing truth of the Church.

Cremation in the past was forbidden period. Christ was not cremated, the apostles were not cremated. Read the History of Cremation then ask yourself why did Pope Paul allow such a practice.
remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/archive-2007-church_and_cremation.htm

 

[stmaria]

I’m not sure if these are good examples of people following the current regulations. I don’t know anything about the first example, but you can find priests who will do just about anything, so it’s not necessarily an example of correct procedure.

With regard to the second example, I’ve heard various explanations such as Schultz actually expressed a change of heart before this event, or that Cardnial Ratzinger didn’t realize who he was until it was too late.

Cardinal Ratzinger and Roger Schultz meet at Vatican II where Schultz was one of the Protestant observers. They had known each other for years. When Schultz died { he was murdered} he had a Protestant funeral. He never converted.

This is an article ablout him

"Pope Benedict, who will be in Cologne this week, called the killing “a very sad piece of news which touches me all the more in that I received only yesterday a moving letter from him.”

The Pontiff also revealed that, in the letter Brother Roger wrote, he had “ the desire to come to Rome as soon as possible to meet with me and to tell me that ‘our Taizé community wishes to walk along in communion with the Holy Father"

catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=4645

 

[Caesar]

Cardinal Ratzinger and Roger Schultz meet at Vatican II where Schultz was one of the Protestant observers. They had known each other for years. When Schultz died { he was murdered} he had a Protestant funeral. He never converted.

This is an article ablout him

"Pope Benedict, who will be in Cologne this week, called the killing “a very sad piece of news which touches me all the more in that I received only yesterday a moving letter from him.”

The Pontiff also revealed that, in the letter Brother Roger wrote, he had “ the desire to come to Rome as soon as possible to meet with me and to tell me that ‘our Taizé community wishes to walk along in communion with the Holy Father"

catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=4645

Schultz only recieved communion by accident at the funeral of John Paul II. After the funeral the Vatican Press Office announced he was in line only by accident and that he did not support intercommunion.

Everything you mentioned above are points of Canon Law, not doctrine. Your assertion that doctrine has changed in incorrect.

 

[cam100]

Schultz only recieved communion by accident at the funeral of John Paul II. After the funeral the Vatican Press Office announced he was in line only by accident and that he did not support intercommunion.
QUOTE]

I was getting ready to reply to StMaria, but I think Caesar really did it for me. Regardless of the situation with Schultz, (and different people claim to have different info, so the real story isn’t clear) the offical line from the Vatican is that the Church does not invite all Protestants to come up to receive communion. The current Catechism does not advocate this, either.

 

[stmaria]

Schultz only recieved communion by accident at the funeral of John Paul II. After the funeral the Vatican Press Office announced he was in line only by accident and that he did not support intercommunion.

Everything you mentioned above are points of Canon Law, not doctrine. Your assertion that doctrine has changed in incorrect.

Accident?? Oh Please. They were friends. He gave him communion in the hand.

Photo of event
traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A118rcRatzingerCommunionSchtz.htm

So Canon Law that made cremation a mortal sin and giving communion to heretics should be changed? Doesn’t Canon Law just like a Catechism contain the teachings of the Church?

 

[latinmasslover]

Schultz only recieved communion by accident at the funeral of John Paul II. After the funeral the Vatican Press Office announced he was in line only by accident and that he did not support intercommunion.

Everything you mentioned above are points of Canon Law, not doctrine. Your assertion that doctrine has changed in incorrect.

Doctrine can never change no matter what anybody says. I think that the point stmaria was trying to make is that it still isn’t morally right to do, even if it is “approved.”

 

[scylla]

Accident?? Oh Please. They were friends. He gave him communion in the hand.

Photo of event
traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A118rcRatzingerCommunionSchtz.htm

So Canon Law that made cremation a mortal sin and giving communion to heretics should be changed? Doesn’t Canon Law just like a Catechism contain the teachings of the Church?

Canon Law has not changed the faith and it is still wrong to give Communion to those who are outside the Church.
This is between Shultz, Cardinal Ratzinger(the Pope) and God. It looks like he did something wrong, heck Peter denied Christ 3 times! Leave it up to Peter and Jesus to reconcile, in this case leave it up to the Pope and God.

I read the article about cremation, and I agree with the premise of rejection of cremation. It is all about respect for the body, and cremation would certainly be a mortal sin if done to deny God.
What is the sin?
Cremation is not recommended by the Church but allowed as it is being a good steward of money, it should never be done out of disrespect and some people these days do not have the means to dispose of the body in a Christian burial.
Why not start a thread on cremation, it is not a change in belief such as, denying God and respecting the body are timeless truths we must abide by.

God Bless
Scylla

 

[SemperFidelis]

Also, check out these Baltimore Catechisms from Tan Books:

tanbooks.com/index.php?keyword=Baltimore+Catechism&PHPSESSID=4ca8b8da2590c346f4667d8a8110abcd&page=shop%2Fsearch&user_id=

You can buy them as a set or by themselves. I really like Baronius but they don’t offer the #4 Baltimore Catechism (which is the most extensive of the Baltimores).

Another really good catechism is This Is The Faith by Canon Francis Ripley:

tanbooks.com/index.php/page/shop:flypage/product_id/537/keywords/faith/

The guy who runs fisheaters.com thinks that it is the single, best, Catechism. I don’t know if it is the best, but it is really good.

