Posted on 10/11/2017 2:12:10 PM PDT by iowamark
The Catechism, published 25 years ago today, is no dry-as-dust manual - as I discovered when wrestling with its contents
I have never argued more with a book than the one that sits before me now. When I open my dog-eared copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, I see page after page covered in pencil marks. The comments, written almost 20 years ago, read like those of a stranger: someone trying to argue his way out of becoming a Catholic.
As I flick through the book, with its yellowed and broken spine, I see expressions of bafflement and even outrage. I dismissed one section (83) as “Essentialised tradition”. Next to another (107) I simply wrote “difficulties”. But as the pages turn, there are fewer objections.
I remember marvelling at the Catechism’s elegant structure: its four parts – the Profession of Faith, the Celebration of the Christian Mystery, Life in Christ and Christian Prayer – serving as a firm foundation for the soaring tower of Catholic teaching.
I was impressed that the book not only explained what Catholics believe, but also how to be a Catholic. I had expected it to be a dry-as-dust manual, but it had such zeal and beauty that my objections to Catholicism collapsed one by one, until none remained.
It was only later that I discovered how controversial the Catechism had been within the Catholic Church. As Cardinal Christoph Schönborn explains in an interview marking the book’s 25th anniversary, there were “violent discussions” over whether a universal Catechism was desirable or even possible.
“The main argument of the opponents of this project,” he recalls, “was: it is impossible to create a book of faith for the entire world – a Catechism for the whole world Church – today, in the face of the pluralism of cultures, theologies and narratives. This was the most massive counter-argument against the project.
“I think Cardinal Ratzinger took this challenge very seriously. It was ultimately a question of a fundamental theological opinion: can faith today be formulated as one faith in a common form?”
I am so grateful that Cardinal Schönborn, Cardinal Ratzinger and their colleagues persisted. If they hadn’t, it’s quite possible I wouldn’t be a Catholic today.
I am interested in churches, so if a friend mentions that he or she goes to a particular church, I sometimes look at the website. Nondenominational churches, in particular, often have “Statements of Faith,” but they raise more questions than they answer.
“What do you mean by *this”?” “Is *this* different from *that*, or is it some other thing?”
Especially in the modern age, with the technology we have available, it seems like every church should be able to provide some sort of decision-tree model: A or not A. A or B. B or not B. And so on, so interested parties can figure out what *exactly* is going on.
No, I don’t need to read more closely. The footnotes in JPII’s Catechism include many footnotes from the documents of the Vatican II Council. Hence, my mention of the Vatican II Council.
“No, I don’t need to read more closely.”
Yes, you do.
“The footnotes in JPII’s Catechism include many footnotes from the documents of the Vatican II Council.”
And Trent. And Vatican I. And Scripture. And the Roman Catechism.
“Hence, my mention of the Vatican II Council.”
You didn’t just mention it. It was THE thing you were talking about even though the issue was the CATECHISM and not Vatican II.
Vatican II is what makes JPII’s Catechism different than the other catechisms wrt its footnotes. None of the other catechisms have content nor footnotes that reference documents from Vatican II.
“None of the other catechisms have content nor footnotes that reference documents from Vatican II.”
None of the other catechisms? There was only one other universal catechism - and it was published in the late 16th century. There are other catechisms (national, or personal works approved by the Church) that “have content [and] footnotes that reference documents from Vatican II.” These include the United States Catholic Catechism for Adults, The Teaching of Christ, Catechism of the Catholic Church - Simplified Version, The Essential Catholic Catechism, and a number of others.
My original point is that the JPII Catechism includes teachings from Vatican II whether we are referring to its content or its footnotes. Here is my first post #7 in this thread (which was the basis of all of my other posts in this thread):
I once felt the same way....until I learned that the JPII Catechism is not the same as previous Catholic Catechisms such as the Baltimore or Pius X’s Catechisms.
JPII’s “New” Catechism (as with JPII’s “New” Code of Canon Law) bases its theology on Vatican II, not on the Catholic Faith prior to Vatican II.
I hope that clears things up.
“You are correct that there have been other catechisms issued post-Vatican II.”
There were other catechism issued BEFORE Vatican II. You keep missing the point.
“However, when I referred to “the other catechisms” I was referring to the “other catechisms” I mentioned in post #7. I am not concerned with other post-Vatican II catechisms for the purpose of this thread given the OP is specifically about JPII’s Catechism.”
But the point is the CCC is replete with citations of Trent, the Roman Catechism, and Vatican I. As should be expected.
“My original point is that the JPII Catechism includes teachings from Vatican II whether we are referring to its content or its footnotes.”
My original comment was about how you replaced the CCC with Vatican II. You had written to Mrs. Don-O: “Well, if you believe Vatican II is “traditional”, then there’s really nothing I could say to convince you otherwise.”
“JPII’s “New” Catechism (as with JPII’s “New” Code of Canon Law) bases its theology on Vatican II, not on the Catholic Faith prior to Vatican II.”
You’re not being accurate here. The CCC incorporates Vatican II, but it most certainly does not ignore previous catechisms or councils or scripture. It, in fact, cites them heavily.
“I hope that clears things up.”
No. The CCC is not Vatican II. The Roman Catechism was not Trent. Vatican II did not ignore Trent or the Roman Catechism. The CCC does not ignore Vatican I or Trent or the Roman Catechism.
This isn’t hard. Just be accurate. Try it.
bttt
In fact, just as with JPII's 1983 Code of Canon Law, Vatican II was a major reason for its promulgation. Among other references to Vatican II, JPII himself wrote in his Apostolic Constitution, Fidei Depositum written on the 30th anniversary of the opening of the Second Vatican Council:
Following the renewal of the Liturgy and the new codification of the canon law of the Latin Church and that of the Oriental Catholic Churches, this catechism will make a very important contribution to that work of renewing the whole life of the Church, as desired and begun by the Second Vatican Council.
Vatican II is the difference and therefore if one believes that Vatican II teachings are in accordance with Tradition, then they also believe that the JPII Catechism is in accordance with Tradition... which is exactly what I meant in my post to Mrs. Don-o (who I have pinged per the rules)
This post is clear and accurate and as such, I have no need nor desire to further this back-and-forth with you.
Have a good weekend.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.