CCC vs. Council of Trent?
#11
(07-27-2017, 09:01 PM)Miriam_M Wrote: I consider the so-called CCC mostly junk.
Council of Trent is my go-to place for authentic doctrine, but in addition I truly respect the St Pius X Catechism for the Laity.

Mostly junk? Most of it's very solid, there are a few questionable passages (make sure you have the most recent edition which was translated from the latin editio typica and not the initial French publication), but nearly all of it sound. You have to remember that it's not written in a traditional catechism format, which has its downsides, but also its merit (it's not like most theologians and father wrote in a strict question answer format anyways), like I also find that it can often expand on things better in this paragraph format. It also uses a great amount of patristic text, which is appreciated. Sure the new catechism is not very easy to read at times, and yes there are a few ambiguities, but calling it mostly junk is a LONG shot.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Florus's post:
  • formerbuddhist
Reply
#12
(07-27-2017, 10:09 PM)Florus Wrote:
(07-27-2017, 09:01 PM)Miriam_M Wrote: I consider the so-called CCC mostly junk.
Council of Trent is my go-to place for authentic doctrine, but in addition I truly respect the St Pius X Catechism for the Laity.

Most of it's very solid, there are a few questionable passages, ...

And unless one is a highly trained theologian, how is one to distinguish? The best bet is to avoid the whole thing like the plague!
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
  “Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog also.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'


[-] The following 1 user Likes jovan66102's post:
  • catquilt
Reply
#13
Whoever is so inclined, the late Abbe de Nantes'

[Image: Abbe-de-Nantes_defenseur-foi.jpg]

BOOK OF ACCUSATION To his Holiness pope John Paul II, Book of Accusation for HERESY against the Author of the supposed catechism of the Catholic Church
a catechism of pride, a catechesis of deceit

is found here, with links to each chapter:

http://crc-internet.org/further-informat...ainst-ccc/

Of course it went unanswered, as did his Book of Accusations against Paul VI and JPII

 Fr. Georges de Nantes' bio is found here   http://crc-internet.org/our-founder/fidei-defensor/

A theological heavyweight he was.  Uniquely he went further than Archbishop Lefebvre in his accusations against the Post Vatican II hierarchy, but did not consider himself a sedevacantist, and would not join Archbishop Lefebvre in what he considered questionable jurisdiction.

A very interesting man for sure.
[-] The following 2 users Like BC's post:
  • jovan66102, Miriam_M
Reply
#14
Thanks, BC! I often post links to l'Abbe's works, but I hadn't yet gotten round to it in this thread.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
  “Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog also.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'


Reply
#15
(07-27-2017, 10:09 PM)Florus Wrote:
(07-27-2017, 09:01 PM)Miriam_M Wrote: I consider the so-called CCC mostly junk.
Council of Trent is my go-to place for authentic doctrine, but in addition I truly respect the St Pius X Catechism for the Laity.

Mostly junk? Most of it's very solid, there are a few questionable passages (make sure you have the most recent edition which was translated from the latin editio typica and not the initial French publication), but nearly all of it sound. You have to remember that it's not written in a traditional catechism format, which has its downsides, but also its merit (it's not like most theologians and father wrote in a strict question answer format anyways), like I also find that it can often expand on things better in this paragraph format. It also uses a great amount of patristic text, which is appreciated. Sure the new catechism is not very easy to read at times, and yes there are a few ambiguities, but calling it mostly junk is a LONG shot.
Compared to far better written catechisms, it is indeed junk.  And some of it is downright shameful.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)