The problem with your thinking is that you do not account for the mandate that Christians got on the day of Pentecost. We have an obligation to bring the knowledge of the salvific action of Christ to the ignorant people.
Where is that ‘obligation’ stated in the catechism…or is it?
Never mind…found it…
The two problems with this way of thinking are:
Really interesting thoughts, Mark!
Our goal should be to please God, not to score eternal life for ourselves. In the same way that perfect contrition is distinguished from the imperfect inasmuch as it is occasioned by sorrow at having offended God versus fear of going to Hell, likewise our thoughts and actions are the more perfect to the extent we direct them to please God rather than to gain our own salvation. “For he that will save his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for my sake, shall find it.”
Good analogy. Beat me to it.
The issue is that the CCC assumes that you know what came before. If you notice, it gives you references in the margins or and footnotes, as well as end notes. When you go to those references, they are based on other writings that came before them and so forth down the line.Interesting. I don’t see what is hard about the CCC?
With the advent of the internet and not to mention the fact that a lot of people have college degrees, I think the average person is very well educated.
Now the Summa Theologica, is another matter…
My my, don’t you know that in linear algebra we can work with infinite dimensional space?Good analogy. Beat me to it.
One thing I’d add. Linguistics is multi-dimensional. If the world and the Truth were only as simple as 3-dimensions.
Truth to be told, it is not possible to contain the whole subset of complex truth within one model. Differing formulation sometimes necessary to complement it.
So, what is God’s will in so far as our destiny??? If His will is that we be with Him for all eternity (in heaven) then does it not follow that to aim to get there ‘pleases’ Him???
I read the CCC early on in my journey and I’m slowly reading the Roman Catechism now. I believe the reason it is easy to be confused is not because someone doesn’t have the theological background. Christianity is not supposed to be a religion that you need multiple degrees to understand. You can enrich your understanding, but not only theologians have access to Jesus.They tried as hard as they could to make the CCC user friendly for those who do not have a philosophy and theology background. Even when you try, you’re always going to have to count on the reader gong back to other sources. You can only squeeze so much into one book.
The CCC leaves out complete branches of theology that it never touches. It can’t contain them all, so did the Baltimore Catechism, the Catechism of Trent and the Catechism of Pius X. They all left out complete branches of theology. The hope was that people would explore those through courses or on their own.
It’s not an issue of how educated the laity is. It’s a issue of whether the reader has the right background education. A brain surgeon may pick up the CCC and be left in awe, because there are words that mean something different to him. Of course, if he goes to Webster, instead of a Dictionary of Theology, Dictionary of Philosophy, Dictionary the Bible, he will get the wrong definition.
Like our friend said, each discipline has its own language. This has nothing to do with Latin. Even if you had everyone read Latin, the same word can have five meanings in five different disciplines or better yet, in five branches of theology. Each branch, even though it uses Latin, has its own jargon and nuance.
It’s actually a lot of fun, if one has the interest and the time to explore. If one is looking for a quick answer, the Compendium is a much better book.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Here you are mixing religion with theology. They are not the same thing! You can be a very religious person and become a Saint without having a grasp of theology. You do not even need to know how to read and write to be a very religious person and become a Saint, but you need a bit of education to be a reasonable theologian.I read the CCC early on in my journey and I’m slowly reading the Roman Catechism now. I believe the reason it is easy to be confused is not because someone doesn’t have the theological background. Christianity is not supposed to be a religion that you need multiple degrees to understand. You can enrich your understanding, but not only theologians have access to Jesus.
The problem is that there is a lot of ambiguous language. The Roman Catechism was written as a resource for priests to use to give their homilies. That wasn’t written for the laity either. However, my feel so far is that there is a lot less ambiguity in the Roman Catechism.
Sometimes that ambiguous language appears to be at odds with earlier dogma. I would use the word ambiguous and also “careful”. There is a lot of careful language as if to avoid offending anyone who is non-Catholic.
Now, I don’t know if this means the Church is still developing its understanding of doctrine and that is why there is a lot of vagueness in some more modern encyclicals and the CCC. Reading through some Catholic history books, showed me how some doctrines were developed, sometimes through much arguments between different theologians.
