Skip to comments.USCCB New Version of Catholic Catechism
Posted on 11/23/2004 4:56:01 PM PST by thor76
Amchurch Bishops Come up with Another Phony Catechism From: Fr. Moderator
Donald Wuerl, Newchurch Bishop of Pittsburgh Theological Bojanles Writes Amchurch "Catechism" Newvatican Previously Found Him So Ignorant of Canon Law That He Was Sent back to Remediation School
If you thought that the New Order would stop after its Vatican II Catechism of the Catholic Church in 1992 (well, that was the year of its first version at least), were you wrong!
Although the Novus Ordinarians quote that travesty as if it were Holy Writ, the Vatican II catechism is so full of mistakes and "nuancing" of true Catholic doctrine that it should be thrown into the fireplace, where it will have some use. And why wouldn't it be defective? The bishops and cardinals on the writing committee admitted that they were incompetent to read the seminal documents of the Faith in their original languages. How can any book pretend to be a catechism when the Newchurch officials can't even read the text of St. Augustine, St. Ambrose, St. Gregory the Great, St. Anselm, St. Albertus Magnus, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Bonaventure, St. Alphonus, and so many others?
Theologians have pointed to numerous errors in the Vatican II catechism, some committed from ignorance, some obviously deliberate to be "politically correct." The common teaching of the Fathers on limbo is entirely omitted. The section on capital punishment underwent several revisions until it could satisfy the liberalist types and contradict the constant teaching of the Catholic and Apostolic Church. The section on marriage contracts previous teaching. And on and on it goes. (If you, in ignorance at the time, bought a copy, it is not too late to ditch it and get the Roman Catechism written by St. Charles Borromeo after the Council of Trent, a brilliant and eminently readable work that expounds Scripture, Tradition, doctrine, and practice for all of the Church's essential teachings.)
After the first "version" of the catechism was floated, Newvatican gauged its popular reception and then issued a second "version" with several significant changes in the doctrine. Apparently, Newchurch doctrine can be changed by popular demand! This situation is reminiscent of what happened with the "New Mass," which, when first issued in 1969, contained an explicitly heretical definition of the Mass. When this egregious error was pointed out, a red-faced Paul VI recalled the original text and had it patched up a little. Nevertheless, it still remains heretical.
Now it seems that the Newchurch bishops of the United States have fabricated a "national adult catechism in the hope of reaching young adults who have left" Newchurch. Don't hold your breath, you Newchurch bishops. Another phony catechism isn't going to bring them back. Only the authentic Roman Catholic Mass, Sacraments, doctrine, and morality will do that, and you are light-years distant from that!
And guess who was chairman of the Amchurch editorial board. Why, it was the same Donald Wuerl, of Pittsburgh, who was found so ignorant of canon law that Newvatican issued a stern reprimand against him and directed that he return to school!
Nor is this Amcatechism a serious work. Unlike the Roman Catechism, the Baltimore Catechism, or even the Vatican II catechism, it doesn't lay out and explain the teachings of the Church in a serious exposition. No, each of its 36 chapters opens with a story, purportedly of model Novus Ordinarians, including:
Dorothy Day, leader of a communistic worker movement Joseph Bernardin, Modernist archbishop of Chicago, a vocal proponent of a "gay-friendly" Church, whom Donald Wuerl publicly described as his "role model" -- go figure! Cesar Chavez, another socialistic agitator Thomas Merton, the Buddhist-Trappist, who died in 1968 of electrocution in a bathtub while participating at an "oecumenical conference" with Buddhists in the Orient These choices were too much even for ten of the Ambishops, who voted nay! on the catechism and got Merton pulled out of the final text.
The Newchurch bishops recognized that American Novus Ordinarians are now so ignorant of their cult these days that they cannot hand real doctrine. So a dumbed-down, "Americanized" version had to be concocted. And, of course, the Amcatechism had to be politically correct. Against the dictates of even the Newvatican, the Amerbishops insisted upon using "gender-inclusive language." Is the New Order she-god far away?
