Catholics bound to catechetical teaching? Teaching order?

[GodHeals]

Hi,

Are Catholics bound to any or all catechetical teaching? Specifically, I believe in a young earth, but saw the following:

337 God himself created the visible world in all its richness, diversity and order. Scripture presents the work of the Creator symbolically as a succession of six days of divine “work”, concluded by the “rest” of the seventh day. On the subject of creation, the sacred text teaches the truths revealed by God for our salvation, permitting us to “recognize the inner nature, the value and the ordering of the whole of creation to the praise of God.”
scborromeo.org/ccc/para/337.htm

Is there an order of dogma, doctrine, catechism, etc. that we must obey from the Magisterial teachings of the Church?

God Bless You,
Brian

 

[april32010]

 

[Regina_Love]

What do you mean by young earth? I don’t feel confident that the earth is millions of years old either. I don’t see anything here which would say other wise.

 

[tabycat]

I have very little, if any, problem with a 4.5 billion year old earth and a 13 (or more) billion year old unavirse, I do have a problem with a 20,000 (or less) year old earth.

 

[triumphguy]

As a Catholic teacher I have a problem with school systems that allow/encourage young earth science.

Christ came to take away our sins, not our intelligence! We need to use our minds for the glory of God, and not be anti-intellectual.

If science can (and it can) objectively prove that the earth is 4.5 billion years old then that is because it was God’s plan that the earth is 4.5 billion years old. And this knowledge is not in contradiction to scripture or Church teaching at all.

 

[thistle]

Hi,

Are Catholics bound to any or all catechetical teaching? Specifically, I believe in a young earth, but saw the following:

Is there an order of dogma, doctrine, catechism, etc. that we must obey from the Magisterial teachings of the Church?

God Bless You,
Brian

The Church does NOT teach that the world was created in 6 literal 24-hour periods.

As to the CCC it contains a summary of Catholic teachings (both infallible and non-infallible), and also disciplines.
We are not bound to the CCC. We are bound to the Church teachings therein. We may disagree with disciplines but accept them.

 

[Ad_Orientem]

Hi Brian, concerning your broader question of “orders of teaching,” you may find the following article helpful:

Four Levels of the Church’s Teaching by Fr. William Most (theologian)

The catechism contains statements from different teaching levels, so that they do not all carry the same weight. If you want an actual reference that catalogs teachings according to different levels, you might get a copy of Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (which, FYI, is *not *in the public domain; you can get it from TAN for around $50).

I don’t know the status of various interpretations of Genesis 1, but if I’m not mistaken there were Church Fathers who held to something like literal days. I suspect that your view is an allowable theological opinion, but you might want to consult an apologist.

We should, of course, be open and docile to the Magisterium in general, even in matters that are not infallibly defined; in fact, in many cases we are bound to do so. (Those who say “It’s not infallible, therefore we don’t have to believe it” are wrong.)

 

[GodHeals]

Hi Brian, concerning your broader question of “orders of teaching,” you may find the following article helpful:

Four Levels of the Church’s Teaching by Fr. William Most (theologian)

The catechism contains statements from different teaching levels, so that they do not all carry the same weight. If you want an actual reference that catalogs teachings according to different levels, you might get a copy of Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (which, FYI, is *not *in the public domain; you can get it from TAN for around $50).

I don’t know the status of various interpretations of Genesis 1, but if I’m not mistaken there were Church Fathers who held to something like literal days. I suspect that your view is an allowable theological opinion, but you might want to consult an apologist.

We should, of course, be open and docile to the Magisterium in general, even in matters that are not infallibly defined; in fact, in many cases we are bound to do so. (Those who say “It’s not infallible, therefore we don’t have to believe it” are wrong.)

I agree with what you are saying about being obedient to the Magisterium. It seems there is an allowance on 6 literal days of creation because the Church doesn’t make dogma or doctrine? even on science matters.

Thank you for the links. The EWTN link might have been the link that I saw in the past! Thanks.

 

[GodHeals]

As a Catholic teacher I have a problem with school systems that allow/encourage young earth science.

Christ came to take away our sins, not our intelligence! We need to use our minds for the glory of God, and not be anti-intellectual.

If science can (and it can) objectively prove that the earth is 4.5 billion years old then that is because it was God’s plan that the earth is 4.5 billion years old. And this knowledge is not in contradiction to scripture or Church teaching at all.

Hi,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I think we aren’t suppose to discuss evolution on the forum at this time, unless the ban is lifted by now. Cool to read about your weight loss journey on the bottom of your page. Thanks be to God that He helps us in all things!

God Bless You!
Brian