Does the Catholic Church teach from the Bible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter smiddle
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I often speculate as to why the Catholic Church opposed the translation of the Bible from the dead Latin? Opposition was fierce, too: Wycliffe ( probably the first to translate into English) had his bones dug up 44 years after his death, burnt and thrown into a river - on the orders of the then Pope.
Have you read his translation? It’s pure junk. And it was not “the first.” The Venerable Bede was putting the Scriptures into English at about the same time that the English got an alphabet, in the 700s AD.

I’d love to see your source that says the Pope ordered his bones to be dug up and thrown in the river - I always thought it was his frustrated parishioners who were looking for an orthodox priest for their parish.
Tyndale’s (possibly the second translator) disciple John Huss was burnt at the stake, hung drawn and quartered. The Duoay version of 1582 was translated from Jerome’s Latin Vulgate, despite Erasmus having proved years earlier Jerome to be inaccurate , corrupt and heavily biased towards Rome dogma.
Aha, so you are admitting that the Early Church had “Rome dogma.” HMMM, wonder where it came from originally? :hmmm:

**HINT: **IT WAS THE APOSTLES. :extrahappy: :extrahappy: :extrahappy:
 
From the beginning, Confirmation was a normal part of Christian initiation. The “laying on of hands,” along with repentance, faith, and Baptism are elements of the foundation of Christian faith. Confirmation completes the grace received in Baptism.
The sign of anointing with oil is a symbol of gladness and abundance (Ps. 23:5). It was used to cleanse the body before and after a bath and to limber an athlete before competition. Wounds were dressed with oil to aid healing. Objects set aside for sacred use as well as people consecrated to a sacred purpose were also anointed with oil.
Through this anointing, the person who is confirmed receives the seal of the Holy Spirit (2 Cor. 1:21-22). In ancient times, a seal signified ownership. Receiving the seal of the Holy Spirit in Confirmation indicates that we belong to Him and are enrolled in His service. When I received my Confirmation, I received a slight slap on the face as a reminder of this enrollment as a Soldier of Christ.

In Him also, when you had heard the truth of salvation, and had believed in HIm, were marked with the seal of the Holy Spirit; this is the pledge of our inheritance toward redemption of God’s own people, to the praise of His glory.[Eph. 1:13-14].
 
Sorry, I can see where my post seemed like it could have been attacking teachers, so I apologize to any of you that felt offended!

We had those books (the white ones with glossy covers), but every teacher I’ve ever had just makes you skip around the book and then read one page or so to the class. Nobody really took anything out of it, and I found that the only time I really learned is when I took the books home and read them by myself.

I got Confirmation a few years ago, but my connection with the Bible really started in sixth grade. A late start, but I’m still glad I started in the first place!
I understand your point. I had some really abysmal catechesis, and did not learn to read the Scripture until I left Catholicism and began hanging out with Baptists. The Bible I got for a confirmation gift was a King James Bible from my Methodist grandmother. I never learned how to read or pray it until my separated brethren taught me. I was resentful toward the Catholic Church for a long time over that.

Now I see that RCIA and childrens catechism is taught around the daily readings at Mass, and participants are encouraged to study the daily readings at home. There is also Catholic radio, which did not exist when I was in confrimation classes, where excellent homilies on the scriptures are available every day, as well as many language and history scholars such as Fr. Mitch Pacwa that can unpack the scriptures in an awesome way.

We are finally learning something from our separated brethren, and there are more Catholics in the Bible now than ever.
 
I have been asked to pull back from answering, apparently, to paraphrase…

The HOLY-SPIRIT INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE IS INFALLIBLE. Ask HIM–THAT IS MY POINT.

The NEW TESTAMENT was WRITTEN BY THE HOLY SPIRIT–AS IT SAYS:

2 Peter 1:21
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

AND 2 TIMOTHY 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

AND 1 Corinthians 2:13
Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
. <3+
Tell us, please, is your interpretation of the Bible infallible? If not, why should we accept it?

Do you know where we got the Bible? I doubt it. Most Protestants (and many Catholics) don’t have a clue about where we got it, why it was written, or how to understand it.

The New Testament was written by Catholics, for Catholics. The Catholic Church selected 27 of her own writings and named them the New Testament when she compiled the Bible at the end of the fourth century. The NT is based on the teaching of the Church, not vice versa. And the Church’s teaching is a guide by which the New Testament must be read in order to understand it correctly. The thousands of Protestant denominations have imposed their own (mis)interpretations upon it, and the result is chaos in Christendom.

