Is the CCC a rule or a suggestion or?

[Andreas_Hofer]

mikew262:

Ok, you’ve turned a blind eye to the point I’m trying to make, so I give up.

If you seriously believe that the only way to salvation is through the Catholic Church and that all non-Catholic Christians are potenially lost if they don’t follow the Truth, as dictated by the Catholic Church, then so be it. However, I find that view extremely eliteist and narrow.

I choose to be Catholic because I believe The Church comes the closest to what I think Jesus had in mind for us. However, I will not presume that everybody should think like me, and if they make their connection to God through a slightly different path, who am I (and you for that matter) to judge that their path will not lead to them God.

This is, however, the fundamental difficulty of your position. You say that if one seriously believes the Catholic Church is the one true Church and that remaining outside of it is dangerous, one is elitist and narrow-minded. But that is the teaching of the Church you claim to belong to. This amounts to saying “I choose to be Catholic, but my definition of the Catholic Church is different from the Catholic Church’s definition of itself.” Do you not see the tension there?

 

[Crumpy]

There was a relevant link posted on Scott Hahn’s and Mike Aquilina’s website,

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021009_ratzinger-catechetical-congress_en.html

which is Cardinal Ratzinger’s treatment ot “Current Doctrinal Relevance of the Catechism of the Catholic Church”

His zinger at the end is perhaps worth quoting directly

**The relevance of the Catechism of the Catholic Church "will remain intact far beyond the murmurings of its critics. **

 

[buffalo]

Crumpy:

There was a relevant link posted on Scott Hahn’s and Mike Aquilina’s website,

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021009_ratzinger-catechetical-congress_en.html

which is Cardinal Ratzinger’s treatment ot “Current Doctrinal Relevance of the Catechism of the Catholic Church”

His zinger at the end is perhaps worth quoting directly

**The relevance of the Catechism of the Catholic Church "will remain intact far beyond the murmurings of its critics. **

Yeah! They won’t be able to say “We don’t teach that anymore”. :clapping:

 

[mikew262]

Andreas Hofer:

This is, however, the fundamental difficulty of your position. You say that if one seriously believes the Catholic Church is the one true Church and that remaining outside of it is dangerous, one is elitist and narrow-minded. But that is the teaching of the Church you claim to belong to. This amounts to saying “I choose to be Catholic, but my definition of the Catholic Church is different from the Catholic Church’s definition of itself.” Do you not see the tension there?

The only tension I see is the different Christian denominations each claiming they possess the Truth, and saying if you don’t believe in my version you cannot obtain salvation. Sad and not what God had in mind, in my opinion.

I wish everybody believed the Catholic Church “Truth”, but it will probably never happen. However, I will not condemn and judge a fellow Christian who has accepted Jesus as Lord in their own way, and trys to live his/her life according to his teachings.

 

[fix]

mikew262:

The only tension I see is the different Christian denominations each claiming they possess the Truth, and saying if you don’t believe in my version you cannot obtain salvation. Sad and not what God had in mind, in my opinion.

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336
847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337
848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338

 

[buffalo]

mikew262:

The only tension I see is the different Christian denominations each claiming they possess the Truth, and saying if you don’t believe in my version you cannot obtain salvation. Sad and not what God had in mind, in my opinion.

.

You have to take that up with Jesus. He is the one who said it had to be His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

 

[mikew262]

buffalo:

You have to take that up with Jesus. He is the one who said it had to be His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Where did Jesus ever mention the word “Catholic”?

 

[mikew262]

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336
847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.337
848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338

Ok, we’ve been through this before. You are quoting Catholic doctrine. It’s meaningless to a non-Catholic. Their interpretation of the Truth is different than the Catholic interpretation.

How can I make this any clearer?

 

[buffalo]

mikew262:

Where did Jesus ever mention the word “Catholic”?

“My Church”

The Church must be one
Jn 10:16 - there will be one fold and one shepherd.
Eph 4:3-6 - one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father
Rom 16:17 - I urge that there be no divisions among you
1Cor 1:10 - I urge that there be no divisions among you
Phil 2:2 - be of same mind, united in heart thinking one thing
Rom 15:5 - God grant you to think in harmony with one another
Jn 17:17-23 - I pray that they may be one, as we are one
Jn 17:23 - that they may be brought to perfection as one
1Cor 12:13 - in one spirit we are baptized into one body
Rom 12:5 - we, though many, are one body in Christ
Eph 4:4 - one body, one Spirit, called to be one hope
Col 3:15 - the peace into which you were called in one body
Mt 16:18-19 - upon this rock I will build my Church (singular)
Mt 18:17 - tell it to THE Church; if he refuses to listen even to THE Church… (must be visible)

   **[Catholic](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm)**

The combination “the Catholic Church” (he katholike ekklesia) is found for the first time in the letter of St. Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, written about the year 110. The words run: “Wheresoever the bishop shall appear, there let the people be, even as where Jesus may be, there is the universal katholike] Church.” However, in view of the context, some difference of opinion prevails as to the precise connotation of the italicized word, and Kattenbusch, the Protestant professor of theology at Giessen, is prepared to interpret this earliest appearance of the phrase in the sense of mia mone, the “one and only” Church

