Former Protestants: Do some Protestants worship the Bible as an Idol?

[lak611]

And some would not even feel like a Christian anymore without the Bible in hand every Sunday. Especially here in the south. “Toting a Bible into Church” has become an expectation and rule amongst the brethren in some churches, not all.

It is not just Protestants who take Bibles to church. I am a Catholic, and I take my Bible to church. I have Bible study on Sunday, following Mass.

 

[Contarini]

And some would not even feel like a Christian anymore without the Bible in hand every Sunday. Especially here in the south. “Toting a Bible into Church” has become an expectation and rule amongst the brethren in some churches, not all.

When going to church with my doctoral advisor once (he’s a very intellectual, high-church Methodist) I was surprised that he took his Bible along (I had gotten out of the habit as an Episcopalian, though my church had plenty of pew Bibles, a habit I wish Catholic churches would imitate). When I commented on it he said, “I take my Bible every week, in the faint hope that something will be said about the Bible in church”!

OK, Methodist-baiting moment over!

Edwin

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

I know there are some on this thread urging us to show love to Protestants who honor their Bibles.

As I said in my earlier post, there are quite a few Protestants who believe that The Bible, or Word of God IS Jesus, the Word of God.

This is wrong, and we are not showing “love” to not speak up when we meet up with this belief. Yes, many Protestants DON’T believe this, but MANY DO! (And I’m not talking “fringe” snake handlers, I’m talking evangelicals.)

In spite of the fact that each Protestant relies ultimately on the Holy Spirit to gain a correct interpretation of the Bible, there are many different individual interpretations of the Bible. Most Protestants will leave a church if the church teaches something different than THEY believe the Holy Spirit has led them to believe about the Bible.

This is difficult for Catholics to grasp, but its true. It happens often in Protestant churches. Over on another Protestant forum right now, there is a thread about leaving churches, and the biggest reason listed for leaving is that the churches start teaching something that is contrarty to the Word of God.

For my family, this “worship of the Bible” was devastating.

Difference of interpretation is not worship - it is difference of interpretation.​

The church we attended used the Bible–or at least their interpretation of it

Which is something all Churches have, including the CC​

-to throw us out of the church and shun us. We had done nothing wrong–a woman pastor spread lies about us. (She was caught in a lie a year later and fired; turned out she was a pathological liar). But the BIBLE–or Jesus–was used to justify that cruel treatment of us.

Using the Bible to support a lie does not amount to an objection to the right use of the Bible - it’s equivalent to rubbishing the entire clergy, just because some are no better than they should be.​

In the same way, Christians use the Bible to justify belief in hurting homosexuals and even terrorizing abortion clinics.

And it’s very bad that such things happen - but that is not an objection to the Bible; only to the abuse of it. The authority of the Church has been abused for bad ends, such as for gaining political power: but it does not follow the Church does not have authority; it does.​

If everything misused by Christians in the last 2000 years were removed, there would very little left. The Bible is used by sinful human beings - so it is as liable to misuse as the authority of the Church or the Liturgy: to name only two things. Why not abolish the episcopate ? That would make careerism, & simoniacal elections, impossible. It’s not going to happen, because the episcopate is of Divine authority. As is is the Bible. ##

I don’t think it shows “love” to encourage Protestants to continue this false adulation of the Bible.

In “Prot-speak”, that would be: “I don’t think it shows “love” to encourage Catholics to continue this false adulation of Mary.” But when that is translated into “Catholico-speak”, people object.​

Yes, we should honor it, read it, study it. But to say that the Word of God (BIble) = the Word of God (Jesus) is wrong and dangerous, especially when there is no Church or Magisterium to interpret what the Word of God (Bible) or the Word of God (Jesus) really teaches. We need to be discerning when we talk to Protestants, and make sure that their respect for the Bible isn’t really worship of the Bible.

A common position is that spelt out by R. A. Torrey:​

• Jesus Christ is the Word of God incarnate
• The Bible is the Word of God “inscripturate”

• which is a very good way to put it (yes, I know: that “proves” that Protestants think the Bible is a member of the Blessed Trinity - just in case anyone thinks of that); because the one Word witnesses to the other Word (an assertion made by Jesus in the fourth gospel, FWIW).

