Is this legitimate?

[CounterRevolutionary]

Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements. Christ’s Spirit uses these churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to ‘Catholic unity.’

Catechism of the Catholic Church, #819

[CatholicCrusader]

Simply put, no.

[CounterRevolutionary]

anyone care to go a bit more in depth?

[miss_fluffy]

I have a further question about this.  While the above excerpt from the Catechism can be interpreted several different ways.  How can we simply state that it is wrong/heresy and still call ourselves Catholic?

 

It seems to me that stating that any part of the current catechism is heretical would be tantamount to stating that sedevacantism is a present reality, or that Catholicism itself is not the one true religion.

 

Sorry to bring that up in this thread, I don't mean to debate the sv position specifically, just wondering how you can deny the teaching of the catechism if you aren't sv?

[DominusTecum]

QUESTION 14 What are we to think of the NEW CATECHISM of the Catholic Church (1992)?

This question illustrates the fundamental differences between the Society of Saint Pius X and the Conciliar “traditionalists” or conservatives. These latter are often seen defending both the traditional Latin Mass and the “new” Catechism but not openly attacking either the Novus Ordo Missae or Vatican II. The Society of Saint Pius X on the other hand defends the traditional catechisms and therefore the traditional Latin Mass, and so attacks the Novus Ordo Missae, Vatican II and the “new” Catechism, all of which more or less undermine our unchangeable Catholic faith. Conservatives defend the Catechism of the Catholic Church for its re-affirmation of teachings silenced or denied by out rightly modernist catechisms; the Society of Saint Pius X rejects it though because it is an attempt to formalize and propagate the teachings of Vatican II. Pope John Paul II agrees with this: "The Catechism was also indispensable (i.e., as well as the 1983 Code of Canon Law), in order that all the richness of the teaching of the Church following the Second Vatican Council could be preserved in a new synthesis and be given a new direction." (Pope John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, London, Jonathen Cape, 1994, p. 164) One need but consider the 806 citations from Vatican II, a number which amounts on average to one citation every three-and-a-half paragraphs throughout the 2,865 paragraphs of the Catechism. In particular, the novelties of Vatican II appear in the following paragraphs: an infatuation with the dignity of man (§§225; 369; 1700; 1929...), such that we may hope for the salvation of all the baptized (§§1682ff), even non-Catholics (§818), or those who commit suicide (§2283), and of all the unbaptised, whether adults (§847), or infants (§1261); which is the basis of all rights (§§1738; 1930; 1935) including that of religious liberty (§§2106ff), and the motive of all morality (§1706; 1881; 2354; 2402; 2407, etc.), a commitment to ecumenism (§820f; 1399; 1401) because all religions are instruments of salvation (§§819; 838-843; 2104), collegiality (§§879-885), over-emphasis on the priesthood of the faithful (§§873; 1547; 1140ff, etc.). Now, just as he who denies but one article of Faith loses the Faith [PRINCIPLE 7], so a teacher who errs on one point alone proves himself fallible, and, renders all he teaches questionable.  Just as the Second Vatican Council is not an authority to quote even where it propounds Catholic teaching (it does not do so infallibly and clearly), so this Catechism is not an authority of Catholic belief because of the modern deviations which it encompasses. Those who defend this Catechism are supporting the innovations of Vatican II. Also see: http://www.sspx.org/New_Catechism/new_catechism__is_it_catholic_I.htm

[gladius_veritatis]

anyone care to go a bit more in depth?

This is not meant as a rhetorical, nor a loaded, question, but how "more in depth" do you want to go?

 

God does not use - EVER - another religion as a "means of salvation".   Some who have left the One Fold took some of the things that belong to God's Church - and ONLY to God's Church - with them when they left (through heresy, schism, etc).   These things still work, but not in the manner indicated by this passage from the Catechism.

[miss_fluffy]

Thank you DT for such a clear answer to my question.  You have given me much to chew on!

[DominusTecum]

As for the sede aspect of your question, I don't particularly want to touch on that here, because it's not a question for this forum, but I will say that the same principles hold true for the Catechism just as any other novelty of the past 40 years, like the Novus Ordo Missae, the new ecumenical spirit, 5 new rosary mysteries, ad infinitum. If rejection of those would equate to sedevacantism, then so would rejection of the catechism. However, if rejection of all that novelty does not make one a sedevacantist, then neither will the questioning of the new Catechism.

 

The Catechism of the Council of Trent is orthodox in every respect, and was written by a Saint, Charles Borromeo, I believe. Consequently, one cannot go wrong with it. The Catechism of St. Pius X is good, too, for setting out the truths of the faith, and the Baltimore is also very solid, pre-VII.

[gladius_veritatis]

The Catechism of the Council of Trent is orthodox in every respect, and was written by a Saint, Charles Borromeo, I believe.

It was ordered to be written by a decree from the Council of Trent, edited by Saint Charles Borromeo, published by the order of Saint Pius V, and is held by many to be part of the ordinary magisterium (due specifically to its connection to the Sacred Council of Trent, which guaranteed its orthodoxy with regard to the sections on the Sacraments, I think). 

[Kephapaulos]

 

anyone care to go a bit more in depth?

This is not meant as a rhetorical, nor a loaded, question, but how "more in depth" do you want to go?

 

God does not use - EVER - another religion as a "means of salvation".   Some who have left the One Fold took some of the things that belong to God's Church - and ONLY to God's Church - with them when they left (through heresy, schism, etc).   These things still work, but not in the manner indicated by this passage from the Catechism.

Such elements found in heretical and schismatic sects though are only profitable toward salvation probably when a Catholic is in danger of death and needs the sacraments or if inculpable ignorance is present. Otherwise, like you said, Gladius, these elements work not in the way Vatican II has put forth, but they will only work insofar as if these sects ever return to the Church or like the above cases I just mentioned. I think a good analogy I have heard here on the forum about valid sacraments outside the Church is that they are like river beds, yet they do not have the river water which is like the grace of the sacrament.