Maybe the next catechism will have a different flavor
I am somehow reminded by your comments of the lesson Christ taught us as regards children.
He realizes that the innocence and openness of youth make it easier to open one’s heart to the fullness and goodness of God.
The so called ambiguity in the CCC is not ambiguous to the theologian. It is ambiguous to the parish priest, the layman in the pews, the religious sister or brother in ministry. This was not written for that audience. The assumption was that those reading it would be scholars who speak the language of theology.I read the CCC early on in my journey and I’m slowly reading the Roman Catechism now. I believe the reason it is easy to be confused is not because someone doesn’t have the theological background. Christianity is not supposed to be a religion that you need multiple degrees to understand. You can enrich your understanding, but not only theologians have access to Jesus.
The problem is that there is a lot of ambiguous language. The Roman Catechism was written as a resource for priests to use to give their homilies. That wasn’t written for the laity either. However, my feel so far is that there is a lot less ambiguity in the Roman Catechism.
Sometimes that ambiguous language appears to be at odds with earlier dogma. I would use the word ambiguous and also “careful”. There is a lot of careful language as if to avoid offending anyone who is non-Catholic.
Now, I don’t know if this means the Church is still developing its understanding of doctrine and that is why there is a lot of vagueness in some more modern encyclicals and the CCC. Reading through some Catholic history books, showed me how some doctrines were developed, sometimes through much arguments between different theologians.
Maybe the next catechism will have a different flavor
Agreed.
I’m not sure what you mean with moderation. The Catholic Church is famous for education and for having the most educated members in the world, lay, religious and clergy. It has produced not only great works in theology, but also science, mathematics, art, music, literature, law, agriculture and political science.
Given what you have said…Agreed.
I’m not sure what you mean with moderation. The Catholic Church is famous for education and for having the most educated members in the world, lay, religious and clergy. It has produced not only great works in theology, but also science, mathematics, art, music, literature, law, agriculture and political science.
You have Franciscans like Copernicus, Roger Bacon, Dante, Thomas More and Maximilian Kolbe who were geniuses.
There are the great Carmelite scholars like Brother Lawrence, Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, Therese of Lieseaux, Edith Stein
The Dominicans and Jesuits have produced more scientists, mathematicians and scholars than we can count.
We have operated the best centers of learning in the Western World and made great contributions to knowledge. Even today, the Catholic Church spends billions of dollar a year to operate the world’s largest and most advanced astonomical observatories in Europe and the USA. They are totally owned by the Vatican. Neither the USA nor the European Union have any money involved. But every scholar of physics, astronomy and other sciences related to the origins of the universe has access to these facilities and techonology.
We run the mos expensive and expansive network of universities. These are the Pontifical Universities, which are different from the Catholic colleges and universities run by religious communities or lay groups. The Pontifical Universities are chartered directly by the Vatican’s commission on Education and they provide education in every area from journalism to theology. There are several hundred of them. There are more pontifical universities than state universities in the USA. They surely have less students, because they’re smaller. But they’re scattered around the world. We have three in the USA.
Having said that, I certainly agree that scholarship does not translate into sanctity. Scholarship is a means. Sanctity is an end.
A genius like Thomas Aquinas was not canonized because of his scholarship. He was canonized because he was a humble, faithful, obedient and virtuous friar. It was his love of God and neighbor that made him a saint. His theology helped him explain love, God and neighbor. But it did not help him love. That was a choice that he had to make.
The opposite side of that coin would be Luther. He too was a brilliant theologian and scholar. But he was filled with scruples, anger, despair, and mistrust. A lot of good his knowledge did for him. He just ended up in trouble.
There are three different things: Theology, Religious Education and Faith.
Theology is faith seeking understanding or as Pope Benedict says, faith informing reason.
Religious Education is learning what the Church believes and teaches. It does not aspire to go into the depths of theology.
Faith is the one that makes saints.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
I think that probably he was implying that we cannot compromise other critical things in the name of education and that we cannot use education to justify intellectual impropriety.
WalMart is going to put warning labels only when mandated by law or when the financial liability is higher than the project revenues. Neither cases would apply to the CCC.
