W
whizkid43
Guest
care to translate please?
- Status
E
estesbob
Guest
R
RobHom
Guest
Friend, you have apparently not been in a Catholic Church in “years”. Both “bread and wine” have been a part of Communion for years now.
R
RobHom
Guest
And yet we do not “surrender our intellect”… You seem to be hung up on that phrase “personally interpret”… but you have hit on the problem with “personal interpretation”…that it can be either wrong or right. Sadly too many times it is wrong.
Ooooh, was that the kettle calling the pot black?
Not quite. Simply because there is absolutely zero consensus regarding “scriptural interpretations” between Protestant denominations… Seems every denomination has its own “take”, no?
Actually, the only way that we have a “consistency problem” is in that we are consitent. And in actuality…we don’t really interpret scriptures. The word “interpret” is a tricky one and conveys too much “ability” especially when applied to the average person. I think… each person may derive a meaning to what they read, but at the bottom line…we defer to the teachings of the Church, and therein lies the consistency.
R
RobHom
Guest
I can relate to what you are saying. And where you may have feelings of conflict with me…if that is the case, understand that it is not my cause to create enmity. I have the habit of speaking my mind… So please accept what I say as one friend to another. We believe in many of the same things…we just differ on some.
As to where “you belong”…just pray that the “Holy Spirit” guide you, and keep an open mind. Let Him work in you, and you will get there… Peace!!
M
myredeemerlives
Guest
Comparing “protestant” christianity to Islam because they both rely on a book?
What? Are you saying that Catholics don’t rely on the bible? That speaks volumes doesn’t it?
Muslims believe that Jesus peace be upon him according to the Holy Quran is a wonderful, humble, generous messenger of God who came down and revealed God’s words to his people, the people of Israel. Muslims do not believe that Jesus is God, nor they believe that God ever chose to come down to earth in a form of a man to die for our sins to purify us and forgive us.
The Quaran is NOTHING like the bible.
Also, I’ve heard a few of you say that “protestants” get into trouble because they interpret the bible wrong. I don’t believe this is correct, because the problem comes when people CHANGE scripture to suit what they believe.
EG: Mormons go by both the bible and the book of mormon, but the book of Mormon is the higher authority. Jehovah’s witness have their own bible which is their own translation (and tampered with if you ask me) and they also submit to the watchtower society.
So the problem for most is not that they mis-interpret scripture but they totally change it.
Heb 4:12
For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Pentecostal Christians give God’s word the final authority by obeying it.
What? Are you saying that Catholics don’t rely on the bible? That speaks volumes doesn’t it?
Muslims believe that Jesus peace be upon him according to the Holy Quran is a wonderful, humble, generous messenger of God who came down and revealed God’s words to his people, the people of Israel. Muslims do not believe that Jesus is God, nor they believe that God ever chose to come down to earth in a form of a man to die for our sins to purify us and forgive us.
The Quaran is NOTHING like the bible.
Also, I’ve heard a few of you say that “protestants” get into trouble because they interpret the bible wrong. I don’t believe this is correct, because the problem comes when people CHANGE scripture to suit what they believe.
EG: Mormons go by both the bible and the book of mormon, but the book of Mormon is the higher authority. Jehovah’s witness have their own bible which is their own translation (and tampered with if you ask me) and they also submit to the watchtower society.
So the problem for most is not that they mis-interpret scripture but they totally change it.
Heb 4:12
For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Pentecostal Christians give God’s word the final authority by obeying it.
C
ckempston
Guest
I was under the impression that Catholics have the option to take either/or. That doesn’t seem to be what Jesus instituted at the Last Supper. Sorry if I was unclear, but that is what I was referring to.
C
ckempston
Guest
I just don’t know what else to call it. It seems as good a phrase as any, and it does seem to fit. I’m not meaning it in a derogatory manner. If I was to return to the Catholic church, I would be “surrendering my intellect” to that of the Magestrium.
I think I missed something here…Ooooh, was that the kettle calling the pot black?
Zero concensus is a bit strong. Most Protestants believe many of the same things by simple virtue of the fact that they hold the Bible to be true. Those bits that are “open to intepretation” are, admittedly varied, but to say “zero” is a bit of a stretch.
Ok, can’t really disagree with this.
C
cazayoux
Guest
Of course Catholics rely on the Bible.
To us, there is no higher authority that the Word of God.
You stated that you do not believe you interpret the bible incorrectly.
However, you have a different view of Salvation that at least one other non-Catholic Christian group.
Why, even though reading the same bible, do you come to a different understanding than this other group?
An example might be infant baptism.
Catholics are not the only ones that believe in this.
So there are non-Catholic Christians that say infant baptism is okay, but others that say it is not.
I don’t want to discuss ‘infant baptism’ per se, but want to see how you think about people having different ideas about Christian beliefs using the same bible.
michel
To us, there is no higher authority that the Word of God.
You stated that you do not believe you interpret the bible incorrectly.
However, you have a different view of Salvation that at least one other non-Catholic Christian group.
Why, even though reading the same bible, do you come to a different understanding than this other group?
An example might be infant baptism.
Catholics are not the only ones that believe in this.
So there are non-Catholic Christians that say infant baptism is okay, but others that say it is not.
I don’t want to discuss ‘infant baptism’ per se, but want to see how you think about people having different ideas about Christian beliefs using the same bible.
michel
C
cazayoux
Guest
You are right that Catholics believe that Christ is wholly present in both. I just got the three volume set called “The Faith of the Early Fathers”, which is at home. I’m curious to see what I find there.
If I remember this afternoon to look, I’ll post what I find.
