Catechim-Infallible?

[mercygate]

Boy, I wish my faith was that clear. Consider yourself Blessed that you have that.

Yeah. It’s easy. Only took me three decades!

The point is TRUST. After I stopped kicking about all MY ideas, I realized that nobody but nobody thinks things through with the diligence and clarity that you find in Catholic theology. So even while I still had personal reservations about some things, I came to the point where I realized that my reservations were trivial compared to my conviction that THIS Church IS the Church promised to build “on the Rock”. I had to face it: HIS Church, on HIS terms. It’s a beautiful thing!

God love ya!

 

[expectthebest]

Not at all. Luther rejected the Magesterium-- the teaching office of the Church. If one reads Scripture with the mind of the Church one has a sure norm and will not go astray as Luther did. Luther divorced Scripture from the living Church and its guardians the Bishops.

You are right. He did. Although he would argue that he did not leave the Church. Lutherans argue that the Pope/Magesterium divorced itself from the Church and that the Church was still alive within the correct intrepretation of the Bible. They would argue that they have the interpretation set forth by the great Church fathers like Augustin.

We are not free to interpret Scripture in a way that contradicts the deposit of faith. For example, John 6 cannot be interpreted symbolically b/c the Church has a definitive teaching that it is not symbolic.

This brings me back to my original question. Why read the Bible if everything has already been defined? What is there to learn?The Scripture of relevance is in the Catechism. To learn what the Bible means, all one has to do is turn to the Catechism, right? So, in the end, the Catechism is where we go to learn what we are supposed to believe.

Maybe we as Catholics aren’t supposed to read the Bible for insight because the only insight permissable is that defined by the Church. Could there be another reason we should be reading it, something that I am missing? Maybe more for prayerful like reasons?

It is the responsibility of the parents to teach their children the faith.

The Catechism is much more in depth and complicated than any child could ever understand other than rudimentary basics. I would argue that an educated person could study the Catechism for years and still not grasp all of it. So, until we understand the minutia of the Catechism, why are we reading the Bible which we cannot understand anyway without the Catechism?

Then perhaps you should seek advice from your pastor for guidance and for bible study material suggetsions to help you interpret them, because there is no conflict with Scripture and church teaching.

You may be right and that’s what I’m struggling with. There are many who would disagree with you.

Maybe a “for instance” would help because I’m really not following you here.

You wrote that much of the Bible is up for discussion and has not been infallibly decided by the Church. I said that all issues relevant to salvation have already been decided an are not up for discussion. So what I am asking is for an example of anything in the Bible that is relevant to salvation that has not already been decided and which is truely up for discussion.

 

[expectthebest]

You hear this ALL the time from people who pick up a Bible one day and decide that the teaching of the Catholic Church is not consistent with Scripture. ALL THE TIME. But that is hogwash.

As a convert to the Catholic faith, trained as a minister in a Protestant denomination, I can testify that ONLY the Catholic Church has the depth and breadth of understanding that makes sense of ALL the Scripture. Be like St. Augustine, who said that if he had a problem with understanding Scripture the fault was in himself. I say that if you THINK Scripture contradicts Catholic teaching, then you are missing something important about EITHER the Scripture OR the teaching of the Church.

Catholic teaching is nothing if not lucid.

I’d be very interested to know your story of conversion. What made you decide that the protestant/reformist interpretation of Scripture and Tradition was not valid? Thanks.

 

[expectthebest]

Yeah. It’s easy. Only took me three decades!

The point is TRUST. After I stopped kicking about all MY ideas, I realized that nobody but nobody thinks things through with the diligence and clarity that you find in Catholic theology. So even while I still had personal reservations about some things, I came to the point where I realized that my reservations were trivial compared to my conviction that THIS Church IS the Church promised to build “on the Rock”. I had to face it: HIS Church, on HIS terms. It’s a beautiful thing!

God love ya!

It would be much easier to trust the Church if the people within the Churhc, including the Pope, had not been down right evil in so many cases throughout history. If the Pope is truely elected by the will of the Holy Spirit as the holder of the keys to the Church, why would the Holy Spirit allow an evil person to hold that office as leader of the Church?

 

[davidv]

It would be much easier to trust the Church if the people within the Churhc, including the Pope, had not been down right evil in so many cases throughout history. If the Pope is truely elected by the will of the Holy Spirit as the holder of the keys to the Church, why would the Holy Spirit allow an evil person to hold that office as leader of the Church?

Please name one pope in your lifetime that was “evil”.

Once in office, a pope can sin just like the rest of. He retains his free will.

 

[mercygate]

I’d be very interested to know your story of conversion. What made you decide that the protestant/reformist interpretation of Scripture and Tradition was not valid? Thanks.