I’ve come across the equation you mention, once - just as I’ve come across the equation Jesus = the Church, once: from a Catholic. Theological howlers such as those do not of themselves prove that a practice or attitude is wrong; they may be caused by lack of understanding of theology; & not everyone is articulate - that does not make them heretics, nor anything of the kind.

Torrey’s formula preserves the unity of the two Words. Both are

• God-spoken
• God-breathed
• revelatory
• canonical
• God-produced by human means
• life-giving
• holy
• etc., etc.
  It can be given an unsound meaning - & so can a lot of Catholic formulas, such as “Mother of God”. We don’t throw out that - why should Protestants throw out their devotion to the Bible ? Devotion to the BVM would have to go, if weird ideas about a thing were a reason to chuck a thing out ##

 

[Singinbeauty]

Respectfully, you go a little too far in this analogy attempt. We do have a connection to Mary, but she is not our lifeline to God.

And while it would be pointless to go without asking Mary for her prayers and deny ourselves of the communion of Saints given to us by Christ through His body, we could still learn and grow in Him if we choose to ignore the communion of Saints available to all Christians.

However, Catholic Christians would agree with you that going without His word for a year would be impossible. To do so, one would have to either not go to Mass or ignore almost everyword of the Mass in order to not listen to or read His Word.

God bless,
Maria

Good to know. I will be the first one to admit I don’t know everything or even anyone’s heart when it comes to how they feel for Mary or the Saints. With the powerful passion that most catholics exude on this topic tells me that this passion runs deep within their belief. That it almost is a lifeline between them and God. Not something to worship but something they hold so dear that it is a part of them. Perhaps ‘lifeline’ isn’t the right term. I was trying to convey that the prayers offered to Mary and the Saints are important and instrumental in the catholic faith. Not being catholic myself and not really knowing any fully practicing catholics (any that I know say they are catholic but attend a protestant church and don’t follow the sacriments ) I am still trying to get a foot hold on the position that Mary and the Saints hold.

 

[mayra_hart]

about protestant worship of the bible the only thing that come into my mind are when some christians come on saturday mornings knockiing at your door with there bibles under the arms. and they ask you are you save? i don’t know is this will be consider a form of worship. is the answer is no. then they should understand the catholic love for mary and the saints. for us they are only mediators between us and god. i do pray a lot to mary but also to st judes.for me they both mediates the grace of christ to his church. the church is very clear that the saints and mary role depends on the basis of christ. May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be Adored, Glorified, Loved & Preserved throughout the world, now & forever. Sacred Heart of Jesus, please pray for me. Saint Jude, Worker of Miracles, please pray for me. Saint Jude, Helper of the Hopeless, please pray for me. Amen

 

[Grace_Seeker]

When going to church with my doctoral advisor once (he’s a very intellectual, high-church Methodist) I was surprised that he took his Bible along (I had gotten out of the habit as an Episcopalian, though my church had plenty of pew Bibles, a habit I wish Catholic churches would imitate). When I commented on it he said, “I take my Bible every week, in the faint hope that something will be said about the Bible in church”!

OK, Methodist-baiting moment over!

Edwin

I’m a Methodist and I’ll take the bait.

I couldn’t got even a week without taking my Bible to church, let alone a year. But then I’m the pastor, and without my Bible I would be stuck preaching from the thistles instead of the epistles.

Truly I wish more people did bring their Bibles to church. Embarrassing to say, but about 2 months ago, I was preaching a sermon and got away from the pulpit and thus both my notes and my Bible. I said something and my wife interrupted me. “No, that’s not what it says.” I was taken aback. I asked her what she was talking about, and she repeated for me what I had said (which she had heard correctly), but I had mispoken. In my preparation, I had somehow misread the passage and was about to teach incorrectly. Because she was following along, she was able to correct me, and keep me from presenting a false doctrine.

I don’t call that bibliotary. I just call it going to the primary source material for yourself. Can you imagine someone studying Abraham Lincoln without reading the Gettysburg Address?

 

[Grace_Seeker]

So with fear and trembling, I will say that many Protestants leave a church because they can’t get their way, and they use the Bible to prove that “their way” is the “true way” and that their church is in error.

Sadly, this is true far too often, though I’m not sure that has to do with bibliotary as much as narcissism.

 

[JoeyWarren]

It is not just Protestants who take Bibles to church. I am a Catholic, and I take my Bible to church. I have Bible study on Sunday, following Mass.

