Non-Catholic's view of RC Catechism

[boswd]

And I honestly agree with this as well...especially the highlighted portion.

we're on the same page then.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

.

5. CCC # 87 makes a foundational claim that should be solidly heard before one opens the Catechism (it should be in those early introductory points). Catholics are required to accept whatever the book says "with docility" as Jesus Himself speaking. This is on a par with Scripture. I think too often people read it as a sort of summery of what Catholics teach, they are to evaluate and consider it or perhaps use it as a reference book for Catholic theology. Wrong. They are to accept every word "with docility" as Jesus speaking. Read it as listening to Jesus. Accept every letter as such (and be a Catholic) or have the integrity to admit that you don't and leave.

You are simply, completely and totally wrong.

#87 is talking about the Magisterium of the Church, not the Catechism.

Actually, I'm dead-on accurate. There actually are two options: Accept what the Church says with docility as Jesus speaking. Or leave.

Now, yes, technically, it's the Magisterium that determines what may and may not be taught, but are you suggesting that the Official Catechism is filled with non-authorized teachings or heresies? I'm sure you're not. Few Catholics are (or even can be) aware of the binding statements of the Magisterium since the beginning of the CC and nor does CCC 87 mention that. I think you are making much ado about a fine point - unless you believe the Catechism contains heresies that should NOT be believed - and I'm sure you don't.

87 the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms.

.

Right.




.

 

[Dark_Lite]

Actually, I'm dead-on accurate. There actually are two options: Accept what the Church says with docility as Jesus speaking. Or leave.

Before accepting that claim of the Church, one has to evaluate it in the first place. You are creating a false dichotomy. There are many, many situations between the two extremes you continually perpetuate in regards to the 87th paragraph of the CCC.

 

[Harry3142]

I have also read the RCC catechism, and it is interesting reading. Of course, there are parts that I disagree with as a protestant, but it is well worth studying.

 

[SpiritualAntiseptic]

Actually, I'm dead-on accurate. There actually are two options: Accept what the Church says with docility as Jesus speaking. Or leave.

You are wrong on a number of points. These include:
- The fact is that you quoted what was about the Magisterium of the Church and claimed it was about the Catechism. The Magisterium is about what the Holy Spirit reveals to the Church, not everything the Church teaches and does.
- The Church doesn't teach that if you don't agree, you must leave. There is a lot said about conscience, even when it contradicts the Church.

Now, yes, technically, it's the Magisterium that determines what may and may not be taught, but are you suggesting that the Official Catechism is filled with non-authorized teachings or heresies? I'm sure you're not. Few Catholics are (or even can be) aware of the binding statements of the Magisterium since the beginning of the CC and nor does CCC 87 mention that. I think you are making much ado about a fine point - unless you believe the Catechism contains heresies that should NOT be believed - and I'm sure you don't.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]

This is what happens when you apply a fundamentalist-bible attitude to the Catechism. You are under the impression that anything an authority writes within the Church must be accepted. The Magisterium is not the one that determines what may and may not be taught. There is not a group of bishops that is the "Magisterium". The Magisterium is what the Holy Spirit reveals-guides.

The Catechism is a resource for Catechesis (imagine that). It is full of contemporary and historical views of theology and Church practices. It often refers to scripture and church documents on its various topics. However, it is not part of the Magisterium, although parts of the Magisterium may be within it.

 

[MrPolo]

There is not a group of bishops that is the "Magisterium". The Magisterium is what the Holy Spirit reveals-guides.

The Magisterium is the teaching body of the Church, described by the Catechism #100 as "the Pope and...the bishops in communion with him." Of course you are correct that when that body uniformly acts to teach a doctrine, we believe there to be the Holy Spirit at work, speaking through the Church. If you really get deep into theology, even the deceased bishops and Popes are part of that Magisterium since their contributions are always considered when doctrines of a present day are named.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Bump for LLOJ et. al.

 

[Virgil the Roman]

To which particular catechism are you referring?

The Roman Catechism is quite good at explaining the Catholic faith; it is a good resource; equipped with a sundry array of Scriptural quotations and cogent explanations of doctrine regarding the Seven holy sacraments, the 10 commandments, and a step-by-step break down of the Apostles' Creed, and the Pater Noster.


Personally I use the one below:

THE ROMAN CATECHISM

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

To which particular catechism are you referring? Personally I use the one below:

THE ROMAN CATECHISM

I was going to mention the Roman Catechism. It is greatly superior to the New Catechism, to which this thread is addressed.

 

[Virgil the Roman]

I was going to mention the Roman Catechism. It is greatly superior to the New Catechism, to which this thread is addressed.

Good.

By all means, discuss away.

 

[Korah]

I was going to mention the Roman Catechism. It is greatly superior to the New Catechism, to which this thread is addressed.

