Best Source for Authentic Catholic Teaching

[clem456]

Just to add my two cents and beat this horse completely to death cause it’s Saturday night and I don’t want to go to sleep yet and have nothing else to contribute:::

What Tim posted was not ironic. Read the definition carefully. What Tim posted is similar to irony, but is not irony.

Here are some examples of irony (or the lack of):

Is it ironic that I posted a video about how boring and useless Facebook is on Facebook?
NOT IRONIC.

Is it ironic that the name of Britain’s biggest dog (until it died recently) was Tiny?
IRONIC.

Is it ironic that I can’t go to church because I have a theology test to study for?
NOT IRONIC.

Is it ironic that someone steps into a puddle and you make fun of them… and the next thing you know – YOU step in one!?
IRONIC.

Thanks for listening, now I can go to sleep, having made my contribution to CAF.

 

[Rich_C]

I like the Baltimore Catechism, which you recommended, but obviously that does not include Vatican II, which is certainly important for people to understand, hence my recommendation of Fr. Hardon’s Catechism, which you seem to like as well.

I always say a post-1950 edition of the Baltimore Catechism is perfectly complete, since that’s the last time the Faith was formally updated (Dogma of the Assumption).

Vatican II has been explained to me as putting the perennial Faith into modern language, so I didn’t think I was missing anything, just another explanation.

Now you’ve intrigued me into wanting to read Fr. Hardon’s catechism. I endorsed it because I trust Fr. Hardon’s books completely, but I haven’t read it.

If I’d know he’d made sense of Vatican II I would have looked into it, as I thought that task was still far in the future.

Gonna go look for a copy now.

 

[Julia_Mae]

The Baltimore catechism is just that, not what we have now: The Catechism of the Catholic Church, promulgated in Latin by the Church, not a local Bishop.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church has nothing new that came out of Vat2, it’s tie to Vat2 was the decision of the Council for the Church to officially create and distribute the teachings in this form. The Baltimore Catechism is not an a official Church document promulgated by a Pope. It is not “universal.”

 

[jwinch2]

If I’d know he’d made sense of Vatican II I would have looked into it, as I thought that task was still far in the future.

Gonna go look for a copy now.

I don’t know if I would go that far, but he certainly gives it a good shot and does as well as any. What I like most about his catechism is that he talks about the history of doctrine to some extent, which I enjoy.

I’ll be curious as to your thoughts on it when you have given it a good look over. PM me if you wish to share them.

I am considering the Kindle version right now, though I already have the hard copy.

Peace,

 

[YoungTradCath]

I find Vatican II to be very confusing from my own perspective. I think it would not be a good idea to use this primary source except for more advanced catechetical courses. Rather I think a better idea for lower level situations would be for a competent catechist or priest to formulate the Council’s pertinent paragraphs into clear statements and to present these to the course attendees.

 

[Dies_Irae_1]

The Baltimore catechism is just that, not what we have now: The Catechism of the Catholic Church, promulgated in Latin by the Church, not a local Bishop.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church has nothing new that came out of Vat2, it’s tie to Vat2 was the decision of the Council for the Church to officially create and distribute the teachings in this form. The Baltimore Catechism is not an a official Church document promulgated by a Pope. It is not “universal.”

No, but the Catechism of the Council of Trent is an official Church document, was a decision of a Council, and officially promulgated by Pope St. Pius V. It was written in Latin, but is available in English, among other languages.

 

[Julia_Mae]

No, but the Catechism of the Council of Trent is an official Church document, was a decision of a Council, and officially promulgated by Pope St. Pius V. It was written in Latin, but is available in English, among other languages.

First, none of these translations are done by our Church. 2nd, that isn’t the Catechism the Church has specifically made for our use. It is not the same and not as complete. I trust for authentic teaching what is given to me by my Church, which I think knows what’s best for me, rather than my deciding independently I can make a better choice of something never intended by the Church for distribution to me.

 

[jwinch2]

First, none of these translations are done by our Church. 2nd, that isn’t the Catechism the Church has specifically made for our use. It is not the same and not as complete. I trust for authentic teaching what is given to me by my Church, which I think knows what’s best for me, rather than my deciding independently I can make a better choice of something never intended by the Church for distribution to me.

A small point here. The CCC was intended for distribution to the Bishops, not the Laity. It was intended for the development of catechisms for the Laity by the Bishops of specific countries. I am not suggesting that the Laity cannot utilize it, but that was not its primary intent, per the preface in the CCC itself.

 

[7_Sorrows]

i don’t know if i would recommend going to deacons or even some priests for authentic
Catholic teaching because in my brief time since becoming Catholic i know that many deacons and some priests have basically liberal views that contrdict the authentic teachings of the Catholic church.

 

[jwinch2]

Now you’ve intrigued me into wanting to read Fr. Hardon’s catechism. I endorsed it because I trust Fr. Hardon’s books completely, but I haven’t read it.

