Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: AAABEST
The truth is that John Paul was far more focused on his own musings

Perhaps that is true, but exaggerations or even outright (if unintended) falsehoods do not help the trads prove their case.

no catechism classes use them anymore.

The Trent Catechism was never used by catechism classes, at least widely. It was directed towards priests and assumes a level of theological knowledge beyond that enjoyed by most laity (especially children). The Baltimore Catechism was already out of use almost entirely by 1990 - it wasn't JP II's fault, as others have pointed out. In fact, the CCC is not supposed to replace all other catechisms anyway - JP II's letter in the front says that explicitly. And Ratzinger stated openly that the Pius X Catechism was still perfectly appropriate for use. A much better perspective on the good work that JP II did in promulgating the CCC is here, from an address at the Wanderer Forum in 1993.

What all this amounts to, of course, is that, with the advent of the Catechism, it is once again made clear beyond all possible doubt that the Church which is about to launch into the Third Millennium is still the Catholic Church of all the ages. So from now on the appropriate response to the tired old taunt that this or that point of orthodoxy is "pre-conciliar" will be that heterodoxy is "pre-Catechism." ...

The Catechism simply yields nothing to their demands. Not one article of faith is demythologized, muddied or called in question. Not one moral norm is discarded or compromised. And they know it!

As the old maxim says, scripta manent: what is written remains. And nowhere is this truth more relevant than when the Catholic Church publishes a universal catechism. That of the Council of Trent "remained" as a source of life-giving truth for four centuries, and that of Vatican II will certainly not be here today and gone tomorrow.

PS: Those who think of the old catechisms as "subversive" generally do the same of the new one.

41 posted on 05/10/2005 12:36:42 PM PDT by gbcdoj (St. Athanasius, ora pro nobis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: gbcdoj
Your point is well taken in that some of us tend to assign more blame to John Paul then he deserves, myself included.

This being said, nearly every facet of the way we practiced our faith for so long has been dramatically altered by him almost single handedly - putting his wisdom and piety above all of his predecessors. His intentions may have been very good, but the results have been beyond awful. If some or even most of the blame isn't assignable to him, there exists the feeling among many of us that "My Church underwent a full scale revolution and all I got was this lousy t-shirt".

Those who think of the old catechisms as "subversive" generally do the same of the new one.

Well then nearly the entire US Episcopate is corrupt, because not only are the other catechisms ignored, they're forbidden in many cases.

42 posted on 05/10/2005 1:49:23 PM PDT by AAABEST (Kyrie eleison - Christe eleison †)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson