Well, yes, but…
The problem is that in the analysis of particular actions and the determination of its sinfulness is not always so simple; sometimes it is and sometimes it isn’t. For example, it is clear that murder is a grave sin. But, not all homicides are murder. Self-defense, killing in just war, manslaughter, negligent homicide, etc., are all homicides that may not be sinful or may be sinful but not grave sins, or may be grave sins but are not murder.
(Note, the above is not situational ethics. Murder is ALWAYS sinful whatever the situation. The question is whether you are, in fact, dealing with murder at all.)
Likewise as you read through the CCC you can find things, especially issues of morals but also theological issues, that might need to be fleshed out. Make no mistake, the CCC is authoritative, but it is a catechism - a teaching tool - and it is not designed to provide a fully applicable exegesis on either the theology or moral issue set forth in it; it is a precis. Therefore additional research could be needed on any issue it in to fully understand the matter.
Well, yes, it is a “teaching tool”, but it is more than that. It is a comprehensive summary of the philosophical and theological underpinnings of what Catholicism is.
If anyone bothers to read it thoroughly, natural curiosity would get ou wanting to read more and more about what lays underneath what the catechism displays. Most of us, however, have neither the time, nor the inclination to start to delve into the philosophy and the theology upon which the catechism stands.
mathematoons says the priest states the catechism is to be believed and then asks a valid question in querying “why doesn’t this settle the matter”. probably because not enough people have read the Catechism thoroughly. Or, as MarkOmalley points out, a lack of catechesis, which is an identified problem in Catholicism in this day and age. Even for those well versed in the Catechism itself, there is a constant barrage of real world publicity and dialogue which attempts to disprove what the Catechism contains. If one reads the catechism carefully, it will be noticed that it refers constantly to “objective” truths. In the real world and here on CAF, great arguments erupt over whether or not objective truths even exist! I know and I’m sure you know that the objective truths refered to in the Catechism have a Natural Law base. Now start a discussion with you local parishioners about Natural Law and you’ll get a lot of blank stares.
The first step, in my opinion, is to point out to people the cogency and coherency of the Catechism in its outlining of an ethical and moral system that stands the individual in good stead for living a moral life, as it has stood the whole of western society in good stead right up until the moral relativism started to creep into social discourse.
Take, as an example, contraception. It is a point that is well discussed in the Catechism and yet it is a point that many Catholics take on themselves to disagree with. They disagree not realising that the aticle on contraception is but one little brick in the wall of an objective moral and ethical system. When they reject what the Catechism says on contraception, they inadvertently reject much of the rest of that moral and ethical system is built on and they do not know of the philosophical and moral reasoning which undepins the stance on contraception, of which the catechism is but the tip of the iceburg. Yet, the world tells them it’s OK and unless they are pursuaded to delve a little deeper into why the Catechism says what it says, they are a lost cause on the subject and a great inconsistency creeps into the moral and ethical aspect of their lives.
It isn’t good enough, in this day and age, for a Priest to simply say “it must be believed”. He should expalin why it is true and correct and that it should be followed because its cogency and coherency makes it true and correct and worthy of belief.
