Can I sign a statement of faith that says the Bible is the only, inspired Word of God?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Asillia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Asillia

Guest
Hi. I apologize if I am in the wrong part of the forum but…this was the best fit I found.

I have begun the process of applying to volunteer at an emergency pregnancy center. In addition to the general application, they have a mission statement, and a statement of faith to sign as a Christian volunteer (I am not sure if it is required to be Christian to work there, or what). It is a non-denominational organization, although they don’t promote artificial contraception, which I appreciate.

I can agree with most of the tenants, but the first one is

“The Bible is the only inspired, infallible and authoritative Word of God.”

I am just wondering if there is a conflict there with the idea of Apostolic Tradition and the Magisterium, etc. Are those things also called the ‘Word of God’, or would that fall under something else?
 
Draw a line through “only” and initial it. Then you can sign it. I’ll let others debate whether “infallible” should be replaced with “inerrant”.
 
Asillia said:
a statement of faith to sign as a Christian volunteer
It is a non-denominational organization, although they don’t promote artificial contraception, which I appreciate.

I can agree with most of the tenants, but the first one is

“The Bible is the only inspired, infallible and authoritative Word of God.”

I am just wondering if there is a conflict there with the idea of Apostolic Tradition and the Magisterium, etc. Are those things also called the ‘Word of God’, or would that fall under something else?
Click to expand...
Non-denominational organizations like that do have a denomination in that they are Protestant. The above statement about the Bible is not one that a Catholic with good concience can sign. I know that it is tough. I have a co-op that my kids go to that I would have to sign a similar statement if I wanted to teach at. I couldn’t do that in good concience because we have Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. Both are the word of God.

Now, you might be able to talk to them about this. Tell them that you do believe that the Bible is Sacred Scripture and as such is the “inspired, infallible and authoritative” word of God, but that you also believe in Sacred Tradition. So, if you can cross out the word “only”, that you would be happy to sign their statement of faith. If they will not let you do that, then look for a different organization to volunteer for.
 
Scottgun said:
Draw a line through “only” and initial it. Then you can sign it. I’ll let others debate whether “infallible” should be replaced with “inerrant”.
Click to expand...
Hi, I am new here, But would like to know where is
the difference between Infaillible and Inerrant.?!..
As my reply to the question I totally beleive that the
bible;(OT.NT) is the only inspired book for God.
Others Books including (Quran) are inspired from
the Bible.
I am a catholic , and I am proud to be it.
God give us The Hole Truth in the Bible
and we are responsible of revealing it to
The Hole World.
My Humble Opinion With God Bless.

" If You Speak, Speak about Jesus.
If You don’t Speak, Speak to Him".
 
Cathh(name removed by moderator) said:
Non-denominational organizations like that do have a denomination in that they are Protestant. .
Click to expand...
Hah, I laughed a little at that - trust me, I know where you’re coming from on that. I used to go to one of those ‘non-denominational’ churches and Bible Studies in high school (before I had recommitted to the Catholic faith in college).
 
nohamaria said:
Hi, I am new here, But would like to know where is
the difference between Infaillible and Inerrant.?!..
As my reply to the question I totally beleive that the
bible;(OT.NT) is the only inspired book for God.
Others Books including (Quran) are inspired from
the Bible.
I am a catholic , and I am proud to be it.
God give us The Hole Truth in the Bible
and we are responsible of revealing it to
The Hole World.
My Humble Opinion With God Bless.

" If You Speak, Speak about Jesus.
If You don’t Speak, Speak to Him".
Click to expand...
Inerrant means free from error. Infallible has three meanings that I can find, 1) Incapable of error, 2) not liable to mislead, deceive, or disappoint, 3) Incapable of error in defining doctrines touching faith or morals.

Those definitons imply that the Bible would have somewhat of a teaching authority which it does not, so inerrant would be a more accurate definition.

Your post kind seemed (to me) to imply that you either don’t know of Sacred Tradition, or don’t accept it as equally being the Word of God as the Bible. If you are really Catholic, you must accept the Bible, Tradition (capital “t”), and the teaching authority of the Church which is the Magisterium.

Pax,
Zach
 
What she said is that the Bible is the only inspired BOOK of God…and that is true.

It seems to me that the Bible would be infallible according to your definition - just that it is not the ONLY infallible source we have.
 
Yes. Because it is true. And the same Bible says that the Church is the Pillar of the Truth, and as St Peters, the Bible is not meant for private interpretation - so if you bear that in mind, all should be OK… The Bible nowhere says that it is the only thing that we should rely on. But yes, it is the only inspired Word of God… God bless
 
Yes, because it is true.
And the same Bible says that the Church is the Pillar of the Truth (1 Timothy 3:15), and that we should hold on to the traditions passed to us by Church (2Tessalonians 2:15) and as St Peters writes, the Bible is not meant for private interpretation (II Peter 1:20-21): as far as the doctrines go, which does not mean we should not read the Bible and see what God is telling us each day.
 
Asillia said:
What she said is that the Bible is the only inspired BOOK of God…and that is true.

It seems to me that the Bible would be infallible according to your definition - just that it is not the ONLY infallible source we have.
Click to expand...
Actually, the OP said " Word" not “Book”. We have Sacred Tradition as well as Sacred Scripture. Both are from God.

Here is what the CCC says:

IN BRIEF

96
What Christ entrusted to the apostles, they in turn handed on by their preaching and writing, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, to all generations, until Christ returns in glory.

97
“Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture make up a single sacred deposit of the Word of God” (DV 10), in which, as in a mirror, the pilgrim Church contemplates God, the source of all her riches.

98
“The Church, in her doctrine, life, and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes” (DV 8 §1).

