The Catechism

[ps139]

Jeffrey Lloyd posted this explanation by David Currie explaining the distinctions between Deposit of Faith, Dogma, Doctrine, Discipline, Devotion etc.

First is the Deposit, the Tradition and the Scriptures left to us by the Apostles. This is considered infallible and unalterable.

Next comes Dogma, meaning some point of faith that's so important that the Holy Spirit led a Council---or once or twice, a Pope---to declare it infallible and unalterable. Dogmas include things like the Trinity, the Hypostatic Nature of Christ, the Assumption of Mary, and whatnot.

Then comes Doctrine, which is important but not infallible, and it can be altered if a better understanding comes along. A classic example of this would be Limbo.

Then we have Discipline, like not eating meat on Fridays and celibacy, which can be imposed by the Church, and can be lifted by the Church. Not infallible, not unalterable.

And last, the bottom rung: Devotion. This is what the individual catholic decides to do insofar as prayers, meditations, and so on goes. Not infallible by any stretch, and certainly not unalterable. Tellingly, this includes 99.999999999% of all Marian activity, from Rosaries to novenas to Our Lady of Lourdes. You don't even have to believe in this stuff, and you can still be a good and faithful Catholic.

My question is: What is the Catechism? I assume it is some mixture of dogma and doctrine - is there any way we can know the difference on certain teachings? Whether they are dogma or doctrine, or discipline or devotions?

 

[Aaron-Aggie]

.

 

[Michelina]

from "Laetamur Magnopere", promulgating the CCC:

With today's promulgation of the Latin typical edition, therefore, the task of composing the Catechism, begun in 1986, is brought to a close and the desire of the aforementioned Extraordinary Synod of Bishops is happily fulfilled. The Church now has at her disposal this new, authoritative exposition of the one and perennial apostolic faith, and it will serve as a "valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion" and as a "sure norm for teaching the faith," as well as a "sure and authentic reference text" for preparing local catechisms (cf. Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum, no. 4).

teaching=doctrina

The CCC is Doctrine. (It does also contain specifically defined Dogmas.)

The Code of Canon Law is Discipline.

 

[BBAS 64]

from "Laetamur Magnopere", promulgating the CCC:



teaching=doctrina

The CCC is Doctrine. (It does also contain specifically defined Dogmas.)

The Code of Canon Law is Discipline.

Good day, Michelina

"With today's promulgation of the Latin typical edition, therefore, the task of composing the Catechism, begun in 1986, is brought to a close and the desire of the aforementioned Extraordinary Synod of Bishops is happily fulfilled. The Church now has at her disposal this new, authoritative exposition of the one and perennial apostolic faith, and it will serve as a "valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion" and as a "sure norm for teaching the faith," as well as a "sure and authentic reference text" for preparing local catechisms (cf. Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum, no. 4)."

Does this mean that the Catechism was non existant before 1986? The reason I ask is in past disscusions with Shelb5 as to the ECF I thought that in reading the ECF I must look at the state of the church in their time. If the Catechism was not ava. to Augustine in the 4th century then it is not a relevant source of "FACTS" information.

Thank you,

BBAS

 

[geocajun]

My question is: What is the Catechism? I assume it is some mixture of dogma and doctrine - is there any way we can know the difference on certain teachings? Whether they are dogma or doctrine, or discipline or devotions?

All dogma is doctrine but not all doctrine is dogma. Its not prudent to get hung up on the differences as both are binding for belief - that is unless your just seeking technical distinction.
The CCC is the universal teaching [doctrine] of the Church.

The CCC does not always explicitly state that something is a dogma for the reasons above, but you can find out the dogmas through further study in other books. I highly recommend Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Dr. Ludwig Ott.

 

[Aaron-Aggie]

Good day, Michelina

"With today's promulgation of the Latin typical edition, therefore, the task of composing the Catechism, begun in 1986, is brought to a close and the desire of the aforementioned Extraordinary Synod of Bishops is happily fulfilled. The Church now has at her disposal this new, authoritative exposition of the one and perennial apostolic faith, and it will serve as a "valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion" and as a "sure norm for teaching the faith," as well as a "sure and authentic reference text" for preparing local catechisms (cf. Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum, no. 4)."

Does this mean that the Catechism was non existant before 1986? The reason I ask is in past disscusions with Shelb5 as to the ECF I thought that in reading the ECF I must look at the state of the church in their time. If the Catechism was not ava. to Augustine in the 4th century then it is not a relevant source of "FACTS" information.

Thank you,

BBAS

Your going the wrong way. The Catechism is the reference text not the source. Every thing in the Catechism is from some other source. The index of Citations in the back of the Catechism is 62 pages long. We're talking thousonds of footnotes and citations.

There are 91 citations to the works ofAugustine ALONE

 

[ps139]

All dogma is doctrine but not all doctrine is dogma. Its not prudent to get hung up on the differences as both are binding for belief - that is unless your just seeking technical distinction.
The CCC is the universal teaching [doctrine] of the Church.

When you say "binding for belief" does that mean that to be in full Communion with the Church, you must assent to all of the doctrines in the Catechism?

The CCC does not always explicitly state that something is a dogma for the reasons above, but you can find out the dogmas through further study in other books. I highly recommend Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Dr. Ludwig Ott.