Jim Dandy
Ex-Southern Baptist, ex-agnostic, ex-atheist, ecstatic to be Catholic!
 
Are you sure you’re Catholic? You not only impose your own personal interpretation upon the Bible, you also invent your own version of history. This is bull-oney. .
I did write: Check Google and Wiki. I could recommend any number of Christian Histories which I had to study at University along with RK. Blame the Groves of Academe for opening my mind.🙂 BTW Someone said the Bible is like an onion, the more you peel the more you discover yet another layer. Any mature Christian will confirm this. I am often conscious of the Lord looking over my shoulder, reading the Bible with me. I asked Him once: “Lord, you WROTE this book, why do you want to read it again and again?” He replied “Ian, you are a writer: don’t you enjoy reading your own words?”😃
 
Have you read his translation? It’s pure junk. And it was not “the first.” The Venerable Bede was putting the Scriptures into English at about the same time that the English got an alphabet, in the 700s AD.

I’d love to see your source that says the Pope ordered his bones to be dug up and thrown in the river - I always thought it was his frustrated parishioners who were looking for an orthodox priest for their parish.

Aha, so you are admitting that the Early Church had “Rome dogma.” HMMM, wonder where it came from originally? :hmmm:

**HINT: **IT WAS THE APOSTLES. :extrahappy: :extrahappy: :extrahappy:
So sorry, no apostles around in Jerome’s time, dogma kicked in around 338AD when Eusebius wrote his history ( somewhere in there he mentions “Tongue Speakers trying to interrupt as usual”. Looks like Church councils were not happy with Charisamtics even then! I must check with my Penguin copy of Bede’s “History of the English Church and People.” Cant recall any scripture therein.:confused:
Check Google re Huss. I can also recommend other sources.
 
MY God has a sense of humour, but then he’s my FATHER! I could never respect a po-faced God, let alone LOVE him!😃
 
(name removed by moderator) Re: Why doesn’t the Catholic Church teach from the Bible?

Quote:
Originally Posted by IanGE
A. I have not “put my faith in” - I was profoundly shocked that the head of a research department IN the Vatican should say that. But a reading of any unbiased Christian history will reveal any number of dodgy popes, notably the dreaded Borgias, not forgetting the time of TWO popes and Pope Joan! The authority to teach comes from Jesus to any who believe on Him: oaths of obedience to Rome are not good enough. ( please read Mt. 5:34 -37; Do not swear at all) Matthew’s Great commission includes the enigmatic words (Mt. 28:17) “…but some doubted!” Marks Gospel ends with 16:20: Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed His word by the signs (16:17 &18) that accompanied it… Nuff said.

No-one would claim all the Popes were personally models of moral virtue, however Pope Joan never existed so to claim you are using unbiased sources and start dragging a piece of medieval folklore like that in undermines your case.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Joan

??? Tell us about the Pope who never exisTed
 
The baptism of the Holy Spirit does not necessarily come by the laying on of hands, although it is given that way IN THE BIBLE. IT IS ALSO given BY GOD EVEN BEFORE BAPTISM BY WATER SIMPLY BY HEARING THE WORD. <3+

(name removed by moderator) Re: Why doesn’t the Catholic Church teach from the Bible?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rniznik
Please tell me where in the Bible it states this.

Confirmation in the Bible

We read in the Acts of the Apostles (8:14-17) that after the Samaritan converts had been baptized by Philip the deacon, the Apostles “sent unto them Peter and John, who, when they were come, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost; for he was not yet come upon any of them, but they were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus; then they laid their hands upon them, and they received the Holy Ghost”.

Again (19:1-6): St. Paul “came to Ephesus, and found certain disciples; and he said to them: Have you received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? But they said to him: We have not so much as heard whether there be a Holy Ghost. And he said: In what then were you baptized? Who said: In John’s baptism. Then Paul said: John baptized the people with the baptism of penance . . . Having heard these things, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had imposed his hands on them, the Holy Ghost came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied”.

From these two passages we learn that in the earliest ages of the Church there was a rite, distinct from baptism, in which the Holy Ghost was conferred by the imposition of hands (dia tes epitheseos ton cheiron ton Apostolon), and that the power to perform this ceremony was not implied in the power to baptize.

