Credible Catholic Sources

[Blue_Serenity]

It seems like every time a Protestant posts a source, whether it be a link or a book or whatever, Catholics shoot it down, saying it’s not credible.
So, I’m asking all Catholics here just what is a credible source to you? Are there certain authors that you trust for certain issues or what?
I’m getting frustrated when I read threads where Catholics ask Protestants for proof and then shoot down their source.
Catholics, enlighten me!

 

[VociMike]

The problem is that for 500 years the Protestant world has been putting out propaganda against the Church, which does not tell the truth (to put it mildly). So “Protestant” sources are instantly and deservedly suspect. The solution is to offer scholarly, unbiased sources. The same sources one would (hopefully) cite in a thesis or other academic endeavor.

For the crucial role which distortions and outright lies hold in certain sections of Protestantism, see John Henry Newman’s essay. Here’s a sample:

“If you would have some direct downright proof that Catholicism is what Protestants make it to be, something which will come up to the mark, you must lie; else you will not get beyond feeble suspicions, which may be right, but may be wrong. Hence Protestants are obliged to cut their ninth commandment out of their Decalogue. “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour” must go, must disappear; their position requires the sacrifice. The substance, the force, the edge of their Tradition is slander.”

 

[rr1213]

There are certain things to remember when engaging in apologetics. One is the need to cite to a source which the “other side” is likely to consider to be authoritative or, at a minimum, a respected source. So, if you are a Catholic talking to a Protestant, don’t bother citing the CCC but, instead, cite Scripture. If you are a Protestant talking to a Catholic, cite Scripture or the CCC, preferably the CCC because it presumably contains the Catholic Church’s “take” on theological matters. Or cite to the Catholic Encyclopedia, that’s a good one also:

newadvent.org/

 

[water]

It seems like every time a Protestant posts a source, whether it be a link or a book or whatever, Catholics shoot it down, saying it’s not credible.
So, I’m asking all Catholics here just what is a credible source to you? Are there certain authors that you trust for certain issues or what?
I’m getting frustrated when I read threads where Catholics ask Protestants for proof and then shoot down their source.
Catholics, enlighten me!

I like these websites - and there are more out there but I don’t know yet:
nobiblenobreakfast.com/?page_id=23

 

[Keikiolu]

It seems like every time a Protestant posts a source, whether it be a link or a book or whatever, Catholics shoot it down, saying it’s not credible.
So, I’m asking all Catholics here just what is a credible source to you? Are there certain authors that you trust for certain issues or what?
I’m getting frustrated when I read threads where Catholics ask Protestants for proof and then shoot down their source.
Catholics, enlighten me!

This brings up an interesting question:

Have you ever seen anyone “win” an argument (apologetically) with the person they are “debating”…?

I haven’t.

The apology is generally for the benefit of the AUDIENCE, and not to convert the opposing apologist.

The definition of the point of contention needs to be SEVERELY constricted, extremely well defined, or the “response” will ALWAYS be simply a dismissal of the opposing contention, and “sources” will be veritably irrelevent.

So,… bring every contention down to the narrowest possible definition so that you and your “opponent” can either determine what “correctness” look like or can define that thing about the contention that you can agree to disagree about…!

 

[Tomster]

It seems like every time a Protestant posts a source, whether it be a link or a book or whatever, Catholics shoot it down, saying it’s not credible.
So, I’m asking all Catholics here just what is a credible source to you? Are there certain authors that you trust for certain issues or what?
I’m getting frustrated when I read threads where Catholics ask Protestants for proof and then shoot down their source.
Catholics, enlighten me!

Traditionally, credible Catholic books have an imprematur and nihil obstat.

 

[VociMike]

There are certain things to remember when engaging in apologetics. One is the need to cite to a source which the “other side” is likely to consider to be authoritative or, at a minimum, a respected source. So, if you are a Catholic talking to a Protestant, don’t bother citing the CCC but, instead, cite Scripture.

Unless, of course, the purpose is to demonstrate what the Catholic Church actually teaches, in which case the CCC is authoritative and must be held to be authoritative by any reasonable person.

 

[rr1213]

Unless, of course, the purpose is to demonstrate what the Catholic Church actually teaches, in which case the CCC is authoritative and must be held to be authoritative by any reasonable person.

Ha! Except for certain Catholic posters in these forums, not including you, who shall go unnamed!

Seriously though, while I understand the reasoning I still find it disconcerting to see how Catholics deem the CCC to be more authoritative than the Scriptures. Of course, you would say that the CCC simply illustrates the correct way to interpret the Scriptures, but IMHO it goes beyond that.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Ha! Except for certain Catholic posters in these forums, not including you, who shall go unnamed!