True. I take mine to church for the same reason.

But, it would not adversely affect me, if I was asked not to bring my Bible anymore. Can you say the same? Can you say the same for a stereotypical Fundamentalist or Evangelical?

 

[lak611]

True. I take mine to church for the same reason.

But, it would not adversely affect me, if I was asked not to bring my Bible anymore. Can you say the same?

Yes. It would not bother me to leave the Bible in my car if I was told not to bring it to church.

Can you say the same for a stereotypical Fundamentalist or Evangelical?

I do not know how a Fundamentalist or Evangelical would react. I do not think they can all be stereotyped as behaving a certain way.

 

[Kevan]

But, it would not adversely affect me, if I was asked not to bring my Bible anymore. Can you say the same? Can you say the same for a stereotypical Fundamentalist or Evangelical?

Lemme take a stab at this . . .

On another thread, someone pointed out that the question posits a situation that none of us can imagine, so we need more info: who is asking and why? When others point this out, you call them stupid.

But trying to work in this scenario you’ve manufactured, I’ll say as a fundamentalist that looking in the Bible is part of my religion; it’s what we do in church. So if someone said don’t have a Bible in church, I’d object strongly. Not because I have some subjective attachment to it, but because the one asking is proposing that it’s okay to quit studying the Bible in church.

 

[jmcrae]

When going to church with my doctoral advisor once (he’s a very intellectual, high-church Methodist) I was surprised that he took his Bible along (I had gotten out of the habit as an Episcopalian, though my church had plenty of pew Bibles, a habit I wish Catholic churches would imitate).

There are missals in the pews. The Bibles are in the classrooms downstairs, where they will be used in Bible study and Catechism classes.

This is because we have Mass in the Church, and Bible study, etc., downstairs.

 

[MariaG]

Good to know. I will be the first one to admit I don’t know everything or even anyone’s heart when it comes to how they feel for Mary or the Saints. With the powerful passion that most catholics exude on this topic tells me that this passion runs deep within their belief. That it almost is a lifeline between them and God. Not something to worship but something they hold so dear that it is a part of them. Perhaps ‘lifeline’ isn’t the right term. I was trying to convey that the prayers offered to Mary and the Saints are important and instrumental in the catholic faith. Not being catholic myself and not really knowing any fully practicing catholics (any that I know say they are catholic but attend a protestant church and don’t follow the sacriments ) I am still trying to get a foot hold on the position that Mary and the Saints hold.

Yes, it can be difficult. Especially since so much here on the forums and apologetic work is about Mary. Since she is so prominent in things that non-Catholics come into contact with, it can give a false impression of the importance of her role in the Church and the live of her members.

Christ is the meat. He is the main course. He is even the cake, I would say. Mary is like the big frosting roses on the cake. Not neccesary but they sure look good and make the cake even more sweet than it is.

I would completely agree with your statement that Mary and the Saints are people whom we hold dear and are a part of us. After all, we are ONE body in Christ

 

[MariaG]

No, I said that Catholic practices and Protestant practices in this area are worlds apart. Several times in my posts I used the word “generally,” just to make sure that nobody would respond as you did. I conceded that superstition could be found in any group, but I’m alleging that superstitious behavior is characteristic of the Catholic community in a way that it isn’t of the Protestant community.

You need to be more specific. You claim that superstitious behavoir is characteristic of the Catholic Commnunity. Please be more specific.

When you say characteristic of, I read that superstitious behavoir is part of authentic Catholic worship since a characteristic is intrinsically part of someone or something. Which I then hear you are saying that the practices (like the sacraments) are superstitious. So I really need you to clarify to better understand what you are saying, because I fear I am completely misreading what you are saying and thereby trying to defend against something you are not even saying

Well, I never claimed that I know what the people think. I just told you what they do and how contributors to this forum have defended it. And what I’ve seen, I’ve seen plenty of times; so many times, in fact, that I’m quite surprised that you question it.

Yes, I do question practices that I have never seen happen at all, that they are “common”. Common to me would mean that Many, many people do things with superstitious intentions, and do so regularly.

Are you placing the use of sacarmentals like Holy Water in the same catergory as superstitious behavoir like chain letters and burying of statues?

