CCC, Roman Catechism, Small Catechism, Baltimore Catechism

[Meepy]

What are the difference between all 3? I notice on some footnotes of the CCC it lists the Roman Catechism. Also how does the Baltimore edition compare? I've already finished reading the whole CCC. It seems the Baltimore one is deeper because it is broken into 4 books in many editions

 

[ChristoEtEcclesiae]

The Baltimore Catechism is the one that tends to be recommended all the time, since it's more like a teaching guide and less like a reference.

"This is the Faith" by Canon Francis Ripley is probably your best bet.

 

[benedictaoo]

The dates when they were published.

A CCD teacher let me know that they do not use the Baltimore catechism any longer to teach children with... and I was like, well I'll still use it at home becuase it is a very good instruction manual for children I find.

But the language may be updated a bit that would nuance the teachings a little bit better but the teaching itself never changes, so nothing is really different.

 

[Servus Christi]

The Catechism Explained: An Exhaustive Explanation of the Catholic Religion is without a doubt the best catechism I have ever come across. It's out of date in some areas (indulgences attached to specific devotions &c.) but it is one hundred percent solid where it matters.

Anyway, to address your question the Roman Catechism is the Catechism of the Council of Trent which was published in 1566. I generally consider is to be a superior catechism to the current Catechism of the Catholic Church but the CCC does have a few gems in it that the Roman Catechism doesn't due to the different periods we are in.

The Baltimore Catechism is a good tool for children and teenagers and I my self still enjoy a look to it. But it's only really good for the basics.

 

[_Shannon_]

The Roman Catechism is referrring to the Catechism of the Council of Trent. The Baltimore Catechism was a teaching version of that Catechism (which I still use and love, love, love!). The CCC is an updated and the currently authoritative Catechism of the universal Church. The Compendium --is a teaching version of that new Catechism.

 

[QuantaCura]

The Roman Catechism was published after the Council of Trent and was designed primarily as a guide to aid priests in preaching about the faith. It's a good summary and explanation of the basics of the faith.

The Baltimore Catechism was a Catechism produced by the bishops of the USA. The different books are geared to different age groups and are in question and answer format.

I'm not sure what the "Small Catchism" is, but it sounds like it might be like the Penny Catechism or the Catechism of St. Pius X which are very basic question and answer guides.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is by far the most extensive and provides copious citations to primary sources, etc. In some ways it's almost like some of the old theology manuals in its expansiveness and coverage of topics at a variety of theological levels. This expansiveness has it's pluses and minuses, which is why a Compendium was also published (which itself is pretty big!).

Different Catechisms have different strengths and weaknesses, but one shouldn't be seen to invalidate others--thus the citations of the Roman Catechism in the CCC. The current Pope, for example, also had this to say about the Catechism of St. Pius X when discussion the publication of the Compendium to the CCC:

The faith as such is always the same. Hence the Catechism of Saint Pius X always preserves its value. Whereas ways of transmitting the contents of the faith can change instead. And hence one may wonder whether the Catechism of Saint Pius X can in that sense still be considered valid today. I believe the Compendium we’re preparing can respond better to the needs of today. But that doesn’t exclude that there may be people or groups of persons who feel more at ease with the Catechism of Saint Pius X. One shouldn’t forget that that Catechism derived from a text that had been prepared by the Pope himself while he was bishop of Mantua. The text was the fruit of the personal catechistic experience of Giuseppe Sarto and was characterized by simplicity of exposition and depth of content. That is also a reason why the Catechism of Saint Pius X may still find friends in the future.

30Days - The catechism in a post-Christian world

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The Baltimore Catechism is a good way to learn the basic teachings of the Catholic Church.

If you want to learn about these teachings, you need the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

When I was in Catholic School back in the 1950's we memorised the Baltimore Catechism. It was a time of black and white acceptance of everything.

However, as Catholics began to question things, in a desire to have better understanding, a new Catechism had to be published for general use among lay Catholics.


Jim

 

[gloryseven]

I was a Catholic homeschool mom for five years. I taught Our Lady of the Rosary Homeschool and used the Baltimore Catechism for basics for K-4

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

The Protestants were the first to introduce the catechism as we know it today. One example of this is Martin Luther's "Small Catechism" and "Large Catechism" -- the "Small Catechism" was aimed at laymen and the "Large Catechism" at Lutheran clergy.

The Catholic Church countered by producing what is known as the "Roman Catechism", or Catechism of the Council of Trent, as the first universal Catholic catechism. It is still a very important and foundational work. It covers less ground than the new CCC but is unassailable and definitive.

There have also been catechisms prepared by local diocese. The most popular of which is the "Baltimore Catechism". It is aimed at schoolchildren and is divided up into four editions covering the same ground but in increasing depth.