No distinct mention is made as to the origin of this rite; but Christ promised the gift of the Holy Ghost and conferred it. Again, no express mention is made of anointing with chrism; but we note that the idea of unction is commonly associated with the giving of the Holy Ghost. Christ (Luke 4:18) applies to Himself the words of Isaias (61:1): “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, wherefore he hath anointed me to preach the gospel”. St. Peter (Acts 10:38) speaks of “Jesus of Nazareth: how God anointed him with the Holy Ghost”. St. John tells the faithful: “You have the unction (chrisma) from the Holy One, and know all things”; and again: “Let the unction [chrisma], which you have received from him, abide in you” (1 John 2:20-27).

A striking passage, which was made much use of by the Fathers and the Schoolmen, is that of St. Paul: “He that confirmeth [ho de bebaion] us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God, who also hath sealed [sphragisamenos] us, and given us the pledge [arrabona] of the Spirit in our hearts” (2 Corinthians 1:20-21). No mention is made of any particular words accompanying the imposition of hands on either of the occasions on which the ceremony is described; but as the act of imposing hands was performed for various purposes, some prayer indicating the special purpose may have been used: “Peter and John . . . prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost”. Further, such expressions as “signing” and “sealing” may be taken as referring to the character impressed by the sacrament: “You were signed [esphragisthete] with the holy Spirit of promise”; “Grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby you are sealed [esphragisthete] unto the day of redemption” (Ephesians 1:13; 4:30). See also the passage from Second Corinthians quoted above.

Again, in the Epistle to the Hebrews (6:1-4) the writer reproaches those whom he addresses for falling back into their primitive imperfect knowledge of Christian truth; “whereas for the time you ought to be masters, you have need to be taught again what are the first elements of the words of God” (Hebrews 5:12). He exhorts them: “leaving the word of the beginning of Christ, let us go on to things more perfect, not laying again the foundation . . . of the doctrine of baptisms, and imposition of hands”, and speaks of them as those who have been “once illuminated, have tasted also the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost”. It is clear that reference is made here to the ceremony of Christian initiation: baptism and the imposition of hands whereby the Holy Ghost was conferred, just as in Acts 2:38. The ceremony is considered to be so well known to the faithful that no further description is necessary. This account of the practice and teaching of the Apostles proves that the ceremony was no mere examination of those already baptized, no mere profession of faith or renewal of baptismal vows. Nor was it something specially conferred upon the Samaritans and Ephesians. What was done to them was an instance of what was generally bestowed. Nor was it a mere bestowal of charismata; the Holy Ghost sometimes produced extraordinary effects (speaking with divers tongues, etc.), but these were not necessarily the result of His being given. The practice and teaching of the Church at the present day preserve the primitive type: the imposition of hands, the gift of the Holy Ghost, the privileges of the episcopate. What further elements were handed down by tradition will be seen presently.
 
Mark 3: 28 - 30; I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. But whoever blasphemes agianst the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven: he is guilty of an eternal sin. He said this because they were saying, “He has an evil spirit.”
I speak in frustrated love: the Church is missing out on so much because it fears (if that’s the right word?) handing over control to the Holy Spirit. It did that way back in Eusebius’ day, about 338AD.
This is the TRUTH. There is no controlling the HOLY SPIRIT. That is called TO SHUTTER the Holy Spirit. That is forbidden. HOLY SPIRIT will control the proceedings when allowed to. THERE IS NO FEARING THE HOLY SPIRIT.

In a Spirit-led gathering one will hear the speaking of Tongues by one followed by Interpretation by another–as mentioned by THE BIBLE–and the interpretation may be True or FALSE, but the Holy Spirit will FOLLOW THE FALSE WITH THE TRUE. The SPIRIT of the believer will AGREE WITH THE TRUE. There is no need to stop the voices of the prophets. The protocol is to let two or three prophesy and the other check–so we are talking up to four just in this description. IT IS THE JOB OF THE PROPHET TO CHECK. The voice of GOD speaking DOES THE CHECKING–THIS IS THE INSTRUCTION OF THE APOSTLE PAUL. 1 CORINTHIANS 14:

29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

30 If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.

31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
<3+
 
Yes, but the Tongues Speakers were most likely false prophets Church Fathers spoke against being mentioned. False prophets, however, do not make all prophets false; false tongues-speakers do not make all tongues-speakers false. Apostles knew by tongues that certain were true believers and on that authority baptism was given. <3+
 
Nevertheless, early arguments–which containing some good points–were incomplete regarding the aspect of prophets, exclusion of examples of Saul notable and the irresistability of the prophesying of Jeremiah, as well as the words of Paul regarding operating both with and without understanding in “modus operandi”… People tend to argue from their bias and come up with arguments to suit. We need balance–which is in the SCRIPTURES.

