On Reading Holy Scripture

[the lumberjack]

but is it NOT a NEW, very recently instituted teaching?

not certified up until this passed sunday?

[Dave]

[quote name='the lumberjack' date='Apr 20 2004, 01:17 PM'] sure, you weigh NEW catholic tradition against old, yet still approved, catholic tradition, and as long as there are a couple of bible verses in there to support the new catholic point, you'll go with it.

you fear the laws of men, rather than the Word of God.

what about this last Sunday? when Divine Mercy Sunday was held for the first time, officially?

could you elaborate on that? [/quote]
The Word of God encompasses Sacred Tradition AS WELL AS Scripture. When we say Sacred Tradition, we're just not talking about man-made laws. The Church has taught the same things that Jesus taught for 2000 years. Some are explicitly found in Scripture, and some are explicitly found in Sacred Tradition. But NEITHER contradicts the other.

And as for Divine Mercy Sunday, the Church has the authority to institute new feast days. But that's not an issue of doctrine. What is an issue of doctrine is Christ's mercy for us. That has always been taught since the earliest times. But whether a feast day should be made or which day it should be held falls into the realm of discipline.

[amarkich]

Lumberjack, you are wrong about Divine Mercy Sunday. I attend a Mass that uses the 1962 Missal (the Mass, Feasts, Breviary, etc.), and the Feast of the last Sunday is called Low Sunday properly speaking, but it is also referred to as Divine Mercy Sunday as well as Quasi Modo Sunday (the first two words of the Introit, similar to Gaudete Sunday and Laetare Sunday), even before Vatican II. As far as I understand, the prayers of the Mass have not changed this year (any more than they have since Vatican II, compared to the Traditional Mass). I agree with you completely about the fact that the Mass should not have changed, but you must recognize that it is within the Church's authority to change the Mass. While the changing of the Mass was utter chaos and a destruction of Tradition (among other things), it is not a dogmatic issue and can change. We simply must pray for a Restoration of Tradition in the Mass and within the Church in general.

[Livin_the_MASS]

[b]Scott Hahn "Scripture Matters"[/b]

"Indeed, the Magisterium has thrown down the gauntlet. What will happen if theologians take it up? Undoubtedly, to do so, systematicians must become thoroughly acquainted with Scripture, and grounded in its covenant theology and salvation history, just a exegetes must be able and willing to teach a style of theological exegesis that build upon---yet goes beyond--- historical-critical exegesis.

"This point must be made clearly: Catholic exegetes do not need to reject historical-critical methods. But they should only employ these methods with caution; at the same time, they do not have to employ only these methods. The Church recommends cautions but non-exclusive use. Two centuries of practice showed limited uses---and virtually unlimited abuses.

"What would happen to ordinary Catholics if this challenge were accepted and the mandate realized? Perhaps the result would be Catholics discovering all the riches and mysteries of their faith within Scripture. Indeed, this is precisely what Catholic catechesis must strive for in the future, as John Paul II forcefully states in his "Apostolic Exhoration on Catechesis in Our Time" (Catechesi Tradendae), where he makes a strong plea for restoring the primacy of Scripture to catechesis:

[b][i]'To speak of Tradition and Scripture as the source of catechesis is to draw attention fo the fact that catechesis must be impregnated and penetrated by the thought, the spirit and the outlook of the Bible and the Gospels through assifuous contact with the texts themselves; but it is also reminder that catechesis will be all the richer and more effective for reading the texts with the intelligence and the heart of the Church and for drawing inspiration from the two thousand years of the Church's reflection and life.'[/i][/b]

"Unfortunately, many Catholics still feel they must avoid studying Scripture, sometimes because they are confused by difficulties in the text or with critical interpretations of it. In any case, many Catholics still react to the tactics used by aggressive non-Catholic believers---the so-called Bible Christians who teach and practice the Protestant doctrine of [i]sola scriptura.[/i] By now evey Catholic should know--- and be able to show--- the unscriptural character of this doctrine (cf. 1 Tim. 3:15; 2 Thess. 2:15, 3:6) although it is not beyond rehabilitation. (e.g., [i]solum verbum Dei[/i], only the Word of God"' [i]prima sciptura[/i], "Scripture first")

"Too often, however Catholics yield to something like an out-of-court divorce settlement:"She gets the house while I keep the car and furniture," becomes. "They get the Scripture while we keep Tradition and the Magisterium.' In truth, they are inseparable:[b][u] Scripture and the Church---both or neither![/u][/b]

"Thus, the proper interpretation of Scripture must be done in the Church, of the Church, and by the Church. For the Church is the Mystical Body of Christ Who, as its head, sent the Holy Spirit to be the indwelling soul of the Body of Christ. The some Spirit Who inspired the founders and leaders of the Church in the first generation to write the New Testament is able to guide their successors to understand and teach it truly in all future generations. The Holy Spirit enlightens the Church to interpret what He inspired.


