Passage from catechism of trent

[angell1]

still offputting to see something like that in there though

 

[fhansen]

We live in very different times now.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

I personally think it would be good if people focused on the moral guidance of the Church today , as expressed in the Catechism today , which is written for our world and its culture today , instead of reading a guidance document from the 1500s, which was written for the culture back then , and trying to apply it 500 years down the road. If we could just use the Catechism of Trent then the Vatican wouldn’t have spent so much time and effort writing a new one.

I guess Catholics are just realizing that the Catholic church is more than just today but rather full of Tradition that even though happened years ago, continues today. and they want to study and know the truths of their faith.

Pope Benedict XVI, while a cardinal, said the Catechism of Trent is the most important Catechism. My parish priest said the same thing and has encouraged us to read it.

And one that says we’re supposed to honor kings and rulers and civil officials even if they are wicked, because their authority comes from God

Tis_Bearself:

If we sometimes have wicked and unworthy officials it is not their faults that we revere, but the authority from God which they possess.

I was always taught to honor those in authority. We do not obey them in wickedness but honor them as in honoring the seat they hold.

It is also scriptural.

1 Peter 2: Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, 14 or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right.

Romans 13: Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God

 

[angell1]

there is plenty of good in the catechism of trent, no one is disputing that, but to be honest, passages like htis one, just make me not want to get married even more, unless this is the wrong interpretation. i have already lived with a lifetime of control of tyranny

 

[MagdalenaRita]

duties of wives

• THE CATECHISM OF TRENT: The Sacraments – Matrimony

“The wife should love to remain at home, unless compelled by necessity to go out; and she should never presume to leave home without her husband’s consent.”

what does this mean exactly? i really hope it’s not what it looks like at face value reading. very confused. because it really seems to say that wives are not allowed to leave the house unless it’s a necessity. maybe it’s a bad translation? or some missing context?

passages like htis one, just make me not want to get married even more, unless this is the wrong interpretation

I keep hearing everyone say we live in different times now but IMHO that is a misunderstanding and doesn’t matter what time it is. Catholic teaching on marriage is Catholic teaching on marriage.

Even today communication is a huge key in every marriage. Without it arguments happen.

I see this passage as saying that a husband and wife should be in agreement as to their roles, activities and what is happening in their marriage. It doesn’t mean she has to get permission from her husband every time she walks out the door but rather she would not go anywhere that her husband would completely feel she should not be going and she would not be involved in secret coming and going.

Once we are married we are no longer our own person. We can not just do what ever we want but we have others feelings and needs to consider.

The husband is the head of the home. That is Biblical, but he is to love his wife, not be a tyrant but it also Biblical that a wife is to respect her husband.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

but to be honest, passages like htis one, just make me not want to get married even more, unless this is the wrong interpretation. i have already lived with a lifetime of control of tyranny

I know exactly how you feel, although I was not concerned with the Council of Trent. (I got married before the Internet, so I wouldn’t have even known where to find a copy of the Catechism of the Council of Trent and anyway I would have used the Baltimore Catechism that I grew up with.)

I took many years to get married because I heard too many horror stories of husbands who turned abusive or controlling after the wedding, or took all the family money and ran off, or some other bad behavior. And when you are Catholic, you can’t just say, “Oh well I will get a divorce if he’s a bad husband”, and you can’t even get a prenup to protect yourself. So you better know your fiance (or fiancee for men) very, very well if you are going to be spending decades together.

The important thing is to find a good husband and have a lot of discussions with him before you get married.
Also see how he treats his mother and how his mother and father get along.
The apple often doesn’t fall far from the tree.
If he has a good, healthy relationship with his mom, and his parents get along, then those are good signs that they raised their son to treat women right.

Any man who would start quoting passages to you about what women should do based on the Catechism of the Council of Trent is a red flag…normal men know that the world has changed a lot in 500 years. And in fact, normal men may be so busy living their lives and being responsible members of society that they simply don’t have time to read a 500-year-old book when they can instead read a current Catechism or ask a priest or a deacon.

Of course, if someone really loves these old Catechisms like some posters on here seem to, they’re perfectly free to find a spouse who loves it as much as they do, and good luck to 'em…but leave me out.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

(I got married before the Internet, so I wouldn’t have even known where to find a copy of the Catechism of the Council of Trent

I was married before the internet also and never even heard of the Council of Trent until recent years, fortunately though, I was taught from my parents and good Catholic priests much (not all) but a good portion of Catholic teaching on marriage. It kept me from making a couple of bad decisions that looking back would have been disastrous.

I guess that is why that passage doesn’t seem that horrible and scary to me. It’s just Catholic. It’s just about love and respect.

Also see how he treats his mother and how his mother and father get along.

Very good thing to consider when in a relationship with someone who may be a potential husband.

I would say the same applies for a man. He should watch how a potential wife treats her father.

 

[JSRG]

All Anathemas are binding for every Catholic.

Given that there is no anathema stated in the passage, I am not sure how this is supposed to be relevant.

 

[Pitcairn17]

Three weeks ago a young priest in our town preached that while the Baltimore Catechism was “OK,” the catechism that faithful Catholics should really go by is the Catechism of Trent. I wonder how he would respond to the issues raised in this thread. I will try to ask him.

