Welcoming The Catechism
Editorial FAITH Magazine May-June 1994
Readers of FAITH will undoubtedly rejoice that the Vatican has prevented the deranged language of the politically correct from spoiling the English text of the Catechism. Although it has been a painful wait, we can reflect that in a sinful world, the teaching of Christ will always be given through pain and suffering. In a perfect world, Christ would come in all his glory with no opposition, only a joyful reception as the perfect fulfilment of man. As it is, the redemption of the human race is won through the cross. It seems that the tremendous work of the Catechism has to be troubled in the influential English-speaking world with struggle and hard work even to be born at all.
We know that the publication of the English version will not mark the end of the struggle but only the beginning. Mgr Wrenn who wrote in the January/February 1994 issue of FAITH on the problems in the translation of the Catechism, has also written on the “commentary” to be published by Geoffrey Chapman to coincide with the publication of the Catechism. His article is too long for us to include in this issue of FAITH but it has been published separately (and is available from Michael Real, 22 Surbiton Hill Road, SURBITON, Surrey KT5 8ET, price £1 post free.) I would unhesitatingly recommend it for its robust challenge to the Commentary.
Routine disloyalty
For us in England, this “commentary” is just one more example of the routine disloyalty of our theological establishment. The publisher’s blurb tells all “The Catechism of the Catholic Church is potentially the most important document to be issued by the Vatican since the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council in 1965. But how well does it represent the faith which it is meant to encapsulate? In this definitive Commentary, a team of distinguished Catholics drawn from theological faculties in London, Oxford, Rome, Louvain, Boston, Ottawa, and elsewhere around the world enter into critical dialogue with the text and relate its strengths and weaknesses” Mgr Wrenn points out the arrogance of a team of theologians sitting in judgement on a text which has itself been prepared over several years, submitted to all the Bishops of the world for amendments. Even of a group of theologians loyal to the magisterium, one could ask what qualification they have to sit in judgement on the Catechism. But of these!
The editor of the “commentary”, writing a few months ago in a secular newspaper, said that the encyclical Veritatis Splendor takes its place “in a long line of dogmatic statements: loud, confident and wrong.” (Michael Walsh 'Blunders that started with Original Sin' Independent 24 September 1993) Therefore, the publishers who have been given the prestigious honour of publishing the Catechism in England will be including, side-by-side with it in their catalogue, a “commentary” edited by a writer who considers a major papal encyclical on morality “wrong” and is also on record as saying that the doctrine of original sin was a mistake “invented by St Augustine of Hippo in the early fifth century out of an incorrect translation in the fifth chapter of St Paul to the Romans.”(ibid.) He and various colleagues are now to relate to us the strengths and weaknesses of the Catechism.
The Catechism is sure to be a commercial success. It has been a best seller in France and no doubt will sell in great quantities here. It is not only an honour to publish the Catechism but a lucrative one. With this in mind, it is worth quoting the way in which Michael Walsh began a recent talk on his “commentary”. “I did a commentary. Perhaps I should explain how I came to be involved in this at all. One of the things that I do is to advise the firm of Cassells on religious publications for Catholics and Catholic religious publications. You probably don’t know them as Cassells - they are the imprints of Geoffrey Chapman. You see Cassell Books are owned by Geoffrey Chapman. I advise them on religious books and when the Catechism was given to Cassell by the English bishops, the Hierarchy owned the copyright. They gave the job of publishing it to Cassell and I suggested fairly promptly that what we would do would be to get a Commentary, to be ahead of our competitors. This was by the way of a commercial decision in a sense - to be ahead of our competitors. We had the text, so we did the Commentary” Further comment would be superfluous.
The treacherous via media
So much for the behaviour of the extremist opponents of the Catechism. What will be the official line? Although it will not be so gross as to sit in judgement on the “strengths and weaknesses” of the Catechism, I think we may expect that the official reception will be the usual apology. The general tenor will be that the Catechism is really surprisingly good considering the obvious limitations of such an enterprise. If consenting adults choose to read it privately, they may even gain some benefit from the text itself. It will not answer all questions but can be of great service to us all. As with Veritatis Splendor, a close reading of the actual text will provide some interesting food for thought. Although we all presume that it is largely a load of old rubbish to be ignored and shelved as soon as conveniently possible, we can, if we try hard, find some good things to say about it for the press during the first couple of weeks.