[b]"A Wholehearted Return to Scripture"[/b]

"The fortunes of the Church throughout history depend on her love of Christ and, consequently, her openness to Him speaking through Scripture. The great Catholic Scripture commentator, Cornelius A. Lapide, testifies to the conviction of Saint Teresa of Avila: "S[aint] Teresa, a women endowed with the spirit of prophecy, and renowed throughout all Spain for the glory of her miracles, and the sanctity of her life, [b]was taught by God that all the troubles of the Church, all the evils of the world, flow from this source, that men do not, by clear and sound knowledge, and serious consideration, penetrate into the verities of Sacred Scripture."[/b]





To me Sacred Scripture must be read within the guide lines of the Church, but this does not state by any means that one should not read or own there own Bible.
I have like 5 Bibles each one is different in translation. Scripture should always be a part of our daily lives within the Church. We need to read Gods Word!

God Bless
Jason

[Livin_the_MASS]

Crazy computer :pebcam:

Edited April 21, 2004 by Jason

[p0lar_bear]

[quote]I do say, however, that laymen should not read the Bible for the same purpose which Thomas A Kempis stated, to come to a knowledge of the truth (as he says, the reason for which it was written).[/quote]

I'm sorry, I'm still stuck on this....

Regarding your quotes:

First of all, they are from a local council, so by no means proof of a constant teaching of the Church.

Second, the document seems to be an attempt to address the problem of Albegensianism and its use of bad translations. The Church still strives for better and better translations in all languages and She condemns (though not by name) those translations that are not true to the meaning of the ancient texts.


Also, if this is the teaching of the Church, as you claim, then why is there no mention of it in [i]Providentissimus Deus[/i] or [i]Divino Afflante Spiritu[/i]? Leo XIII talks about departments of biblical studies at seminaries [i]and academic institutions[/i] (cf. PD, no. 11). Throughout both documents the Holy Fathers refer to "private students," "biblical scholars," and "Catholic commentators," never qualifying these as exclusively clergy or religious. Given the problems in biblical studies that they were addressing, if they wanted to restrict such biblical studies to priests and religious, these two documents would have been the place to do it, but they did not.

If the Church maintains that the laity should not read the Bible so as to discover truth within it, why does She award lay people with STBs, STLs, and STDs in biblical studies? Why does She allow lay people to study and the Pontiffical schools such as the Angelicum and the Gregorian? (This was allowed before Vatican II). Why has there been nothing written by any Pope or Ecumenical council in the history of the Church restricting the reading and study of the Bible? Aside from a local council trying to deal with the problem of bad translations, there is absolutely no Magesterial evidence for your position.


[quote]While the changing of the Mass was utter chaos and a destruction of Tradition (among other things),[/quote]

If [b]T[/b]radition has been destroyed, the gates of Hell have prevailed. The only thing touched was [b]t[/b]radition.

[the lumberjack]

p0lar bear, at the risk of sounding like a complete baffoon, I commend you for questioning things like this... questions like this are what really lead to wisdom and knowledge... not just taking the word of another man, no matter how long he's been dead, or how good he was...

i have no doubt that you are a catholic that wants to serve Christ with all you heart, and be faithful to His church... and it makes me glad in my little dumb protestant heart to see someone unafraid to ask those questions and make those statements.

though you will undoubtedly be corrected and reassymilated to conform to the infallible church teaching...

God bless.

[cmotherofpirl]

Lunber you still don't get it do you?

There is nothing wrong with questioning and never has been.
However, there are somethings that are defined and you accept them.
It is not necessary to keep re-inventing the wheel.

Do you argue with the Trinity or do you accept it?

Some things are the bottom line of Christianty, some basic standards.
So those people who call themselves Christians, and do not believe in the physical
Resurrection of Jesus, are not christians, no matter what they call themselves.

Catholics are the most logical and questioning people I know.

Groups that have defined themselves in narrow little boxes are the ones who never question anything. I know people who cannot make a decision unless the run it by their preacher.

