The "New York Catechism" Quotes

There is a quote you can find some people claim is found in a Catholic catechism called the "New York Catechism". It goes thusly:

"The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth. . . . By divine right, the Pope has supreme and full power in faith and morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true Vicar of Christ, the Head of the entire Church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils, the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God Himself on earth." 

While there have been some very laudatory phrases used to describe the Pope in Catholic writings, this is very extreme, particularly with the "God Himself on earth" statement. But is this true? Did the New York Catechism ever say this? 

People who post this quote never give any further information on this work outside of its name, and no one seems to have been able to find any "New York Catechism" that has this quote. As a result, various people have asserted that the quote is made up or at best a muddled version of what a catechism does say. 

So why make another one post on this topic, if this information about how it seems a false quote is already available online? Well, some of the examinations seem incomplete, and I thought it might be good to try to add some more information. The short version is there are three things that I have seen put forward as possibly being this "New York Catechism"... but none of them appear to have this quote. So if you want just the short version, this quote does indeed to be a false one.

Let's begin with the origin. The first one to produce this quote, at least the first that I've seen anyone find, is  Lorarine Boettner's work "Roman Catholicism" published in the 1960's. The work is an attack on Roman Catholicism that is best known for two things: The first is a timeline of innovations it accuses the Catholic Church of introducing (sometimes called the "Boettner list"), and the second is the quote under discussion. The former has certainly come under some criticism, but our interest is in the quote rather than the timeline.

Boettner gives no further information about the source other than saying it comes from the "New York Catechism". This kind of vagueness is something that is frustrating about the book, where he cites a lot of sources ambiguously (vague as "New York Catechism" is, it's actually still more specific than another quote that he simply attributes to "an authorized catechism" without any further information). While it's the quote about the pope that's attributed to the New York Catechism that gets the most attention, Boettner does offer several other quotes he attributes to the "New York Catechism", again giving no further information about it (note the italics as well as the "[italics ours]" is Boettner's):

"Jesus Christ gave us the sacrifice of the Mass to leave to His Church a visible sacrifice which continues His sacrifice on the cross until the end of time. The Mass is the same sacrifice as the sacrifice of the cross [italics ours]. Holy Communion is the receiving of the body and blood of Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine." 

"I must tell my sins to the priest so that he will give me absolution. I shall go to confession often . . . to fulfill a condition for gaining certain indulgences. . . . A person who knowingly keeps back a mortal sin in confession commits a dreadful sacrilege, and he must repeat his confession. . . . The sacrament of penance remits the mortal sins and their eternal punishment; it revives the merits annulled by the mortal sins, and gives a special grace to avoid sin in the future."

"The priest gives penance in Confession, to help me to make up for the temporal punishment I must suffer for my sins. The penance given to me by the priest does not always make full satisfaction for my sins. I should, therefore, do other acts of penance . . . . and try to gain indulgences"

The last of these, it should be noted, is not attributed to the "New York Catechism" but rather a "catechism, published in New York says" which leaves it unclear whether this is some separate catechism in New York or is indeed supposed to be the same New York Catehcism.

Whether or not this last one is an invocation of the New York Catechism or a separate one, Boettner neglects to provide any information about the New York Catechism other than its name. No page is offered for the quotes, no date of publication is given, and no author is cited. It is very sloppy work on his part to throw these quotes out and give so little information about the source.

All right. So what is this New York Catechism? Assuming this quote wasn't manufactured out of whole cloth, I have seen three suggestions put forward.

Possibility #1: An Old Episcopalian Catechism Called the "New York Catechism"

The first possibility I have seen some suggestions of is that Boettner was mixing things up and referring to an old Episcopalian catechism. It would be odd to see such a statement in an Episcopalian catechism (unless it was being done to criticize Catholics), there is an Episcopalian catechism which several older sources refer to as the "New York Catechism". See for example pages 117-118 of "A History of the Parish of Trinity Church in the City of New York" from 1906 which says:

"The New York Catechism was compiled from a Catechism of a Scottish Bishop which was first reprinted in this country by Bishop Seabury. Bishop Hobart found copies in circulation in Connecticut. He adapted it for use in his Diocese without any indication of the original source."

Similarly we see in page 78 of the 1924 book "A History of Religious Education in the Episcopal Church to 1835":

"In 1802 the Diocese of New York published a Catechism which carried on its title page the recommendation of the Bishop and the clergy of the Diocese. This consisted of the regular Church Catechism followed by another Catechism which was printed without acknowledgment but which upon comparison with the Innes Catechism proves to be that Catechism slightly altered and somewhat abridged. In a letter which the Rev. Amos G. Baldwin wrote from Utica on December 13, 1806, to Bishop Moore, he stated that this "larger Catechism would be a good book" to use in his parochial work It is not surprising that Church officials in the new country should adopt this Scotch instruction material in question-and-answer form; for Bishop Seabury who first republished the text of Innes's Catechism, had received his ordination in Scotland, and the question-and-answer form was highly approved at the time. What seems to be most significant is the publication of the New York Catechism without recognizing either Innes or Seabury. The explanation lies in the fact that the Church was becoming more conscious of her independent American existence; she was willing to use this good material from across the water but when she published it it was as her own."

