Should I use the CCC or the Baltimore Cathechism?

[Genesis315]

When the Baltimore Catechism stated that the death penalty was permissible, that was the exact line that had been said by the Church for all of history until that time. When the current Catechism states the death penalty is NOT permissible, that is something new. Therefore the former position is infallible and the latter is not.

What would my response to this be?

In this case, if the new CCC said that, that would be in error. Some have tried to interpret Pope Francis’s death penalty doctrine as simply meaning in our specific times and circumstances it is not conducive to the common good. That would be a valid opinion (but not one where disagreement would rupture communion with the Church), but saying the death penalty is per se evil or absolutely forbidden would be simply wrong according to Catholic doctrine.

If our authorized teachers do not fulfill their duty and instead introduce novel doctrine and unorthodox practices at odds with what the Church has defined and always taught, God permits it as a trial.

Here’s what a Catholic believes:

St. Vincent de Lerins, Commonitorium:

The Notes of a true Catholic.

[48.] This being the case, he is the true and genuine Catholic who loves the truth of God, who loves the Church, who loves the Body of Christ, who esteems divine religion and the Catholic Faith above every thing, above the authority, above the regard, above the genius, above the eloquence, above the philosophy, of every man whatsoever; who sets light by all of these, and continuing steadfast and established in the faith, resolves that he will believe that, and that only, which he is sure the Catholic Church has held universally and from ancient time; but that whatsoever new and unheard-of doctrine he shall find to have been furtively introduced by some one or another, besides that of all, or contrary to that of all the saints, this, he will understand, does not pertain to religion, but is permitted as a trial, being instructed especially by the words of the blessed Apostle Paul, who writes thus in his first Epistle to the Corinthians, There must needs be heresies, that they who are approved may be made manifest among you: 1 Corinthians 2:9 as though he should say, This is the reason why the authors of Heresies are not immediately rooted up by God, namely, that they who are approved may be made manifest; that is, that it may be apparent of each individual, how tenacious and faithful and steadfast he is in his love of the Catholic faith.

In light of that, if error is spread wide:

St. Vincent:

[7]…What, if some novel contagion seek to infect not merely an insignificant portion of the Church, but the whole? Then it will be his care to cleave to antiquity, which at this day cannot possibly be seduced by any fraud of novelty.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3506.htm

So there are times when older is better. Given the confusions of the present day, this might be such a time.

 

[catholicworker1922]

“new revision affirms that the understanding of the inadmissibility of the death penalty grew ‘in the light of the Gospel’” and “expresses an authentic development of doctrine that is not in contradiction with the prior teachings of the Magisterium.”

I understand the position that all new developments should be understood in light of what came before. However, can you please explain to me how it works in this case in particular? The previous teaching was that the death penalty was permissible. Now the teaching is that it is inadmissible. How does one develop from the other?

If the idea is that the world has changed since the Baltimore Catechism, I am not sure that is true. I am even less sure that the world has changed from St. John Paul II’s time to Pope Francis’s time. That seems absurd.

Can you in your own words tell me how “the death penalty is inadmissible” authentically develops from “the death penalty is permissible”?

 

[fhansen]

Point me to the paragraph where it says the death penalty is not permissible-I haven’t seen that unless that’s in a revised version. Either way the magisterium is either infallible-or it’s not, meaning trustworthy from the birth of the faith until now-or not.

 

[catholicworker1922]

Point me to the paragraph where it says the death penalty is not permissible-I haven’t seen that unless that’s in a revised version.

“The death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person,” reads the Catechism of the Catholic Church now on the death penalty, with the addition that the Church “works with determination for its abolition worldwide.”

 

[fhansen]

Where did you find that? This is the only teaching on this matter that I’m aware of:
2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically non-existent."

 

[Genesis315]

As Cardinal Ratzinger noted on the authority of the Catechism:

The individual doctrine which the Catechism presents receive no other weight than that which they already possess.

He elaborates further on this point:

The catechism must certainly avoid giving the impression that all the statements it contains have the same degree of certainty. It would be neither practical nor desirable constantly to indicate these degrees (de fide, de fide definita, sententia communis, etc.). Rather, the doctrine’s degree of certainty should be evident from the context from the way it is stated, from the doctrinal authority of the statement.

Pope Francis’s odd addition to the Catechism comes from a random speech of his, and at best is a practical judgment and at worst is a total novelty. Therefore, its weight is minimal and its degree of certainty is doubtful. It should be treated as such . The Church’s perennial doctrine as to the civil power being granted authority to inflict death–as a proportionate punishment and to provide security–in order to serve the common good is found explicitly in Scripture and Tradition, taught by the ordinary and universal magisterium–it is therefore weighty and certain.

 

[catholicworker1922]

Where did you find that?

This is the newest revision promulgated by the Holy Father. It has only occurred in the past few weeks, but it has been major news AFAIK.

 

[Crocus]

Baltimore states: "Human life may be lawfully taken … (3) by the lawful execution of a criminal, fairly tried and found guilty of a crime punishable by death, when the preservation of law and order and the good of the community require such execution.