Edited April 21, 2004 by cmotherofpirl

[the lumberjack]

cmom, I don't want to post TOO much to take away from p0lar bear's post....

yeah, we DO agree on the basics...so long as we're not talking about it in the "historical" sense.

the trinity.
Jesus is Lord and Saviour of the Universe.
we need to be baptized.
we should partake of communion.
we should do good deeds, not to merit anything, but to show our faith and be justified in our walk and life to men...
we are saved by grace thru faith.
Christ was born of a virgin.
and all the other absolute basics.

but beyond this, there is too great a rift to be breached...

I DO get it.

your relics, over indulgence in the superfancy ornate dress and ornamentation and exaltation of the bishops and papal representatives, "sainthood", immaculate conception, you know the rest...this is what is unbreachable in the mind of all evangelical christians.

the fact that to get to know your religion, I would have to dig thru over 2000 years of inconclusive contradicting documents and councils.

don't take that last statement the wrong way....but come on, if you HAVE been around for 2000 years as you all love to claim, shouldn't there be a SOLID doctrine now? 2000 years later?

as a Christian, my doctrine is not complete...yet what I know I have, is rock solid in God's word. there are some teachings I might not be ready for, and some that I might not agree with...but you know...thats just me. no one is perfect...no one. I do not interpret the bible for myself, as your religion SOOO loves to claim I do.

[u]I ask again, what does ANYTHING I've posted do to lift me above the station of a sinner that has been redeemed thru Christ?[/u]

I have read in the Bible that FAITH is the center of our walk with Christ, with God drawing us closer to Himself... where as everything I've read, APART from what you claim here on the board, is that physical perishable things draw us closer to God. that by our works, or a prayer in front of a statue, or wearing some little scapulary, or saying a certain prayer a certain amount of times, or anything else YOU do to draw closer to God.

I do get it...and maybe its time I leave, since I guess I'm prone to spark "fruitless dialogues"...but only the Lord knows.

[p0lar_bear]

Lumberjack,

Umm...I'm a bit confused by your praise. I wasn't in any way questioning that which the Church teaches. I was pointing out that Amarkich's claim was invalid. I was showing that the Church does not and has never taught that lay people should not read the Bible in order to discover truth in it.

Not that I've never asked questions about why the Church teaches what She teaches (which is perfectly legitimate), but this is not one of those occassions.

[amarkich]

Polar Bear, my claim was certainly valid. I could get into specifics of how Tradition has been destroyed but that it has not been abandoned or rejected. There is a great difference here (the rejection of Tradition vs. the abandonment of Tradition). While Tradition has been maintained insofar as validity of the Novus Ordo Mass, it has been abandoned in the Novus Ordo culture (not to say that it has been in the Mass). I apologize for the ambiguity. The Novus Ordo, as you may agree, has completely abandoned tradition to the fullest and most absolute extent whereas Novus Ordo culture has abandoned Tradition. I apologize again.

Now, more importantly, Lumberjack, you make another error in your post concerning Catholic teaching.

[quote]we should partake of communion.
we should do good deeds, not to merit anything, but to show our faith and be justified in our walk and life to men...
we are saved by grace thru faith.[/quote]

The Church does not teach and has never taught that works are simply a manifestation of faith. The Church does not teach and has never taught we are saved by grace through faith. These are both part of the Protestant heresy. It is condemned by the Council of Trent, c.f., Canons on Justification. Recognizing that these are Canons on [i]Justification[/i], it must be noted that these Canons must be understood correctly. If you are to adhere to the heresy that we are saved by grace through faith, you may as well believe that you are saved by grace alone (because 1) faith in itself is a type of good work and 2) faith is an action taken by an individual, which, constituting as a good work, would be the equivalent of man saving himself under the Protestant heresy of Sola Fide, even when it is taught "properly" and includes works as necessary for justification). God bless.

Edited April 22, 2004 by amarkich

[amarkich]

Likewise, while I do not have time to sufficiently reply with an argument of equal length, I stand by the simple fact that the Bible leads many astray. This has been stated by the Church and the Popes (as well as many Saints). The fact of the matter is this: even if the Church does not forbid Bible reading for seeking Truth, it should not be done because of the simple fact that it leads even the "educated and gifted" to be deceived. Also, it is very interesting to note that absolution was denied to those who were distributing the Books of the Bible. If it is so harmless, why was this practice advocated? It is clear that the "Bible-happy" (sorry, I can think of no other terminology) attitude of the Modernist "catholic" culture has focused so strongly on the use of the Bible that those who choose to read it as an option devotion also choose to believe that they can discern truth from it. This is not the vocation of the individual, however, regardless of whether or not it is within his ability. It is the job of the Church. God bless.

