Changes in Catechism

[billcu1]

IDK if this is the right place to post this or not. The last change I am aware of to the Catechism is that execution is no longer accepted by the church. This I suppose we are to accept, but IDK if the Pontiff is speaking by word of the Holy Spirit or infallibly or not either. And, have there been any more recent changed in the Catechism that anyone might happen to know of ?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

The Pontiff didn’t change the teaching. The Church does not like the idea of capital punishment, but has recognized that it has sometimes been a necessity when there was no other way to protect society. All the Pope said was that society at this point is able to contain dangerous criminals in secure prisons, so there’s no need for the death penalty right now. If a war broke out tomorrow causing chaos so we could not contain all the crazed killers in the nearest Supermax, we could resort to the death penalty again.

Church doctrine doesn’t change. The Catechism in part applies that doctrine to the society reading the Catechism and those application parts may well have to evolve as society changes.

 

[TMC]

The Pontiff didn’t change the teaching.

This is correct, but I think it is important to remember what teaching did not change. The underlying teaching is “Thou shalt not kill.” The Church in the past taught that capital punishment can be an exception to that teaching. The Church has removed that exception. I agree that part of the reason the exception was removed is modern ways to protect society, but I would argue the new teaching goes a bit deeper than that

For the OP, I am not sure what the last big change was to the Catechism, or to Church teaching. The state of the souls of unbaptized infants, maybe? Regardless, the Church does not tag parts of the Catechism as “infallible” and other parts as “not so sure.” All of it is considered a sure norm for teaching the faith.

 

[Weave]

Before the rewording of capital punishment the Catechism’s section on lying was reworked.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Before the rewording of capital punishment the Catechism’s section on lying was reworked.

That one actually bothers me way more than the capital punishment change, because it seems to indicate you need to tell the Nazi if you’re hiding the Jews in your basement.
I personally hope i would not tell the Nazi and just tell God I would rather take my lumps for lying to save people than telling the truth to kill people.

 

[StudentMI]

As a priest told me, the Catechism can be changed and is not an infallible document. He warned me ‘don’t deify the Catechism’.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Right. It’s my understanding there can even be slightly different Catechisms for use in different parts of the world.

 

[TK421]

The Catechism has a high level of teaching authority but it isn’t an infallible document: it can (and will) be altered. The translations themselves from language to language can result in subtle but significant differences.

It also only covers the basics. You can’t necessarily answer more complex questions using a quote from the Catechism, but for general everyday usage in RCIA or for Catholics giving themselves a fresher upper, it is the ideal go-to reference.

 

[billcu1]

Hum what then is an “infallible” document? The Bible? I wouldn’t
think so. I might be very well wrong. That sounds more like the
protestants. There is “enchidrion”, bulls. Is there a such thing
as an infallible document. Doesn’t the Pontiff speak for the Holy
Spirit, at times anyway. There is an Orbi et Urbi I believe it’s
called and this is a “work” for an indulgence I believe anyway. Is
Orbi et Urbi speaking for the Holy Spirit? Just trying to learn
more.

 

[Weave]

It takes a more Thomistic approach to lying that’s for sure.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

For Urbi et Orbi, it’s the Pope’s blessing that gives you the indulgence. His speech is just that, a speech.

When Popes wish to speak infallibly, they generally make that very clear, such as in the case of the more recent Marian dogmas.

 

[TMC]

The Church acknowledges that some teachings have more authority than others, but has never provided a list of the “infallible” teachings and the “fallible” teachings. You will see much discussion and argument on this forum and elsewhere as to what is or is not infallible, but the Church does not generally engage in those discussions, and has never provided a definitive list of the infallible teachings (for good reason, IMO).

 

[Ender]

The last change I am aware of to the Catechism is that execution is no longer accepted by the church. This I suppose we are to accept, but IDK if the Pontiff is speaking by word of the Holy Spirit or infallibly or not either.

Neither. You really wouldn’t expect the Holy Spirit to say one thing to some popes and then contradict that teaching by saying the opposite to another, and a pope speaks infallibly only when he actually claims to be speaking that way.

The Church does not like the idea of capital punishment…

This is clearly true, but that’s not at all the same as morally condemning it. You may form your own opinion on its propriety in any particular case.

The Church in the past taught that capital punishment can be an exception to that teaching. The Church has removed that exception.

If that exception was removed then capital punishment would be intrinsically evil, and that cannot be so. You may claim that the exception has been abridged even further, but not that it has been removed.

The Catechism has a high level of teaching authority…

The authority of any part of the catechism comes from its existing authority. It does not gain authority for being included in the catechism.

“The individual doctrines that the catechism affirms have no other authority than that which they already possess.” (Cardinal Ratzinger 1993)

 

[Emeraldlady]

IDK if this is the right place to post this or not. The last change I am aware of to the Catechism is that execution is no longer accepted by the church. This I suppose we are to accept, but IDK if the Pontiff is speaking by word of the Holy Spirit or infallibly or not either. And, have there been any more recent changed in the Catechism that anyone might happen to know of ?

A Catechism is a teaching tool specifically for the generation it is reaching. It reflects the correct application of the timeless teachings of the Church in the circumstances of the times. Things like sperm donation, surrogacy and ivf were addressed in St JPII’s version for example that of course didn’t appear in the previous Catechism.

Look at the Catechism like you would look at any teaching guide that needed to be updated to reflect the issues of the day.

 

[TMC]

If that exception was removed then capital punishment would be intrinsically evil, and that cannot be so. You may claim that the exception has been abridged even further, but not that it has been removed.

I think the Catechism speaks for itself on that point:

Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”,[1] and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.

 

[Emeraldlady]

Ender:

If that exception was removed then capital punishment would be intrinsically evil, and that cannot be so. You may claim that the exception has been abridged even further, but not that it has been removed.

I think the Catechism speaks for itself on that point:

Consequently, the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”,[1] and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.

And this is perfectly in line with the timeless teaching of the Church in that acts of human justice must serve the common good and are forbidden if they don’t.

 

[billcu1]

The changes I saw to my understanding was that there were ways to
control criminal activity that the death penalty was no longer
acceptable.

 

[billcu1]

I see, it certainly is helpful. I know the sacraments will never
change. That’s the one thing I can depend on. The Bible IDK.
Isn’tit a teaching tool. And “catechisms” were around before the
Bible, for example, the Didache.

 

[Ender]

I think the Catechism speaks for itself on that point:

You would think so but that is clearly not the case. This past fall the US bishops, in Baltimore for their annual meeting, asked the question “What does inadmissible mean?” The answer given, and regrettably accepted, was that it was an “elegant ambiguity.” There is nothing elegant about ambiguity in the church’s doctrines, especially when added to one that was already poorly understood. At least the bishops acknowledged the uncertainty even if they took no steps to resolve it.

 

[Ender]

The changes I saw to my understanding was that there were ways to control criminal activity that the death penalty was no longer acceptable.

One of the objectives of punishment is security, but that has never been its primary objective, and of itself does not justify punishment. We punish individuals because they deserve it; it is a matter of justice, and this has not, and cannot, change. This is true of all punishment; the death penalty is not an exception, and all punishments, to be just, must be commensurate in severity with the severity of the crime. This, too, is not something that can change.