Also the Catechism of Trent shown in Caesar’s Baronius link is really good:

baroniuspress.com/book.php?wid=56&bid=27

as is the Catechism of St. Pius X, which has already been stated.

Other good Catechims include:

A Catechism of Modernism

tanbooks.com/index.php/page/shop:flypage/product_id/15/keywords/catechism/

The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine

tanbooks.com/index.php/page/shop:flypage/product_id/115/keywords/catechism/

and

This one from Angelus Press (My Catholic Faith):

angeluspress.org/index.php?act=warehouse&info=3006

Geez, I have too many Catechisms.

 

[SemperFidelis]

Also does anyone know where I could get a hard copy of The Catechism of St. Pius X. I’ve read it online but I’ve never been able to find a hardcopy.

 

[palmas85]

Believe it or not they turn up on E-Bay frequently and are usually in the 10-20 dollar range.

 

[Caesar]

I forgot to ask, those of you with your old Baltimore Catechisms, which versions do you all have? As I understand it, there are three editions- two for school children and one for adults- that you learn in sequence.

 

[SemperFidelis]

I forgot to ask, those of you with your old Baltimore Catechisms, which versions do you all have? As I understand it, there are three editions- two for school children and one for adults- that you learn in sequence.

I’ve got all four. The larger the number the more “in-depth” it goes. The first is for young children, second for middle schoolers, third for older children (high schoolers and adults), and fourth for priests and the laity who teach catechism and/or are into somewhat more “heavier” doctrine.

 

[DustinsDad]

I forgot to ask, those of you with your old Baltimore Catechisms, which versions do you all have?

I taught a 6th grade PSR class with the number 2 version. Perfect for that age group.

I now have, for myself and my 14-year-old son, this version of the number 3. My personal favorite -

Baltimore Catechism and Mass No. 3: The Text of the Official Revised Edition 1949 with Summarizations of Doctrine and Study Helps
http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/51SJQMKZBSL.BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-dp-500-arrow,TopRight,45,-64_OU01_AA240_SH20.jpg
**Book Description
**This comprehensive Catechism contains the constant, authentic doctrine and moral teaching of the Catholic Faith. It is not only excellent for adults and children, but is also perfect for religious programs and anyone desiring information about the Church.

More than 500 clear and concise questions and answers are included. Fr. Connell’s catechism is superior to any other catechism, including any other Baltimore catechism, because developed explanations and Sacred Scripture are used extensively to amplify the answers and each chapter concludes with study helps, exercises, and a summary essay for teachers and students.

Twenty-two extraordinary engravings help to make this edition among the finest Catholic catechisms ever printed. This is a reprint by The Seraphim Company of Fr. Connell’s 1949 Baltimore Catechism No. 3, originally published by Benziger Brothers. This reprint is identical to the original except for the addition of an excellent section of essential Catholic prayers at the beginning, and the twenty-two beautiful engravings with explanations.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad

 

[latinmasslover]

I’ve got all four. The larger the number the more “in-depth” it goes. The first is for young children, second for middle schoolers, third for older children (high schoolers and adults), and fourth for priests and the laity who teach catechism and/or are into somewhat more “heavier” doctrine.

What’s the title of the fourth? Is it just Baltimore Catechism N. 4? I’ve only seen 1-3.

 

[SemperFidelis]

What’s the title of the fourth? Is it just Baltimore Catechism N. 4? I’ve only seen 1-3.

You can get the fourth one here at Tan Books:

tanbooks.com/index.php/page/shop:flypage/product_id/49/keywords/catechism/

For some reason Baronius doesn’t sell it. It is also called An Explanation of the Baltimore Catechism of Christian Doctrine: For the Use of Sunday-School Teachers and Advanced Classes by Amazon:

amazon.com/Explanation-Baltimore-Catechism-Christian-Doctrine/dp/0895553406/ref=pd_bbs_sr_9/102-3084585-2944951?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191861097&sr=8-9

 

[Starfish]

I have the only two that I ever knew about. The green and the blue. Father McGuire Baltimore Catechism.

Interesting to me, some of the things in there. I’m uncomfortable with some of it.

 

[Caesar]

I have the only two that I ever knew about. The green and the blue. Father McGuire Baltimore Catechism.

Interesting to me, some of the things in there. I’m uncomfortable with some of it.

Why? That is the faith, put in a simple, factual manner.

 

[Starfish]

well, I just can’t say right now, I feel as if I am being judged. I had the Baltimore Catechisms when I was young, many years ago. They seemed different then and they do now.

I think that I am going to stop posting at this website. The whole thing. If one wants answers, it isn’t going to happen here. Sad.

 

[Hesychios]

The Balt Cat includes a teaching on Limbo for infants, which today would be considered improper by the Pope.

“Persons, such as infants, who have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism, cannot enter heaven; but it is the common belief they will go to some place similar to limbo, where they will be free from suffering, though deprived of the happiness of heaven”

Less sophisticated Catholics (mainly, the target audience of the book, young people) rarely realized that this was not actually a doctrine of the church. Neither was it made clear that a belief in Limbo was optional. Interestingly, the rival opinion (until recent decades) that kept Limbo from being a certain teaching was between Limbo and Hell, not Limbo and Heaven. Limbo as a “doctrine” was always considered preferable to the more likely alternative in Catholic theory of damnation of innocent babes, a belief that can be traced to Saint Augustine, a Doctor of the church.

Now it is gone, but a relic of the teaching survives in the Baltimore Catechism.

Michael