 

[Motherwit]

The 1560’s were very different times. That’s just a fact. I don’t think it’s far fetched that people were expected to accept the teaching at face value. It’s only modern times that Catholic feel free to make there own interpretation of a teaching. And even Priests of the day who imparted those teachings to the lay faithful, were being discouraged from making their own interpretation because of the whole Luther schism. To not believe that today’s living Magisterium is the go to for interpretation of Scripture and Tradition to me is to not accept that the Holy Spirit is guiding the Church today.

 

[angell1]

well if you take the words at face value, tha’s not what it says at all, it honestly looks like something else

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Three weeks ago a young priest in our town preached that while the Baltimore Catechism was “OK,” the catechism that faithful Catholics should really go by is the Catechism of Trent.

Does his bishop know he runs around saying this, instead of promoting the actual official Catechism of the Catholic Church?

 

[angell1]

so the church seriously taught that women were not to step out of the house if it oculd be avoided if they were married? that realy does seem extreme

 

[1ke]

what does this mean exactly? i really hope it’s not what it looks like at face value reading.

Angel, stay away from whackadoodles. We’ve had this conversation before.

Stop reading things if you lack the context and prerequisite knowledge to understand it correctly.

very confused.

Have you heard any Pope talking about this in your lifetime? NO.

Remember, not everything expressed by the Church, or even in the Bible, is a doctrine.

Some things are cultural artifacts of their day and time.

 

[1ke]

so the church seriously taught that women were not to step out of the house if it oculd be avoided if they were married?

No. It didn’t. Remember, catechisms are teaching aids, they aren’t doctrinal documents, they themselves are not binding. This is NOT a doctrinal teaching.

It’s talking about not neglecting the household. “To to out” or “leave home” means to neglect the primary duties of the household with other pursuits. It might also mean travel.

 

[Motherwit]

so the church seriously taught that women were not to step out of the house if it oculd be avoided if they were married? that realy does seem extreme

It does seem extreme to us today for sure, but we also know there was context behind these teachings that explain them. Transport yourself back to 16th century Italy/Europe. It was the height of what is now referred to as the Renaissance era. At that time marriage was moving from being a contract arranged by families, to being love based. Women were coming into their own in society after centuries of an unchanged dynamic. There was no precedent for preserving the marriage and family in such an environment. Before the Council of Trent marriages were presided over by the magistrate. So the Council introduced marriage presided over by the Priest standing in as the Magistrate so that the Church could impart a Christian view of marriage in this modern world of changing mores.

So perhaps that Church teaching on marriage was meant to moderate the sudden new world that threatened this important bedrock of Christian life.

 

[angell1]

i to come across actual stuff like that in official documentst’s just a bit disturbing. i just don’t relaly knwo what to think, everytime i feel lke i’m getting to be ok, something like this happens

 

[Tis_Bearself]

so the church seriously taught that women were not to step out of the house if it oculd be avoided if they were married? that realy does seem extreme

500 years ago, a woman leaving her house without husband’s permission may well have been putting herself in physical danger. Women spent most of their time at home, and it was often unsafe to be out wandering around even if you were a man walking around by yourself, let alone a woman. Also, women did not generally work outside the home or outside the family-run home business if they were helping their husband run an inn or a bakery or something, so there wasn’t much reason for women to be out walking around. People didn’t go to the grocery store or the Walmart every week, for example, she would have been home either raising and preparing that food or helping oversee the servants who did raise it and prepare it.

Furthermore, there was nothing to stop a man from giving his wife a blanket permission to go certain places regularly such as the church, her mother’s house, etc. so she wouldn’t have needed to ask all the time.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

The 1560’s were very different times.

I do agree they were different times but …

It’s only modern times that Catholic feel free to make there own interpretation of a teaching. And even Priests of the day who imparted those teachings to the lay faithful, were being discouraged from making their own interpretation because of the whole Luther schism.

I completely agree with this and…

To not believe that today’s living Magisterium is the go to for interpretation of Scripture and Tradition to me is to not accept that the Holy Spirit is guiding the Church today.

I am pretty sure I did not say anything such as this. I completely agree that the Magisterium is the go to for interpretation of Scripture and no one should read Scripture except under the guidance of the Catholic Church, though the Catholic Church has not changed it’s interpretation of Scripture and we can’t throw out our past written documents. They are a part of the Church.

well if you take the words at face value, tha’s not what it says at all, it honestly looks like something else

Yes, you could take those words literally and out of context of Scripture and other Catholic teaching but that could cause misinterpretation.

Does his bishop know he runs around saying this, instead of promoting the actual official Catechism of the Catholic Church?

In all charity, the Catechism of Trent is an official Catechism. The modern Catechism today is based off of the Catechism of Trent. They both have similar formats. Today’s modern catechism is just more in depth. The Catechism of Trent was promulgated by St. Pope Pius V and Pope Benedict XVI, while a cardinal, said it was the most important catechism.

Past Catholic documents, such as The Roman Catechism (Catechism of Trent), encyclicals, and more are part of our faith.

If we could only go by what is said today, anything from St. Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict VI, St. Pope Paul VI or any thing our modern popes and saints have said in the past would need to be disregarded. They would be too outdated.

 

[angell1]

ok makes sense, i am trying to understand it properly, i want to know the correct interpretation, that’s why i am asking