Catholics neeed to read their Bibles!

[Canto]

Scripture is authorative over Sacred Tradition.

Could you please quote Scripture to back this claim up.

I would be curious to know which verses/chapters you think proves this.

 

[guanophore]

I think that your impressions are colored by your misperceptions, and it shows in an ugly way around the edges of your posts.

Yeah, I picked up on some of those uglies too. Puts the stomach in knots.

This is absolutely not true.  Catholics and Protestants can discuss what scripture means with resort to scripture alone.

I think what he is trying to say is that he knows HE cannot win a debate under those conditions. This is, of course, why Jesus set it up this way. He trained, annointed, empowered, and authorized the Church to settle these types of disputes precisely because they cannot be settled by scripture itself.

I think this is why he will not risk a visit to the Sacred Scripture area to post his invitation. He knws that what was cited in the article in the OP does not describe the Catholics here at CAF.

Many of us have come from Protestant backgrounds, and are even more well versed in Scripture than our separated brethren.

Your argument is essentially saying something akin to the accusation that heterosexuals cannot argue the immorality of homosexuality without first acknowledging the morality of the act.

This is an astute observation, and indeed, has been borne out throughout this thread. We have been trying to raise issues with 2nd that pertain to the framework in which we read scripture, and how it differes from the way he reads it.

Instead of leading to the willingness to actually plunge into the text, it appears to have resulted in pouting and whining.

I find the opposite to be true. Protestants who are confronted with a Catholic who is solidly grounded in both Scripture and Church teaching will become quite disoriented with the fact that Catholic “superstitions” are actually well supported by Scripture. I also find that in most cases the Protestant argument from scripture is hyperfocused on certain passages while ignoring context. But that is the nature of the error.

I find this to be the case also.

Actually, what I find is that Protestants submerge themselves in the tradition of their own Christian community, which they do not even recognize to be a tradition. And their faith is formed (and deformed to greater or lesser degrees) within that unrecognized “other” tradition which is shrouded by the claim that it is simply the bible alone, when in fact it is the bible, plus a set of preconceptions.

To his credit, 2nd does acknowledge that he claims an “historic Protestant” position (whatever that means?). I don’t think he realizes, though, that when he reads scripture, he does so with Calvanistic glasses. That is what makes it appear to him that Jesus adn Paul “agreee with Calvin”. I think he would have to be willing to set this aside, and at least make an attempt to put on another pair of glasses, at least temporarily.

What you’ve stated is opinion. And the fact that you do not see it as such is quite sad. And you speak of Sacred Tradition as if it’s bad to have a “stack” of something that is sacred?

I, too, am saddened by this opinion. It reeks of prejudice and misinformation.

But this is my opinion, after years of prayer and study. You are free to accept or reject my thoughts, posted late on a Friday night.

Peace,
Robert

I appreciate your thoughts, Robert and I thank you for sharing them.

 

[2nd_Adam]

This makes no sense to me in the light of your stated desire to discuss scriptures with Catholics, and your implications that, when Catholics read the Scripture, they will come to their senses, and leave the Catholic faith.

That’s an incorrect statement. I never had the intention for Christians who are Catholic to leave the Catholic Faith. Heck, from my perspective… in some areas of the country… the Catholic Church is a better body to belong to than some of the more liberal Protestant churches. Remember, I do not make a clear distinction that you do with being Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, or Anglican. There is a remnant chosen by grace in all of these Christian communities that makeup the universal body of Christ. At my older age, I have seem mature Christians who worshipped at a variety of churches in their lives… from various Protestants denominations, to Catholic, to Orthodox, and back again. There is only one body of Christ which is made-up of those individuals who have been born from above and untied to Christ. The true body of Christ is not divided like you may think. Therefore, ecumenism within the essential core doctrines of the Faith is a very good thing.

 

[2nd_Adam]

Originally Posted by 2nd Adam
Scripture is authorative over Sacred Tradition.

Could you please quote Scripture to back this claim up

I would be curious to know which verses/chapters you think proves this.

