I’m listening to the Catechism of the Council of Trent as an audiobook. It is really informative and inspiring.

"We think that if we saw a man raised from the dead, who should tells us what he had seen and suffered in another world, it would make more impression upon us than past miracles, which we hear of, or the promises and threats of the prophets, apostles, and our blessed Saviour, which are contained in Scripture; but it is a false notion, a vain excuse. The wicked, and unbelievers, would even in that case find pretexts and objections for not believing." - St. John Chrysostom

I use Ludwig Otts book" Fun damentals of Catholic Doctrine"

I use the The New St. Joseph Baltimore Catechism. Is this catechism good or not? God bless Fr. Gruner and the Fatima Center!🙏

How about the catechism of st. Pius x?

What about The Fr Sparago Catechism Explained?

Where can I find this book Please?

wait...they only recommended catechisms!

In regards to BonVon D's post. Although this sounds appealing, it is entirely unscriptural and completely Protestant in nature. Justification by Faith alone is an error and a grave one at that. One who believes in Christ must believe in all that Christ taught, not selectively. Christ said "If a man will not hear the Church, let him be as the heathen." Matt. XVIII., 17. And again "Unless your justice abound more than that of the Scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Matt. V., 20. The above is evidence that more is needed than merely belief, as one could believe in Christ's sacrifice but be lacking in justice. Another quote - "Not everyone who cries: 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven." Matt. VII., 21. This proves that faith alone is not sufficient. Reason itself revolts against the notion that everything necessary for salvation has been accomplished and secured, as that would likewise ransom all Christians from the need to avoid sin or practice virtue. We could be essentially as wicked as we cared to be, so long as be had Faith in the sacrifice of Christ. That goes against all that Christ taught by word and deed, the teachings recorded in scripture, the traditions of the Church and the basic command to repent and do penance. To find what more is needed, we look at the real teachings of Christ, who said it was necessary to hear the Church he founded. Which Church did he found? History, adherence to Christ's true and entire teachings and the various signs of the true Church (One, Holy, Apostolic) admits no possibility other than the Catholic Church.

Next to Vatican II documents, on the seats reserved for those charged with treason of faith would sit literal Latin Bible translations into English. There is nothing more deadly than serving a literal translation from an old language which comes with a grammar, and requiring thinking patterns diametrically opposite to today’s languages. As a result, for a few hundred years people had been stuck with this: following the literal Hebrew thinking pattern in grammar of the Latin language - translated literally into English. Translating Bible as such yield in lapses that steered many people away. It introduces unnecessary extra pains: misunderstanding of the dogma, increases labour of explaining the real meaning, increases frustration while reading, and finally, little love for Bible. Yet we do not count those silent, invisible crimes for they happen in people’s homes and in the classrooms. Translating committees cared about following of the letter of the law down to the letter of it; they have excused themselves from all guilt, weren't they? See this example from John 18:36, in which a common misunderstanding occurs. The literal translations of Douay Rheims (edited by bishop Challoner) and KJV deliver English sentences that can be understood in two different ways: John 18:36 ... What hast thou done? Jesus answered: My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would certainly strive that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now my kingdom is not from hence. [Douay-Rheims 1899] ... What hast thou done? Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. [King James Version] Is Our Lord’s kingdom not of this world, so that our Lord has no jurisdiction over this world, nor power in it to call on his servants? Hence he gives up before Pilates, for it is not ‘from hence’? Or, this unclear English means something else: His kingdom does not have origin in this world and its values? How many books were written about polemics of this single line, especially in modern times, when some phrases have more meanings and we must strive for clarity. All the confusion for no good reason - because of the too literal translation. Which, paradoxically, causes problems with dogmatic understanding! Now follows the translation of Msgr Knox, Catholic bishop, who was aware of such problems found in Douay Rheims and KJV in spades. He clears the point to the English speaking audience, so that there are no doctrinal and thinking errors caused by literal translation of different thinking patterns of the original language: .. What offence hast thou committed? My kingdom, said Jesus, does not belong to this world. If my kingdom were one which belonged to this world, my servants would be fighting, to prevent my falling into the hands of the Jews; but no, my kingdom does not take its origin here. [Msgr Ronald Knox’ translation of the Vulgate Bible]

Best Catechism is the New Catechism.