 

[Linnyo]

“My Church”

The Church must be one
Jn 10:16 - there will be one fold and one shepherd.
Eph 4:3-6 - one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father
Rom 16:17 - I urge that there be no divisions among you
1Cor 1:10 - I urge that there be no divisions among you
Phil 2:2 - be of same mind, united in heart thinking one thing
Rom 15:5 - God grant you to think in harmony with one another
Jn 17:17-23 - I pray that they may be one, as we are one
Jn 17:23 - that they may be brought to perfection as one
1Cor 12:13 - in one spirit we are baptized into one body
Rom 12:5 - we, though many, are one body in Christ
Eph 4:4 - one body, one Spirit, called to be one hope
Col 3:15 - the peace into which you were called in one body
Mt 16:18-19 - upon this rock I will build my Church (singular)
Mt 18:17 - tell it to THE Church; if he refuses to listen even to THE Church… (must be visible)

   **[Catholic](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm)**

The combination “the Catholic Church” (he katholike ekklesia) is found for the first time in the letter of St. Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, written about the year 110. The words run: “Wheresoever the bishop shall appear, there let the people be, even as where Jesus may be, there is the universal katholike] Church.” However, in view of the context, some difference of opinion prevails as to the precise connotation of the italicized word, and Kattenbusch, the Protestant professor of theology at Giessen, is prepared to interpret this earliest appearance of the phrase in the sense of mia mone, the “one and only” Church

You always cut and paste these verses. They are always taken out of their meaningful context.

 

[buffalo]

Linnyo:

You always cut and paste these verses. They are always taken out of their meaningful context.

I don’t think so. :banghead:

 

[mikew262]

“My Church”

The Church must be one
Jn 10:16 - there will be one fold and one shepherd.
Eph 4:3-6 - one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father
Rom 16:17 - I urge that there be no divisions among you
1Cor 1:10 - I urge that there be no divisions among you
Phil 2:2 - be of same mind, united in heart thinking one thing
Rom 15:5 - God grant you to think in harmony with one another
Jn 17:17-23 - I pray that they may be one, as we are one
Jn 17:23 - that they may be brought to perfection as one
1Cor 12:13 - in one spirit we are baptized into one body
Rom 12:5 - we, though many, are one body in Christ
Eph 4:4 - one body, one Spirit, called to be one hope
Col 3:15 - the peace into which you were called in one body
Mt 16:18-19 - upon this rock I will build my Church (singular)
Mt 18:17 - tell it to THE Church; if he refuses to listen even to THE Church… (must be visible)

   **[Catholic](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03449a.htm)**

The combination “the Catholic Church” (he katholike ekklesia) is found for the first time in the letter of St. Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, written about the year 110. The words run: “Wheresoever the bishop shall appear, there let the people be, even as where Jesus may be, there is the universal katholike] Church.” However, in view of the context, some difference of opinion prevails as to the precise connotation of the italicized word, and Kattenbusch, the Protestant professor of theology at Giessen, is prepared to interpret this earliest appearance of the phrase in the sense of mia mone, the “one and only” Church

I know where the term “Catholic” came from, and it didn’t come from Jesus’ mouth as you insinuated. This was my point.

 

[Linnyo]

buffalo:

I don’t think so. :banghead:

I do!

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Russ 2073:

Finally got back here. Thanks, you guys rock.

If anyone is still listening (Dave), how do I sort out which part is which?

[Sorry I’m not up on the cool quote thing] The Catechism is a summary of doctrine and theology, not the source of doctrine and theology. A “sure norm” of Catholic teaching which includes “common teaching” (theological speculation which is not binding) and “certain teaching” (requires religious assent) and “infallible teaching” (requires assent of faith). Thus, it is too simplistic a question. Parts are revealed truth, parts are speculative.

Sorry Russ, I went on vacation and hadn’t noticed this post.

Firstly, the question you should ask yourself is why you want to sort out which part is which. When Sancta Mater Ecclesia teaches her sons and daughters, why would her sons and daughters, if they truly loved Sancta Mater, why would they want to know the extent to which they ought to obey and submit to her teachings?

Secondly, the manner in which Holy Mother Church asserts a teaching is how one determines whether or not is it speculative theology, or certain (and therefore binding) teaching. If in doubt, simply ask the living magisterium whether the teaching is speculative or binding. (see example, here). Your Ordinary is the bishop of your diocese. He pronounces the ordinary teaching of the Church in various ways, to include the pastors in his diocese. Read the Catechism and if you have question s regarding the level of teaching described, aske your pastor, as he is ordained by God for the care of your soul. You can also continue to query up the “chain of command” through the bishop and even the Holy See in Rome.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Linnyo:

I don’t recall reading anything Jesus ever taught about condoms. It is not his teaching but someone in the churches teachings. It is not a fundemental belief in any case so it shouldn’t affect my standing with God. Esp. since I don’t use contracepion anyway. Rejecting the authority of a church is very different from rejecting the standpoint of one man within the chuch who claims infallibility as a matter of tradition.