Seriously though, while I understand the reasoning I still find it disconcerting to see how Catholics deem the CCC to be more authoritative than the Scriptures. Of course, you would say that the CCC simply illustrates the correct way to interpret the Scriptures, but IMHO it goes beyond that.

The Catholic Church is authoritiative because it canonized the Scripture and proclaim it to be authoritative. Without the Church, the Bible has no authority since it was the Church who put the OT and NT and made it the Bible we see today (except for the Protestants which only have 66 OT books compared to the 72 Books in the OT in the Catholic Bible)

The Church is only the sole interpreter of Scripture so it has that authority. If you try to interpret the Bible contrary to the teachings of Christ, you would see many churches with different dogmas and doctrines we see in the Protestant Churches.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

It seems like every time a Protestant posts a source, whether it be a link or a book or whatever, Catholics shoot it down, saying it’s not credible.
So, I’m asking all Catholics here just what is a credible source to you? Are there certain authors that you trust for certain issues or what?
I’m getting frustrated when I read threads where Catholics ask Protestants for proof and then shoot down their source.
Catholics, enlighten me!

The Bible (the whole Bible, not the truncated 66-book version). [the only inerrant and inspired text of Catholicism]

The Nicene-Constantinopalitan Creed [infallibly defined]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church. [summary of Catholicism, as promulgated by the Roman Pontiff and the college of bishops in communion with him].

And if you are real ambitious, the texts promulgated and published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis, which includes the approved Councilar constitutions, declarations, decrees and disciplinary norms of the Church. [Some of these are infallibly and immutably defined].

The writings of the early Church Fathers (although these and any other opinions of theologians past and present can be erroneous, and any theological disputes are submitted to the authority of the Catholic Church as their final arbiter).

Perhaps however, your mistake is treating the Catholic Church as though it were a Protestant Church. It isn’t. While we have a much better centralized summary of Catholic teaching than do non-Catholic Churches (eg. Catechism of the Catholic Church), we don’t go by “Bible alone” or by any “written source” alone. Instead, Christ build a Church (Matt 16:18), and in so doing he ordained teachers to teach, govern, and sanctify with authority, and these men which Christ ordained also ordained other ministers to continue their God-given authority to govern, sanctify, and teach. Catholicism is not a self-study correspondence program, where you can simply read a book and know with certainly what is taught. Catholicism is something based upon the living Christ, guided by the Holy Spirit, and not something based upon one’s personal arbitrary interpretation of a written text alone. We have a teaching authority given to us by God, vesting in living men who were ordained in historical succession to the apostles. They are the teaching Church and it is to this magisterial authority which Christ said: “He who hears you, hears me, he who rejectes you, rejects me.” So, we obey and submit to our lawful pastors, just like Hebrews 13:17 demands.

Much of the problem derives form those who aren’t really seeking to authentically learn about Catholicism, but are searching from some “sound bite” they might use to argue against Catholicism. It’s best probably to assume that the practicing Catholic knows more about his own beliefs that the non-Catholic or ex-Catholic.

 

[Mommyof02green]

Another Catholic web-source would be:
vatican.va/phome_en.htm

 

[onenow1]

It seems like every time a Protestant posts a source, whether it be a link or a book or whatever, Catholics shoot it down, saying it’s not credible.
So, I’m asking all Catholics here just what is a credible source to you? Are there certain authors that you trust for certain issues or what?
I’m getting frustrated when I read threads where Catholics ask Protestants for proof and then shoot down their source.
Catholics, enlighten me!

Hi, BlueSerenity
I dont know if there is a source that you would accept, but here’s one I just think you might. John 17: 17-23 Jesus praying they may be one. This may help also. Matt 13: 31- 32.

I don’t think Jesus is very happy with so many theological differences in the world today.

I would search as hard as I could to see who comes closest in theology and moral values.

I’ll pray the Holy Spirit guides you on your quest.

Peace, OneNow1

 

[Pax]

It seems like every time a Protestant posts a source, whether it be a link or a book or whatever, Catholics shoot it down, saying it’s not credible.
So, I’m asking all Catholics here just what is a credible source to you? Are there certain authors that you trust for certain issues or what?
I’m getting frustrated when I read threads where Catholics ask Protestants for proof and then shoot down their source.
Catholics, enlighten me!

Have the Catholic responses been reasonable and when a source has been shot down was there a reason for it?