Thus the "Baltimore Catechism 1" says:

Q. Why did God make you?
A. God made me to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him for ever in heaven.

It is the same in Baltimore Catechism 2 but 3 adds a greater explanation in the following question:

Q. Why is it necessary to know God?
A. It is necessary to know God because without knowing Him we cannot love Him; and without loving Him we cannot be saved. We should know Him because He is infinitely true; love Him because He is infinitely beautiful; and serve Him because He is infinitely good.

The "Baltimore Catechism 4" or "Teacher's Guide" contains a very long explanation:

Q. Why did God make you?
A. God made me to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him forever in the next.

"To know" Him, because we must know of a thing before we can love it. A poor savage in Africa never longs to be at a game or contest going on in America, because he does not know it and therefore cannot love it. We see a person and know him; if he pleases us we love him, and if we love him we will try to serve him; we will not be satisfied with doing merely what he asks of us, but will do whatever we think might give him pleasure. So it is in regard to God. We must first know Him—learn who He is from our catechisms and books of instruction, but especially from the teaching of God's ministers, the Holy Father, bishops and priests. When we know Him, we shall love Him. If we knew Him perfectly, we should love Him perfectly; so the better we know Him the more we shall love Him. And as it is our chief duty to love Him and serve Him upon earth, it becomes our strict duty to learn here whatever we can of His nature, attributes, and holy laws. The saints and angels in Heaven know God so well that they must love Him, and cannot therefore offend Him.
[...Three more paragraphs follow...]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is the new universal catechism. It was published in 1992 and is very strongly influenced by the documents of Vatican II. There is some controversy surrounding it because of this. It was edited by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) and Abp. Christoph Schönborn of Vienna, Austria. The latter has made a number of controversial statements in support of homosexuality, divorce, contraception and an abandonment of clerical celibacy.

So the "Small Catechism" is a Lutheran catechism and therefore is not appropriate for Catholics, unless of course you are referring to St. Robert Bellarmine's Catechism or another small catechism (e.g. Penny Catechism or Catechism of St. Pius X). The Roman Catechism and the Baltimore Catechism are both very solid and well-accepted -- the Roman Catechism was originally aimed at clergy, particularly pastors, and was written in the 16th century. The Baltimore Catechism is aimed at schoolchildren (though books 3 and 4 are fine for adults as well) and was written in the late 19th and early 20th century (revised several times). The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) is the most recent catechism and covers a lot of ground, however, there is some controversy around it.

 

[Memento Mori]

I want to memorize the Baltimore Catechism some day, like some of you probably did as kids. I might start working on that after my first full read through the Bible. Anyone still have it memorized?

 

[_Shannon_]

I have a lot of it memorized from my kids learning it.

I dunno--I think just reading through it and being familiar with it's contents is sufficient. Knowing where to go when you have a question is great. It is a great starting point, for sure.

 

[Meepy]

The Protestants were the first to introduce the catechism as we know it today. One example of this is Martin Luther's "Small Catechism" and "Large Catechism" -- the "Small Catechism" was aimed at laymen and the "Large Catechism" at Lutheran clergy.

The Catholic Church countered by producing what is known as the "Roman Catechism", or Catechism of the Council of Trent, as the first universal Catholic catechism. It is still a very important and foundational work. It covers less ground than the new CCC but is unassailable and definitive.

There have also been catechisms prepared by local diocese. The most popular of which is the "Baltimore Catechism". It is aimed at schoolchildren and is divided up into four editions covering the same ground but in increasing depth.

Thus the "Baltimore Catechism 1" says:



It is the same in Baltimore Catechism 2 but 3 adds a greater explanation in the following question:



The "Baltimore Catechism 4" or "Teacher's Guide" contains a very long explanation:



The Catechism of the Catholic Church is the new universal catechism. It was published in 1992 and is very strongly influenced by the documents of Vatican II. There is some controversy surrounding it because of this. It was edited by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) and Abp. Christoph Schönborn of Vienna, Austria. The latter has made a number of controversial statements in support of homosexuality, divorce, contraception and an abandonment of clerical celibacy.

So the "Small Catechism" is a Lutheran catechism and therefore is not appropriate for Catholics, unless of course you are referring to St. Robert Bellarmine's Catechism or another small catechism (e.g. Penny Catechism or Catechism of St. Pius X). The Roman Catechism and the Baltimore Catechism are both very solid and well-accepted -- the Roman Catechism was originally aimed at clergy, particularly pastors, and was written in the 16th century. The Baltimore Catechism is aimed at schoolchildren (though books 3 and 4 are fine for adults as well) and was written in the late 19th and early 20th century (revised several times). The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) is the most recent catechism and covers a lot of ground, however, there is some controversy around it.

Yea I think the biggest thing in the CCC is the including of Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate. It can be controversial. Homosexuality and BC was condemned. Which Catechism is the most systematic do you think and the most deepest? I haven't read the Compendium, but I have been told that it is like a Catechism for the Catechism. The small catachism is not the Lutheran one, it was definitely a Catholic one, I think from Bellarmine. Also I notice on the footnotes it says things like "CF" "DV", "DS", "LG" "GS" and "ibid". Are these books??

