Why don't we use the Baltimore Catechism anymore?

[Seeker1961]

(referring to boldface, mine, above)–Anytime someone has to do work on their own to learn something, they will truly learn it and it will be established deeply within their minds and souls. Babies are spoon-fed, mature people are able to feed themselves.

True, however-the whole point is that the majority of Catholics in the pews on any given weekend are NOT mature in their faith. For most of them, religious education stopped at Confirmation, and even that religious education may not have given them the foundation that would allow them to “feed themselves”

The worst problem to have is to not know what you don’t know, and I really think that a lot of Catholics who are still attending Mass and even more who have fallen away are in that place. They are ignorant of what they’re doing when they go to Mass and what they’re missing when they don’t.

I stayed away for 5 years and I KNEW what I was missing and what I had given up. However, I met a great many “recovering” Catholics during that time that had no idea what they had left. When we talked about the Church, they were surprised to hear some of the things I told them about the importance of the Bible in Liturgy and about the place of Mary and the Saints. Catholics raised and educated in the Church had the same prejudices about the faith as Protestants who had never set foot in a Catholic church.

 

[TrueLight]

I did not know this… This would explain a lot about the “Catholic” guilt my parents and grandparents used on us. I do think a little Catholic guilt is good.

What is being called Catholic guilt here is the Catholicism the Saints were raised on.

St Paul says we shooul work out our salvation in fear and trembling.

 

[ConstantineTG]

What is being called Catholic guilt here is the Catholicism the Saints were raised on.

St Paul says we shooul work out our salvation in fear and trembling.

I do not think that is what St. Paul meant. This guilting is a byproduct of legalism which didn’t exist in the early Church.

 

[Madaglan]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church promulgated by Pope John Paul II has become the standard catechism in many schools. While officially the catechism is not meant to replace the local catechisms, it does include quotations and footnotes from 20th century popes and from Vatican II, which makes it appear more contemporary than many traditional catechisms. The language too reflects a more contemporary approach.

 

[buffalo]

The new YOUCAT Rocks!! I can even read it to my 6 year old. I read the 900 plus page catechism and boy its a tough one to get thru!!

Yes, the big catechism is pretty deep, beyond an el ed child.

JESUS, THE CATECHISM, AND ME
by Rev. Robert J. Levis, Ph.D. A brief companion to the Catechism of the Catholic Church and a local catechism fully approved by ecclesiastic authorities. This book is most helpful to students in upper grade school, high school students and candidates for Confirmation. With precise question-and-answer format, this book is concise and easy to use. Paperback. 134 pages.

 

[OraLabora]

What is being called Catholic guilt here is the Catholicism the Saints were raised on.

Not necessarily. Reading the Patristic and Hagiographic readings that go back to nearly the very beginnings of the Church, I can say that the approach of the saints and early Church fathers was not always negative and based on fear but also often positive and based on love, especially love of God. If we teach adherence to God’s law based on love and desire to please God, we foster perfect contrition when we do mess up as we invariably will. If we place too much focus on simply fear of hell, we will foster imperfect contrition. While imperfect contrition is still valid, perfect contrition leads to a more complete communion with God. The saint’s writings seem to me very heavy on a burning love of God, more so than a burning fear of hell.

Over the centuries there have been movements and currents in the Church that have ebbed and flowed. Jansenism for example, and Lacouturism, greatly influenced the Quebec church, the latter from the 30s onwards. Both were heavy on attaining perfection and light on giving us confidence and hope in God’s mercy. The latter also migrated to the US.

St Paul says we shooul work out our salvation in fear and trembling.

Yes but St. Paul also taught about hope, charity, God’s love, loving God, faith, and the certainty of God’s Grace. Too much focus on the fear and guilt part without equal teaching about love, charity, mercy, grace, etc. isn’t healthy. We really can’t take just one element out context. St. Paul’s writings are fairly complex and need to be viewed in light of the communities to which they are addressed, communities that were in varying degrees of communion at the time.

 

[TimothyH]

I do not think that is what St. Paul meant. This guilting is a byproduct of legalism which didn’t exist in the early Church.

God is supposed to be a father. We are supposed to follow him in freedom, out of love, not out of fear and guilt.