Linnyo,

According to Catholicism, papal infallibility and the immorality of contraception are examples of “fundamental beliefs.” Your insistence to the contrary is as absurd as one self-proclaimed Catholic who asserted to me that he could be “Catholic” and reject the writings of St. Paul from “his” canon of the Bible. Both of you fail to realize that Catholicism is not defined by subjective opinion, but by the living magisterium of the Catholic Church.

 

[Linnyo]

itsjustdave1988:

Linnyo,

According to Catholicism, papal infallibility and the immorality of contraception are examples of “fundamental beliefs.” Your insistence to the contrary is as absurd as one self-proclaimed Catholic who asserted to me that he could be “Catholic” and reject the writings of St. Paul from “his” canon of the Bible. Both of you fail to realize that Catholicism is not defined by subjective opinion, but by the living magisterium of the Catholic Church.

Both?? I am one person.
St Paul? What did he have to do with it?
Many Catholics are of the same opinion as me. God doesn’t mind. If he did, he would tell me. The magisterium is subjective as they have an inside interest. To get an objective viewpoint would be very diffcult but we can ask Jesus when we join him.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Linnyo:

Both?? I am one person.
St Paul? What did he have to do with it?
Many Catholics are of the same opinion as me. God doesn’t mind. If he did, he would tell me. The magisterium is subjective as they have an inside interest. To get an objective viewpoint would be very diffcult but we can ask Jesus when we join him.

Let me give you analogy so you can understand, from my perspective, how absurd this is.

I’m in the US Air Force. In the USAF we have official AF Doctrine. It is published for all USAF members to study and put into practice. It comes from the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, whose official organization, called the AF Doctrine Center is responsible for developing and promulgating AF Doctrine. It can certainly change over time, but it does not change by mere opinion, but by official act of those placed in governing authority over the Air Force.

It would be absurd for anyone, even those in the Air Force like me, to insist that something is a “fundamental belief” of AF Doctrine if it was indeed not found to be congruent with AF Doctrine as published by the USAF Chief of Staff. I can’t simply wish it to be AF Doctrine and poof it is so. Even if “other AF members agreed with me” it would still not be AF Doctrine until the Chief of Staff made it AF Doctrine.

Likewise, simply asserting that a fundamental belief of Catholicism as described by the authentic magisterium is not a fundamental belief, is absurd. It is not up to personal opinion as to what constitutes official Catholic Doctrine. It is instead up to the governing body of the Church. It is no more a matter of personal opinion as it would be for me to assert what AF Doctrine is, contrary to the official publications of the AF Doctrine Center and the Chief of Staff–those vested with the authority to determine AF Doctrine.

Now, to the Catholic who rejected St. Paul’s writings. He shares the same epistemology as you seem to. What you call mere opinion is simply your version of the same dissent he exercises. Both you and he deny Catholic dogma, a fundamental article of the Catholic faith. You deny papal infallibility, which is defined dogma. He denied the inspired nature of the canon of Holy Scripture, which is defined dogma. Both acts deserve anathema, according to the Catholic Church. Observe…

According to the canons of the First Vatican Council:

If anyone does not receive as sacred and canonical the complete books of Sacred Scripture with all their parts, as the holy Council of Trent listed them, or denies that they were divinely inspired : let him be anathema.

… faithfully adhering to the tradition received from the beginning of the Christian faith…with the approval of the Sacred Council, we teach and define as a divinely revealed dogma that when the Roman Pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA, that is, when, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church, he possesses, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, that infallibility which the divine Redeemer willed his Church to enjoy in defining doctrine concerning faith or morals. Therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are of themselves, and not by the consent of the Church, irreformable. So then, should anyone, which God forbid, have the temerity to reject this definition of ours: let him be anathema.

Linnyo:

I’m definately not guilty of heresy though…I don’t think.

You might want to look up what “anathema” means.

 

[buffalo]

mikew262:

I know where the term “Catholic” came from, and it didn’t come from Jesus’ mouth as you insinuated. This was my point.

Of course not - Catholic is the English word for the Greek.

There probably isn’t an Aramaic word either.

However, the concept of universal did, which was then translated.

 

[Russ_2073]

Hey thanks Dave for the nutshell summary of the answer to the original question. Whats really spooky is that I have not been back until tonight…

And double thanks to young Crumpy for the link in post #180. Absolutely positively gold.

I wrote down (ok, copied and pasted) some quotes from Cardinal Ratzinger’s address that struck me. Hopefully they make sense out of context.

(on what is the CCC for) "…the Pope says - this book “is offered to every individual who asks us to give an account of the hope that is in us (cf. I Pt 3,15) and who wants to know what the Catholic Church believes”.

(on how bibles and catechisms are rightly used) “At the centre of the Christian faith there is not a book, but a person - Jesus Christ, who is Himself the living Word of God…”

(on theology) 'On this point, the Catechism cites the noted saying of St Augustine, that classically synthesizes the essence of the theological endeavour: “I believe in order to understand and I understand the better to believe” ’

I encourage all to follow Crumpy’s link. Best of all, its free.