The issue is tradition. Scripture speaks of two kinds of tradition which the Catholic Church also teaches. We have Sacred Tradition and tradition. The challenge for both Catholic and Protestant communities is determine if a particular tradition is Sacred Tradition or just tradition. For example, who will determine if Mary can be a co-redemptrix for the Catholic. Until it is official defnied by the Magisterium, there are many views in the Catholic community. So, what is the determining factor to know if something is Sacred Tradition or just tradition. For the Catholic, the Magisterium does this for you. For the Protestant, Scripture determines if a tradition is Sacred Tradition or just tradition. We already know that what is written in Sacred Scripture is from above. So, true Sacred tradition lines up with Sacred Scripture. Remember, Catholics and Protestants agree with most of the core doctrines of the Christian Faith. Do you guys agree with my posting?

Colossians 2:8
See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.

2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6
Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.

 

[Love_is_Patient]

2nd, I’d love for you to address this post (#342) Thanks!

Love is Patient
"2nd Adam:

I think if is more important to be in union with the Lord Jesus Christ.

Are you saying that Jesus has seperated himself from His Church? That contradicts Scripture, which clearly states that the Church is His Body.

Not to mention: “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?”

Love is Patient

 

[2nd_Adam]

Are you saying that Jesus has seperated himself from His Church? That contradicts Scripture, which clearly states that the Church is His Body.

Not to mention: “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?”

Love is Patient

Do you understand that our definition of the church (his body) is mutually exclusive? The body of Christ consist of all those whom the Spirit moved from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light, or the kingdom of HIs Son. It is universal or catholic, which crosses denominational lines or divisions within Christendom. The body of Christ is not the Catholic Church exclusively since there is a remnant in the Catholic Church chosen by grace. The true body of Christ include all the sheep from different Christian communities.
So when you think of the word church, you see Catholic, and I see catholic (universal). Christ came to rescue His sheep (the church) from their sins.

I Am the Good Shepherd
10:1 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber. 2 But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 To him the gatekeeper opens. The sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. 5 A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers.” 6 This figure of speech Jesus used with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them.

7 So Jesus again said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who came before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly. 11 I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12 He who is a hired hand and not a shepherd, who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. 13 He flees because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. 14 I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16 And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd. 17 For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.”

19 There was again a division among the Jews because of these words. 20 Many of them said, “He has a demon, and is insane; why listen to him?” 21 Others said, “These are not the words of one who is oppressed by a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?”
John 10

 

[Love_is_Patient]

Do you understand that our definition of the church (his body) is mutually exclusive? The body of Christ consist of all those whom the Spirit moved from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light, or the kingdom of HIs Son. It is universal or catholic, which crosses denominational lines or divisions within Christendom. The body of Christ is not the Catholic Church exclusively since there is a remnant in the Catholic Church chosen by grace. The true body of Christ include all the sheep from different Christian communities.
So when you think of the word church, you see Catholic, and I see catholic (universal). Christ came to rescue His sheep (the church) from their sins.

Agreed that Jesus came on a rescue mission. And I understand that you are heir to Reformation theology.

But I don’t see where you are coming up with the idea that the Body of Christ is invisible.
Bodies, by definition, are visible, not invisible. There’s no biblical basis for assuming that His Body is some ephemeral collection of believers. And you do claim to hold the Bible as your highest authority…

Finally, Catholic=catholic=Catholic=universal. I suppose it’s well within your rights to try to say that Catholic doesn’t mean universal, but it’s a specious argument. No matter how many times you claim that there’s a difference, it won’t make it so.

Love is Patient

 

[2nd_Adam]

Agreed that Jesus came on a rescue mission. And I understand that you are heir to Reformation theology.

But I don’t see where you are coming up with the idea that the Body of Christ is invisible.
Bodies, by definition, are visible, not invisible. There’s no biblical basis for assuming that His Body is some ephemeral collection of believers. And you do claim to hold the Bible as your highest authority…

Finally, Catholic=catholic=Catholic=universal. I suppose it’s well within your rights to try to say that Catholic doesn’t mean universal, but it’s a specious argument. No matter how many times you claim that there’s a difference, it won’t make it so.