A footnote mentions that the New York Catechism had only 29 lessons compared to the Innes Catechism which had 44. Unfortunately, these sources do not give the actual name of this catechism. Fortunately, further searching reveals that on page 244 of Volume 5 of "Archives of the General Convention" (published 1912) that the title when first issued was the rather lengthy "The Catechism of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. Published at the Expense of a Fund arising from the Charitable Contributions of the Members of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the State of New York. new York, Printed by T. & J. Swords, No. 99 Pearl street. 1802. Appended. A Catechism published at the Expense of a Fund arising from the Charitable Contributions of the Members of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the State of New York and Recommended by the Bishop and Clergy."

A second edition had the slightly shorter title of "The Catechism of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America. To which is annexed, A Catechism designed as an Explanation and Enlargement of the Church Catechism. Recommended by the Bishop and Clergy of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the State of New York. The third edition. New York: Printed and sold by T. & J. Swords, No. 160 Pearl street. 1806."

With this information, the work can be found. WorldCat does not seem to have the specific 1802 or 1806 printings, but does offer some others. As noted earlier, this is an Episcopalian catechism, so one would not expect to find any statement like the one Boettner produces in it, unless it was done as a criticism of Catholics (such as to claim it was something Catholics believed). However, I was able to look at a copy and this quote does not seem to be there, not even as a criticism of Catholics. So this one does not have it.

Possibility #2: A 19th Century Catholic Catechism Referred to as "The Small New York Catechism"

The second is one that I do not think I have seen someone else examine, but I have seen mentioned as a possibility, though they were unable to look into it. One can find some references to something called "The Small New York Catechism" in a few list of books, as seen here ("The Publishers' Trade List Annual", published in 1878--unfortunately, there are not page numbers to specifically cite, but the link will take you there). This work, which was being sold by D. & J. Sadler & CO. in New York, is entitled "The Small New York Catechism" for short with the full name being "The Catechism; or, A Short Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine. Newly Revised. For the Use of the Catholic Church in the United States. To which is added a Prayer before and after Catechism. Permissu Superiorum. 48mo, 84 pp., per 100, net, . . . . . . $2.00".

(the ability to get 100 copies of a book, even a short one, for only $2 seems staggering, but remember that we have gone through a century and a half of inflation since then)

Unfortunately, finding this specific New York printing is difficult. There are various works with similar titles, but if we want the specific New York version to see if it is possibly different, I do not know where to find it; WorldCat has an entry for it here but it lists zero libraries as having this.

However, we can look at what seem to be printings of this in other areas. For example, here we find "A Catechism: Or Short Abridgment of Christian Doctrine. Newly Revised for the use of the Catholic Church. To which is prefixed a short Daily Exercise" that is from Quebec. One may notice the title is very similar. Also there is here which titles itself "A Short Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine; Newly Revised and Augmented, for the use of the Catholic Church in the Diocese of Boston." Again a similar, although not identical, title.

The Boston one does have some extra things at the start and end, but otherwise they seem nearly identical in context from what I have looked at. So most likely this has the same basic text as what "Short New York Catechism" had to say. However, the applicable quote about the Pope is not there; its treatment of the pope consists only of "Has the Church any visible head on earth? Yes; the Bishop of Rome, who is the successor of St. Peter, and is commonly called the Pope." That is essentially all they have to say about the pope.

Without a copy of the specific New York printing, one cannot say with absolute certainty that the quote isn't there. However, the evidence is strongly against it. Not only do we have a book that appears to have the same content that doesn't have it, such a statement would almost certainly have caught the eye of Protestants in the 19th century, but any search on Google Books for the quote turns up nothing from that era, or anything prior to Boettner. Copyright does mean that the available material will be either things out of copyright (that is, from the early 20th century or earlier) or recent enough that they were digitized and available in preview form, but that still is plenty of time for someone to take note of this extreme statement. It also doesn't seem likely Boettner would have had access to a copy of a minor catechism from a century ago. So while we cannot be absolutely certain the New York printing did not include the quote without looking at it, the odds are extremely against it, and the onus is clearly on anyone who claims this is where Boettner got the quote to get a copy and prove it.

Possibility #3: A Garbled Misquote from a 20th-century Catechism That Had a New York Printing

This brings us to the final possibility, and the one that those who have examined this seem to think is the most likely possibility. Namely, a catechism by Peter Cardinal Gasparri (also referred to as Pietro Gasparri), which was translated into English as "The Catholic Catechism" and published in New York (and other cities). Unlike the prior two examined, which were from the 19th century, this was from the 20th century, making it more possible that it was available to Boettner. Unfortunately, the specific New York printing does not seem to be available online, but I was able to look at physical copy of it from a library. One can find online a London printing here and a Toronto printing here. I compared a few pages between them and the New York version, and their text appears identical, though the pages themselves don't necessarily match up perfectly (that is, the actual words are the same, but may be found on different pages due to slightly different number of lines per page). So you can look at those links to see what the New York version has.

