Wednesday, September 07, 2011

Robert Sungenis on YouCat

Source: The Vatican’s “YouCat” Catechism: Weak on Homosexuality, Contraception, Euthanasia, Evolution, and Scripture

"A youth catechism, known popularly as “YouCat,” which is claimed to be modeled from the official 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church, contains dubious, suggestive and sometimes scandalous teachings on issues such as homosexuality, contraception, euthanasia, evolution, philosophy, and last but not least, biblical inerrancy."

"YouCat was released by the Vatican on April 4, 2011 and was translated in more than a dozen languages. Under direction from Pope Benedict, YouCat will make its big splash on World Youth Day in Madrid on August 16-21, 2011."

-snip-

"As dubious as YouCat’s teaching is in certain places, it makes Scripture’s teaching in certain places even more dubious. For example, Question 15 states: “How can Sacred Scripture be ‘truth’ if not everything in it is right?” Directly against the numerous official and infallible Catholic teachings on the total inerrancy of Scripture, YouCat implies that Scripture simply cannot be trusted. A whole generation of young people will now view the Bible as an assortment of historical mistakes and ignorant concepts, despite the fact that the Holy Spirit was supposed to have inspired it all."

"It is particularly egregious for YouCat to say that the biblical authors were “dominated by the errors” of the culture around them. If that were the case, why weren’t they dominated by the same “errors of the culture” when they were writing about the “way of salvation”? For example, maybe Jesus didn’t actually rise from the dead. Maybe it was just the “error of the culture” to believe that he did. Maybe Jesus really wasn’t God. It was just the “error of the culture” which was steeped in wishing for a divine Messiah that made the people think that way. If the biblical writers can make errors in science and history why can’t they make errors in salvation? Where does the Bible or the Church say that the biblical writers are only protected from error when they speak about salvation? For that matter, where does either the Bible or the Church say that only certain parts of the Bible are for the purpose of salvation? The answer to both questions is: nowhere. It has all been made up out of thin air by modern biblical scholarship which is bent on promoting its unproven scientific theories as fact."

19 comments:

Rhology said...

Apparently YouCat = gold mine. Wow.

Ryan said...

Very interesting.

Andrew said...

Knock knock, Dr. Sungenis.

Pete said...

Yes, very terrible. When are you guys gonna come in the Church and help us fight the good fight? Here is the inerrancy paragraph in German for Brigitte:

15. Wie kann die Heilige Schrift “Wahrheit” sein, wenn nicht alles, was in ihr steht, richtig ist?

Historische Präzision oder naturwissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse will uns die Bibel nicht vermitteln. Auch waren die Autoren Kinder ihrer Zeit. Sie teilten die kulturellen Vorstellungen ihrer Umwelt und waren manchmal auch ihren Irrtümern verhaftet. Doch alles, was der Mensch über Gott und den Weg seiner Erlösung wissen muss, findet sich mit unfehlbarer Sicherheit in der Heiligen Schrift. [106 – 107, 109] (http://www.droemer-knaur.de/livebook/LP_978-3-629-02194-6/index.html)

Too bad.

With love in Christ,
Pete Holter

louis said...

"When are you guys gonna come in the Church and help us fight the good fight?"

They tried that and were thrown out... it was called the Reformation. :)

louis said...

"When are you guys gonna come in the Church and help us fight the good fight?"

They tried that and were thrown out... it was called the Reformation. :)

Rhology said...

When are you guys gonna come in the Church and help us fight the good fight?

For starters, any fight that results in RCC's being strengthened (unless it involves massive repentance for its DOGMA) is not good.

Paul Hoffer said...

Why would not an action that builds up the ecclesial Body of Christ a good thing?

louis said...

"When are you guys gonna come in the Church and help us fight the good fight?"

They tried that and were thrown out. It was called the Reformation.

louis said...

"When are you guys gonna come in the Church and help us fight the good fight?"

They tried that and were thrown out. It was called the Reformation.