Love is Patient

The church is both visible and invisible. If you study Catholic theology in this area, it also teaches an invisible church too, because not all Catholics will be in Heaven, and not all Protestants will be outside of Heaven. The Catholic Church also is much broader too on the invisible church (those who will be in Heaven), leaving a way to Heaven through non-Christian faiths (Islam, Judiasm, etc). I guess the invisible church are all those individuals who will dwell with Christ forever and forever in Heaven. The visible church consists of all Christian religions who profess the Biblical Jesus Christ. In contrast, the Mormon Church is not part of the visible church because they do not preach the biblical Jesus Christ.

 

[Love_is_Patient]

The church is both visible and invisible. If you study Catholic theology in this area, it also teaches an invisible church too, because not all Catholics will be in Heaven, and not all Protestants will be outside of Heaven. The Catholic Church also is much broader too on the invisible church (those who will be in Heaven), leaving a way to Heaven through non-Christian faiths (Islam, Judiasm, etc). I guess the invisible church are all those individuals who will dwell with Christ forever and forever in Heaven. The visible church consists of all Christian religions who profess the Biblical Jesus Christ. In contrast, the Mormon Church is not part of the visible church because they do not preach the biblical Jesus Christ.

Biblical backing, please. I appreciate your speculation, though.

Love is Patient

 

[2nd_Adam]

Biblical backing, please. I appreciate your speculation, though.

Love is Patient

Sheep and goats, wheat and tares, legitimate son and illegitimate sons (bastards) (Hebrews 12). There is a visible church. But within the visible church, we have a mix of sinners, some united to Christ and some still united to Adam. If I understand Catholic theology, nobody is united to Christ on an eternal basis until you pass from this life, correct?

 

[guanophore]

That’s an incorrect statement. I never had the intention for Christians who are Catholic to leave the Catholic Faith.

Then perhaps you are sending this message unintentionally. Perhaps your anti-Catholic perspective, though clear to us, is hidden to yourself? Allow me to illustrate:

Catholics are united to Christ and His Church
To be fully united to Christ one must be united to his Church too
After all, he instituted it!

Canto offers the Apostolic teaching, preserved in the Catholic Church, that ther is no separation between Christ and His One Body.

You respond:

Interesting belief… and if you continue to read your Bible, you will have a hard time supporting this belief. All Christians have some sort of thelogy. But not all Christians have biblical theology and biblical beliefs.

What you are saying here is that the Catholic belief that has been preserved from the Apostles is not “biblical theology”. It seems that you are saying that, if Cathollics 'continue to read Bible" we will abandon the faith of the Catholic Church, and move toward what you call a 'biblical theology". In essence, losing our Catholic identity.

Remember, I do not make a clear distinction that you do with being Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, or Anglican.  There is a remnant chosen by grace in all of these Christian communities that makeup the universal body of Christ.

Although it is true that the Catholic Church teaches that there are members of His One Body found everywhere (including outside the visible Apostolic Church), you are using this notion to justify pulling Catholics away from their Catholic faith and toward being “bible Christians”. You do this, apparently, because you believe that “biblical theology” is at odds with what the Catholic Church teaches.

There is only one body of Christ which is made-up of those individuals who have been born from above and untied to Christ. The true body of Christ is not divided like you may think.

This much is Catholic teaching. Although there is only One Body - One Church, there are many visible divisions and fractures that exist.

Therefore, ecumenism within the essential core doctrines of the Faith is a very good thing.

It might seem good to you, but any effort based upon a man made notiuon such as “essential core doctrines” will ultimately fail.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

Heck, from my perspective… in some areas of the country… the Catholic Church is a better body to belong to than some of the more liberal Protestant churches.

That must have been really tough for you to say The Catholic Church is better to belong to than some liberal Protestant churches…

Remember, I do not make a clear distinction that you do with being Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, or Anglican.

And yet you start a thread about Catholics (distinction) needing to read their Bibles. Another thread, started by you, asked us Catholics to defend our faith. Yes you do make distinctions.

God bless

 

[guanophore]

The issue is tradition.