There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear because fear has to do with punishment, and so one who fears is not yet perfect in love. (1 John 4:18)

There may be some guilt when we are yet immature as Christians, and this is probably better understood as holy remorse for our sins, like David in Psalm 51. As we mature however, we are supposed to move toward perfect love. Guilt plays no part here.

People didn’t willingly accept martyrdom because of guilt, but because of complete trust in God whom they loved as a father.

-Tim-

 

[OraLabora]

People didn’t willingly accept martyrdom because of guilt, but because of complete trust in God whom they loved as a father.

-Tim-

 

[OraLabora]

I would add: I think this guilt, legalism and excessive emphasis on sin, hell, and our depravity might have contributed to us throwing out the baby with the bathwater in the 60s; for those who did stay in the Church, excessive liberalism and rebelliousness after Vatican II, and for those who left… well we can see the results in the secular world today.

In the end, that “good old fashioned religion” may just be what people ran away from, and it was thus a contributor to our decline (at least in the Western world).

Trust in and love for God and trust in His love for us, I think are essential to our true inner conversion. They give our faith deep roots. Legalism and guilt simply results in a superficial faith. At least that’s what I found in my case, however I know I’m not alone!

 

[FloridaJoan]

I have heard that before, but I have never really understood how you could know the facts but not know how to apply them. We studied theology on a deeper level in high school but without the foundational facts, I don’t think I would have understood the deeper theology. I know some of the kids from schools that didn’t use the BC had a tougher time.

It’s kind of like the times tables. You can do algebra without having memorized the times tables, but knowing them makes it a whole lot easier.

hello Seeker1961:

I am a cradle Catholic and studied the Baltimore Catechism all through school. I remember most vivdly learning and discussing the BC ideas involved in our religion classes. We had wonderful , loving nuns who helped us to form our consciences. I’m most happy that I had those experiences because I’ve read about many modern religion classes that don’t even touch upon sin, or hell. I also remember many hours spent at school Masses and even Adoration. I consider myself truly blessed to have had such careful instruction in our Faith. I’m certain that my early religious ed helped much in my appreciation and love of our wonderful Faith and Mother Church.

 

[buffalo]

I would add: I think this guilt, legalism and excessive emphasis on sin, hell, and our depravity might have contributed to us throwing out the baby with the bathwater in the 60s; for those who did stay in the Church, excessive liberalism and rebelliousness after Vatican II, and for those who left… well we can see the results in the secular world today.

In the end, that “good old fashioned religion” may just be what people ran away from, and it was thus a contributor to our decline (at least in the Western world).

Trust in and love for God and trust in His love for us, I think are essential to our true inner conversion. They give our faith deep roots. Legalism and guilt simply results in a superficial faith. At least that’s what I found in my case, however I know I’m not alone!

The faith journey goes through stages. When you are training a baby you cannot reason the stove is hot. You teach him it is dangerous and will hurt him. Over time the reasoning takes effect.

The BC is a good tool for early faith formation.

 

[OraLabora]

The BC is a good tool for early faith formation.

I don’t agree that “one size fits all”. It didn’t work for me (well, we had a French equivalent in Quebec based on rote learning). It may work for some, it may work better with some teachers than others.

In my case it really turned me off religion and I ran from the Church as quickly as I could as soon as I was old enough (17) that my mother could no longer force me to go.

But I do agree with you that faith goes through stages.

 

[JillianRose]

I do not think that is what St. Paul meant. This guilting is a byproduct of legalism which didn’t exist in the early Church.

HELL being real is enough for me!! lol

 

[buffalo]

I don’t agree that “one size fits all”. It didn’t work for me (well, we had a French equivalent in Quebec based on rote learning). It may work for some, it may work better with some teachers than others.

In my case it really turned me off religion and I ran from the Church as quickly as I could as soon as I was old enough (17) that my mother could no longer force me to go.

But I do agree with you that faith goes through stages.

You were still learning from the BC at 17?

 

[TrueLight]

I did not know this… This would explain a lot about the “Catholic” guilt my parents and grandparents used on us. I do think a little Catholic guilt is good.

I do not think that is what St. Paul meant. This guilting is a byproduct of legalism which didn’t exist in the early Church.

From the early church sin, especially mortal sin, was taken very seriously.

Now if guilting means encouraging someone to have a healthy respect for God’s holiness and a fear of mortal sin, the early fathers preached this very message. We should feel bad when we commit sin we should hurry to repent.