As long as THE CHURCH is holding up THE BIBLE then THE CHURCH HAD BETTER NOT DEFY THE WORD OF GOD IT UPHOLDS. <3+
 
I am referring to the remark humorously inserted regarding comments about Tongues Speakers interrupting again–by Eusebius, if I am not mistaken–as identified with charismatics but clarifying that these are not necessarily the same, without disqualifying charismatics who are TRUE. <3+
 
A. I have not “put my faith in” - I was profoundly shocked that the head of a research department IN the Vatican should say that. But a reading of any unbiased Christian history will reveal any number of dodgy popes, notably the dreaded Borgias, not forgetting the time of TWO popes and Pope Joan! The authority to teach comes from Jesus to any who believe on Him: oaths of obedience to Rome are not good enough. ( please read Mt. 5:34 -37; Do not swear at all) Matthew’s Great commission includes the enigmatic words (Mt. 28:17) “…but some doubted!” Marks Gospel ends with 16:20: Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed His word by the signs (16:17 &18) that accompanied it.. Nuff said.
Huh. Let’s read Mark 16, shall we?
[14] At length he appeared to the eleven as they were at table: and he upbraided them with their incredulity and hardness of heart, because they did not believe them who had seen him after he was risen again. [15] And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
[16] He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned. [17] And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name they shall cast out devils: they shall speak with new tongues. [18] They shall take up serpents; and if they shall drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them: they shall lay their hands upon the sick, and they shall recover. [19] And the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God. [20] But they going forth preached everywhere: the Lord working withal, and confirming the word with signs that followed.
Mark 16:14-20.

Who’s the “them” in the Great Commission? The Eleven. Not “the disciples.” Not “anyone who believes.” Not “all followers of Jesus.” Not “anyone who feels like they can do a better job.” The Eleven. And we know from Acts chapter 1 that apostlehood was an office (some translations say “office” while others say “bishopric”) and not just a person or a job.

Preaching is first and foremost the place of the bishops, who are the successors to the Apostles. Yes, others may preach as well, and they are entitled to their opinions; but Jesus left us a stable set of people to preach His word. Read Matthew chapter 23 and Mark chapter 12: the scribes and Pharisees had inherited the seat of Moses, so Jesus exhorted His followers to do all that they said, even if their examples were poor. But He also pointed out that their teaching authority would be taken away from them and given to others. To whom? The Apostles. And what happened to their authority? It passed to the bishops, who still have that authority today.

Even if individual bishops exhibit personal failings like the scribes and the Pharisees.
 
40.png
Godfollower:
Huh. Let’s read Mark 16, shall we?

Mark 16:14-20.

Who’s the “them” in the Great Commission? The Eleven. Not “the disciples.” Not “anyone who believes.” Not “all followers of Jesus.” Not “anyone who feels like they can do a better job.” The Eleven. And we know from Acts chapter 1 that apostlehood was an office (some translations say “office” while others say “bishopric”) and not just a person or a job.

Preaching is first and foremost the place of the bishops, who are the successors to the Apostles. Yes, others may preach as well, and they are entitled to their opinions; but Jesus left us a stable set of people to preach His word. Read Matthew chapter 23 and Mark chapter 12: the scribes and Pharisees had inherited the seat of Moses, so Jesus exhorted His followers to do all that they said, even if their examples were poor. But He also pointed out that their teaching authority would be taken away from them and given to others. To whom? The Apostles. And what happened to their authority? It passed to the bishops, who still have that authority today.

Even if individual bishops exhibit personal failings like the scribes and the Pharisees.

