A reader writes:

Over the years I have asked MANY orthodox Christian Catholics this question - priests included. The usual reaction is "You are crazy."

I'd like to read your response. I can not abandon the idea this is VERY POORLY written in The Catechism.

I'll begin with quoting the relevant sections.

588 Jesus scandalized the Pharisees by eating with tax collectors and sinners as familiarly as with themselves.364 Against those among them "who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and despised others", Jesus affirmed: "I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."365 He went further by proclaiming before the Pharisees that, since sin is universal, those who pretend not to need salvation are blind to themselves.366

589 Jesus gave scandal above all when he identified his merciful conduct toward sinners with God's own attitude toward them.367 He went so far as to hint that by sharing the table of sinners he was admitting them to the messianic banquet.368 But it was most especially by forgiving sins that Jesus placed the religious authorities of Israel on the horns of a dilemma. Were they not entitled to demand in consternation, "Who can forgive sins but God alone?"369 By forgiving sins Jesus either is blaspheming as a man who made himself God's equal, or is speaking the truth and his person really does make present and reveal God's name.

II. RESPECT FOR THE DIGNITY OF PERSONS

Respect for the souls of others: scandal

2284 Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. The person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor's tempter. He damages virtue and integrity; he may even draw his brother into spiritual death. Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense.

2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized. It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea."85 Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others. Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep's clothing.86

2286 Scandal can be provoked by laws or institutions, by fashion or opinion.

Therefore, they are guilty of scandal who establish laws or social structures leading to the decline of morals and the corruption of religious practice, or to "social conditions that, intentionally or not, make Christian conduct and obedience to the Commandments difficult and practically impossible."87 This is also true of business leaders who make rules encouraging fraud, teachers who provoke their children to anger,88 or manipulators of public opinion who turn it away from moral values.

2287 Anyone who uses the power at his disposal in such a way that it leads others to do wrong becomes guilty of scandal and responsible for the evil that he has directly or indirectly encouraged. "Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to him by whom they come!"89

Objectively, The Catechism teaches Jesus led others to do evil. "Jesus scandalized..." Jesus gave scandal..." ..."SCANDAL IS an attitude or BEHAVIOR WHICH LEADS OTHERS TO DO EVIL.."...THE PERSON WHO GIVES SCANDAL BECOMES HIS NEIGHBOR"S TEMPTER..

Now, of course I know The Catholic Church does not teach error or heresy but this is written about as poorly as possible. The truth is some Jews and Pharisees who took scandal.

To write "Jesus scandalized..." or "Jesus gave scandal.." was an error, imo. It makes much more sense to write that others took scandal. As written the Catechism, objectively, teaches Jesus was a tempter. It reads as though HE was the problem.

Am I just nutz?

I don't think you're nuts. But I do think you are working too hard. Words are polyvalent. They virtually never mean one thing and one thing only. That's why context is so important. Saying "The air is brisk" means one thing on an autumn evening and another at a Bach concert. I think it's pretty clear that the Catechism (authors? translators?) are trying to get across the idea "Jesus shocked the Pharisees". I agree that it could probably be phrased better for precisely the reason you point out. Yet the fact that I've never heard anybody make mention of this in 15 years suggests it's probably not a flub that has lead to many people into a major Christological crisis.

The Catechism is an instrument of the Church and sets forth the normative teaching of the Church as it has been articulated in magisterial documents. It is not, however, protected by infallibility. So it's quite possible for inapt phrasing such as this to occur. Our task as Catholics is to be smart readers.