Would you mind stating just what he has said publicly about the things I’m grousing about? Would he publicly state that, for instance, burying an image of St. Joseph in your yard to make your house sell is contrary to the Christian religion and displeasing to God?

He has said that while there is nothing intrinsictly wrong with burying a statue if it helps you to remember to say your prayers more, he has publically stated that he does not think it is healthy because people can start to think of the statue as a rabbits foot or something.

Burying a statue could work ONLY IF it was because a person prayed more about it and God answered the prayer of the person and St. Joseph. He said one would be better to place a statue of St. Joseph in a visable area in order to help one to remember to pray about it more often instead of wasting one’s money to bury a perfectly good statue.

In my tradition, the preachers make it clear that the Bible is not to be treated as a talisman or as a tool of divination (letting it fall open and considering the first verse you see to be divine guidance). And if someone were to commit such an error, he’d be gently corrected by the first Christian who saw it. Bottom line, that stuff just isn’t a part of our worldview

And in mine also. I have said repeatedly that I do not think that it is common at all for people to worship the Bible as if it were God although there may be nominal Christians that do so.

The biggest problem is that there are people who are nominal Catholics at best, hardly go to Mass, who don’t have a relationship with God at all except maybe to remember to throw up last minute “I swear I’ll change” prayers who hear that St. Joseph can help and treat it as a lucky rabbits foot. Yet even then, I have still NEVER personally met someone who has done this. Based on this, I question how “common” a practice it really is.

Or maybe the difference is you only seem to know the nominal Catholics, and I actuallly know the ones who have an ongoing intimate relationship with God:shrug:

 

[JoeyWarren]

Lemme take a stab at this . . .
But trying to work in this scenario you’ve manufactured, I’ll say as a fundamentalist that looking in the Bible is part of my religion; it’s what we do in church. So if someone said don’t have a Bible in church, I’d object strongly. .

Not because I have some subjective attachment to it, but because the one asking is proposing that it’s okay to quit studying the Bible in church

You aresubmitting a strawman argument. The one asking is proposing nothing of the sort. He is only proposing him to stop taking his Bible to church for one year. The mind will create it’s own presupposed proposals.

But back to your presupposed proposal. Have you ever considered giving the Pastor 100% of your undivided attention instead of givng partial attention.

For example, our Priest has banned the handing out of Church bulletins before Mass because he wants your 100% undivided attention during the Homily. Furthermore he wants you 100% concentrated on the Liturgy of the Eucharist. I agree 100%.

For example, you are talking to your wife about a serious matter and she has her head buried in a book or some other task which is rendering less than an undivided attention. And if that does not affect you, just turn the table around…most women demand undivided attention when they are talking to you…right?

 

[Legal_Eagle]

But back to your presupposed proposal. Have you ever considered giving the Pastor 100% of your undivided attention instead of givng partial attention.

For example, our Priest has banned the handing out of Church bulletins before Mass because he wants your 100% undivided attention during the Homily. Furthermore he wants you 100% concentrated on the Liturgy of the Eucharist. I agree 100%

Some Catholic parishes have stopped using missalettes for the same reason. I don’t use one myself, but my wife finds it helpful.

 

[rr1213]

For example, our Priest has banned the handing out of Church bulletins before Mass because he wants your 100% undivided attention during the Homily.

With all respect, and to the best of my recollection, I’ve never attended a Catholic Mass where the Homily exceeded 10 minutes anyway. Teaching from the pulpit is not one of the areas where the average Catholic priest is particularly strong.

 

[jmcrae]

With all respect, and to the best of my recollection, I’ve never attended a Catholic Mass where the Homily exceeded 10 minutes anyway. Teaching from the pulpit is not one of the areas where the average Catholic priest is particularly strong.

With all due respect, the Mass isn’t a teaching venue; it’s a time of worship.

Have you ever heard a priest give a talk in a teaching environment such as a Mission or a Bible study, etc.? I think that your experience would be much different. The last Mission I was at, the priest spoke for six hours without ever getting boring.

 

[rr1213]

With all due respect, the Mass isn’t a teaching venue; it’s a time of worship.

Have you ever heard a priest give a talk in a teaching environment such as a Mission or a Bible study, etc.? I think that your experience would be much different. The last Mission I was at, the priest spoke for six hours without ever getting boring.

