One Core Difference Between Christians and Catholics

[Budge]

[b]A Christian believes SCRIPTURE HAS AUTHORITY OVER THE CHURCH. [/b]All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness

[b]A Roman Catholic is taught that ITS CHURCH HAS AUTHORITY OVER SCRIPTURE.[/b] "The manner of interpeting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the church, which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God" 119

[img]http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/bible.gif[/img]

[Anomaly]

Budge,
I'd love to see your definition of "christian".

The Catholic Church believes it has authority WITH scripture, which makes a little more logic since the Church established what 'Scripture' is and isn't.

[Eutychus]

In a nutshell...

One is Sola Scriptura

the other is

SOLA ECCLESIA

[Anomaly]

Eut,
You disappoint me.

There is not such thing as Sola Scriptura or Sola Ecclesia.

Is Scriptura w/ private interpretation of the local preacher or pastor.(and is practiced by prots and caths)

The others are Scriptura with the historical interpretation of the chruch organization. (And it's not just Catholics)

[thessalonian]

No budge the magesterium does not have authority over scripture in fact. That is not the way it works out. JP II has gone under intense pressure to allow women to be preists for instance. Many Anglican, Luther, Presbyterian communities have buckled to this because Sola Scriptura allows for man to put his mind and what he thinks scriptures says in authority over scripture. Same thing with the gay issue. Many Protestant Churches who teach Sola scriptura are buckling on this matter. The facts bear out that in fact protestantism puts men over scripture. That is why there are so many denominations out there contradicting eachother.

[Justified Saint]

Anomaly,

Sola Scriptura defintely exists -- its one of the pillars of Protestantism.

On the other hand sola ecclesia is simply a false label used by anti-catholics who possess little charity and even less intelligence.

thess,

Don't forget that all those communities you listed aren't in Budge's book of Christians either. The road to Budge's church is especially narrow with very few inside.

Edited August 9, 2006 by Justified Saint

[Guest JeffCR07]

The Church has always, does now, and will always teach that Scripture, Tradition, and Magesterium are three equal pillars of Truth, because the Holy Spirit works through each. One does not have "authority" over the other. That would be to say that the Holy Spirit has "authority" over the Holy Spirit, which is contradictory.

We put faith in all three, and thus remain internally consistent. You put faith in only one, and thus render yourself in a state of self-contradiction.

[thessalonian]

[quote]thess,

Don't forget that all those communities you listed aren't in Budge's book of Christians either. The road to Budge's church is especially narrow with very few inside.[/quote]

You mean like one? :. Doesn't matter as long as he doesn't think he is infallible. He is still asserting some point of his own reasoning over scripture. Do you think your infallible budge.

[curtins]

[quote name='JeffCR07' post='1040144' date='Aug 9 2006, 10:05 AM']
The Church has always, does now, and will always teach that Scripture, Tradition, and Magesterium are three equal pillars of Truth, because the Holy Spirit works through each. One does not have "authority" over the other. That would be to say that the Holy Spirit has "authority" over the Holy Spirit, which is contradictory.

We put faith in all three, and thus remain internally consistent. You put faith in only one, and thus render yourself in a state of self-contradiction.
[/quote]


Couldn't have said it better myself

[avemaria40]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1040095' date='Aug 9 2006, 08:47 AM']
In a nutshell...

One is Sola Scriptura

the other is

SOLA ECCLESIA
[/quote]


Sola verbum Dei, not sola ecclesia, we believe the Word of God comes from Scripture, the Church and Tradition. NOT that the Church has sole authority

[Jesuspaidtheprice]

The Bible is a development that came from many different texts and writings from the early Church. Its canonization and the belief of the infallibility of these new texts, added to the scriptures of the Hebrews was a decision by the early Church. The question is, do these infallible texts alone consist of an infallible canon - did the early Church make an infallible decision?

I've always thought of the Catholic Church as being a servant of the scriptures in its regular, daily preaching of the scriptures, and yet in its servanthood it bears the responsibility of the accurate interpretation of the scriptures. So in that, this "core difference" is not really very different. In any given Protestant Church the leaders of the Church must also decide how to appropriately interpret the scriptures and in themselves become magisterial authority figures.