Best thing is to just stick with the Baltimore Catechism. No heresy or liberal, modernist, sodomite-coddling "nuancing" there.
Do they plan to use this dreck in ALL the RCIA classes?
My traditional priest recommends DeHarb's Catechism.
Have you heard of it? I haven't found it yet so I'm wondering if it is still in print.
On the contrary, it will be very useful.
When was "Fr. Moderator" ordained? Or is he ordained?
Perhaps Fr. Moderator would like to produce evidence that Wuerl had to "go back to school." Nobody who knows him is aware of that.
How do you know it's "dreck?" You haven't read it.
And, yes, most parishes will use it for RCIA.
I just ignore the USCCB like faithful Roman Catholics should. It is not part of the magesterium, just a collection of 60s and 70s era wreckage.
I would have never really thought of this aspect of it, due to my own ignorance, but it's huge. My goodness what a gift it is to have a Pastor aware of what he needs to make his sheep aware of.
This is going to only continue to deteriorate though, because I can't imagine the Church is going to produce enough language scholars to be able to read these works in their original language. Or is that something that is being concentrated on in some of the more conservative or better seminaries?
Wonder what they're teaching prospective Priests at Ave Maria. The Dean at that School (Florida location), as Pio said, has got it going on, big time and major league.
My parish, that is not a TLM parish, will still use the CCC for its RCIA(in reality its adult Cathechisis taught by a priest), not any USCCB trash.
Anything that includes Dorothy Day and Caesar Chavez and holds them up as role models is "dreck."
I know you teach RCIA classes, Sinkspur, and I don't know what goes on at your parish, but I had the unfortunate experience of sitting through a class at my own parish.
It was full of feminist psychobabble, hand waving and swayin' to the tinkly new age music (I believe it was Vangelis).
Then we got to hear one of the nuns tell us how awful we Americans all are because we "use up" so much stuff and "don't share it with humanity."
Dreck, I tell you, and this appears to be more of the same.
Caesar Chavez, indeed!
An excerpt from a Wanderer editorial that expresses the sentiment well:
"Now, this is not going to make the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops go away, mores the pity. Each year, November will still come, and nature will start to die; the days will grow cold, and short, and dark, leaves will fall off trees, bushes will shrivel, the ground grow hard, birds will fly to more hospitable climes, the winds blow cold and sharp, and we will know that the bishops are gathering for their annual November meeting. This is the way it is, my friendsthe cross is the gift God gives to His friends, as the Cure of Ars once said. If you prefer W.C. Fields, I believe it was he who said, Thats the way the cookie crumbles." Let them meet, let them deliberate, let them publish position papers on whatever they care to, enlighten the western world on the economy, and peace, and racism, and add another twelve volumes to the Lectionary, and eliminate more holy days, and solemnly authorize us to high-five each other at the sign of peace. Whatever they choose to do is so utterly beside the point that our best refuge from the anger they might provoke within us is hilarity at such idiocy. I did not decree their irrelevance; they did. It was not our decision that they would do absolutely nothing, over two generations, to address the problems afflicting our beloved Church. Let them do whatever they choose to do; it wont matter in the least. But while they are gathered in solemn session, deliberating on whether to permit priests to wear blue vestments for advent, or merely to authorize us to wear the bluer hues of purple for advent while saving the violet-er hues of purple for Lent, lets you and I get on with itthe wonderful privilege of living our Catholic Faith."
http://bettnet.dyndns.org/blog/weblog.php Domenico Bettinelli, Jr. Blog
"Let them do whatever they choose to do; it wont matter in the least."
Misleading thousands of unsuspecting souls - and wasting good people's hard-earned contributions - does matter.
You're really perceptive. Lets go eat some salad and drink some Fruitopia.
Fruitopia Fused Fruit Drinks are a free-spirited, eclectic mix of fruit juices and other intriguing flavors.
look it up. I withdraw my previous statement for the sake of making everything easy on me. I have to sleep.
Thanks. I had no idea.