Within this general approach to the Catechism, we will find all the usual friends, the hierarchy of truths, the development of doctrine, the different senses of scripture, the different experiences of faith in a multi-cultural society, and of course the wonderful achievements of Weaving the Web and Here I Am which fall so perfectly in line with all that the Catechism teaches. The real danger is that this campaign of disinformation may work with some people. They may genuinely think that you need to know about the different senses of scripture before you can understand the Catechism. People may not realise that there is an excellent summary of the matter in the Catechism itself (115-119).
The hidden assumption behind both the extremist and the probable “official” English line on the Catechism is that people should not, by and large, read the Catechism for themselves. Of course some people will read it for themselves but in the face of expert de-bunking, a conscientious and humble Catholic teacher could be forgiven for refusing to trust their own judgement. The many reservations expressed, the alleged need for theological expertise, and the assurance of the alternative magisterium of theological dissent, will leave the ordinary educated Catholic confused. The programme of disinformation about the Catechism will have two quite contemptible effects. The first is that it will effectively discourage people from reading the text itself. The second is that it will undermine the confidence of the laity in their own understanding of the faith. We need to counter these two unpastoral results of the agenda of the magisterium of dissent.
Ad fontes!
For many years now, any informed Catholic wishing to counter the misrepresentation of Vatican II has only had to turn to the source texts themselves. In some popular theology, the second Vatican Council could be summed up as “before 1965 bad, after 1965 good”. The “reform” of the liturgy in many parishes seems to have operated on a rule of thumb which states “anything beautiful must have been forbidden by the Council”. If the dreary, unchallenging experience of Catholicism which results is blamed on Vatican II, a reading of the texts of the Council themselves will quite unequivocally exonerate the Holy Spirit. The inspiring account of the liturgy as heaven on earth in Sacrosanctum Concilium, the clear and balanced account of the magisterium in Lumen Gentium, the compassionate yet uncompromising teaching on marriage in Gaudium et Spes; all of these are heartening to read. It is very instructive to introduce these texts to those who may be misled into thinking that Vatican II was somehow responsible for the miserable apology for Catholicism that is peddled by the magisterium of dissent. As we would expect from texts that were fought over word by word, they are a reliable account of the faith of the Church, expressed in a masterful way, taking into account the experience of Bishops all over the world.
The text of the Catechism has also been prepared carefully, over many years, consulting all the bishops of the world who in their turn have been able to consult their own theologians. There has indeed been input from theologians from the whole Catholic world. What the Vatican has not allowed, Praise the Lord, is for a small minority of western liberal theologians to dictate to the rest of the universal Church. They may find this upsetting but nobody should be duped if they claim to sit in judgement on the final text to examine “its strengths and weaknesses”.
The catholic faithful should not allow the magisterium of dissent to put the Catechism on their index of forbidden books, nor should they be fooled into thinking that it can only be read with the aid of a “commentary”. The Catechism should be given directly into the hands of the faithful as a treasure which will nourish and strengthen their faith. Only then should they read the “commentary”. By that stage they will be able to refute most of its criticisms from the text of the Catechism itself.
This is particularly true because of the comprehensive nature of the Catechism. Do we need to have some sort of introduction on the structure and purpose of the catechism? Then look to nn.1-25. Surely we need to have some introduction on the nature of faith, the ways of knowing God, the relationship between personal faith and the magisterium? I have not seen a more succinct and helpful treatment than that in the section I Believe, We Believe which introduces the first part of the Catechism on the Profession of Faith. The world-wide collaboration which has been responsible for the production of the Catechism makes it a work that is vastly superior to any similar attempt to provide a handbook of the Catholic faith for the modern world. Any reader of the Catechism will see this immediately. We should do our best to ensure that no adult Catholic is deprived of the opportunity to benefit from this tremendous enterprise.
Confidence in the faith
Even more important than ensuring that people are encouraged to read the Catechism is the restoration of confidence among lay people in their own ability to understand the teaching of the Church. This confidence has been undermined in various ways. Many educated lay Catholics have been led to believe that everything they have done in the past is wrong because “we don’t do it like that any more”. The Catholic teacher who has made an altar in the classroom, the parent who teaches the child a formula for going to confession, even the parish priest who tries to encourage his people’s faith can be demoralised by the expert with a flip chart and easel who uses ridicule and exaggeration to rubbish the achievements of the past. They have nothing to replace those achievements with. Their solution is to sit in interminable discussion groups to pool ignorance while their own education is used to browbeat any opponents.