So the real question then, is this Catholic Church the same Church that was able to decide what texts belonged in the new canon of scripture, does the Church contradict any of these scriptures in her current teachings, and thus is the Catholic Church the same (though grown up) Church that Peter and Paul belonged to and that Christ founded. Catholics would answer with a resounding yes, while Protestants would say even if the Church can trace its roots deeply into the early Church, they have since fallen astray.

[mortify]

If I were analyzing a painting and had a question on a certain symbolic aspect, it would make more sense for me to ask the artist than invent and stubbornly hold on to my personal interpretation. Infact, you could project thousands of various interpretations into the painting unless the painter himself were to reveal the true meaning of it.

The Church is like that painter, divinely commisioned by Christ, to paint the life of Christ and also bear the knowledge and meaning of all it paints. Throw out the painter and you are at a loss.


oh, and btw, "scripture" in that verse is referring to the OT

[Justified Saint]

[quote name='mortify' post='1040226' date='Aug 9 2006, 09:53 AM']
If I were analyzing a painting and had a question on a certain symbolic aspect, it would make more sense for me to ask the artist than invent and stubbornly hold on to my personal interpretation. Infact, you could project thousands of various interpretations into the painting unless the painter himself were to reveal the true meaning of it.

The Church is like that painter, divinely commisioned by Christ, to paint the life of Christ and also bear the knowledge and meaning of all it paints. Throw out the painter and you are at a loss.
oh, and btw, "scripture" in that verse is referring to the OT
[/quote]

That is an interesting analogy, but I think it has its difficulties too. It's not as if the Church painted the Bible (is that a mixed metaphor?)

The Church, though it possesses the fullness of truth and meaning, still walks by faith and makes interpretations which rest ultimately in faith -- in other words the Church doesn't have the privelege of sitting next to the painter and having all its questions answered. Thus talking about the "true meaning" (of the text) seem like the wrong words to describe or otherwise irrelevant, and I don't think this conflicts with the Church as infallible at all.

[Eutychus]

[quote]Sola verbum Dei, not sola ecclesia, we believe the Word of God comes from Scripture, the Church and Tradition. NOT that the Church has sole authority
[/quote]

What determines the meaning of scripture? The church. What determines what is tradition? The church. What determines new doctrines? The Church.

As I said, SOLA ECCLESIA.

[quote] unless the painter himself were to reveal the true meaning of it.

The Church is like that painter, divinely commisioned by Christ, to paint the life of Christ and also bear the knowledge and meaning of all it paints. Throw out the painter and you are at a loss.[/quote]

Silly, just silly.

The ARTIST is God, the ARTIST wrote a book. The ARTIST tells us what it means.

The Roman Church, is just the most recent critic writing on the painting. Every administration has a completely new spin.

Think that is untrue?

Just imagine Piux IX telling a practictioner of Voodoo, that Jesus can be found in Voodoo too.

EVERY Pope, prior to Vatican II, would have excommunicated the last few popes for what they have promoted, Mommy T praying to Buddha, JPII having another GOD, the Dalai Lama come an pray with him. Inviting Muslim terrorists, murderers into the Vatican and giving them praise and glory.

[b]Amazing, and you just cannot see that, can you?[/b]

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='Budge' post='1040086' date='Aug 9 2006, 08:24 AM']
[b]A Christian believes SCRIPTURE HAS AUTHORITY OVER THE CHURCH. [/b]All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness

[b]A Roman Catholic is taught that ITS CHURCH HAS AUTHORITY OVER SCRIPTURE.[/b] "The manner of interpeting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the church, which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God" 119[/quote]
I like the subtle message that protestants "believe" something, while Catholics are "taught" something else. Heaven forbid we'd believe what we were taught.

Just to finish the comparison (following the annoying all-caps pattern), the Holy Bible teaches that the CHURCH HAS AUTHORITY OVER SCRIPTURE.
[url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/1timothy/1timothy3.htm#v15"]1 Timothy 3:15[/url]
[url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/acts/acts8.htm#v31"]Acts 8:31[/url]

Opps. Forgot the big font size:
[size=5][b]...the CHURCH HAS AUTHORITY OVER SCRIPTURE.[/b][/size]
Man, nothing conveys a message better than a giant font!