I never heard of the Roman Catechism being used, even though I was an adult convert to RC in 1969 and remained very active (Charismatic Renewal even) until I left in 1992. Was it just valid in the Diocese of Rome?

 

[Virgil the Roman]

The Roman Catechism was the first universal or church-wide catechism in the Catholic Church. The Baltimore and St Pius X Catechism take their material and inspiration therefrom. It held pre-eminence as the primary catechitical source text where-from simpler catechisms were derived. It remains authoritative and valid today. However the New Catechism (CCC) is seen as the modern successor to it and has largely replaced it in preeminence [if not in clarity, precision, and straightforwardness).

 

[ivebeenshown]

From the very limited amount of excerpts I have read it seems to have the right goal and does a good job of breaking down some of the scripture into an easily digestible form. Of course, there are several aspects of the RCC I disagree with, but in Christ we are one body and I can't really hold any of it against my RCC brethren, I just have to work at understanding it with all the patience I can muster.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

From the very limited amount of excerpts I have read it seems to have the right goal and does a good job of breaking down some of the scripture into an easily digestible form. Of course, there are several aspects of the RCC I disagree with, but in Christ we are one body and I can't really hold any of it against my RCC brethren, I just have to work at understanding it with all the patience I can muster.

As they say, "patience is a virtue"

KJV) Revelation 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here [are] they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

 

[Virgil the Roman]

"But the fruit of the Spirit is, charity, joy, peace, patience, benignity, goodness, longanimity, Mildness, faith, modesty, continency, chastity. Against such there is no law. And they that are Christ's, have crucified their flesh, with the vices and concupiscences. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. Let us not be made desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying on another."
--Romans V:xxii-xxvi

 

[razeontherock]

The Magisterium is the teaching body of the Church, described by the Catechism #100 as "the Pope and...the bishops in communion with him." Of course you are correct that when that body uniformly acts to teach a doctrine, we believe there to be the Holy Spirit at work, speaking through the Church.

This more than I ever knew about any RC catechism or any other publication. Since this just said that man can over rule G-d, I'll go be sick now.

 

[ANM29]

I have been reading it today, and I must say, it is truly everything I thought it to be and more.

Works, Works, and more Works.

What in the world did Jesus come to earth for, die for and what was he raised for?

I actually believe some people just have a personality that calls for 'works'. They NEED to feel they are a part of their salvation, it is for their own personal self-approval.

Pride says that, " I have to help God out". It is the old nature of Adam wanting to take GOD'S GLORY. Also, to keep the institutions running, you have to have slaves to your system. Everything can be justified, so that is no issue at all as far as they are concerned. EVERYTHING is justifiable one way or another.

At the end of the day, we all are saved by Grace and Faith in Christ. So, the works can be done all day long, that is not where your salvation lies. It is just a part of you passing time really, the work is already completed.

Anyway, A very interesting read I must say. I had not read any of it in probably a few years until today.

 

[sunlover1]

Puts all the doctrines and so forth of the Roman Church in a nice nutshell.

word

 

[simonthezealot]

My view? One needs an infallible interpreter to even begin to understand it, the doctrine layed forth in Romans are much easier than the jigsaw puzzle of the catechism.

 

[Dark_Lite]

This more than I ever knew about any RC catechism or any other publication. Since this just said that man can over rule G-d, I'll go be sick now.

Where does that state that man can overrule God? There is no such notion in Catholic theology. The Magisterium is seen as proclaiming the truth of God's revelation. It's not going to contradict anything in the (Catholic interpretation of) the Bible or history.

I have been reading it today, and I must say, it is truly everything I thought it to be and more.

Works, Works, and more Works.

What in the world did Jesus come to earth for, die for and what was he raised for?

I actually believe some people just have a personality that calls for 'works'. They NEED to feel they are a part of their salvation, it is for their own personal self-approval.

Pride says that, " I have to help God out". It is the old nature of Adam wanting to take GOD'S GLORY. Also, to keep the institutions running, you have to have slaves to your system. Everything can be justified, so that is no issue at all as far as they are concerned. EVERYTHING is justifiable one way or another.

At the end of the day, we all are saved by Grace and Faith in Christ. So, the works can be done all day long, that is not where your salvation lies. It is just a part of you passing time really, the work is already completed.

Anyway, A very interesting read I must say. I had not read any of it in probably a few years until today.

The Catholic understanding of salvation and grace is indeed a bit different than the Protestant version. However, the sacraments are viewed as God acting through the Church.

Works would be us "pulling" grace from the sacraments. The theology is that God "pushes" grace to us through the sacraments. Hence, it is not works-based. Make no mistake though, the Catholic Church does not deemphasize works like some Protestant denominations seem to do. Remember James 2:24.