99
Thanks to its supernatural sense of faith, the People of God as a whole never ceases to welcome, to penetrate more deeply, and to live more fully from the gift of divine Revelation.

100
The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him.
 
Asillia said:
Hi. I apologize if I am in the wrong part of the forum but…this was the best fit I found.

I have begun the process of applying to volunteer at an emergency pregnancy center. In addition to the general application, they have a mission statement, and a statement of faith to sign as a Christian volunteer (I am not sure if it is required to be Christian to work there, or what). It is a non-denominational organization, although they don’t promote artificial contraception, which I appreciate.

I can agree with most of the tenants, but the first one is

“The Bible is the only inspired, infallible and authoritative Word of God.”

I am just wondering if there is a conflict there with the idea of Apostolic Tradition and the Magisterium, etc. Are those things also called the ‘Word of God’, or would that fall under something else?
Click to expand...
I believe that you can sign this statement.

Although Sacred Tradition contains the Word of God, the Catholic Church does not refer to it as inspired. Father Mitch Pacwa points this out in The Authority Debate with Eric Svenden. Only the Bible contains the inspired Word of God.

Also, the Church uses infallible in reference to Sacred Scripture, for example, in the recent Synod of Bishops’ Lineamenta: “Emphasis needs to be placed on the Word of God’s …] infallible confirmation in Sacred Scripture and its transmission in the living Tradition of the Church.”

And in responding to a question posed to him, St. Augustine answers, “how ancient is the ordinance of sacrifice which the infallible and sacred writings declare to be due to no other than to the one true God” (Letter 102).

Finally, and of course, Scripture is authoritative. 🙂

Augustine (A.D. 400): “[T]here is a distinct boundary line separating all productions subsequent to apostolic times from the authoritative canonical books of the Old and New Testaments. The authority of these books …] claims the submission of every faithful and pious mind. If we are perplexed by an apparent contradiction in Scripture, it is not allowable to say, The author of this book is mistaken; but either the manuscript is faulty, or the translation is wrong, or you have not understood. …] Scripture has a sacredness peculiar to itself. …] In consequence of the distinctive peculiarity of the sacred writings, we are bound to receive as true whatever the canon shows to have been said by even one prophet, or apostle, or evangelist. Otherwise, not a single page will be left for the guidance of human fallibility, if contempt for the wholesome authority of the canonical books either puts an end to that authority altogether, or involves it in hopeless confusion” (, Bk. 11, 5Against Faustus).

So these three descriptive terms, when used together, unless I am mistaken, are only rightly said of the Word of God in Sacred Scripture.

However, you may still want to clarify for them that you are not signing this against the Catholic Church’s teaching, since many non Catholics may assume that this statement is contrary to our faith. This may be a good evangelistic opportunity. 🙂

May God bless you!
Pete
 
Cath(name removed by moderator) -
I AM the OP!! 🙂

When I made the comment about the book vs. the word of God, I was referring to another poster who said something about believing the Bible was the only inspired book of God, and somebody said that meant she didn’t believe in Tradition.
 
Asillia said:
What she said is that the Bible is the only inspired BOOK of God…and that is true.

It seems to me that the Bible would be infallible according to your definition - just that it is not the ONLY infallible source we have.
Click to expand...
Thank you Asillia that’s exactly what I mean.
The bible is to be considered as The basis of any
Tradition or Teaching of The church.
It is also The Only inspired Book By God that we
know and worship.
All other beleives Speaking about This same
God were inspired from the Bible.
The Bible hold the Hole Truth about God.
All other Books and Sacred Traditions are
related to it and never to be considered
the basis of our beleif on God.
I am a Fransiscan member of OFS; thus
I do respect and abide to Sacred Tradition
and the Catholic Church Teaching( my reply to Zuch Dunn)
Peace and Good.
Nohamaria:blessyou:
 
The only inspired, authoritative, infallible Word of God, hmmm? Seems like they left out Jesus Christ there.

Now if it said HE was the only inspired, authoritative, infallible Word of God I’d agree (after all, the Bible is capable of twisting and distortion, so certainly isn’t incapable of teaching error!)
 
LilyM said:
The only inspired, authoritative, infallible Word of God, hmmm? Seems like they left out Jesus Christ there.

Now if it said HE was the only inspired, authoritative, infallible Word of God I’d agree (after all, the Bible is capable of twisting and distortion, so certainly isn’t incapable of teaching error!)
Click to expand...
I think I would put that line thru the “only” and add a line to the effect that** the Bible clearly says that Jesus Christ is the Word.**
HTH
 
You may want to add in “yep all 73 books” 🙂

I think the same way Peter does on this.

However, I’m not 100% sure the church says nothing else is inspired. Moreover I think it may be somewhat misleading. Some people would misinterpret what that says to mean only the bible is authoritative. But then even some Protestant Churches couldn’t sign.

Unlikely though it may be, what if we find another letter from Paul? Just because it was written by Paul would not prove it is inspired, that’s true. But could the church also deem it was inspired or has the church already authoritatively closed the cannon to this possibility? I don’t know. If they didn’t a Catholic could believe there may be other inspired writings out there. (of course a catholic would not be bound to believe this as I’m sure most don’t) Personally I have wondered about this and simply reserve judgment on the issue. So I guess I would say “I don’t know” to the question.

As a Catholic we would have no problem adding another text if the church deemed it ok. (again assuming it hasn’t been authoritatively closed in this way) We believe the Holy Spirit is still guiding our church just as it did when our 73 books were decided on. Protestants might have a more difficult time with such a find.

It seems intended to be an anti-catholic requirement - albeit misguided - which is sort of a bummer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top