-----------------

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1040252' date='Aug 9 2006, 01:48 PM']Just imagine Piux IX telling a practictioner of Voodoo, that Jesus can be found in Voodoo too.[/quote]Or imagine St. Paul, complimenting the religiousness of a group of Athenian pagans after seeing their shrines to false gods; and telling them that one of their gods was Jesus Christ. ([url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/acts/acts17.htm#v22"]Acts 17:22-23[/url])

Imagine.

Edited August 9, 2006 by Mateo el Feo

[Justified Saint]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1040252' date='Aug 9 2006, 10:48 AM']
What determines the meaning of scripture? The church. What determines what is tradition? The church. What determines new doctrines? The Church.

[/quote]

The interpretation of the scriptures is the task of the Church (who else?). The tradition is determined by Biblical revelation (which always points to the person of Jesus). New doctrines result as a consensual and definitive development of interpretation.

In Sola Scriptura either scripture interprets itself (probably the most ridiculous idea the Reformers ever imagined and also the first discared by Protestants) or the private conscience. Many Protestants hold the former while tacitly practicing the latter (since the former isn't possible).

Sola Scriptura (and by necessity much of Protestantism) entails a contradiction.

Edited August 9, 2006 by Justified Saint

[memory-singer]

[quote name='Budge' post='1040086' date='Aug 9 2006, 05:24 AM']
[b]A Christian believes SCRIPTURE HAS AUTHORITY OVER THE CHURCH. [/b]All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness

[b]A Roman Catholic is taught that ITS CHURCH HAS AUTHORITY OVER SCRIPTURE.[/b] "The manner of interpeting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the church, which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God" 119

[img]http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/bible.gif[/img]
[/quote]


WORD and SACRAMENT. SCRIPTURE and TRADITION. THE WORD BECAME FLESH.

I understand that you don't represent the Catholic Church. Which Christian Church are you speaking for?

Pax,

Dare

P.S. I don't like your graphic. It makes the Bible look like a weapon.

[Eutychus]

[quote]Or imagine St. Paul, complimenting the religiousness of a group of Athenian pagans after seeing their shrines to false gods; and telling them that one of their gods was Jesus Christ. (Acts 17:22-23)[/quote]


uhhhhhhhh, nooooo.....

Go reread it. Paul TAUGHT Christ, used the unknown god to illustrate the true God.

JPII actually REALLY SAID that voodoo was a perfectly acceptable path to salvation. He was standing there, and in a fashion, rejected the exclusivity of Christ, over and over, and did NOT preach the Gospel of salvation, as Paul did.

[quote]Pope John Paul II meeting with Voodoo worshippers, whom he invited to come pray with him at Assisi in 1986. The Animist religion to which they belong worships the souls of ancestors, the forces of nature, and also the Devil. John Paul II assured the witch doctors, just as he assured all the pagans, infidels and idolaters at Assisi, how "great" their religion is.

John Paul II, Angelus Address, Sept. 21, 1986: “To begin with, I would like to thank all those of the Christian Churches and of the other great religions of the world, who have accepted the invitation to go to Assisi on 27 October, for a special meeting of prayer for peace, today so fragile and threatened.”

On August 8, 1985, John Paul II prayed with African Animists (witch doctors). John Paul II recalled the meeting:

[color="#990000"][b]
“Particularly noteworthy was the prayer meeting at the sanctuary of Our Lady of Mercy at Lake Togo where, for the first time, I also prayed with a group of Animists.” (L’Osservatore Romano, August 26, 1985, p. 9.)[/b][/color][/quote]



[img]http://www.religion-cults.com/pope/pope-african-voodoo83.jpg[/img]

[quote]Oct. 27, 1986, pope John Paul II prayed with over 100 different religious leaders of various false religions, thereby repudiating the teaching of Scripture and the 2000-year teaching of the Catholic Church outlawing prayer with false religions.

The entire day of prayer with the pagans, infidels, and heretics was Antipope John Paul II's idea and they came at his invitation. During this meeting, the Dalai Lama placed a Buddhist statue on the tabernacle in the Church of St. Francis.[u] Among the various false religious leaders at Assisi, there were rabbis, Islamic muftis, Buddhist monks, Shintoists, assorted Protestant ministers, Animists, Jainists and others. During the meeting, a member of each false religion came forward and offered a prayer for peace. In 1928, Pope Pius XI authoritatively condemned this activity and denounced it as apostasy from the true Faith.[/u]

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (# 2), Jan. 6, 1928: “For which reason conventions, meetings and addresses are frequently arranged by these persons, at which a large number of listeners are present, and at which all without distinction are invited to join in the discussion, both infidels of every kind, and Christians… Certainly such attempts can nowise be approved by Catholics, founded as they are on that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthy... Not only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it...”

