Should I use the CCC or the Baltimore Cathechism?

[catholic03]

I have the Catechism to the Catholic Church. Another one I have is the Compendium to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is a more concise summary of Church doctrine, about 200 pages.

The Companion to the Catechism of the Catholic Church is expensive but an amazing book. I got it for my birthday. It has every document and scripture reading referenced in the Catechism repeated in full!

 

[PetraG]

The CCC lists sources precisely because the CCC is NOT the authority.

Suffice it to say we all know the CCC never cited the Baltimore Catechism as an authoritative source.

Again, the equal ranking in “authority”, i.e., both catechisms being wholly without authority, a third authoritative source is required to settle a contradiction.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved 25 June last and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, is a statement of the Church’s faith and of Catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, Apostolic Tradition and the Church’s Magisterium. I declare it to be a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion and a sure norm for teaching the faith. May it serve the renewal to which the Holy Spirit ceaselessly calls the Church of God, the Body of Christ, on her pilgrimage to the undiminished light of the kingdom!…

This catechism is not intended to replace the local catechisms duly approved by the ecclesiastical authorities, the diocesan Bishops and the Episcopal Conferences, especially if they have been approved by the Apostolic See. It is meant to encourage and assist in the writing of new local catechisms, which must take into account various situations and cultures, while carefully preserving the unity of faith and fidelity to Catholic doctrine.
Fidei Depositum, Pope St. John Paul II, 1992

The Baltimore Catechism was never approved by the Apostolic See, however.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in contrast, was declared by the Pope to be “a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion and a sure norm for teaching the faith.”

 

[PetraG]

I have the Catechism to the Catholic Church. Another one I have is the Compendium to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is a more concise summary of Church doctrine, about 200 pages.

The Companion to the Catechism of the Catholic Church is expensive but an amazing book. I got it for my birthday. It has every document and scripture reading referenced in the Catechism repeated in full!

Just a note: Both the Catechism and the Compendium are available online for free.

 

[MiserereMeiDei]

Some believe we have had no Pope since Pius X. Some think it was Pius XII.

Sedevacantism is hardly traditional.

 

[Sub_Tuum_Praesidium]

Nobody seems to acknowledge the existence of the Compendium of the CCC, produced by order of JP2 and published during B16.

 

[1ke]

Nobody seems to acknowledge the existence of the Compendium of the CCC , produced by order of JP2 and published during B16.

Nobody except @TheLittleLady, @Genesis315,
@PetraG, @Vico, @catholic03, and me… who have ALL mentioned the Compendium on this thread.

 

[Vico]

Nikolaite:

The CCC lists sources precisely because the CCC is NOT the authority.

Suffice it to say we all know the CCC never cited the Baltimore Catechism as an authoritative source.

Again, the equal ranking in “authority”, i.e., both catechisms being wholly without authority, a third authoritative source is required to settle a contradiction.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved 25 June last and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, is a statement of the Church’s faith and of Catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, Apostolic Tradition and the Church’s Magisterium. I declare it to be a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion and a sure norm for teaching the faith. May it serve the renewal to which the Holy Spirit ceaselessly calls the Church of God, the Body of Christ, on her pilgrimage to the undiminished light of the kingdom!…

This catechism is not intended to replace the local catechisms duly approved by the ecclesiastical authorities, the diocesan Bishops and the Episcopal Conferences, especially if they have been approved by the Apostolic See. It is meant to encourage and assist in the writing of new local catechisms, which must take into account various situations and cultures, while carefully preserving the unity of faith and fidelity to Catholic doctrine.
Fidei Depositum, Pope St. John Paul II, 1992

The Baltimore Catechism was never approved by the Apostolic See, however.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in contrast, was declared by the Pope to be “a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion and a sure norm for teaching the faith.”

The Catechism of the Council of Trent (1570) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1992 (and later revisions and translations) are universal catechisms, whereas the Baltimore Catechism 1885 (and later revisions) and the United States Catholic Catechism for Adults (2004) are minor catechisms. United States Catholic Catechism for Adults was approved by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-te...e/catechism/us-catholic-catechism-for-adults/

Baltimore Catechism (4) received

• Nihil Obstat by D. J. McMahon (Censor Librorum)
  Imprimatur by Michael Augustine (Archbishop of New York) on September 5, 1891.
• Nihil Obstat by Arthur J. Scanlan (STD, Censor Librorum)
  Imprimatur by Patrick J. Hayes (D.D., Archbishop of New York) on June 29, 1921.

