Catechism of the Catholic Church - have you read it?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guyonthestreet
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have a copy of the CCC (A 1992 edition) which I use often. I also have numerous source materials such as catholic books on VII, Trent and so forth. I have hard bound copies of the Ante-Nicene Fathers (10 volumes), Augistine (City of God), several volumes by J.N.D. Kelly (history of doctrine , history of the creeds), the early church councils and so forth. I also have many non-catholic books on the same subjects. I have numerous mult-volume systematic theologies, church histories, reference works, too much to list.

I have a very large personal library of Christian books and Bibles. While I’m Protestant to the core, I’m making an honest attempt to understand catholic dogma. My main area of interest is the development of the church dogma over the years. At this point based on my studies of both catholic writers and protestant, I conclude that much of what is practiced today in the RCC is the result of many years of development. I know that this probably offends some but that is where the available source material leads me to conclude. I could easly refute many things I read on this forum, from either a pro-catholic or pro-protestant preespective. While some here are quite knowledgable with regard to their respective theology, the bulk of posters in any camp are simply trying to push an agenda. For this reason and others, I don’t persue discussions to the death and let some go unanswered because quite frankly, I have better things to do with my time than debate theology with agenda pushers who are not interested in a two way discussion.

yours truly,
Jon
 
Jon_Hus said:
I have a copy of the CCC (A 1992 edition) which I use often. I also have numerous source materials such as catholic books on VII, Trent and so forth. I have hard bound copies of the Ante-Nicene Fathers (10 volumes), Augistine (City of God), several volumes by J.N.D. Kelly (history of doctrine , history of the creeds), the early church councils and so forth. I also have many non-catholic books on the same subjects. I have numerous mult-volume systematic theologies, church histories, reference works, too much to list.

I have a very large personal library of Christian books and Bibles. While I’m Protestant to the core, I’m making an honest attempt to understand catholic dogma. My main area of interest is the development of the church dogma over the years. At this point based on my studies of both catholic writers and protestant, I conclude that much of what is practiced today in the RCC is the result of many years of development. I know that this probably offends some but that is where the available source material leads me to conclude. I could easly refute many things I read on this forum, from either a pro-catholic or pro-protestant preespective. While some here are quite knowledgable with regard to their respective theology, the bulk of posters in any camp are simply trying to push an agenda. For this reason and others, I don’t persue discussions to the death and let some go unanswered because quite frankly, I have better things to do with my time than debate theology with agenda pushers who are not interested in a two way discussion.

yours truly,
Jon
Click to expand...
Books are good. If you don’t have it, you may want to get Ludwig Ott’s FUNDAMENTALS OF CATHLIC DOGMA.

GKC
 
Publisher said:
I purchased a nice plastic bound version of the CCC from the Goodwill many years ago…it’s a thick book…interesting in parts…I’ve not read the whole thing by any stretch of the imagination…but then I’ve not read both volumes of The Journal of George Fox either.🙂
Click to expand...
It’s set up so you can search it for whatever it is you have questions on. I have 2 versions of it, and a few shorter catechisms. Since it’s on the Net, though, I usually search it that way.
 
Has a thorough read has not been possible for you up until now, because the style has been intimidating (with the paragraphs and numbers it looks like a government document and the language is not the most engaging, although the truth it imparts is sublime)? Get the new US Catholic Catechism for Adults the red book from the usccb.org website (it can be had at lower price in bulk) which reads more in prose style, is very engaging, a much easier read, does a great job compressing the style, and has questions for self or group study. It would be much easier to go through this book reading a chapter each week. But if you want to look something up, it will much easier to find in the CCC esp. if you search on line.

If you want short answers to specific questions, get the Compendium.
 
I’ve been reading it for the past few months now from time to time as I attempt to better understand the teachings of the CC. Recently I’ve been studying the teaches of the church on free will and predestination. In the articles/paragraphs written about free will, I keep finding references to a source labeled as “GS” then a # of some sort.

What does GS stand for?

I’ve also noticed (within the sections I’ve read so far), that this is 3-4x more reference to outside sources then there are to scripture.

Its definitely helpful book in learning. But like a lot of the articles on this site, I’m not impressed by most of the defenses made.

Just my 2 cents
 
Stouts, I wish I had written what you have below. Well said, good questions very thought provoking and insightful. I’m sure when you conclude your study on free-will vs predestination, the conclusions will be of a dynamic (not static) nature. Should be a fun study. Are you Arminian or Calvinistic? I would assume you believe in election of the saints?

