Fr. Sosa on the Scriptures

[Pulvis]

Last week the new Superior General of the Jesuits issued a statement on the Gospels in regards to AL and Divorce and Remarriage.
wdtprs.com/blog/2017/02/has-the-head-of-the-jesuits-jettisoned-doctrine-and-the-words-of-the-lord-in-scripture/

And here is a very good piece on the same issue from the UK:

catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2017/02/27/it-isnt-just-fr-sosa-some-scholars-have-been-undermining-the-gospels-for-decades/

Comments?

 

[JPUSC]

He’s right. Who wrote the Gospels anyway? And why would I trust something based on oral tradition? And for that matter, why would I believe the Resurrection story?

Who Wrote The Gospels?

Though it is evidently not the sort of thing pastors normally tell their congregations, for over a century there has been a broad consensus among scholars that many of the books of the New Testament were not written by the people whose names are attached to them. So if that is the case, who did write them?

npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124572693

Scholars hold a wide spectrum of views on the origins and composition of the gospels. John Riches states the mainstream view: “Many scholars doubt that the Gospels were written by eye-witnesses as their attributions seem to suggest: there is too much evidence of reworking oral traditions and of straight borrowing from other Gospels to make this likely.” For example, the vast majority of material in Mark is also present in either Luke or Matthew or both, suggesting that Mark was a source for Matthew and Luke. He writes that the four canonical gospels “were probably all written by the end of the first century”. But they did not yet at that time have a consistent narrative. “In 170 Tatian sought to find a solution by composing a single narrative out of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, with some additional oral material.” Richies concludes that the gospel passages themselves can be unclear, and some of the messages within are “straightforwardly ambiguous” and intended to be “metaphorical” or “poetic”.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel

There’s one just one problem — Paul didn’t write those words. In fact, virtually half the New Testament was written by impostors taking on the names of apostles like Paul. At least according to Bart D. Ehrman, a renowned biblical scholar, who makes the charges in his new book “Forged.”

“There were a lot of people in the ancient world who thought that lying could serve a greater good,” says Ehrman, an expert on ancient biblical manuscripts.In “Forged,” Ehrman claims that:

• At least 11 of the 27 New Testament books are forgeries.

• The New Testament books attributed to Jesus’ disciples could not have been written by them because they were illiterate.

• Many of the New Testament’s forgeries were manufactured by early Christian leaders trying to settle theological feuds.

religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/13/half-of-new-testament-forged-bible-scholar-says

Telephone in the United States—is an internationally popular game, in which one person whispers a message to the ear of the next person through a line of people until the last player announces the message to the entire group. Although the objective is to pass around the message without it becoming misheard and altered along the way, part of the enjoyment is that, regardless, this usually ends up happening. Errors typically accumulate in the retellings, so the statement announced by the last player differs significantly from that of the first player, usually with amusing or humorous effect. Reasons for changes include anxiousness or impatience, erroneous corrections, the difficult-to-understand mechanism of whispering, and that some players may deliberately alter what is being said to guarantee a changed message by the end of the line.

The game is often played by children as a party game or on the playground. It is often invoked as a metaphor for cumulative error, especially the inaccuracies as rumours or gossip spread, or, more generally, for the unreliability of human recollection or even oral traditions.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_whispers

 

[Gorgias]

He’s right. Who wrote the Gospels anyway?

Umm… God. With help from human authors.

And why would I trust something based on oral tradition?

Because God was at the source of that tradition, and the Church that Jesus founded was the protector of that tradition.

And for that matter, why would I believe the Resurrection story?

Because, after all, the folks who were there believed it… and the folks to whom they told it, believed it… and those who witnessed Jesus believed it… and because the Church that Jesus founded has taught it for 2000 years.

By the same token… why would you believe any historical story from antiquity? Or is it only Jesus’ story that is suspect?

 

[Todd977]

And why would I trust something based on oral tradition?
. . .
Telephone in the United States—is an internationally popular game, in which one person whispers a message to the ear of the next person through a line of people until the last player announces the message to the entire group. . . .

I also once thought the game of telephone might be a fair comparison to oral tradition until I took into account a number of important factors that makes me now think it is not a fair comparison at all:

1. The public nature of oral tradition and how the community might provide corrective feedback to any innovations as opposed to the private nature of message passed in telephone that offers no safeguards against the corruption of the message. One has only to read on these forums how upset some Catholics get and how ready they are to contact their bishop or even the pope when a priest changes one word in the prescribed prayers at Mass to understand what I am talking about.
2. The approval process that men went through before becoming bishops to insure that they were apt teachers of sound doctrine as opposed to the unrehearsed manner in which the telephone message is passed. Consider the words of St Paul:

what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also (2 Timothy 2:2)

Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands (1 Timothy 5:22, said of elders but equally applicable to bishops)

Now a bishop … must not be a recent convert (1 Timothy 3:2,6)

And let them also be tested first (1 Timothy 3:10, said of deacons but equally applicable to bishops)

For a bishop, as God’s steward, … must hold firm to the sure word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine (Titus 1:7,9)

1. The longevity of some early Christian bishops who might provide corrective feedback to any innovations as opposed to the private nature of the message passed in telephone that offers no safeguards against the corruption of the message. See examples, below.
2. The recourse to councils of early church leaders to settle disputed matters, as in Acts 15.
3. The fact that a signification amount of the oral tradition was eventually written down by early Christians, such as the Apostolic Fathers, St Justin Martyr, etc., that might be used as a corrective against the corruption of oral tradition, as opposed to the strictly oral nature of passing of the message in telephone that offers no safeguards against the corruption of the message.

