authentic papal statement

[Tarcisius]

That quote is taken directly from the Pius X Catechism. Most phatmassers dont like it and try to make it seem like this Saint Pope was only talking about what to do at the point in time he spoke the words... They would rather trust that they, themselves are strong enough in there faith to decide what to do with dangerous false books.

[thessalonian]

I am fine with the quote and it certainly does have application today. We most certainly should have serious reason for reading anything that might damage our faith. However counter information is also much more readily availible today as well. Historical context does have to be taken in to account. I think your broadbrushing of phatmassers is a bit out of line.

Edited August 14, 2006 by thessalonian

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='avemaria40' post='1043540' date='Aug 14 2006, 08:33 AM']
ahhhh! triple post!!
[/quote]

Don’t you get a medal for that?

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1043594' date='Aug 14 2006, 11:02 AM']
Catholics were never forbidden to own Catholic Bibles, only prot bibles.
[/quote]
aha
I assume for reference purposes I am ok with also owning a Jehovah’s Witness Bible, a Mormon Bible, and a Bible with an expanded “apocrypha” ?

[Resurrexi]

[quote] aha
I assume for reference purposes I am ok with also owning a Jehovah’s Witness Bible, a Mormon Bible, and a Bible with an expanded “apocrypha” ?
[/quote]

The first two are protestant bibles so are automatically banned by the quote from the Catechism. But I'd really like to know if owning a bible with extra apocrypha (and I'm non talking about the dutero-canonicals, I"m speaking of books like the Acts of Pilate, the Gospel of the Nativity of Mary etc.) ever forbidden.

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1045953' date='Aug 18 2006, 10:13 AM']
The first two are protestant bibles so are automatically banned by the quote from the Catechism. But I'd really like to know if owning a bible with extra apocrypha (and I'm non talking about the dutero-canonicals, I"m speaking of books like the Acts of Pilate, the Gospel of the Nativity of Mary etc.) ever forbidden.
[/quote]
ya - so I think you understand me
and I am talking for reference purposes entirely
And I have all of these on my reference shelf

* StThomasMore, I am asking if you would feel I should not have these reference books in my possession?
This is def NOT for my “recommended reading” bookcase, for example.

What is your practical perspective?

[Tarcisius]

"What is your practical perspective?"

Saint Pope Pius X already gave you his;)

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1042890' date='Aug 13 2006, 09:21 PM']
It's not dogma, but you comitt the grave mortal sin of disobedience if you don't reject a protestant bible with disgust, or, if you already have one, burn it or hand it in to the parish priest.
[/quote]
You are right that its not dogma, but its also not a mortal sin.

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1043012' date='Aug 13 2006, 10:24 PM']
It was and IS binding on all the Faithful. The Chuch's teachings do not change and never will change. The Church does intend to apply this command universely.
[/quote]
Its not faith and morals, and you are not qualified to decide what part of church teaching this falls under, or decide if it is universal.
If you take a class where you compare translations of the Bible you will need to own and actually read a KJV bible. :, and several other translations.
You cannot explain what you haven't learned, so you cannot point out errors in a KJV bible if you don't have one or never opened one.

[Resurrexi]

[quote]ya - so I think you understand me smile.gif
and I am talking for reference purposes entirely
And I have all of these on my reference shelf[/quote]

If you are a priest or theologian or apologist, it would probably be fine (though even if it's not sinful it would be outright supid becuase you could by a Catholic book with the money instead) but if you are a layperson who has intensensly studies Catholicism and is not VERY FIRM in your faith, then it would be a sin.

[quote]You are right that its not dogma, but its also not a mortal sin.[/quote]

Wow, you must be really special to get to decide which papal commandments you obey. Yep, people like you, Calvin, Luther and Henry VIII are VERY speical

[quote]Its not faith and morals, and you are not qualified to decide what part of church teaching this falls under, or decide if it is universal.[/quote]

And you, my dear, are not allowed to decide which part of the Church teaching it does not fall under, nor are you allowed to deside if it's not univeral. But, it clearly is, seeing as it said "What should a [b]Christian[/b] do who has been given a Bible by a Protestant...". Obviously, that means it's a binding commandment to all Christians.