And that is one of the problems with the Catholic Church. So many of your members are not well educated about Catholic doctrine and so many are reasonably ignorant of the teachings of the CCC. Most of the time you don’t hear teaching from the pulpit and most of the time you don’t have the equivalent of Sunday School for teaching either. I say most of the time because I am confident that there are numerous exceptions, but I still think that the general observation is correct. Indeed, Benedict himself commented recently on the need for improvement with respect to homilies. This is one of the few instances where I submit that you can learn a lot from your separated brethern because it is one of our strengths.

 

[jmcrae]

And that is one of the problems with the Catholic Church. So many of your members are not well educated about Catholic doctrine and so many are reasonably ignorant of the teachings of the CCC. Most of the time you don’t hear teaching from the pulpit and most of the time you don’t have the equivalent of Sunday School for teaching either. I say most of the time because I am confident that there are numerous exceptions, but I still think that the general observation is correct. Indeed, Benedict himself commented recently on the need for improvement with respect to homilies. This is one of the few instances where I submit that you can learn a lot from your separated brethern because it is one of our strengths.

Actually it’s our Third World priests who give the best homilies, and as far as I know, they aren’t in contact with Protestantism at all. I don’t know what it is, but it seems as though our North American priests don’t get the intensity of homiletical training that they do in the Third World - and so far, I’ve never heard a Third World priest go on and on about what he did on his vacation, during the homily at Mass.

So, yes, I agree with you that a lot of our priests need to learn how to preach good homilies - but I think they will find excellent teachers among their own brother priests, rather than having to go to the Protestants.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

You need to be more specific. You claim that superstitious behavoir is characteristic of the Catholic Commnunity. Please be more specific.

When you say characteristic of, I read that superstitious behavoir is part of authentic Catholic worship since a characteristic is intrinsically part of someone or something. Which I then hear you are saying that the practices (like the sacraments) are superstitious. So I really need you to clarify to better understand what you are saying, because I fear I am completely misreading what you are saying and thereby trying to defend against something you are not even saying

Superstition is as really a sin as abortion or murder - it is always objectively wrong; & it is a long way from Catholic teaching to defend it.​

The only question is, whether in a particular instance what is called superstitious, is in fact so. The sacraments are not - though they can be, & have been, treated in a superstitious manner. But of themselves, they are good, holy, life-giving; as is the Bible.

OTOH, it’s hard to see how burying an image of St.Joseph to sell a house is not superstitious. The difference between doing that, & (say) baptism, is that there is a connection between the sacramental action, the effect intended, & the effect conferred. Baptism uses water, to effect the interior cleansing of which water, by washing the body, is a natural external sign. Statue-burying is more like magic, because there is no intrinsic connnection between statue-burying, & selling a house: statues of that saint are no more connected with that supposed effect as the cause of that effect, than burying a rabbit’s foot would be. ##

Yes, I do question practices that I have never seen happen at all, that they are “common”. Common to me would mean that Many, many people do things with superstitious intentions, and do so regularly.

Then maybe some Catholics might like to stop accusing Protestants in that way ​

Are you placing the use of sacarmentals like Holy Water in the same catergory as superstitious behavoir like chain letters and burying of statues?

He has said that while there is nothing intrinsictly wrong with burying a statue if it helps you to remember to say your prayers more, he has publically stated that he does not think it is healthy because people can start to think of the statue as a rabbits foot or something.

Burying a statue could work ONLY IF it was because a person prayed more about it and God answered the prayer of the person and St. Joseph. He said one would be better to place a statue of St. Joseph in a visable area in order to help one to remember to pray about it more often instead of wasting one’s money to bury a perfectly good statue.

And in mine also. I have said repeatedly that I do not think that it is common at all for people to worship the Bible as if it were God although there may be nominal Christians that do so.

The biggest problem is that there are people who are nominal Catholics at best, hardly go to Mass, who don’t have a relationship with God at all except maybe to remember to throw up last minute “I swear I’ll change” prayers who hear that St. Joseph can help and treat it as a lucky rabbits foot. Yet even then, I have still NEVER personally met someone who has done this. Based on this, I question how “common” a practice it really is.

Or maybe the difference is you only seem to know the nominal Catholics, and I actuallly know the ones who have an ongoing intimate relationship with God:shrug:

Maybe that applies to Catholic criticisms of Protestant “bibliolatry” too ?​