I agree that one of the issues is, yes. The other is authority. Jesus appointed persons to have authority. Evangelicals attempt to make the bible assume authority, but this is not possible, because the Scriptures, however Holy, do not contain the elements necessary to exercise authority.

Scripture speaks of two kinds of tradition which the Catholic Church also teaches. We have Sacred Tradition and tradition. The challenge for both Catholic and Protestant communities is determine if a particular tradition is Sacred Tradition or just tradition.

No, 2nd. There is no challenge here. It is not up to us to make this determination. Sacred Tradition is the Word of God, the Teaching of Jesus committed to the Church. It is just as immutable and inerrant as the written Word. The Sacred Tradition does not stand and fall at the whim of individuals such as ourselves.

1 Thess 2:13
13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

This Word of God has always been effectually working in the Church.

For example, who will determine if Mary can be a co-redemptrix for the Catholic.

This is a silly question. God already determined the role of Mary before the beginning of time. This is like asking “who will determine if the Sacred Scriptures are inspired”. No human is capable of determining such a thing. The Sacred Scriptures were inspired by God the moment they were penned.

Until it is official defnied by the Magisterium, there are many views in the Catholic community.

As I am sure there will be after it is defined, if this happens. Such has been the case with most infallible teachings of the Church. Fortunately, the Truth revealed by God is not subject to the “many views of the community”. The Kingdom of God is not a democracy, it is a theocracy.

So, what is the determining factor to know if something is Sacred Tradition or just tradition.

This is a very good question. Probably grist for another thread, don’t you think?

For the Catholic, the Magisterium does this for you. For the Protestant, Scripture determines if a tradition is Sacred Tradition or just tradition.

The Magesterim teaches and propogates what has been revealed to the Church by God already. For Protestants, this determination is made in each individual’s conscience. Each one reads the Sacred Scripture and follows the way of those who have no King:

" In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did what was right in his own eyes." Judges 17:6.

Bible Christians believe that the promise made to the Church, that the HS will guide them into all truth, applies to themselves, even when they depart from what the HS has already revealed to the church.

We already know that what is written in Sacred Scripture is from above. So, true Sacred tradition lines up with Sacred Scripture. Remember, Catholics and Protestants agree with most of the core doctrines of the Christian Faith. Do you guys agree with my posting?

I agree that there is no contradiction, separation, or “juggling” between Sacred Tradition,and Sacred Scripture. Since they both have their infallible Source in God, they cannot contradict.

Your perceptions, though, are quite contradictory.

Colossians 2:8
See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.

2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.

2 Thessalonians 3:6
Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.

Can you discern which of these refers to Sacred, and which to traditions of men?

 

[guanophore]

Do you understand that our definition of the church (his body) is mutually exclusive?

No, it is not.

 The body of Christ consist of all those whom the Spirit moved from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light, or the kingdom of HIs Son.  It is universal or catholic, which crosses denominational lines or divisions within Christendom.

This is the teaching of the Catholic Church.

  The body of Christ is not the Catholic Church exclusively since there is a remnant in the Catholic Church chosen by grace.

The reason that it is not exclusive has nothing to do with the Catholic remnant chosen by grace.

 The true body of Christ include all the sheep from different Christian communities.

This is Catholic teaching.

So when you think of the word church, you see Catholic, and I see catholic (universal). Christ came to rescue His sheep (the church) from their sins.

Our definitions are not mutually exclusive. The Apostolic Teaching includes yours, but is larger. The Body of Christ subsists in the visible Catholic Church, but is not comfined to it.

Jesus came to save all of humanity. He died for all. The Elect are those that respond to His grace.

Agreed that Jesus came on a rescue mission. And I understand that you are heir to Reformation theology.

But I don’t see where you are coming up with the idea that the Body of Christ is invisible.
Bodies, by definition, are visible, not invisible. There’s no biblical basis for assuming that His Body is some ephemeral collection of believers. And you do claim to hold the Bible as your highest authority…

Finally, Catholic=catholic=Catholic=universal. I suppose it’s well within your rights to try to say that Catholic doesn’t mean universal, but it’s a specious argument. No matter how many times you claim that there’s a difference, it won’t make it so.