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (# 10): “So, Venerable Brethren, it is clear why this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in [such] assemblies...."

[b] John Paul II, Angelus Address, Oct. 12, 1986: “In a few days we shall go to Assisi, representatives of the Catholic Church, of other Christian Churches and ecclesial communities, and of the great religions of the world... I issued this invitation to ‘believers of all religions.”[/b][/quote]

[quote]Or imagine St. Paul, complimenting the religiousness of a group of Athenian pagans after seeing their shrines to false gods; and telling them that one of their gods was Jesus Christ. (Acts 17:22-23)[/quote]

[quote] P.S. I don't like your graphic. It makes the Bible look like a weapon.[/quote]

Is it.

You don't read much scripture do you?

Research WORD and SWORD and TWO EDGE and CUT.

Edited August 9, 2006 by Eutychus

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1040252' date='Aug 9 2006, 02:48 PM']
What determines the meaning of scripture? The church. What determines what is tradition? The church. What determines new doctrines? The Church.

As I said, SOLA ECCLESIA.
Silly, just silly.

The ARTIST is God, the ARTIST wrote a book. The ARTIST tells us what it means.

The Roman Church, is just the most recent critic writing on the painting. Every administration has a completely new spin.

Think that is untrue?

Just imagine Piux IX telling a practictioner of Voodoo, that Jesus can be found in Voodoo too.

EVERY Pope, prior to Vatican II, would have excommunicated the last few popes for what they have promoted, Mommy T praying to Buddha, JPII having another GOD, the Dalai Lama come an pray with him. Inviting Muslim terrorists, murderers into the Vatican and giving them praise and glory.

[b]Amazing, and you just cannot see that, can you?[/b]
[/quote]

I'm pretty certain that no one ever said Jesus could be found in voodoo. However, voodoo does recognize that there are good and evil forces in the world, and it recognizes that there is an established order to the way things work, etc. That means that it acknowledges a few truths. One could hardly come to know Jesus through it, though. Jesus comes through the Gospel.

God gave His people the Old Testament, bit by bit. Then God sent His Word, His Son, Jesus Christ, to them. Jesus revealed the mysteries God wished Him to share and then left (although, that's very paraphrased). Then the apostles and the leaders of the early Church, wrote out the New Testament, according to what had been written already and according to what had been passed on orally, that is, whatever was passed on by way of the teaching office of the Church. No one can disagree with these things; they are basic facts. Now, the things written down are Scriptures, but the Scriptures were not complete until the canon was entirely written down. Some of it had not yet been said. As these things were said, passed on orally, they came to be written down. Even the things that had been written already were first passed on as stories. Now, therefore, we have Scripture (literally, those things written down) and Tradition (literally, those things handed on), and we have the Magisterium (literally, the teaching office which passed those things on). This is why the Church states that she is at the service of the Gospel, at the service of Scripture and Tradition. The magisterium, from very early on, held that not all the things were written in the Scriptures, but that there were more things, such as certain rules for living and Christian precepts, which were not part of God's word, but were nonetheless part of the deposit. Thus, St. Paul himself does not restrict his followers to obey only the Scriptures, but also the things passed on by word of mouth. Even in the New Testament, these three are seen in very deep contrast, and all seen together.





PS-I'm willing to bet that when JPII called those religions "great" it was a reference to their size and influence, not to their moral wellness.

Edited August 9, 2006 by Raphael

[avemaria40]

[quote name='Eutychus' post='1040252' date='Aug 9 2006, 01:48 PM']
What determines the meaning of scripture? The church. What determines what is tradition? The church. What determines new doctrines? The Church.
[b]Amazing, and you just cannot see that, can you?[/b]
[/quote]
What gave the Church authority? Scripture! "If I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the [b]church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth[/b]1 Timothy 3:15

[b]And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it[/b]Matt 16:18

If the member refuses to listen to them, [b]tell it to the church[/b] and if the offender refuses to listen [i]even to the church[/i] let such a one be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Matt 18:17

Stand firm brothers and sisters, and hold fast to the traditions you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter. 2 Thessalonians 2:15