Many Protestants that participate on this board handle themselves quite well and use good sources. Sometimes the source is well used and understood and sometimes it is not. Catholics have the same problems. We all do the best we can, but some opinions are better than others. We all like to think that what we present is clear and accurate, but many times we fall short.

Hopefully, the dialogues we have will at least clear up some of the misunderstandings that exist even if we do not always agree.

 

[dcdurel]

It seems like every time a Protestant posts a source, whether it be a link or a book or whatever, Catholics shoot it down, saying it’s not credible.
So, I’m asking all Catholics here just what is a credible source to you? Are there certain authors that you trust for certain issues or what?
I’m getting frustrated when I read threads where Catholics ask Protestants for proof and then shoot down their source.
Catholics, enlighten me!

The ONLY official Church teachings are those given by the Popes, or those teachings of the bishops that are approved by the Popes
The imprematur and nihil obstat, only mean a book is approved by the bishop, at most, and bishops are not infallilble in their teachings, except the few times in history when they are in union with the Pope.

Thus, the two Catechisms of the Catholic Church are official, and the encyclicals and other documents written by the Popes and Church councils, or any other teachings  else a Pope explicitly approves. 

 Since all hereses came from Catholic scripture scholars and theologians, and since none have ever been infallible, then Catholic scholars cannot ever be trusted.

Only the Popes, when they teach for the whole Church on faith or morals, can be completely trusted.

 

[Blue_Serenity]

Have the Catholic responses been reasonable and when a source has been shot down was there a reason for it?

Depends on the topic, of course.
Obviously, those rooted deeply in faith are not going to change their opinions. Most of the folks here are decent to talk to. They are a few radicals, of course, but every bunch has those.
I guess it was just getting frustrating lately, hence what spawned this thread.

 

[Scottgun]

Ha! Except for certain Catholic posters in these forums, not including you, who shall go unnamed!

Seriously though, while I understand the reasoning I still find it disconcerting to see how Catholics deem the CCC to be more authoritative than the Scriptures. Of course, you would say that the CCC simply illustrates the correct way to interpret the Scriptures, but IMHO it goes beyond that.

I think you are missing the point. It is not about deeming the CCC more authoritative than Scripture, it is deeming the CCC (and Code of Canon Law, etc) as authoritative about what the *content of Catholic teaching is. *If x person says, “The Church teaches *X” *the only real way to settle that is to check the CCC et al. and not the Bible. Now of course we can appeal to Scripture to demonstrate why and how the Church teaches what it does, but it is actually only marginally helpful in explaining what Catholic teaching is.

Examples abound. I don’t know how many times I’ve heard that the Catholic teaching is that we are saved by works (Pelagianism or semi-Pelagianism). There is no Bible passage that says the Church teaches works-salvation. There are however many Church teachings denying this. At which point, the person making the claim will hopefully accept the point, or if not, make an anemic claim that, “Well that’s what the Church *says” *and implying there is a nudgenudgewink**wink at which point you can dismiss the person as looking for an argument rather than Truth.

Scott

 

[Pax]

… Most of the folks here are decent to talk to…

And so are you…we are all of God’s children and we need to extend the love Christ to one another.

 

[Blue_Serenity]

And so are you…we are all of God’s children and we need to extend the love Christ to one another.

Definitely! :yup:

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pax forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif
And so are you…we are all of God’s children and we need to extend the love Christ to one another.

Definitely! :yup:

I concur,… even though it may seem at times I don’t.

Part of that love we show for each other is to be honest as to what we truly believe, and how we believe others are in error.

Of course, the lovely thing about being Catholic is that it’s “UNDERSTOOD” that my opinion is only an opinion, and I have a place to go for an authoritative decision about the veracity of my opinion.

So,… if I say something “stupid” (which is rather more often than I’d like, actually) smack me around with the “big papal stick”,… OK…?!

:

I love being proved wrong,… as that’s how I improve.

 

[Blue_Serenity]

I concur,… even though it may seem at times I don’t.

Part of that love we show for each other is to be honest as to what we truly believe, and how we believe others are in error.

Of course, the lovely thing about being Catholic is that it’s “UNDERSTOOD” that my opinion is only an opinion, and I have a place to go for an authoritative decision about the veracity of my opinion.

So,… if I say something “stupid” (which is rather more often than I’d like, actually) smack me around with the “big papal stick”,… OK…?!

:

I love being proved wrong,… as that’s how I improve.

I think what happens is we mix emotion with Truth and turn others off to whatever point we’re trying to make. I guess it’s what makes us human, though, and why we have “debates”.