Replies

terycarlis correct that the Catechism is not an infallible document, it is indeed the opinion of men and can be changed as they wish to "massage ' their doctrine .

This is not what Rome holds, as the CCC can teach that which has been infallibly (imaginatively) defined, while non-infallible teachings of the OM (Ordinary Magisterium) are understood to require submission of mind and will.

With respect to the non-infallible expressions of the authentic magisterium of the Church, these should be received with religious submission of mind and will.” - JP2: http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/speeches/1988/october/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19881015_usa-ad-limina.html

"Bishops, teaching in communion with the Roman Pontiff, are to be respected by all as witnesses to divine and Catholic truth. In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent.

This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking." - Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen gentium, 25

Of course, this RC means to unity is interpretive, as there is disagreement on the character of church teachings, including just what the pope's "manifest mind and will" is, as in what magisterial level such fall under, with some theologians holding there are 3 or 4 levels, and thus what level of assent is required.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is a presentation of Church doctrine that has previously been taught with varying degrees of authority. To determine the degree of authority with which any given doctrine has been taught, one must investigate the history of that particular teaching. Look to the Catechism’s footnotes for help in this regard. There you will find references to Church councils, documents, canon law, Scripture, etc., all of varying degrees of authority. - http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/how-much-authority-does-the-catechism-of-the-catholic-church-carry

Pope John Paul II called the Catechism "a statement of the Church’s faith and of Catholic doctrine" ( (Fidei Depositum 3) and "a sure norm for teaching the faith."

In Casti Connubii (1930), Pope Pius XI appears to infallibly teaches that non-procreative sexual acts are intrinsically evil and gravely sinful, but which i see few RCs affirming as one of the exercises of papal infallibility.

But the fact that the version that would be in current use would have been approved by the pope and the magisterium would place it in the category of not having anything in it that is opposition to rome teaching .It would hold the imprimatur .

While some RCs still invoke the imprimatur as giving assurance of fidelity, many others regard assurance based on it as rather dubious.

See post here on Keenan's Catechism,' a book published with the imprimatur of Scotch Roman Catholic bishops, and recommended also by Irish prelates. This book contained the following question and answer:—

'Q. Must not Catholics believe the Pope in himself to be infallible?

'A. This is a Protestant intention: it is no article of the Catholic faith: no decision of his can oblige, under pain of heresy, unless it be received and enforced by the teaching body; that is, by the bishops of the Church.'

About 1869 or 1870 I had a visit from an English clergyman, who,.. bought some copies of the book to present to his friends abroad. A couple of years later he visited Ireland again, and purchased some more copies of 'Keenan'; but this question and answer had then disappeared. - From George Salmon, The Infallibility of the Church

The RC catechism holds an imprimatur... that only means that the work is not contrary to any RC teaching. To be infallible it would need to be stated as such by the pope or the magisterium... RC are bound to the catechism but the church can change it with an infallible definition by the magisterium or the pope ... " I would have preferred to vote on another option, "The Catechism is an authoritative teaching of the Church, and often internally cites (and references) infallible teaching, but the Catechism itself has not been recognized by the Church as infallible.""

"In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking."
http://www.askacatholic.com/_webpostings/answers/2007_11NOV/2007NovHowAuthoritativeIsTheCatechism.cfm

The problem comes down to was this declared by the pope ex cathedra;

Rome believes it contains some infallible statements but the document is not itself infallible ..

The thing is most catholics think EVERYTHING the church says or teaches is infallible...including the sermon on Sunday and the articles posted here....

Here is one example

Q. 632. Where will persons go who -- such as infants -- have not committed actual sin and who, through no fault of theirs, die without baptism?

From Catholic answers

Limbo is a theological speculation, not a dogma. It was found in some old Catechisms, but it's never been "official Church teaching".

Father William Jurgens, in The Faith of the Early Fathers, makes the interesting observation that the first theologians to come up with Limbo were the Pelagians - and that's not a very great recommendation (I'm paraphrasing.)

However, he does have an interesting argument about the possible salvation of unbaptized infants:

1. St. Thomas Aquinas taught that the Eucharist is essential for salvation (see John 6.)
2. However, St. Thomas also clarified that if a baptized child died before receiving the Eucharist, the Church's desire for the child to receive the Eucharist would suffice for it.
3. By analogy, the Church's "desire" for the baptism of an infant who dies unbaptized through no fault of his / her own could (if St. Thomas' argument can be extended) suffice for an implicit baptism of desire.
4. Therefore, we must have a sanguine hope for the salvation of unbaptized infants.

(I'm simplifying the argument; the whole text can be found in Volume 3 of the aforementioned book.

Here is a contemporary discussion on limbo https://www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/znotionlimbo.HTM

Rome has never said the catechism is infallible.. that way they are free to change doctrine as they will