Edited April 22, 2004 by amarkich

[cmotherofpirl]

Hear we go again...

[Livin_the_MASS]

[quote name='amarkich' date='Apr 21 2004, 08:11 PM'] Likewise, while I do not have time to sufficiently reply with an argument of equal length, I stand by the simple fact that the Bible leads many astray. This has been stated by the Church and the Popes (as well as many Saints). The fact of the matter is this: even if the Church does not forbid Bible reading for seeking Truth, it should not be done because of the simple fact that it leads even the "educated and gifted" to be deceived. Also, it is very interesting to note that absolution was denied to those who were distributing the Books of the Bible. If it is so harmless, why was this practice advocated? It is clear that the "Bible-happy" (sorry, I can think of no other terminology) attitude of the Modernist "catholic" culture has focused so strongly on the use of the Bible that those who choose to read it as an option devotion also choose to believe that they can discern truth from it. This is not the vocation of the individual, however, regardless of whether or not it is within his ability. It is the job of the Church. God bless. [/quote]
[quote name='amarkich' date='Apr 21 2004, 08:11 PM']Likewise, while I do not have time to sufficiently reply with an argument of equal length, I stand by the simple fact that the Bible leads many astray. This has been stated by the Church and the Popes (as well as many Saints). The fact of the matter is this: even if the Church does not forbid Bible reading for seeking Truth, it should not be done because of the simple fact that it leads even the wise and knowledgeable to be deceived. God bless.[/quote]


[quote]"A Wholehearted Return to Scripture"

"The fortunes of the Church throughout history depend on her love of Christ and, consequently, her openness to Him speaking through Scripture. The great Catholic Scripture commentator, Cornelius A. Lapide, testifies to the conviction of Saint Teresa of Avila: "S[aint] Teresa, a women endowed with the spirit of prophecy, and renowed throughout all Spain for the glory of her miracles, and the sanctity of her life, was taught by God that all the troubles of the Church, [b]all the evils of the world, flow from this source, that men do not, by clear and sound knowledge, and serious consideration, penetrate into the verities of Sacred Scripture."[/b][/quote]

You must have missed my post? There is nothing wrong with a Catholic Christian owning and reading his or her own Bible. They should know to stay within the guidelines of the Chuch, this does not mean not to read Sacred Scripture.

Are you misunderstanding this or what? My personal story, God touched me in His Sacred Scripture, First though His True Presence in the Holy Eucharist, which lead me to Sacred Scripture.


[b][i][u]Scripture and the Church---both or neither![/u][/i][/b]



God Bless
Jason

Edited April 22, 2004 by Jason

[p0lar_bear]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Apr 21 2004, 09:12 PM'] Hear we go again... [/quote]
I seem to be getting a lot of deja vu on the board lately....

I should just stop responding, but I'm afraid people will think that these people speak for the Church...

[quote]I apologize for the ambiguity. The Novus Ordo, as you may agree, has completely abandoned tradition to the fullest and most absolute extent whereas Novus Ordo culture has abandoned Tradition. I apologize again.
[/quote]

Actually, I completely and utterly disagree with both of these statements, but that is not the point of the thread and dUst has asked us to avoid Catholic vs. Catholic arguments, so I will drop this now.

[IcePrincessKRS]

Thank you Polar Bear for keeping in mind dUSt's "rules", its always nice to see that some people are indeed trying to follow them.

[cmotherofpirl]

AMEN!

[p0lar_bear]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' date='Apr 21 2004, 10:09 PM'] Thank you Polar Bear for keeping in mind dUSt's "rules", its always nice to see that some people are indeed trying to follow them. [/quote]
Not sure how often I succeed, but I try...

[the lumberjack]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Apr 21 2004, 07:12 PM'] Hear we go again... [/quote]
you said it...and I'm not going to dig thru my bible again to find all the contextual verses that say our works ARE a manefestation of our faith and that we ARE saved by grace thru faith...but hey...Paul HAD to be wrong, right?

you know, that whole ephesians 2:8,9 thing...oh well.

and yeah, amarkich, I KNOW that its part of the "protestant heresy"

thats why I changed my avatar...

if you don't believe I post out of my love for you...too bad.


and as for catholic on catholic debates, whats so wrong with that? THAT is how people are corrected, and brought back to correct doctrine...but hey, not my board...not my rules.

God bless you, my estranged phatmass phamily!

[cmotherofpirl]

We are not estranged, some are not as advanced as others...