The Catechism is the weapon of the ordinary lay Catholic who wishes to provide something more solid for future generations. The laity have a right to use the Catechism since both Pope John Paul and the Catechism itself declare that although it is addressed in the first place to the bishops, it is also addressed to all the faithful and for the benefit of all the faithful. It is not for a privileged few and the laity do not need to be given a course before they are allowed to use it. It can be their own source book with which to challenge the oppression of the magisterium of dissent. A lay person who has thoroughly read and assimilated the contents of the Catechism will be better educated theologically than many priests, (particularly those who have swallowed the “old books bad, new books good” approach of some teachers of theology.) The Catechism, if widely used, would make Cardinal Newman’s dream of an educated laity come true.
A time to say “enough”
For those who have been involved in what may rightly be called a struggle for freedom from the oppression of the magisterium of dissent, there are two important causes in the immediate future. First of all, we must counter the campaign of disinformation about the Catechism. The wait has been demoralising but we should remember that the wait itself was due to a determined attempt to wreck the Catechism by promoting a second-rate and ideologically motivated translation. The courses and talks on the Catechism which were planned a year ago should go ahead as soon as it is issued. We should sell it as widely as possible and promote it by every possible means. If you know a Catholic teacher, buy them a copy. Give a copy to a young person who is being confirmed or to an adult who is being received into the Church.
The second cause is to make sure that the lessons have been learnt. If Rome now knows about the importance of accuracy in English translation, we must make sure that our voices are heard on the question of the translation of the Mass. A new English missal is in the process of preparation. There is no urgency for it. A wait of a few years would be salutary if Rome were to go through it with a fine toothed comb and apply the same standards of accuracy as they insisted on with the Catechism. If that were one of the results of the campaign against the Catechism, it would be divine justice indeed. As the psalmist says, "They laid a snare for my steps, my soul was bowed down. They dug a pit in my path, but fell in it themselves".
Editorial FAITH Magazine May-June 1994
Readers of FAITH will undoubtedly rejoice that the Vatican has prevented the deranged language of the politically correct from spoiling the English text of the Catechism. Although it has been a painful wait, we can reflect that in a sinful world, the teaching of Christ will always be given through pain and suffering. In a perfect world, Christ would come in all his glory with no opposition, only a joyful reception as the perfect fulfilment of man. As it is, the redemption of the human race is won through the cross. It seems that the tremendous work of the Catechism has to be troubled in the influential English-speaking world with struggle and hard work even to be born at all.
We know that the publication of the English version will not mark the end of the struggle but only the beginning. Mgr Wrenn who wrote in the January/February 1994 issue of FAITH on the problems in the translation of the Catechism, has also written on the “commentary” to be published by Geoffrey Chapman to coincide with the publication of the Catechism. His article is too long for us to include in this issue of FAITH but it has been published separately (and is available from Michael Real, 22 Surbiton Hill Road, SURBITON, Surrey KT5 8ET, price £1 post free.) I would unhesitatingly recommend it for its robust challenge to the Commentary.
Routine disloyalty
For us in England, this “commentary” is just one more example of the routine disloyalty of our theological establishment. The publisher’s blurb tells all “The Catechism of the Catholic Church is potentially the most important document to be issued by the Vatican since the conclusion of the Second Vatican Council in 1965. But how well does it represent the faith which it is meant to encapsulate? In this definitive Commentary, a team of distinguished Catholics drawn from theological faculties in London, Oxford, Rome, Louvain, Boston, Ottawa, and elsewhere around the world enter into critical dialogue with the text and relate its strengths and weaknesses” Mgr Wrenn points out the arrogance of a team of theologians sitting in judgement on a text which has itself been prepared over several years, submitted to all the Bishops of the world for amendments. Even of a group of theologians loyal to the magisterium, one could ask what qualification they have to sit in judgement on the Catechism. But of these!