 

[PetraG]

The fact that it can change means it is not infallible.

That would imply that the Gospels contradict each other, since they are four documents with similar purpose that were written not only in different styles but each with a different emphasis.

No one ever said that the Catechism was infallible, since that is a word with a very strict definition. Dogmas, not catechisms, are declared infallibly. The catechisms weren’t meant to be infallible as the Church uses the word. The universal catechisms promulgated by the Church, however, were declared to be what Pope St. John Paul II declared the 1992 Catechism to be: “a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion and a sure norm for teaching the faith” Minor catechisms are checked to ensure that they are sure instruments for teaching the faith, but they are not intended for such a broad audience that they are checked to be instruments for ecclesial communion in the broadest sense. They might be or they might not; the bishops do not send them to Rome unless that is the intended use.

In other words, the Baltimore Catechism was not intended to be a universal catechism. As far as I know, it was never sent to Rome and rejected because that was never the intention when it was written.

It is, however, a somewhat older catechism. The authors did not have access to information that was available in 1992, such as evidence that the death penalty is so often unjustly applied at the expense of poorer defendants belonging to more marginalized groups within society, even within societies with some of the best criminal justice systems. That evidence was not available when the Baltimore Catechism was written! The standard set in the Baltimore Catechism is true, but the low likelihood of a state meeting that standard was not appreciated. Concrete information could not have been had; the authors had to rely on theory. If the likelihood of the death penalty achieving what was believed to be the reason that excused it as a necessity was known to have been as low as it was even then and the likelihood of its being justly given out was understood to have been as low as it was even then, the authors are more likely to have taught about the matter as the 1992 Catechism does.

 

[PetraG]

This was known since the early Church. None of them contradict another just expand and tell the gospel in a different way. It isn’t literalism just the biblical author reflected Gods truth in a unique way.
I believe Marcion was troubled by this and created a Gospel that was harmonious and blended all of them. This was condemned by the Church.

I am only making the point that different ways of saying the same thing does not in any way preclude all from being reliable for teaching. If that were so, it would seem impossible that all four Gospels belong to Holy Scriptures, but as it is that is not the case.

Both are reliable, but the CCC has the advantage that it is more recent (and therefore takes more recent circumstances into account) and that it has been approved by the Pope himself. Having said that, the principles of faith taught in the Baltimore Catechism are correct and some people find the format more approachable, I guess you would say. There is nothing wrong with that, provided a person realizes that there might be circumstances to take into account that were not known when Baltimore was written and approved.

Were a new edition of Baltimore to be published today, however, the current Archbishop of New York, Timothy Cardinal Dolan, would undoubtedly direct that the passage referring to the death penalty be updated to reflect a contemporary understanding of the considerations surrounding the death penalty.

Closing the Loophole on Capital Punishment - Archdiocese of New York

by Cardinal Timothy Dolan Closing the Loophole on Capital Punishment […]

archny.org

Those often identified as “conservative” are dependably protective of the life of the baby in the womb, thank God, but some are soft on defending the life of a criminal on death row; while those termed “liberal” usually protest the death penalty, thank God, but allow abortion…
…One can now hope that Catholics who point to their faith-formed conscience as the reason for their abhorrence of abortion, will do the same with the death penalty; and that Catholic leaders who point to Pope Francis as an inspiration for their opposition to the death penalty (like our governor) will likewise listen and oppose capital punishment for the baby in the womb.…
…A fifth and final remark: this teaching of the Holy Father will be criticized and rejected by some, even by Catholics. But this is hardly new. Earlier I mentioned Humanae Vitae, for which soon-to-be Saint Paul VI was widely and viciously scorned. Neither Pope Paul nor Pope Francis bases Catholic teaching on popular acceptance or opinion polls. Many, even among Catholics, disagree with the Church’s teaching on marriage, sexual morality, for instance, or the just treatment of immigrants. But, we keep at it. We do not consult marketing firms, but the truth of God’s Revelation, as protected and passed on by His Church. It may not be popular; it sure is reliable…and true.