[quote]If you take a class where you compare translations of the Bible you will need to own and actually read a KJV bible. D.gif, and several other translations.[/quote]

Why would you ever need to take such a class if you are not a priest, theologian or trained apologist?

[quote]"What is your practical perspective?"

Saint Pope Pius X already gave you his;)[/quote]

yep!

[DAF]

We could argue about what Pope Pius was saying. "Should" could mean "it would be prudent," not necessarily"you are obliged to."

[Resurrexi]

No, should in this tense is taken as a command as in "A Christian is to reject it with disgust" not "It would be better to reject it with disgust, but a Christian can do whatever he wants and not sin"

Edited August 19, 2006 by StThomasMore

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1046360' date='Aug 18 2006, 09:10 PM']
If you are a priest or theologian or apologist, it would probably be fine (though even if it's not sinful it would be outright supid becuase you could by a Catholic book with the money instead) but if you are a layperson who has intensensly studies Catholicism and is not VERY FIRM in your faith, then it would be a sin.
Wow, you must be really special to get to decide which papal commandments you obey. Yep, people like you, Calvin, Luther and Henry VIII are VERY speical
And you, my dear, are not allowed to decide which part of the Church teaching it does not fall under, nor are you allowed to deside if it's not univeral. But, it clearly is, seeing as it said "What should a [b]Christian[/b] do who has been given a Bible by a Protestant...". Obviously, that means it's a binding commandment to all Christians.
Why would you ever need to take such a class if you are not a priest, theologian or trained apologist?
yep!
[/quote]

You are not qualified to decide if its a sin since you are not my confessor. My professors [priests or theologians ] were qualified to decide where this falls under church teaching and did so. :
You don't have to be a priest, theologian or trained apologist to be educated in your faith. You just have to be a nerd.

[DAF]

[quote name='StThomasMore' post='1046370' date='Aug 18 2006, 07:48 PM']
No, should in this tense is taken as a command as in "A Christian is to reject it with disgust" not "It would be better to reject it with disgust, but a Christian can do whatever he wants and not sin"
[/quote]
Oh yeah? Sorry, I didn't know that 'should' in the pluperfect tense is always a command. I'll log that away somewhere. On what grounds do you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Pope here is speaking imperatively instead of simply cohortatively (if you will)?

[XIX]

[quote name='DAF' post='1046425' date='Aug 18 2006, 08:44 PM']
Oh yeah? Sorry, I didn't know that 'should' in the pluperfect tense is always a command. I'll log that away somewhere. On what grounds do you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Pope here is speaking imperatively instead of simply cohortatively (if you will)?
[/quote]
It seems to me it would be universal if for no other reason than it showed up in the Catechism.

My understanding is that even fallible statements are binding. Example: following the rubrics.


Notice that the statement in question specifies that receiving a protestant Bible as a gift is sinful. It never says that simply owning a Protestant Bible is a sin. I would imagine that accepting something as a present is a very different story from going out and getting one yourself, because the former implies that you approve of the gift itself.

[DAF]

[quote]It seems to me it would be universal if for no other reason than it showed up in the Catechism.[/quote]
It's in the PPX Catechism, which isn't an official Church Catechism (not to my knowledge anyway).

[quote]Notice that the statement in question specifies that receiving a protestant Bible as a gift is sinful.[/quote]
The quote doesn't even say that much (that recieving one as a gift is 'sinful.') At one extreme (mine) he's just saying that the way he sees it (the questioner didn't ask for the Church's official opinion, so we're sort of left in the dark as to if the Pope's response is of his mind or if it's to be taken as a general rule of the Church), it would be prudent for a Catholic to reject such a 'gift.' On the other extreme (STM's), the Pope is saying that it's a mortal sin or something to participate in a 'Bible exchange' with a Protestant.

[son_of_angels]

This is not an official precept of the Catholic Church, but a practical guide, i.e. "Catechism" for the Christian faithful. The precepts of the Church which are binding under pain of mortal sin are all found within the pages of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and dealt with admirably by any number of manuals available to the faithful. Moreover, if you have a question about this, the best advice I could give you would be to seek the advice of a worthy confessor, i.e. one in full communion with the Holy Pontiff, and to study the documents which have been published in this regard.