The editor of the “commentary”, writing a few months ago in a secular newspaper, said that the encyclical Veritatis Splendor takes its place “in a long line of dogmatic statements: loud, confident and wrong.” (Michael Walsh 'Blunders that started with Original Sin' Independent 24 September 1993) Therefore, the publishers who have been given the prestigious honour of publishing the Catechism in England will be including, side-by-side with it in their catalogue, a “commentary” edited by a writer who considers a major papal encyclical on morality “wrong” and is also on record as saying that the doctrine of original sin was a mistake “invented by St Augustine of Hippo in the early fifth century out of an incorrect translation in the fifth chapter of St Paul to the Romans.”(ibid.) He and various colleagues are now to relate to us the strengths and weaknesses of the Catechism.
The Catechism is sure to be a commercial success. It has been a best seller in France and no doubt will sell in great quantities here. It is not only an honour to publish the Catechism but a lucrative one. With this in mind, it is worth quoting the way in which Michael Walsh began a recent talk on his “commentary”. “I did a commentary. Perhaps I should explain how I came to be involved in this at all. One of the things that I do is to advise the firm of Cassells on religious publications for Catholics and Catholic religious publications. You probably don’t know them as Cassells - they are the imprints of Geoffrey Chapman. You see Cassell Books are owned by Geoffrey Chapman. I advise them on religious books and when the Catechism was given to Cassell by the English bishops, the Hierarchy owned the copyright. They gave the job of publishing it to Cassell and I suggested fairly promptly that what we would do would be to get a Commentary, to be ahead of our competitors. This was by the way of a commercial decision in a sense - to be ahead of our competitors. We had the text, so we did the Commentary” Further comment would be superfluous.
The treacherous via media
So much for the behaviour of the extremist opponents of the Catechism. What will be the official line? Although it will not be so gross as to sit in judgement on the “strengths and weaknesses” of the Catechism, I think we may expect that the official reception will be the usual apology. The general tenor will be that the Catechism is really surprisingly good considering the obvious limitations of such an enterprise. If consenting adults choose to read it privately, they may even gain some benefit from the text itself. It will not answer all questions but can be of great service to us all. As with Veritatis Splendor, a close reading of the actual text will provide some interesting food for thought. Although we all presume that it is largely a load of old rubbish to be ignored and shelved as soon as conveniently possible, we can, if we try hard, find some good things to say about it for the press during the first couple of weeks.
Within this general approach to the Catechism, we will find all the usual friends, the hierarchy of truths, the development of doctrine, the different senses of scripture, the different experiences of faith in a multi-cultural society, and of course the wonderful achievements of Weaving the Web and Here I Am which fall so perfectly in line with all that the Catechism teaches. The real danger is that this campaign of disinformation may work with some people. They may genuinely think that you need to know about the different senses of scripture before you can understand the Catechism. People may not realise that there is an excellent summary of the matter in the Catechism itself (115-119).
The hidden assumption behind both the extremist and the probable “official” English line on the Catechism is that people should not, by and large, read the Catechism for themselves. Of course some people will read it for themselves but in the face of expert de-bunking, a conscientious and humble Catholic teacher could be forgiven for refusing to trust their own judgement. The many reservations expressed, the alleged need for theological expertise, and the assurance of the alternative magisterium of theological dissent, will leave the ordinary educated Catholic confused. The programme of disinformation about the Catechism will have two quite contemptible effects. The first is that it will effectively discourage people from reading the text itself. The second is that it will undermine the confidence of the laity in their own understanding of the faith. We need to counter these two unpastoral results of the agenda of the magisterium of dissent.
Ad fontes!
For many years now, any informed Catholic wishing to counter the misrepresentation of Vatican II has only had to turn to the source texts themselves. In some popular theology, the second Vatican Council could be summed up as “before 1965 bad, after 1965 good”. The “reform” of the liturgy in many parishes seems to have operated on a rule of thumb which states “anything beautiful must have been forbidden by the Council”. If the dreary, unchallenging experience of Catholicism which results is blamed on Vatican II, a reading of the texts of the Council themselves will quite unequivocally exonerate the Holy Spirit. The inspiring account of the liturgy as heaven on earth in Sacrosanctum Concilium, the clear and balanced account of the magisterium in Lumen Gentium, the compassionate yet uncompromising teaching on marriage in Gaudium et Spes; all of these are heartening to read. It is very instructive to introduce these texts to those who may be misled into thinking that Vatican II was somehow responsible for the miserable apology for Catholicism that is peddled by the magisterium of dissent. As we would expect from texts that were fought over word by word, they are a reliable account of the faith of the Church, expressed in a masterful way, taking into account the experience of Bishops all over the world.