Dear Godfollower, please cite Chapter AND verse: Both Scripture quotes are lengthy chapters and I couldn’t find the bits you highlighted. I am saddened that your derived theology removes from me (and you, singular and plural) the obligation, duty, rema to evangelize. One of the unsung charisms gifted to Born Agains is a sudden, deep love and hunger for the Bible - all of it. We see it (all of it) as a love letter from God, written to each and everyone personally. Born Agains are living witnesses to Mark 16:17 & 18 “signs of the believers.” You quoted Mark 16:20: “Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed His word by the signs that accompanied it.”
Why is it that the signs are noticeably absent in the Church except by the Holy Spirit Born Agains who skulk like lepers, forced to hide their lamps under a bushel. I feel a “Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees” coming on but I’ll ask the Holy Spirit to renew the fourth of His fruits, Patience and do it NOW, Lord!🙂
 
Born Agains are…

Why is it that the signs are noticeably absent in the Church except by the Holy Spirit Born Agains who skulk like lepers, forced to hide their lamps under a bushel. I feel a “Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees” coming on but I’ll ask the Holy Spirit to renew the fourth of His fruits, Patience and do it NOW, Lord!🙂
Ian, it appears that your association with Protestant thought, possibly encountered in the Charismatic Renewal, has contaminated your Catholicity. Your posts seem to represent ideas that are contrary to Catholic Doctrine.

The Aposltes taught that human beings are born again in baptism. That means that everyone who is validly baptized is “born again”.
 
Godfollower;9401087:
Huh. Let’s read Mark 16, shall we?
[14] At length he appeared to the eleven as they were at table: and he upbraided them with their incredulity and hardness of heart, because they did not believe them who had seen him after he was risen again. [15] And he said to them: Go ye into the whole world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
[16] He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned. [17] And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name they shall cast out devils: they shall speak with new tongues. [18] They shall take up serpents; and if they shall drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them: they shall lay their hands upon the sick, and they shall recover. [19] And the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God. [20] But they going forth preached everywhere: the Lord working withal, and confirming the word with signs that followed.
Mark 16:14-20.

Who’s the “them” in the Great Commission? The Eleven. Not “the disciples.” Not “anyone who believes.” Not “all followers of Jesus.” Not “anyone who feels like they can do a better job.” The Eleven. And we know from Acts chapter 1 that apostlehood was an office (some translations say “office” while others say “bishopric”) and not just a person or a job.

Preaching is first and foremost the place of the bishops, who are the successors to the Apostles. Yes, others may preach as well, and they are entitled to their opinions; but Jesus left us a stable set of people to preach His word. Read Matthew chapter 23 and Mark chapter 12: the scribes and Pharisees had inherited the seat of Moses, so Jesus exhorted His followers to do all that they said, even if their examples were poor. But He also pointed out that their teaching authority would be taken away from them and given to others. To whom? The Apostles. And what happened to their authority? It passed to the bishops, who still have that authority today.

Even if individual bishops exhibit personal failings like the scribes and the Pharisees.

Dear Godfollower, please cite Chapter AND verse: Both Scripture quotes are lengthy chapters and I couldn’t find the bits you highlighted. I am saddened that your derived theology removes from me (and you, singular and plural) the obligation, duty, rema to evangelize. One of the unsung charisms gifted to Born Agains is a sudden, deep love and hunger for the Bible - all of it. We see it (all of it) as a love letter from God, written to each and everyone personally. Born Agains are living witnesses to Mark 16:17 & 18 “signs of the believers.” You quoted Mark 16:20: “Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed His word by the signs that accompanied it.”
Why is it that the signs are noticeably absent in the Church except by the Holy Spirit Born Agains who skulk like lepers, forced to hide their lamps under a bushel. I feel a “Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees” coming on but I’ll ask the Holy Spirit to renew the fourth of His fruits, Patience and do it NOW, Lord!🙂

Sorry you weren’t able to find the passages.

The part of Matthew 23 about the scribes and Pharisees inheriting the seat of Moses, and therefore having authority to teach that Jesus’ followers had to obey, is here:
[1] Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples, [2] Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses. [3] All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not; for they say, and do not. [4] For they bind heavy and insupportable burdens, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but with a finger of their own they will not move them.
Matthew 23:1-3.