 

[MoreCoffee]

The Protestants were the first to introduce the catechism as we know it today. One example of this is Martin Luther's "Small Catechism" and "Large Catechism" -- the "Small Catechism" was aimed at laymen and the "Large Catechism" at Lutheran clergy.

Didn't Saint Augustine have a "handbook of the Christian faith" which is a catechism. And St Athanasius also had one. I am fairly sure that Catechising candidates for baptism was an ancient practise. Luther was much later, and, sadly a heretic.

 

[AMDG]

A CCD teacher let me know that they do not use the Baltimore catechism any longer to teach children with... and I was like, well I'll still use it at home becuase it is a very good instruction manual for children I find.

Most homeschoolers and even one parish around me also still use the Baltimore Catechism. IMO it's a lot better than most of the present day books they use at CCD.

Still have all my copies (and yes I still remember most) and the local Catholic bookstore still sells Baltimore Catechisms, so I know that they are not out-of-print. (Bought the #2 one--there's a #1 or the younger grades, a #2 for those a little older and for Confirmation, and one for adults #3--for my granddaughter not too long ago.)

 

[Meepy]

Didn't Saint Augustine have a "handbook of the Christian faith" which is a catechism. And St Athanasius also had one. I am fairly sure that Catechising candidates for baptism was an ancient practise. Luther was much later, and, sadly a heretic.

yea, I think St Augustine's one was called the Enchiridion.

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

Also I notice on the footnotes it says things like "CF" "DV", "DS", "LG" "GS" and "ibid". Are these books??

CF -- ??? (CDF? Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?)
DV -- Dei Verbum (Vat. II)
DS -- Denzinger-Schönmetzer (ie. the newest edition of Denzinger's "Sources of Catholic Dogma" which was edited by Adolf Schönmetzer, S.J.)
LG -- Lumen Gentium (Vat. II)
GS -- Gaudium et Spes (Vat. II)
ibid. -- short for ibidem, which is Latin for "in the same place", that is the same as the last referenced work.

Full list of abbreviations used in the CCC footnotes

 

[Meepy]

CF -- ??? (CDF? Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?)
DV -- Dei Verbum (Vat. II)
DS -- Denzinger-Schönmetzer (ie. the newest edition of Denzinger's "Sources of Catholic Dogma" which was edited by Adolf Schönmetzer, S.J.)
LG -- Lumen Gentium (Vat. II)
GS -- Gaudium et Spes (Vat. II)
ibid. -- short for ibidem, which is Latin for "in the same place", that is the same as the last referenced work.

Full list of abbreviations used in the CCC footnotes

ohhh, thank you so much. I wonder if Denzinger's "Sources of Catholic Dogma" is in book form.

 

[Meepy]

I found it!

Amazon.com: The Sources of Catholic Dogma (9781930278226): Henry Denzinger: Books

Looks like a worthy buy for dogmatic instruction. I think this is what Im looking for.

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

Yea I think the biggest thing in the CCC is the including of Lumen Gentium and Nostra Aetate. It can be controversial. Homosexuality and BC was condemned.

I meant more that it is controversial among traditional Catholics.

For example, The New Catechism: Is it Catholic? by Fr. Michel Simoulin, SSPX.

The Semi-Catholic Catechism of the Catholic Church by Craig L. Heimbichner (will attempt to print, just hit 'cancel')

Homosexuality is an interesting topic, as it was revised in the New Catechism:

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,[140] tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."[141] They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

The bolded part was removed in the 1997 revision so that #2358 reads:

The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

The phrase "They do not choose their homosexual condition" was removed, as it is vague and debatable. The whole section here is very much soft-sold. For example, what does it means that homosexuals "must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity" and that "[e]very sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided"? Would that include banning same-sex marriage and sodomy? Should they be allowed to teach children? This paragraph brings up more questions than it answers.

There are many other subtle problems in the New Catechism. It takes a casual tone that is supposed to be more readable and friendly to laymen but at the expense of doctrinal precision, creating confusion in the process about what the Church really teaches.

That is why if you really want to get down to it, the Roman Catechism coupled with Spirago's The Catechism Explained is good.

As mentioned by someone else, This is the Faith by Canon Francis Ripley is also pretty good for a friendly introduction. My pastor uses it in convert instruction and has taught other classes from it (he also recommended the Spirago book above).

Denzinger and Ott are also indispensable.

But the real foundational works are St. Thomas' Summa Contra Gentiles and Summa Theologica. You can't go wrong with the Angelic Doctor!

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

Didn't Saint Augustine have a "handbook of the Christian faith" which is a catechism. And St Athanasius also had one. I am fairly sure that Catechising candidates for baptism was an ancient practise. Luther was much later, and, sadly a heretic.

That is why I said the "catechism as we know it" -- both the term "catechism" and the question-and-answer format were invented by Luther.