The text of the Catechism has also been prepared carefully, over many years, consulting all the bishops of the world who in their turn have been able to consult their own theologians. There has indeed been input from theologians from the whole Catholic world. What the Vatican has not allowed, Praise the Lord, is for a small minority of western liberal theologians to dictate to the rest of the universal Church. They may find this upsetting but nobody should be duped if they claim to sit in judgement on the final text to examine “its strengths and weaknesses”.
The catholic faithful should not allow the magisterium of dissent to put the Catechism on their index of forbidden books, nor should they be fooled into thinking that it can only be read with the aid of a “commentary”. The Catechism should be given directly into the hands of the faithful as a treasure which will nourish and strengthen their faith. Only then should they read the “commentary”. By that stage they will be able to refute most of its criticisms from the text of the Catechism itself.
This is particularly true because of the comprehensive nature of the Catechism. Do we need to have some sort of introduction on the structure and purpose of the catechism? Then look to nn.1-25. Surely we need to have some introduction on the nature of faith, the ways of knowing God, the relationship between personal faith and the magisterium? I have not seen a more succinct and helpful treatment than that in the section I Believe, We Believe which introduces the first part of the Catechism on the Profession of Faith. The world-wide collaboration which has been responsible for the production of the Catechism makes it a work that is vastly superior to any similar attempt to provide a handbook of the Catholic faith for the modern world. Any reader of the Catechism will see this immediately. We should do our best to ensure that no adult Catholic is deprived of the opportunity to benefit from this tremendous enterprise.
Confidence in the faith
Even more important than ensuring that people are encouraged to read the Catechism is the restoration of confidence among lay people in their own ability to understand the teaching of the Church. This confidence has been undermined in various ways. Many educated lay Catholics have been led to believe that everything they have done in the past is wrong because “we don’t do it like that any more”. The Catholic teacher who has made an altar in the classroom, the parent who teaches the child a formula for going to confession, even the parish priest who tries to encourage his people’s faith can be demoralised by the expert with a flip chart and easel who uses ridicule and exaggeration to rubbish the achievements of the past. They have nothing to replace those achievements with. Their solution is to sit in interminable discussion groups to pool ignorance while their own education is used to browbeat any opponents.
The Catechism is the weapon of the ordinary lay Catholic who wishes to provide something more solid for future generations. The laity have a right to use the Catechism since both Pope John Paul and the Catechism itself declare that although it is addressed in the first place to the bishops, it is also addressed to all the faithful and for the benefit of all the faithful. It is not for a privileged few and the laity do not need to be given a course before they are allowed to use it. It can be their own source book with which to challenge the oppression of the magisterium of dissent. A lay person who has thoroughly read and assimilated the contents of the Catechism will be better educated theologically than many priests, (particularly those who have swallowed the “old books bad, new books good” approach of some teachers of theology.) The Catechism, if widely used, would make Cardinal Newman’s dream of an educated laity come true.
A time to say “enough”
For those who have been involved in what may rightly be called a struggle for freedom from the oppression of the magisterium of dissent, there are two important causes in the immediate future. First of all, we must counter the campaign of disinformation about the Catechism. The wait has been demoralising but we should remember that the wait itself was due to a determined attempt to wreck the Catechism by promoting a second-rate and ideologically motivated translation. The courses and talks on the Catechism which were planned a year ago should go ahead as soon as it is issued. We should sell it as widely as possible and promote it by every possible means. If you know a Catholic teacher, buy them a copy. Give a copy to a young person who is being confirmed or to an adult who is being received into the Church.
The second cause is to make sure that the lessons have been learnt. If Rome now knows about the importance of accuracy in English translation, we must make sure that our voices are heard on the question of the translation of the Mass. A new English missal is in the process of preparation. There is no urgency for it. A wait of a few years would be salutary if Rome were to go through it with a fine toothed comb and apply the same standards of accuracy as they insisted on with the Catechism. If that were one of the results of the campaign against the Catechism, it would be divine justice indeed. As the psalmist says, "They laid a snare for my steps, my soul was bowed down. They dug a pit in my path, but fell in it themselves".