If I’d know he’d made sense of Vatican II I would have looked into it, as I thought that task was still far in the future.

Gonna go look for a copy now.

Looking back at the preface of the Hardon Catechism, it specifically states the desire to place the documents of Vatican II within the Tradition of the Church, etc. I think you will enjoy it. From the preface:
John Cardinal Wright:

In the wake of the Council, and under the aegis of acting in its “spirit” sometimes without reference to what it actually said, not a few aberrations, exaggerations, and deficiencies began to creep into textbooks and classrooms of some parts of the Church’s teaching structure…

…The attempt to present a “source book” has necessarily resulted in an extensive, though easily read, text with many attractive features. For instance, the Bible is given special prominence in the presentation of the doctrine of the faith. The latest insights offered by the Council are blended with the unchanging dogmas of the Church to present a clear and logical unfolding of the teaching of the Catholic Church from the apostles to our own times.

 

[Rich_C]

Looking back at the preface of the Hardon Catechism, it specifically states the desire to place the documents of Vatican II within the Tradition of the Church, etc. I think you will enjoy it. From the preface:

It may be a while before I can buy a copy, but I’ll let you know what I think. I expect it will be very enlightening.

 

[jwinch2]

It may be a while before I can buy a copy, but I’ll let you know what I think. I expect it will be very enlightening.

I’ll look forward to your thoughts down the road.

 

[Julia_Mae]

A small point here. The CCC was intended for distribution to the Bishops, not the Laity. It was intended for the development of catechisms for the Laity by the Bishops of specific countries. I am not suggesting that the Laity cannot utilize it, but that was not its primary intent, per the preface in the CCC itself.

People keep saying this, but it’s not accurate. It says in Fidei Depositum:

For this reason we thank the Lord wholeheartedly on this day when we can **offer the entire Church **this “reference text” entitled the Catechism of the Catholic Church for catechesis renewed at the living sources of the faith!

…

Therefore, I ask all the Church’s Pastors and the Christian faithful to receive this catechism in a spirit of communion a and to use it assiduously … It is also **offered to all the faithful **who wish to deepen their knowledge of the unfathomable riches of salvation…

While the early recommendation was for something clear that Bishops could use as you describe, the Pope took the ball and ran with it. The CCC is written for all of us and intended to be the Church’s official statement of the body of the Church’s teaching on faith and doctrine. This is, I believe, the first and obviously only catechism the Church has ever officially given us. It has been updated since to make sure it has the clearest statements.

This is the orthodox faith of the Church for all of us.

 

[jwinch2]

People keep saying this, but it’s not accurate. It says in Fidei Depositum:

While the early recommendation was for something clear that Bishops could use as you describe, the Pope took the ball and ran with it. The CCC is written for all of us and intended to be the Church’s official statement of the body of the Church’s teaching on faith and doctrine. This is, I believe, the first and obviously only catechism the Church has ever officially given us. It has been updated since to make sure it has the clearest statements.

This is the orthodox faith of the Church for all of us.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P4.HTM

III. The Aim and Intended Readership of the Catechism

11 This catechism aims at presenting an organic synthesis of the essential and fundamental contents of Catholic doctrine, as regards both faith and morals, in the light of the Second Vatican Council and the whole of the Church’s Tradition. Its principal sources are the Sacred Scriptures, the Fathers of the Church, the liturgy, and the Church’s Magisterium. It is intended to serve “as a point of reference for the catechisms or compendia that are composed in the various countries”.15

12 This work is intended primarily for those responsible for catechesis: first of all the bishops, as teachers of the faith and pastors of the Church. It is offered to them as an instrument in fulfilling their responsibility of teaching the People of God. Through the bishops, it is addressed to redactors of catechisms, to priests, and to catechists. It will also be useful reading for all other Christian faithful.

This seems to identify the intended audience as being primarily the bishops. The fact that it is also recommended to the faithful does not change its primary intent.

In addition, Fidei Depositum also says:

Therefore, I ask the Church’s Pastors and the Christian faithful to receive this catechism in a spirit of communion and to use it assiduously in fulfilling their mission of proclaiming the faith and calling people to the Gospel life. This catechism is given to them that it may be a sure and authentic reference text for teaching Catholic doctrine and particularly for preparing local catechisms. It is also offered to all the faithful who wish to deepen their knowledge of the unfathomable riches of salvation (cf. Jn 8:32).

Again, it was written to serve as a normative text, primarily for the Bishops, but secondarily to the faithful. The question which must be asked is whether the CCC is the best choice for the average Catholic. Regardless of whether it has been recommended to the Faithful (I am not doubting you here), it was not written with them in mind. The unfortunately reality is that the manner in which the CCC is written leaves it, to many, very open to interpretation.

Also:

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 must take into account various situations and cultures, while carefully preserving the unity of faith and fidelity to Catholic doctrine.