My story is on The Journey Home on the EWTN web site. Go to page 6, August 9, 2004.

The main point for me was the historical FACT that the Catholic Church gave us the canon of Scripture. After that, all the rest falls into place.

 

[mercygate]

It would be much easier to trust the Church if the people within the Churhc, including the Pope, had not been down right evil in so many cases throughout history. If the Pope is truely elected by the will of the Holy Spirit as the holder of the keys to the Church, why would the Holy Spirit allow an evil person to hold that office as leader of the Church?

Actually, the fact that the Church has survived her bad Popes is the best evidence that Jesus meant what he said and followed up on the promise.

All those really bad Popes NEVER taught false doctrine. In fact, they were part of what convinced me that the Catholic Church must have something going for it. Not only did it SURVIVE those awful days, but I learned about them from CATHOLIC sources. No cover ups. No hiding from the truth.

 

[expectthebest]

Please name one pope in your lifetime that was “evil”.

Once in office, a pope can sin just like the rest of. He retains his free will.

There has not been an evil Pope in my lifetime but you cannot say that there has not been plenty of bad Popes and other Church leadership for that matter. That’s what spurred the reformation about! Of course the Pope can sin but do you believe the Holy Spirit would direct the election of a Pope that is severely flawed (mistresses, children, corupt, etc)?

 

[Rolltide]

The Catechism is much more in depth and complicated than any child could ever understand other than rudimentary basics. I would argue that an educated person could study the Catechism for years and still not grasp all of it. So, until we understand the minutia of the Catechism, why are we reading the Bible which we cannot understand anyway without the Catechism?

Actually, until very recently, ALL Catholic children got their religious education by reading the Baltimore Catechism, which is available in a series progressing from basic to advanced. It is an ideal introduction to the faith. Versions are available ranging from early grades up to high school/college use. You have to understand that there are MANY Catholic Catechisms available. The “official” Catechism, if you look at the introductory notes, is a “master” Catechism that is to be used as a guide to come up with other Catechisms that address other ethnicities, ages, and so on better and more clearly than the original. The Compendium to the Catechism of the Catholic Church is a great example of this (and available online at the Vatican website). It re-presents the entire Catechism in a question-and-answer format for easier reading.

(By the way, when I had my religious education in the 70s and 80s, the Catechism was rarely used, except by the teacher as a reference. We used other books, alongside the Bible.)

You wrote that much of the Bible is up for discussion and has not been infallibly decided by the Church. I said that all issues relevant to salvation have already been decided an are not up for discussion. So what I am asking is for an example of anything in the Bible that is relevant to salvation that has not already been decided and which is truely up for discussion.

Well, most of Genesis is up for discussion. Currently, the Catholic Church allows for either a literal interpretation, or one that accepts some form of evolution. Several details have been defined, however. For example, the Church infallibly defines that there WAS an original pair of human beings named Adam and Eve (although, as I said, whether they were created intact by God or evolved is left to debate)

There’s a lot of room for discussion on Revelation as well. Again, there are infallible details that have been proclaimed, such as the identity of the crowned woman (Catholics definitively believe it to be Mary). However, if you want to see it as proclaiming the end times, or as a first-century allegory, or as a metaphor foreshadowing the Mass and worship in heaven, that that is all acceptable.

 

[Rolltide]

There has not been an evil Pope in my lifetime but you cannot say that there has not been plenty of bad Popes and other Church leadership for that matter. That’s what spurred the reformation about! Of course the Pope can sin but do you believe the Holy Spirit would direct the election of a Pope that is severely flawed (mistresses, children, corupt, etc)?

Yes. Remember, in the eyes of God, ALL human beings are flawed and in fact, not really deserving of salvation. The Holy Spirit only guarantees that the doctrine of the Church will not be led into error. Humans still maintain their free will to choose to do good or evil, no matter who they are.

 

[expectthebest]

Yes. Remember, in the eyes of God, ALL human beings are flawed and in fact, not really deserving of salvation. The Holy Spirit only guarantees that the doctrine of the Church will not be led into error. Humans still maintain their free will to choose to do good or evil, no matter who they are.

You are correct. But, if the election of Pope is inspired by the Holy Spirit, why would an evil Pope be elected. This does not make sense. Why would the Hold Spirit choose an evil man to lead the Church?

 

[expectthebest]

Actually, until very recently, ALL Catholic children got their religious education by reading the Baltimore Catechism, which is available in a series progressing from basic to advanced. It is an ideal introduction to the faith. Versions are available ranging from early grades up to high school/college use. You have to understand that there are MANY Catholic Catechisms available. The “official” Catechism, if you look at the introductory notes, is a “master” Catechism that is to be used as a guide to come up with other Catechisms that address other ethnicities, ages, and so on better and more clearly than the original. The Compendium to the Catechism of the Catholic Church is a great example of this (and available online at the Vatican website). It re-presents the entire Catechism in a question-and-answer format for easier reading.