I would like to read that, thank you.

 

[Michelina]

It is an excellent book, ps139. I use it all the time.
TAN Books used to sell it.

 

[geocajun]

When you say "binding for belief" does that mean that to be in full Communion with the Church, you must assent to all of the doctrines in the Catechism?

yes. we cannot pick and choose which doctrines we believe and be in full communion with the Church.

 

[ps139]

yes. we cannot pick and choose which doctrines we believe and be in full communion with the Church.

Then comes Doctrine, which is important but not infallible, and it can be altered if a better understanding comes along. A classic example of this would be Limbo.


So - if I am understanding this correctly - we, as Catholics, are required to believe things which may be fallible?

Also, aren't we not required to believe in Limbo? Or is Limbo not "a classic example"?

 

[geocajun]

Then comes Doctrine, which is important but not infallible, and it can be altered if a better understanding comes along. A classic example of this would be Limbo.


So - if I am understanding this correctly - we, as Catholics, are required to believe things which may be fallible?

Also, aren't we not required to believe in Limbo? Or is Limbo not "a classic example"?

Even though a teaching may be fallible, it is a teaching nonetheless, so yes we are required to believe it. Church teaching is of course different from things such as papal opinions - like pope JPII and the war in Iraq - that was a prudential judgement and Catholics are not bound to it.

When a teaching is held by the authority of the Catholic Church, it is to be believed by the faithful.

Can. 753 Whether they teach individually, or in Episcopal Conferences, or gathered together in particular councils, Bishops in communion with the head and the members of the College, while not infallible in their teaching, are the authentic instructors and teachers of the faith for Christ's faithful entrusted to their care. The faithful are bound to adhere, with a religious submission of mind, to this authentic Magisterium of their Bishops.


Can. 754 All Christ's faithful are obliged to observe the constitutions and decrees which lawful ecclesiastical authority issues for the purpose of proposing doctrine or of proscribing erroneous opinions; this is particularly the case of those published by the Roman Pontiff or by the College of Bishops.

 

[Michelina]

So - if I am understanding this correctly - we, as Catholics, are required to believe things which may be fallible.....

What's in the CCC is doctrine, as taught by the Ordinary Magisterium. As such, it is certain (a "sure norm") even if it is not specifically defined (de fide definita). It can be refined by a specific dogmatic definition.

In Ott, you will see the individual doctrines described with various Latin phrases: 'de fide' means it is 'infallible' doctrine, in the looser sense.

Also, aren't we not required to believe in Limbo? Or is Limbo not "a classic example"?

Limbo was never doctrine; it was 'sententia communis', meaning it was a common theological opinion, but not doctrine.

Theologians are not a source of official teaching. It is their proper function to explain doctrine but they do not create doctrine. Only the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, can speak authoritatively.

 

[caitlin]

well, my answer may seem childish compared to many of the other's answers but my teacher explained it so that my tiny mind would understand

"A book that can give you answers to questions you may have on your faith."

that's sorta plain and simple but it works for me.

"It gives you understandings on things that need to be explained. It gives reference to those who have many...uhh...questions."

 

[Michelina]

well, my answer may seem childish compared to many of the other's answers but my teacher explained it so that my tiny mind would understand

that's sorta plain and simple but it works for me.

It works for me, too, caitlin.

 

[ps139]

What's in the CCC is doctrine, as taught by the Ordinary Magisterium. As such, it is certain (a "sure norm") even if it is not specifically defined (de fide definita). It can be refined by a specific dogmatic definition.

This makes sense. I did not know that CCC was from the Ordinary Magesterium. (Or I might have known and forgotten ) Nothing can be taken away, but it can be refined.

Limbo was never doctrine; it was 'sententia communis', meaning it was a common theological opinion, but not doctrine.
Theologians are not a source of official teaching. It is their proper function to explain doctrine but they do not create doctrine. Only the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, can speak authoritatively.

Thank you for this - I was seriously thrown off into a sea of doubt when in the OP Limbo was defined as doctrine. Then I thought - how can this change if it is taught by the Magesterium? I think the definition of doctrine in the OP needs some refinement .

Thank you Michelina.

 

[Michelina]

.... in the OP Limbo was defined as doctrine. Then I thought - how can this change if it is taught by the Magesterium? I think the definition of doctrine in the OP needs some refinement......

It needs correction.

A book like 'OTT' (Fund. of Cath Dogma) comes in handy.

I wonder if it is "online". Mine is falling apart.

 

[BBAS 64]

Your going the wrong way. The Catechism is the reference text not the source. Every thing in the Catechism is from some other source. The index of Citations in the back of the Catechism is 62 pages long. We're talking thousonds of footnotes and citations.

There are 91 citations to the works ofAugustine ALONE

Thank you,

Aaron-Aggie I think I got it now.

BBAS

 

[Aaron-Aggie]

Thank you,

Aaron-Aggie I think I got it now.

BBAS

Good to hear

 

[geocajun]

It needs correction.

A book like 'OTT' (Fund. of Cath Dogma) comes in handy.

I wonder if it is "online". Mine is falling apart.

yea, its a shame that its not very well bound.. I have loose pages in mine too