 

[Nikolaite]

Nikolaite:

The CCC lists sources precisely because the CCC is NOT the authority.

Suffice it to say we all know the CCC never cited the Baltimore Catechism as an authoritative source.

Your response has nothing to do with what I wrote.

Nikolaite:

Again, the equal ranking in “authority”, i.e., both catechisms being wholly without authority, a third authoritative source is required to settle a contradiction.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved 25 June last and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, is a statement of the Church’s faith and of Catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, Apostolic Tradition and the Church’s Magisterium. I declare it to be a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion and a sure norm for teaching the faith. May it serve the renewal to which the Holy Spirit ceaselessly calls the Church of God, the Body of Christ, on her pilgrimage to the undiminished light of the kingdom!…

This catechism is not intended to replace the local catechisms duly approved by the ecclesiastical authorities, the diocesan Bishops and the Episcopal Conferences, especially if they have been approved by the Apostolic See. It is meant to encourage and assist in the writing of new local catechisms, which must take into account various situations and cultures, while carefully preserving the unity of faith and fidelity to Catholic doctrine.
Fidei Depositum, Pope St. John Paul II, 1992

The Baltimore Catechism was never approved by the Apostolic See, however.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in contrast, was declared by the Pope to be “a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion and a sure norm for teaching the faith.”

Your quote from Fidei Depositum (re: the first edition of the CCC) and your conclusion here supports my proposition. The CCC is not an authoritative text. Define your terms.

 

[Nikolaite]

Iustinus1:

The fact that it can change means it is not infallible.

That would imply that the Gospels contradict each other, since they are four documents with similar purpose that were written not only in different styles but each with a different emphasis.

That escalated quickly.

With all due respect there is no contradiction in the sacred scriptures and has been no change therein, so how in the world would your comment logically follow Iustinus1’s comment?

 

[catholic03]

Yes. Just called “The Companion to the Catechism of the Catholic Church”.

Very creative!

 

[PetraG]

That escalated quickly.

With all due respect there is no contradiction in the sacred scriptures and has been no change therein, so how in the world would your comment logically follow Iustinus1’s comment?

I’m saying there is no contradiction between the Baltimore and the CCC.

 

[CatholicELATeacher]

I’ll use this in my 7th grade Religion class.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[CatholicELATeacher]

I may also use this:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

And if somebody doesn’t like it I say that’s just tough, Skippy!

 

[Nikolaite]

I’m saying there is no contradiction between the Baltimore and the CCC.

You need no more than look down at your previous quote (which I quoted yet once before) to observe that it contains no reference to any catechism, but only to sacred scripture.
vvvv----------------vvvv____________________________________________________________vvvv-----------------vvvv

That would imply that the Gospels contradict each other, since they are four documents with similar purpose that were written not only in different styles but each with a different emphasis.

Simply because two texts are not infallible and can be changed, does not imply that some other text (which is in fact inerrant) contradicts itself in its distinct accounts of the same person’s life.

 

[dochawk]

Where can I find the infallible statement on the position on the death penalty

Not “where”, but “when, if ever”. And in that case, the answer, if any, is “in the future.”

That is why I am curious, if the CCC and the Baltimore Catechism are both fallible, changeable documents, where is the true teaching?

Not everything is infallibly defined, nor would that be a good thing . . .

 

[otjm]

My problem is that times change therefor teaching changes. That can lead to the church to a bad path.

Well, Christ assured us that the Holy Spirit will guide the Church in all truth.

So if teachings change because times change (e.g. incarceration is far more reliable not than, say, 50 years ago, which was more reliable than, say, 150 years before that) are you suggesting that the Holy Spirit has been napping? Or has abandoned the Church to its own devices? Or is it that you just prefer your opinion to that of the Pope?

Or would it be better said that teachings don’t “change”, but rather evolve as situations change and the Church spends more time reflecting on the Sacred Scripture and Tradition?

 

[DrawNearToGod]

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.

Im new… what then is “Tradition” and where is it “written”?

 

[otjm]

Shades of Gladys Knight: “Now let’s get right on down to the nitty gritty”.