I too learned my Faith using the Baltimore Catechism. It is of course a quite simplified in comparison with the official Catechism and is what I am using to teach my children now.

You mention Genesis and Revelation. Neither of these carry any real significance in the salvation of the faithful. There are some interesting topics but none that really matter in the big picture. The infallable points you mentioned in each are all a Catholic really needs to know and those are not up for disucussion.

Do you have any examples of something that is of real importance that is up for discussion?

I think you would agree that reading Genesis and Revelation will not necessarily lead one to salvation but the Catechism certainly will. In fact, we must accept it cover to cover in order to be saved.

 

[GJx86]

You’re putting a lot of emphasis on the truths necessary for salvation – and rightly so, since, after all, those truths are the ones that most strongly affect our eternal destiny. But I would submit to you that these aren’t the only important truths – all of God’s truths are important; if they weren’t, why would He have wanted them written down?

If our ultimate goal in the afterlife is full communion with God, then it seems to me we should ask more than “What do I have to do to be saved?” – we should advance to “How can I know God most fully and keep His commandments?” I’d venture that that’s the sort of effort God’s looking for, and that kind of effort, which is based on a desire to live in faith, hope, and love, will let us be confident in our salvation anyway.

With all that in mind, things like Genesis and Revelation are important because they get us thinking about God and allow us to come to a fuller understanding of what He’s tried to teach us in Scripture. The creation story may not have any direct impact on Catholic soteriology, but studying it and praying about it will help us get closer to God, which is our ultimate goal.

 

[bookgirl32]

You are correct. But, if the election of Pope is inspired by the Holy Spirit, why would an evil Pope be elected. This does not make sense. Why would the Hold Spirit choose an evil man to lead the Church?

Just goes to show what the Holy Spirit can do, and how much He knows, huh?

 

[bookgirl32]

I too learned my Faith using the Baltimore Catechism. It is of course a quite simplified in comparison with the official Catechism and is what I am using to teach my children now.

You mention Genesis and Revelation. Neither of these carry any real significance in the salvation of the faithful. There are some interesting topics but none that really matter in the big picture. The infallable points you mentioned in each are all a Catholic really needs to know and those are not up for disucussion.

Do you have any examples of something that is of real importance that is up for discussion?

I think you would agree that reading Genesis and Revelation will not necessarily lead one to salvation but the Catechism certainly will. In fact, we must accept it cover to cover in order to be saved.

If you are a Catholic who truly accepts the truth, then yes, you must, b/c to do otherwise would be denying God, and when you do that, does it really matter what the issue is? If you are NOT, though, and until you are, it is a different matter.

 

[CentralFLJames]

If the Pope is truely elected by the will of the Holy Spirit as the holder of the keys to the Church, why would the Holy Spirit allow an evil person to hold that office as leader of the Church?

We must be careful to judge by human standards. This line of questioning invites challenging God’s wisdom. One could also say for example “why would Jesus chose Judas as an apostle if he was going to turn out to be evil and betray Jesus?” Or one could say, “why did God create Lucifer knowing that he would fall and become Satan?”

In both those examples humans are trying to challenge the wisdom of God. But the clear consistent answer is that God permits certain things to happen because they are part of Divine Providence and it permits a greater good to be manifest.

James

 

[expectthebest]

We must be careful to judge by human standards. This line of questioning invites challenging God’s wisdom. One could also say for example “why would Jesus chose Judas as an apostle if he was going to turn out to be evil and betray Jesus?” Or one could say, “why did God create Lucifer knowing that he would fall and become Satan?”

In both those examples humans are trying to challenge the wisdom of God. But the clear consistent answer is that God permits certain things to happen because they are part of Divine Providence and it permits a greater good to be manifest.

James

You have a good point. But, it’s only challanging God’s wisdom if one believes that the Holy Spririt truely guided the election of an evil man to Pope. A reformer would argue the Cardinals have been resisting the influence of the Holy Spririt for quite some time and that the reformation was the real influence of the Holy Spririt. This is really where the substance of my question is.

So, the question really becomes, has the Catholic Church, as an organization, been open to the guidance of the Holy Spririt? Or, was the reformation, as many argue, in submission to the actual guidance of the Holy Spirit. To answer that question, one must identify the “wolves in sheeps clothing”. So far, it seems that what one believes on this topic is a matter of faith because each side can present a convincing agument. At the same time, each side seems have have holes in it’s arguments that require a leap of faith to believe one or the other. This is really where a lot of my questions come from in my struggle to really grasp full acceptance of Church teaching on some subjects in a heart felt way.