Concerning the longevity of some early Christian bishops:
St John, the apostle, a first-generation Christian, died about the year 96.
St Polycarp, a second-generation Christian, a disciple of the apostle John, lived as a Christians for some 86 years before being killed about the year 155.
St Irenaeus of Lyon, a third-generation Christian, a disciple of St Polycarp, lived to about the age of 72, dying in about the year 202.
St Narcissus, bishop of Jerusalem, also a third-generation Christian, was born about the year 99 and lived to the age of about 117, dying about the year 216.

 

[JPUSC]

Umm… God. With help from human authors.

Because God was at the source of that tradition, and the Church that Jesus founded was the protector of that tradition.

Because, after all, the folks who were there believed it… and the folks to whom they told it, believed it… and those who witnessed Jesus believed it… and because the Church that Jesus founded has taught it for 2000 years.

By the same token… why would you believe any historical story from antiquity? Or is it only Jesus’ story that is suspect?

Anything that depends on the Magisterium is suspect to me in light of recent affairs.

I still trust the first half of the Bible, especially the part about the Ten Commandments.

 

[po18guy]

He’s right. Who wrote the Gospels anyway? And why would I trust something based on oral tradition? And for that matter, why would I believe the Resurrection story?

Cutting and pasting known atheists is not proof of anything except that even the well educated are willing to be ignoramuses. Particualrly Bart Ehrman. He was ‘bible alone’ back when he used to believe in something - which means that he was already seriously handicapped. No thanks!

And the telephone game is a canard used by atheist rascals to impress fools. Not impressed. Tradition is living! Get that? Living and breathing. It is not a single person whispering to another single person. This is the atheist lie. It is an entire Church handing on what they have received - not at a single point in time, but continuously.

Good grief! You are suffering from a risis of faith and have thrown in with doubters - who will very soon know the truth. Examine them: do they love? do they desire the good of the other? Or, do they make $$$ from their sarcastic and dour proclamations? Misery does love company, that much is true.

Oh, and Fr. Sosa is but a single Priest out of 402,000. He is not infallible. He is the exception which proves the rule.

 

[JPUSC]

Good grief! You are suffering from a risis of faith and have thrown in with doubters - who will very soon know the truth. Examine them: do they love? do they desire the good of the other? Or, do they make $$$ from their sarcastic and dour proclamations? Misery does love company, that much is true.

Oh, and Fr. Sosa is but a single Priest out of 402,000. He is not infallible. He is the exception which proves the rule.

The pope and his cronies are giving me very good reasons to ally with the doubters.

 

[QuiVenit]

The pope and his cronies are giving me very good reasons to ally with the doubters.

If someone like Pope Francis has shaken up your faith to such an extent that you doubt the New Testament, your faith was already built on sand to begin with. I say this not to poke fun or even to rebuke you, but to try to help you put things in their proper context. There is such a thing as a conscience that takes scandal far too easily. There is such a thing as having human opinions and it is different from having opinions genuinely rooted in supernatural faith. Finally, there is such a thing as consistently choosing to cultivate doubt, and one can gravely sin in that process.

 

[Gorgias]

Anything that depends on the Magisterium is suspect to me in light of recent affairs.

Erm… what “recent affairs”? Is there some doctrinal statement of the magisterium that is causing you consternation?

I still trust the first half of the Bible, especially the part about the Ten Commandments.

Why not the “second half of the Bible”? What’s suspect about the Gospels, the Epistles, and Revelation?

(After all, if you had problems with oral tradition, the New Testament should be the more trustworthy part for you!)

 

[po18guy]

The pope and his cronies are giving me very good reasons to ally with the doubters.

You are drawing close to the point where you have a moral obligation; an obligation to your conscience, to leave the faith. However, before you do that, it seems that you are making the mistake of looking right and left, rather than upward to the perfect God. You see nothing but sinners. Well, looking at you, what do they see? They tolerate at least as much in you as you do in them, and each of us must first consider ourselves to be the worst sinner present - humility demands that.

As to recent controversies, nothing - zip, zero, nada - in Church teaching has changed, or will change. You say that some are misapplying those teachings. Well, Saint Paul wrote about that 2,000 years ago! No difference there, and the Church remains, as Christ said it would. If you look for reasons to lose your faith, to leave the Church, you will find as many as there are members.

If, on the other hand, you are looking for a reason to remain, the pearl of great price, then there is but one and we all gather in His name.

I would disconnect from the media, stop listening to the negative drum beat, go before Christ in the Blessed Sacrament and lay out all of your troubles before Him.