This work does not have the quote--certainly not the "God Himself on Earth" portion--but makes some comments that have some similarities to some parts of the quote. For example, on page 98, it says:

"The Roman Pontiff has supreme, full, ordinary, and immediate power both over each and every Church, and over each and every Pastor and his flock."

While not a perfect match, this are clear similarities to the portion of the quote that says "By divine right, the Pope has supreme and full power in faith and morals over each and every pastor and his flock".

However, other parts of the quote don't seem to match up with anything in this catechism that I can find; absolutely nothing in the final sentence ("He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils, the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God Himself on earth") appears to match up with it.

For a while, I thought this was where it ultimately came from, and that Boettner just badly garbled the source to change it nearly beyond recognition. This has been the conclusion of some others. However, I am not so sure now. The reason for this is that while the above "pope quote" Boettner presents could possibly be a very garbled version of the original, this would not explain all of the other quotes he claims are from the New York Catechism.

Let's look again at the first of the others:

"Jesus Christ gave us the sacrifice of the Mass to leave to His Church a visible sacrifice which continues His sacrifice on the cross until the end of time. The Mass is the same sacrifice as the sacrifice of the cross [italics ours]. Holy Communion is the receiving of the body and blood of Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine." 

This quote is not found either, though something similar is on page 43:

"The Sacrifice of the Mass is one and the same sacrifice as the Sacrifice of the Cross which is renewed, for the Victim is one and the same, now offering Himself through the ministry of His priests as He then offered Himself on the Cross, only the manner of the offering being different."

There are some similar enough phrasings here that it is plausible the former is a very garbled version of the latter. So that quote and the one about the pope could both possibly come back to this, even if Boettner changed them significantly. However, we run into a problem with the last quote.

"I must tell my sins to the priest so that he will give me absolution. I shall go to confession often . . . to fulfill a condition for gaining certain indulgences. . . . A person who knowingly keeps back a mortal sin in confession commits a dreadful sacrilege, and he must repeat his confession. . . . The sacrament of penance remits the mortal sins and their eternal punishment; it revives the merits annulled by the mortal sins, and gives a special grace to avoid sin in the future."

I cannot find any matches for this in the catechism, even ones that could be considered garbled, for this. Yes, there are portions that treat on confession, but the phrasing is so different that unlike the preceding quotes, it cannot be considered to a garbled version of an actual quote. It's just not there at all, at least not that I can see. This therefore makes me less confident that this was where Boettner got the pope quote. Even if that was a garbled version of a real quote, one would think that would then apply to all of the quotes from this work.

In any event, even if some of his "New York Catechism" quotes do trace back to this, he clearly messed up the wording badly, and the most controversial parts of the pope quote are not there at all. 

Conclusion

So, what can we conclude from this?

Well, the same conclusion others have drawn: There appears to be no "New York Catechism" that has this quote. Assuming the existence of the New York Catechism wasn't simply made up, Possibility #1 does not have the quote, and was an Episcopalian catechism anyway. Possibility #2 cannot be definitively disproved without a copy of the specific New York printing, but given that the evidence is strong that the catechism in question was just a printing in New York of the same catechism available elsewhere, and that the other printings did not have this quote, it is very unlikely that the New York printing would. Furthermore, it is unlikely that no one in the 19th century appears to have caught this, and it was only Boettner writing over a century later who did. Possibility #3 is the most promising and has something that's sort of like the quote about the pope, but if that is the ultimate source it means Boettner botched his quote very badly, and it doesn't explain where the quote he offers about confession came from given that one diverges from the wording of the source so much it can't even be considered a mangled quote.

So on the whole, this post doesn't add that much to the conversation outside of the examination of #2, which still only led to the conclusion of it almost certainly not having the quote. Still, I thought it might be worth it to post it just to give information on that.

Someone thoroughly dedicated to this quote might still insist that it could be out there somewhere. But the onus should be on the person who refers to the quote to demonstrate that the work actually exists. No one, at least no one that I have ever seen, has been able to find a copy of any "New York Catechism" that has the actual quotes Boettner attributes to it. Until such time as someone is able to point to a copy of the New York Catechism that has this quote, there is no reason to give it credence.

We will likely never know for sure how Boettner came up with this quote; we certainly have no real way to ask him, given he died in 1990. Assuming he didn't invent it out of thin air, he may have been inaccurately reconstructing something from memory. Or perhaps he simply took it uncritically from someone else who (purposefully or accidentally) manufactured the quote. But however he came up with this quote, it does not speak well of him as a researcher if he is citing non-existent quotes (nor does it speak well of those who repeat it uncritically without verifying it), particularly when he does it so vaguely and ambiguously.