Jon
Stouts989 said:
I’ve been reading it for the past few months now from time to time as I attempt to better understand the teachings of the CC. Recently I’ve been studying the teaches of the church on free will and predestination. In the articles/paragraphs written about free will, I keep finding references to a source labeled as “GS” then a # of some sort.

What does GS stand for?

I’ve also noticed (within the sections I’ve read so far), that this is 3-4x more reference to outside sources then there are to scripture.

Its definitely helpful book in learning. But like a lot of the articles on this site, I’m not impressed by most of the defenses made.

Just my 2 cents
Click to expand...
 
Stouts989 said:
I’ve been reading it for the past few months now from time to time as I attempt to better understand the teachings of the CC. Recently I’ve been studying the teaches of the church on free will and predestination. In the articles/paragraphs written about free will, I keep finding references to a source labeled as “GS” then a # of some sort.

What does GS stand for?

I’ve also noticed (within the sections I’ve read so far), that this is 3-4x more reference to outside sources then there are to scripture.

Its definitely helpful book in learning. But like a lot of the articles on this site, I’m not impressed by most of the defenses made.

Just my 2 cents
Click to expand...
there is a list in the back of the book both of the scripture citations, organized by book of the bible, and of the other Church Documents (which are coded by first letters of the first words, in Latin, of the document). GS is Gaudium et Spes, a Vatican II document.

There is a companion volume to the CCC which lists all the sources, including the words of the actual passage cited in the relevant document, which is very helpful for a serious student who wants that info. If you are reading the CCC from an apologetics standpoint this volume will be most helpful to you. Again if you are into serious apologetics you may also want to get the 2 vol. flannery compendium of the Vatican II documents, which are heavily cited in the CCC, to read the entire thing. Their footnotes–many of which of course go back to scripture–will help you follow the development of the doctrine which you are studying.
 
Yes, I have read it a couple of times and I’m in the process of reading it again now, deliberately.

It corrected a number of misimpressions I had about Catholic doctrine. I highly recommend it for all (Catholic or not). For Catholics, it will strengthen and enhance your understanding of the faith. For non-Catholics it will provide a better understanding of Catholic doctrine.

Blessings,

Brian
 
Robbinson said:
It corrected a number of misimpressions I had about Catholic doctrine.
Click to expand...
Do you think it’s a useful tool to correct misundertandings of the catholic faith for non catholics?

Have any non catholics dipped into it and had their misconceptions cleared up about praying to Mary and the saints, the use of statues and iconography, transubstantiation, confession to a priest and so on?

Did it every clarify something to the point where you as a non catholic thought darn, I never looked at it that way, and it makes perfect sense?

Or do you think you have to have a predisposition to catholicism to fully grasp it’s contents?
 
Guyonthestreet said:
Do you think it’s a useful tool to correct misundertandings of the catholic faith for non catholics?

Have any non catholics dipped into it and had their misconceptions cleared up about praying to Mary and the saints, the use of statues and iconography, transubstantiation, confession to a priest and so on?

Did it every clarify something to the point where you as a non catholic thought darn, I never looked at it that way, and it makes perfect sense?

Or do you think you have to have a predisposition to catholicism to fully grasp it’s contents?
Click to expand...
While I may not exactly fit the profile, when I returned to the Church I too still had many questions and concerns over doctrine. I’m afraid that I was not well catechized in school. Trying to find answers is partly what led me here to CAF.
I can say that each time I looked something up in the Catechism I DID find it to be logical, and helpful and to make “perfect sense”.

Peace
James
 
Jon_Hus said:
Stouts, I wish I had written what you have below. Well said, good questions very thought provoking and insightful. I’m sure when you conclude your study on free-will vs predestination, the conclusions will be of a dynamic (not static) nature. Should be a fun study. Are you Arminian or Calvinistic? I would assume you believe in election of the saints?

Jon
Click to expand...
I tend to lean towards the more Calvinistic point of view. What I’ve found so far about studying the Arminian/CC definition of free will…there are a number of unanswered verses in scripture or over looked passages. But yes I do believe in the election of the saints. How can one not? Its all over the NT.

To the others who have replied to my post.

Thank you for clearing up what GS is and I’ll look into those other resources. I do spend a lot of time studying apologetics…so thank you!
 
I forgot to say also, if you are reading the CCC from an apologetics standpoint and want more from the actual church documents cited, go in the back to find out what the abbreviation means (which document), and then go on the vatican website, library to find the actual document and the paragraph cited.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top