The part of Mark 12 where Jesus talks about the authority of the priests being taken away from them and given to others is here:
[1] And he began to speak to them in parables: A certain man planted a vineyard and made a hedge about it, and dug a place for the winefat, and built a tower, and let it to husbandmen; and went into a far country. [2] And at the season he sent to the husbandmen a servant to receive of the husbandmen of the fruit of the vineyard. [3] Who having laid hands on him, beat him, and sent him away empty. [4] And again he sent to them another servant; and him they wounded in the head, and used him reproachfully. [5] And again he sent another, and him they killed: and many others, of whom some they beat, and others they killed.
[6] Therefore having yet one son, most dear to him; he also sent him unto them last of all, saying: They will reverence my son. [7] But the husbandmen said one to another: This is the heir; come let us kill him; and the inheritance shall be ours. [8] And laying hold on him, they killed him, and cast him out of the vineyard. [9] What therefore will the lord of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy those husbandmen; and will give the vineyard to others. [10] And have you not read this scripture, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is made the head of the corner:
[11] By the Lord has this been done, and it is wonderful in our eyes. [12] And they sought to lay hands on him, but they feared the people. For they knew that he spoke this parable to them. And leaving him, they went their way.
Mark 12:1-12. In case you’re wondering who the “them” is in this passage, it’s “the chief priests and the scribes and the elders.” See Mark 11:27.

As for Mark 16:20, please re-read it. It does not say “Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed His word by the signs that accompanied it.” You’re simply misreading that passage. It says “But they going forth preached everywhere: the Lord working withal, and confirming the word with signs that followed.” And who is “they”? The Eleven. Whether you’re reading Douay-Rheims, King James Version, New King James Version, New American Standard Bible, New International Version, English Standard Version, or what have you, the “they” in “they went out and preached everywhere” refers back to the people Jesus was addressing – and that’s set out in verse 14: at length He appeared to the Eleven. Jesus gave the Great Commission to the Apostles, who passed that duty on to their successors – the bishops.

Now, that being said, yes, the laity have a duty to spread the good news. It’s right there in the Bible:
[9]But you are a chosen generation, a kingly priesthood, a holy nation, a purchased people: that you may declare his virtues, who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: [10] Who in time past were not a people: but are now the people of God. Who had not obtained mercy; but now have obtained mercy.
1 Peter 2:9-10.

We have a duty to spread the Gospel. But that duty doesn’t flow from the Great Commission, because the Great Commission is directed toward the Apostles and their successors. Our duty is subordinate to theirs. That’s why they have the teaching authority, and their word supersedes ours.
 
Ian, it appears that your association with Protestant thought, possibly encountered in the Charismatic Renewal, has contaminated your Catholicity. Your posts seem to represent ideas that are contrary to Catholic Doctrine.

The Aposltes taught that human beings are born again in baptism. That means that everyone who is validly baptized is “born again”.
I am sorry (well. not really) if I offend; beating me over the head with Catholic Doctrine does not answer the question.

Matthew 13: 57 & 58: “And they took offence at Him. But Jesus said to them, “Only in his home town and in his own house is a prophet without honour”. And He did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith.” The Charismatic RENEWAL is a gift from our God to assist the Church; the signs CONFIRM the Word of God and draw disciples in. So long as the Church persists in setting its tradition and doctrine ABOVE (or. OK, of the the same weight as) the Word Of God there will be protesters and people driven away by the doctrine of bondage. Even Charismatic signs (and particularly prophesy) MUST have roots in the Word of God otherwise it is false. One of the gifts of the Spirit is discernment which enbles the Spirit-filled to detect false doctrines. I expect I’ll be banned, but that’s nothing: my master was crucified.
 
Mark 12:1-12. In case you’re wondering who the “them” is in this passage, it’s “the chief priests and the scribes and the elders.” See Mark 11:27.

As for Mark 16:20, please re-read it. It does not say “Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed His word by the signs that accompanied it.” You’re simply misreading that passage. It says “But they going forth preached everywhere: the Lord working withal, and confirming the word with signs that followed.” And who is “they”? The Eleven. Whether you’re reading Douay-Rheims, King James Version, New King James Version, New American Standard Bible, New International Version, English Standard Version, or what have you, the “they” in “they went out and preached everywhere” refers back to the people Jesus was addressing – and that’s set out in verse 14: at length He appeared to the Eleven. Jesus gave the Great Commission to the Apostles, who passed that duty on to their successors – the bishops.

Well I’ll go to our house: thanks GF. KJV says “they”, NIV ( which I tend to rely on) says “the disciples”. But The Greek (Interlinear) text says “THOSE GOING FORTH”. I’ll have to double-check my NIV in future!
PS I am dubious about the derived theology - that the apostles’ successors were exclusively bishops. Bishops are called but the apostles were sent!🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top