CCC states: “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”, and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.”

I see no contradiction between the two.

the understanding of God’s revealed truth and its application to our modern culture regarding faith and morals has developed as new moral questions arise

 

[MagdalenaRita]

I am very confused by this topic after speaking with a traditionalist Catholic for the first time. I have a few scattered questions that I am hope I am asking respectfully?

Both catechisms are very good. The Baltimore catechism is a “give me the facts” type of catechism and the new CCC is very much more in depth and not to throw you off even further, but both are based on the Catechism of Trent or the Roman catechism, which IMHO is midway between the CCC and the Baltimore catechism. It is more than just the facts but it is not as in depth as the CCC.

That said, neither the CCC nor the Baltimore catechism are infallible. The authority of the Catholic church is threefold: Scripture, Tradition and Pope in communion with the bishops.

my question based on this conversation is: Does this mean that the Church was wrong about the death penalty before?

It seems to me that your question is more about how could the Church change it’s teaching on the death penalty and be stated differently in the two different catechisms rather than wanting to know which catechism is better…

IMHO I don’t know either except that perhaps we have better means today of handling those who commit crimes.

 

[catholicworker1922]

I see no contradiction between the two.

Can you explain how? Please keep in mind that the CCC quote is a categorical/absolute statement and does not leave room for equivocation.

 

[Genesis315]

I see no contradiction between the two.

If Pope Francis, like John Paul II, said it was inadmissable because the preservation of law and order and the good of the community don’t require such execution in current circumstances, that would be noncontroversial (unless he made that analysis of factual circumstances absolutely binding–he is not omniscient as to fact, so others made analyze the circumstances differently and come to a different conclusion, using the same principles).

The problem is he said it is inadmissable “because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the human person.” This is no longer a judgment based on circumstances. The dignity of the human person is always the same–we do not have more dignity than our forebears. Apparently in Francis’ view, the Holy Spirit allowed the Church’s Magisterium for over 2000 years to consider a violation of human dignity an act of justice. That’s impossible.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

To answer the OP’s question:

The CCC is the current official catechism of the Church and is authoritative. It’s the one you should be using right now today in 2019.

The Baltimore Catechism was never an official catechism of the Church. It was a regional catechism developed mainly for use in instructing people in USA about the faith. Many of us who are old were taught from it and therefore we remember a lot of what it said. It is not used to teach people today (or should not be , if some traditionalists are still using it). Today, we are supposed to teach using the CCC, or if teaching young people, use the YOUCAT.

There are a number of issues, including limbo of infants and attitudes towards Protestants, where the info in the Baltimore Catechism does not reflect the Church’s position and attitudes today. For that reason, I would not recommend it for a new Catholic who is likely to be confused reading one thing in the Baltimore Catechism and another in the CCC.

Since the Baltimore Catechism was written, the Church has clarified or further developed its position on some issues and the CCC reflects this.
The CCC also contains many footnotes to supporting sources in Scripture, the writings of early Church fathers, etc.

Catechisms are developed for purposes of teaching the principles of the Catholic faith to the faithful. They are not meant to be compendiums of “infallible statements”.
If you are looking for an “infallible statement” on something then that is a topic for another thread. It’s not a matter of just reading five Catechisms till you find one that says what you want it to say on the death penalty.

 

[catholicworker1922]

The CCC is the current official catechism of the Church and is authoritative. It’s the one you should be using right now today in 2019.

What’s the difference between authoritative and infallible then? Perhaps I’m confused… I thought that the CCC was free from error?

EDIT: Also, sorry but it sounds like you are also saying that the Baltimore Catechism contains error or is discouraged from being used. Is that correct? Does the Church condemn its use. I don’t want to use the wrong thing.

 

[fhansen]

Alright, wasn’t aware of the change although I probably should’ve been. This change had been discussed for at least 20 or so yrs, and it’s not at all out of line with the authority of the Church to make it. There’s a continuous and progressive impact that the light which was introduced to this relatively dark world 2 millennia ago seeks to make and can make on us as a people. And so the Church has grown in understanding of the love and will of God such that certain non dogmatic or non de fide teachings may become refined and/or altered as we grow in the “knowledge of God”. This doesn’t mean she can suddenly decide that Jesus is not Deity for example, or that He’s not really present in the Eucharist, etc. These are de fide.

 

[catholicworker1922]

it’s not at all out of line with the authority of the Church to make it.

Per Vatican I, the Holy Father is well within his rights to forbid capital punishment, but my understanding is that he cannot call it intrinsically evil or that it’s ALWAYS been against moral law. Am I correct about this?

 

[Genesis315]

The Baltimore Catechism was never an official catechism of the Church. It was a regional catechism developed mainly for use in instructing people in USA about the faith.

Just to clarify, it certainly was an official catechism of the Church, being authorized and its use made obligatory by the Third Council of Baltimore. Bishops have real authority in the Church. It was not something a private person published that happened to receive a Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur. .