Anyway regarding the BC, IMHOI see it as an effective tool to learn the basics of the faith. Along with that should come catechisis using church documents, the CCC and the Bible.

 

[OraLabora]

You were still learning from the BC at 17?

No. We didn’t use the BC catechism, but a French sort of equivalent.

By the time I was 17 I had long stopped paying attention to religion and anything that was taught in Catechism class. I went to a public high school, there were no religion classes at all from age 13 onwards.

 

[clem456]

I would add: I think this guilt, legalism and excessive emphasis on sin, hell, and our depravity might have contributed to us throwing out the baby with the bathwater in the 60s; for those who did stay in the Church, excessive liberalism and rebelliousness after Vatican II, and for those who left… well we can see the results in the secular world today.

In the end, that “good old fashioned religion” may just be what people ran away from, and it was thus a contributor to our decline (at least in the Western world).

Trust in and love for God and trust in His love for us, I think are essential to our true inner conversion. They give our faith deep roots. Legalism and guilt simply results in a superficial faith. At least that’s what I found in my case, however I know I’m not alone!

Bingo. God gives us an innate capacity and desire for knowing him. If the presentation of Church teaching only scratches the surface of the intellect people will surely look elsewhere for a fuller presentation of the truth. This doesn’t excuse anyone from pursuing the truth in the Church, but we as Catholics also have an obligation to present the fullness of it, to the best of our ability. Memorization of doctrine is important, but just the beginning.

 

[OraLabora]

Now if guilting means encouraging someone to have a healthy respect for God’s holiness and a fear of mortal sin, the early fathers preached this very message. We should feel bad when we commit sin we should hurry to repent.

Indeed we should avoid sin. But the Saints did not always teach with fear and guilt. As evidence I offer today’s second reading from the Office of Readings, for the memorial of St. Alphonsus of Liguori:

Second reading
From a sermon by Saint Alphonsus Liguori, bishop
On the love of Christ

All holiness and perfection of soul lies in our love for Jesus Christ our God, who is our Redeemer and our supreme good. It is part of the love of God to acquire and to nurture all the virtues which make a man perfect.

Has not God in fact won for himself a claim on all our love? From all eternity he has loved us. And it is in this vein that he speaks to us: “O man, consider carefully that I first loved you. You had not yet appeared in the light of day, nor did the world yet exist, but already I loved you. From all eternity I have loved you.”

Since God knew that man is enticed by favors, he wished to bind him to his love by means of his gifts: “I want to catch men with the snares, those chains of love in which they allow themselves to be entrapped, so that they will love me.” And all the gifts which he bestowed on man were given to this end. He gave him a soul, made in his likeness, and endowed with memory, intellect and will; he gave him a body equipped with the senses; it was for him that he created heaven and earth and such an abundance of things. He made all these things out of love for man, so that all creation might serve man, and man in turn might love God out of gratitude for so many gifts.

But he did not wish to give us only beautiful creatures; the truth is that to win for himself our love, he went so far as to bestow upon us the fullness of himself. The eternal Father went so far as to give us his only Son. When he saw that we were all dead through sin and deprived of his grace, what did he do? Compelled, as the Apostle says, by the superabundance of his love for us, he sent his beloved Son to make reparation for us and to call us back to a sinless life.

By giving us his Son, whom he did not spare precisely so that he might spare us, he bestowed on us at once every good: grace, love and heaven; for all these goods are certainly inferior to the Son: He who did not spare his own Son, but handed him over for all of us: how could he fail to give us along with his Son all good things?

Notice how he says God tries to ensnare us with His gifts… not with fear of damnation.

This happens more often than we might imagine in the patristic and hagiographic texts.

 

[kevthecath]

Not sure if this is the right place for this question so moderator please move if so warranted.

Why did schools stop using the Baltimore Catechism? My school was very traditional and we used it well into the 1970’s even though others in the diocese were changing to other religion texts. Our Pastor felt “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” so he just let it remain. It wasn’t until he left that the school changed texts, and I was in HS.

I know that my religious education was FAR superior to that of my friends in other schools and others my age. I also feel it was superior to what the children are getting now.

I dont recommend Traditional Catholics use the Baltimore Catechism, it contains errors contrary to the Faith.

 

[Seeker1961]

I dont recommend Traditional Catholics use the Baltimore Catechism, it contains errors contrary to the Faith.

That’s interesting-can you elaborate?