Jesus has a mystical body which is not visible. To it belong all those who are saved who are not visible members of the Catholic Church, and the saints who have already been perfected in faith (in heaven). There is plenty of biblical basis for the mystical Body of Christ. Catholic does mean universal. All who are members of His One Body are members of Him, even if they are not members of the visible Catholic Church.

 

[guanophore]

 If I understand Catholic theology, nobody is united to Christ on an eternal basis until you pass from this life, correct?

I am really glad you are here on CAF, 2nd, and hope you can get some of these grave misunderstandings of the Apostolic faith corrected here.

No, this is not what the Catholic Church believes and teaches. We are united with Christ in baptism, and we are sealed with the promised HS, dying to our union with Adam, and having a new nature created in Christ.

That must have been really tough for you to say The Catholic Church is better to belong to than some liberal Protestant churches…

And yet you start a thread about Catholics (distinction) needing to read their Bibles. Another thread, started by you, asked us Catholics to defend our faith. Yes you do make distinctions.

God bless

That is just a smokescreen, Roman. He does not really want to see Catholics defend the faith. If he did, he would post the invitation over in Apologetcs. He is afraid to do that, because people might hurt his feelings.

 

[2nd_Adam]

I am really glad you are here on CAF, 2nd, and hope you can get some of these grave misunderstandings of the Apostolic faith corrected here.

No, this is not what the Catholic Church believes and teaches. We are united with Christ in baptism, and we are sealed with the promised HS, dying to our union with Adam, and having a new nature created in Christ.

.

Please help me understand the official Catholic view on apostasy on those who have been baptized as Catholics and later reject Christ. Within Reformed thinking, those who apostate from the visible church were never united to Christ to begin with. The remnant will believe in Christ to the very end of our lives… by the grace of God.

 

[benidict]

hi 2nd just a quick somthing to think about in reguards to Catholics juggeling scripture and traditionl. dont know how familiar you are with the us constitution. interpreting that document alone can lead to all sorts of trouble. which is why our forfathers gave us the federalist papers and the system of checks and balances we have today. it is also why we have a supreme court. likewise when the Lord ascended he left us with his apostles who not only wrote the bible, but he also left us with his church to teach us its true intent.
he also left us with the magisterium. who being guided by the Holy Spirit, are there to lead us into all truth as taught by Jesus and the apostles. so its really no juggle at all. even in secular governments you need more than just a constitution. how much moreso when it comes down to matters of faith.

 

[guanophore]

Please help me understand the official Catholic view on apostasy on those who have been baptized as Catholics and later reject Christ. Within Reformed thinking, those who apostate from the visible church were never united to Christ to begin with. The remnant will believe in Christ to the very end of our lives… by the grace of God.

Well, we see it differently.

Catholics are not influenced by the errors of Calvanism, and we hold fast to the Teachings of the Apostles. They never taught that it was impossible to fall away from the faith. But, that is grist for another thread, is it not?

 

[Canto]

Hi 2nd Adam. You said “Scripture is authorative over Sacred Tradition,” as I said earlier, I would be curious to know which Bible verses you think say this. Thanks.

 

[2nd_Adam]

Originally Posted by 2nd Adam
If I understand Catholic theology, nobody is united to Christ on an eternal basis until you pass from this life, correct?

I am really glad you are here on CAF, 2nd, and hope you can get some of these grave misunderstandings of the Apostolic faith corrected here.

No, this is not what the Catholic Church believes and teaches. We are united with Christ in baptism, and we are sealed with the promised HS, dying to our union with Adam, and having a new nature created in Christ.

Well, we see it differently.

Catholics are not influenced by the errors of Calvanism, and we hold fast to the Teachings of the Apostles. They never taught that it was impossible to fall away from the faith. But, that is grist for another thread, is it not?

You really avoid answering the difficult questions which the Catholic Faith does not have a very good answer. If you not going to make an effort to answer a difficult question, I will have to take break from you. What I hear you saying is that a Catholic is united to Christ at baptism, but can fall away and no longer be united to Christ. If I understand Catholic theology, Catholic Christians go from the kingdom of darkness, to the kingdom of light, and back to the kingdom of darkness again.