Those who believe that earlier catechisms which have been properly approved are a better way to learn the faith are perfectly within their rights, and the mind of the Church, to recommend them.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Those who believe that earlier catechisms which have been properly approved are a better way to learn the faith are perfectly within their rights, and the mind of the Church, to recommend them.

The thread is for people to list their own version of the most authentic sources for Catholic teaching.

NO ONE has said word one about anyone’s “rights.”

The topic is authentic Catholic (orthodox) teaching. The CCC is for us all, Pope John Paul II said so clearly in several places. It is the only catechism produced by the Church through the Magisterium and promulgated by a Pope.

What you or anyone has the “right” to use is not an issue here or part of the topic. Sources are. You may list whatever you prefer. The issue between you and I is this: the CCC was not intended only for the Bishops at any time. It is ours. Made for us all.

What you use, is up to you.

 

[TimothyH]

I can see that neither EWTN nor ChurchMilitant.TV are on your list, Julia Mae.

ChurchMilitant is not a source of authentic and orthodox teaching.

It is rather fanaticism; division against that very teaching, and has been all but rebuked by the authority from which that teaching comes.

-Tim-

 

[LightBound]

ChurchMilitant is not a source of authentic and orthodox teaching.

It is rather fanaticism; division against that very teaching, and has been all but rebuked by the authority from which that teaching comes.

-Tim-

 

[pnewton]

My top 3 are in this order:

1- Catechism of the Catholic Church
2- Catholic Bible
3- Recent encyclicals and other church documents (recent because they refer to modern situations in terms of social norms, political situations, etc.)
.

I have a similar list:

1. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (it is the sure norm).
2. Contemporary papal teaching for the reason mentioned above.
3. Local bishop(s) for prudential application.

As far as Scripture, the Fathers, Counciliar documents, I do not see these as a dichotomy to the above. I read them for understanding and edification. When there is a difference between these and the above, I first assume that I may be mistaken and try to learn more clearly the mind of the Church.

 

[jwinch2]

The thread is for people to list their own version of the most authentic sources for Catholic teaching.

NO ONE has said word one about anyone’s “rights.”

The topic is authentic Catholic (orthodox) teaching. The CCC is for us all, Pope John Paul II said so clearly in several places. It is the only catechism produced by the Church through the Magisterium and promulgated by a Pope.

What you or anyone has the “right” to use is not an issue here or part of the topic. Sources are. You may list whatever you prefer. The issue between you and I is this: the CCC was not intended only for the Bishops at any time. It is ours. Made for us all.

What you use, is up to you.

The CCC was written with a primary audience of the bishops but has been made available to the Laity as well, I acknowledged this in my earlier post. You stated earlier that it was primarily recommended for the bishops, but was written for all. This is a misstatement. It was primarily written for the bishops and catechists, but is also recommended for the faithful. There is a difference between the two.

Furthermore, your posts give the impression that the Baltimore Catechism for example is not complete or that it is somehow inferior because it was promulgated by a local bishop. This is not the case. Fidei Depositum clearly states that the CCC was not intended to replace or supersede previously approved catechisms, be they promulgated by the Holy See or local Bishops. Also, as noted above by another poster, there has been no dogma defined since before the Baltimore Catechism was written. So, while the CCC does take into consideration the manner in which Vatican II presents the faith, which I certainly think is important, the Baltimore Catechism remains a complete representation of the doctrine of the Catholic Church. Both the preface for the CCC and Fidei Depositum state that the CCC represents a sure norm for teaching the Faith, not the sure norm for teaching the Faith. Again, there is a difference.

One could argue that the Catechism of the Council of Trent probably should not be the primary catechism used, in that it does not contain all defined dogma of the Church. Then again, that might be a bit of the stretch.

Other than that however, you are free to use whichever legitimately approved catechism you prefer. However, so is everyone else, and they are perfectly within the mind of the Church in doing so.

 

[OraLabora]

Given that we live in a post-Vatican II Church I think the primary catechism we use should be one that is set in this context. It’s not only doctrine and dogma, but also many doctrines that existed prior to Vatican II are expressed in a context that is the current mind of the Church on the teaching; although doctrine and dogma doesn’t change, our ability to interpret it for a modern world does. One good example is the doctrine “Extra ecclesiam, nulla salus”. The current interpretation is much more positive and is the mind of the Holy See for inter-religious dialogue. Without that modern interpretation we can actually be hurting the Church’s mission in the world, and working against the Holy Father’s wishes, by feeding anti-semitism, and religious discrimination, etc.

We have the CCC, but also the Compendium; it was intended that the CCC in fact spawn compendia for the laity, and there is an official one on the Vatican website as pointed out earlier.

I consider it in fact a duty of orthodox Catholicism to be faithful to the Holy See. So while catechisms such as Trent or the Baltimore Catechism can be useful to study from a historical perspective, the one I believe we should be turning to whenever we have a question on official Church teaching should be the one currently officially promulgated, and that’s either the CCC or the Compendium, or local ones spawned from the CCC.