General thoughts though are that we see in the last supper a separation of His Body and Blood (his Passion to be experience the next day). In heaven, though, His body is whole and not separated.
When the priest is on the altar, He puts a bit of the host in the chalice for the consecration.
I’m not sure exactly why, but it may have something to do with the question at hand. I’ll see what I can find out.
Salut!
michel
C
ckempston
Guest
A quick question related to this topic. I’m reading a book I found online entitled: Catholic Biblical Apologetics by Dr. Robert J. Schihl and Paul D. Flanagan. When reading about hermeneutics, I came across this paragraph, which seems to say that “personal interpretation” is fine, so long as it doesn’t contradict established teaching. I guess my question is, is there an exhaustive list of these passages that have been “determined by the teaching authority of the church”???
It is often said Roman Catholics cannot interpret the Bible on their own. The Papal Encyclical, Divino Afflante Spiritus, of Pope Pius XII in 1943 attempted to counteract this error by stating that there are but few texts whose understanding has been determined by the teaching authority of the Church; and Catholics do indeed have freedom to interpret the Scriptures.
It is often said Roman Catholics cannot interpret the Bible on their own. The Papal Encyclical, Divino Afflante Spiritus, of Pope Pius XII in 1943 attempted to counteract this error by stating that there are but few texts whose understanding has been determined by the teaching authority of the Church; and Catholics do indeed have freedom to interpret the Scriptures.
J
Jimmy_B
Guest
C
ckempston
Guest
Sorry, I actually found an answer a few pages later. If anyone is interested, or can tell me how valid this writing should be considered, please let me know. I found it here:
catholicapologetics.org/CBANotes.pdf
J
Jimmy_B
Guest
“so long as it doesn’t contradict established teaching”
I believe that this is the key here. One look at the books, The Catechism of the Catholic Church, The Catechism Explained, The Vatican Council II Documents, Vol. 1, 2 and The Basic Sixteen Documents; and we are talking about five very large books and a lot of information and this is just the “tip of the iceberg”. I don’t know about anyone else here but I still haven’t completely gone through any of them.
There are a lot of dangers and traps associated with the “personal interpretation” of the Bible.
Some information can be gleaned from books by Catholic Authors, from Catholic Church documents and some can be found in the Homilies, at Catholic Mass’s today, as well as ancient recorded Homilies; cases, where the Bible has been interpreted, in a way that is not contrary to “established teaching”.
For any “interpretations” of the Bible, I refer to the Roman Catholic Pope and the Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church.
I hope this helps,
Peace
C
ckempston
Guest
Thanks,
C
Chris258
Guest
I think you’ve brought up a healthy thing that Catholics should remember. It seems Catholics get so caught up in fighting against the bad fruits of Protestantism, which certainly were a product of personal interpretation, that a side-effect message from them is that all personal interpretation whatsoever is to be disdained.
I agree wholeheartedly that Catholics can utilize personal interpretation; it’s a great opportunity to explore the richness and depth of Scripture, but let them dare not say that their personal interpretation is anything but that – a human, non-binding interpretation, and that the Church’s authority must always supercede whenever the personal interpretation falls outside the scope (limited by the Church) of certain passages.
Thus, Catholics are free to interpret Genesis across a broad spectrum as far as it pertains to the age and development of the universe but always remembering to hold firm to the anchor of declared doctrines like Original Sin.
G. K. Chesterton described the dogmas of Christianity not as an imposing boundary for limiting our freedom but as the surrounding wall of tall island that would keep us from falling to our doom, and thus in safety we can run and frolic, exploring the intricacies and beauty of this world.
I very much suspect he would have an analogous view of the Catholic dogmas in regards to our exploration of doctrine and faith. One might say many ‘fell’ away into heresy in early Christianity, but the Church learned from these errors and she placed a wall where the entrance to each heresy began in order to safeguard us.
A
AliciaCL
Guest
The apologetics site is very good. Thank you.
Also a quick reference is the Catholic Verse Finder. It’s a double-sided laminated guide with biblical citations for numerous Catholic biblical interpretations. I think it’s $2.00 or something very minimal. Order by phone at 505-327-5343; fax: 505-327-9554; mail: San Jan Catholic Seminars, P.O. Box 5253, Farmington, NM 87499.
Also a quick reference is the Catholic Verse Finder. It’s a double-sided laminated guide with biblical citations for numerous Catholic biblical interpretations. I think it’s $2.00 or something very minimal. Order by phone at 505-327-5343; fax: 505-327-9554; mail: San Jan Catholic Seminars, P.O. Box 5253, Farmington, NM 87499.
R
RobHom
Guest
You are half correct.
When we go to Communion we always take the “the host”, it is the wine that is optional. Not a problem!!
R
RobHom
Guest
Maybe I put too much emphasis on the “surrendering” part. I guess I took it that you were implying that Catholics were mindless drones…which is apparently ( I hope) not what you were trying to convey.
Here’s how I see it or understand it. According to the Church, I am fully able to read and understand or derive my own understanding of the messages in the Bible…but in the event that I am in contravention with the Church…I give credence to the interpretation of the scripture by the Church.
Probably not…it was a weak attempt on my part to be humorous. It flooped…
OK, I’ll grant you that. But what I find amazing is that when some of my non-Catholic friends get in a discussion…things can get really strange…seems none of them agree on very much. But oddly enough a number of them seem to agree with much of what we believe. There just seems to be some sticking points.
So then I guess on some things we can agree to agree!!
C
cazayoux
Guest
Actually, if all you received was the cup, you still have received Jesus wholly, body, blood, soul and divinity.You are half correct.
Jesus is fully present in both forms.
michel
- Status