The difference, as you note, was that it was not authorized and obligatory outside the jurisdiction of that Council. The Baltimore Catechism’s use is no longer obligatory, but, to be fair, JPII never made the use of the CCC obligatory in the way the Council of Baltimore did (he even said it was not intended to supersede such local catechisms).

 

[Tis_Bearself]

What’s the difference between authoritative and infallible then? Perhaps I’m confused… I thought that the CCC was free from error?

EDIT: Also, sorry but it sounds like you are also saying that the Baltimore Catechism contains error or is discouraged from being used. Is that correct? Does the Church condemn its use. I don’t want to use the wrong thing.

Authoritative means that it’s the one the Church currently authorizes and uses. The Church periodically revises the Catechism in order to best teach people in different times and places. The Church might decide to authorize and use a new version of the Catechism ten years from now.

Infallible is a special designation regarding Church teachings. Once a teaching is infallible, the Church isn’t going to come back in 10 years and modify it or amend it.

The Church really does not have an “infallible” position on the death penalty. The current statement in the Catechism is based on our current reality, which is that we generally have prisons adequate enough to keep dangerous criminals contained so we don’t need to kill them in order to keep society safe. If tomorrow we had some kind of devastating chaotic nationwide event where many or most buildings were destroyed so we couldn’t reasonably imprison people for life without parole, then we might need a death penalty again in order to protect society and keep order.

The Baltimore Catechism doesn’t teach “error”. It contains statements that reflect the Church teachings and the general thinking when and where the Baltimore Catechism was written and revised. Nowadays our society has evolved in areas such as how Catholics and Protestants get along. We no longer treat Protestants with such disdain as in the Baltimore Catechism days when let’s face it, a lot of Protestants didn’t like Catholics either and might even wish to do them harm. We get along better today for the most part.

The Church has also had occasion to directly consider teachings like the limbo of infants which it had never really taken a position on. The Baltimore Catechism states a position on limbo of infants that was not the official position of the Church. The current Catechism takes the position that we leave unbaptized infants to God’s mercy and have hope that they might go to heaven. However, since we don’t know for sure what happens to them, people can still believe in limbo of infants if they like; it’s just not part of Church teaching.

 

[1ke]

s the CCC infallible? Is the Baltimore Catechism?

Books are not infallible.

Infallibility is a function of the teaching office of the Church.

What does it mean that the CCC is “authoritative”?

What “authoritative” usually means: has authority. The Pope commissioned it and approved it.

Can a person disagree with it if there is a compelling reason to do so?

I don’t know what you mean by “disagree with” a book? The teachings in the Catechism are the teachings of the Church. We are to give assent to the teachings of the Church regarding doctrine and we are to follow the disciplines of the Church (such as canon law).

What if there is a contradiction between the CCC and the Baltimore Catechism?

In both the current Catechism and the Baltimore Catechism there is a mixture of doctrine and discipline. The Baltimore Catechism is out of date regarding Church law and disciplines-- for example fasting rules and such.

What happens when there are changes to the CCC - for instance in 1997 and 2019, and possibly further?

Then there are new editions printed.

Does this mean there are errors in it?

No.

an Catholics favor earlier publications?

No.

Can Catholics look at the CCC and believe that certain other things should be changed as well?

You can have opinions on things, sure.

What is a truly indisputable and infallible source of Church teaching that Catholics can quickly reference if the CCC does not carry these labels?

The Catechism is a teaching document meant to compile the most salient points of the faith.

There have been many Catechisms throughout history. And, the current CCC is meant for the bishops and church leaders for a source document to produce their own catechisms meant for lay people. The Catechism for the United States is a catechism produced by the US Catholic Bishops.

Thanks! I’m trying to think if there is anything else… these are all new ideas to me that kind of threw me off…

Stay away from people who want to promote the Baltimore Catechism as the “only” catechism. This is simply not true. The BC was the US bishop’s catechism produced in the 1800s. It was a good teaching tool in its day. It was not “infallible” then and isn’t now.

It was never the universal Catechism of the Church.

 

[RogueSemicolon]

I suggest you read this article by Jimmy Akin, titled Understanding the Catechism Revision of the Death Penalty. He explains what the revision means and how it’s not in contradiction to previous Church teaching. Another fine article, Death Penalty – continuity or hardness of heart?, by Pedro Gabriel, explores in greater depth the theological development of the death penalty, demonstrating how the death penalty held greater acceptance in times past and why the Church’s understanding has developed in light of changes in our present social circumstances.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Just to clarify, it certainly was an official catechism of the Church, being authorized and its use made obligatory by the Third Council of Baltimore.

No, it was the official national catechism for use in the United States and North America.

Pretty sure in places like Italy for example, they were using the Pope Pius X Catechism as that was the regional authorized catechism there during part of the time the Baltimore Catechism was being used in USA.

One could, I suppose, say it was ONE of the authorized catechisms of the Church, but it was understood that it would be used in a specific place, North America. There were other catechisms in use during the time of the Baltimore Catechism that were similarly “authorized” for use in one region or another.

It was never a universal Catechism of the Church.
The CCC is a Universal catechism.