Brigitte said...

Thanks for special version Pete. Which language is supposed to be definitive, I wonder. I am meditating over the the "dominated" vs. "verhafted." In the end it leaves the door pretty wide open to things being considered culturally conditioned.

In terms of creation, Genesis is indeed pretty sketchy in terms of how, except we know ex nihilo and by the word (Word).

On the other hand as a biology person I have huge problems with the prevailing dogma of macro-evolution for example. It is pretty ridiculous and I hate to see any Christians adhering to that.

scotju said...

Brigette, as a former Lutheran (WELS) I'm happy you see through the folly of marco-evolution from a scientific viewpoint. Indeed how can a reptile become a bird, when kind reproduces after its own kind? And how can evolutionists claim to know how man 'evolved' when they have never seen the process take place? Their faith is evolution is just that, a faith in evidence never seen, in opposition to true faith that has real evidence not seen. True science, which deals in evidence that can be seen, confirms the basic observable truths of Genesis. Namely, kind reproduces after its own kind, man is superior to animals, and is the master of them, not their descendant, and a day is divided into daytime and nighttime. The evolutionists reject true science and become fools blinded by their false wisdom.

Rebecca Holter said...

Wie geht’s, Brigitte!

I believe the German edition is the only one that’s been “approved” in any sense, although Ignatius Press did their best to provide a faithful translation.

I only took German in high school, but I do remember our true/false exams, and it was richtig and falsch. The YouCat seems to use Irrtümern in contrast with richtig where we know-nothings might expect something like falsch. Could there be anything to this? And could you please expand on the possible meanings of verhaftet? Do you think it could mean something more along the lines of the Biblical authors being constrained to adapt their message to what would be understandable to the surrounding peoples, without having the intent of promoting the errors of that culture; and also without having, while under divine inspiration, succumbed to those errors themselves? I suppose that all of this would be more than what could be derived from what the YouCat says, but is it possible for these ideas to coincide? Or does the text clearly or straightforwardly mean that the Biblical authors were in error under divine inspiration?

Thank you for your help!

Are you in the field of biology?

Have you read the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification? What do you think of it?

With love in Christ,
Pete

Rebecca Holter said...

Louis said…
Louis said…
Louis said…
Louis said…

What is it exactly that you’re trying to say, Louis? :)

In Christ,
Pete

PeaceByJesus said...

"It is particularly egregious for YouCat to say that the biblical authors were “dominated by the errors” of the culture around them. If that were the case, why weren’t they dominated by the same “errors of the culture” when they were writing about the “way of salvation”?

Good point. And as you can see in the thread on "The Canon as Infallible Sacred Tradition", the officially sanctioned liberal notes in the RC NAB are blamed on the presence of Reformed brethren sitting in on the council.

Brigitte said...

"Irrtuemer" is simply "errors". "Verhafted" is really quite strange. Usually it means that the police has caught you and put hand-cuffs on you. You are going to prison. You have lost your liberty. You can't do as you like. You are tied up and can't move. Something like that. Which I guess is something like "dominated".

Re: joint declaration on justification. I sure wish we had agreed to something, but according to conservative people there is too much vagueness to say that something has been achieved. Each can see what they like in the statement. Perhaps, it can be fixed but the way it sounds to me, conservative RC's won't really have it; apparently having a German pope is helping matters, as he might have a better understanding of Luther than other popes. He suggested to Catholics to read Luther. It is my hope that this helps.

Andrew said...

It would be GREAT if Roman Catholic lay people started reading Luther. And Melancthon's apology to the AC, article IV.

Brigitte said...

"verhafted" maybe would be best as "intimately tied up with".

Rebecca Holter said...

Thank you very much for the help, Brigitte.

Hey all!

I’m sorry YouCat ever got published, but the final homily delivered at World Youth Day was the best homily I’ve seen from a Pope: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2011/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20110821_xxvi-gmg-madrid_en.html.

What do you think?

In Christ,
Pete