Give up the Bible, or the Catholic corpus?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Roguish
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Roguish

Guest
Imagine we are told that the great powers of the world have decided that they will utterly and completely rid the world of either the Bible or all Catholic documents (encyclicals, catechisms, apostolic letters, papal exhortations, sermon collections, etc. etc.). But… we get to vote which we would like to keep and which we will give up. Imagine that they actually have the power and means to make this happen, so you don’t get to keep a secret copy of anything, neither electronic nor paper. They will find and destroy every copy of whatever is decided. So if the outcome of the vote is to keep the Catholic docs, the Bible will be wiped off the face of the earth. Conversely if the outcome is the other way around.

What would you vote?
  • Keep the Bible, give up the Catholic docs (and I’m a Catholic)
  • Keep the Catholic docs, give up the Bible (and I’m a Catholic)
  • Keep the Bible, give up the Catholic docs (and I’m not a Catholic)
  • Keep the Catholic docs, give up the Bible (and I’m not a Catholic)
0 voters
 
Last edited:
I’ve seen it. Thought it was pretty cool. But I was a young man back then. 😉
 
I said keep the Catholic docs, because without the tradition and magisterium of the Church, there would be no Bible.
 
I don’t understand how you could have the One, Holy Catholic Church, founded by Christ with any of those options, so there was no vote option available that made sense.
 
StephieNorthCo said:
I don’t understand how you could have the One, Holy Catholic Church, founded by Christ with any of those options, so there was no vote option available that made sense.
Click to expand...
That’s the point of the question. Of course we’d like to keep both. But what if you had to make a choice? If you believe the RCC can do without the Bible more easily than without her non-Biblical other docs, then the first option would be your choice, otherwise the second. Options 3 and 4 don’t apply to you since you’re a Catholic.
 
It’s a both-and thing. The RCC can not do without either, and remain the RCC.

Its like the questions in other threads… “if the Church was shown to be false, pick xxx.”
 
Questions that start by assuming something that’s not possible even in principle aren’t worthy of my time.
 
I feel quite sure that there are rabbinic scholars who could recreate the Hebrew Scriptures virtually verbatim, as there are New Testament scholars who could so the same, to give this premise more seriousness than it deserves. On the other hand, I’m not sure preserving the original text of Quo Primum - and much else - would be a fair trade for the Scriptures.
 
I know you like fantasy movies/books @Roguish (as does the vast majority if we look at the box-office) so I’ll understand the post with sportsmanship in that sense and won’t bash it,

Ok, Scripture couldn’t be derived. It’s development took millenniums and needed countless actors and unrepeatable events.

On the other hand, what exactly is tradition and church authority? Well, if we look at history plenty of the saints and martyrs are obscure. We know little more than their name and that a bishop declared them saints. And, perhaps, a better part of the first millennium AD is like that.

Now, if we look at the liturgy and many details in Catholic tradition plenty of it was derived over centuries with countless saints, mystics, and faithful contributing and cooperating with the Holy Spirit. Could that be entirely lost? Yes. (Some of it, the exact detailed history and key facts, have been lost. We have but minor shreds of fact how things really happened.)

Would, in your scenario or any like it, that entire tradition and elaboration be lost? Yes. But, the church would reconstruct some of it, and attain plenty of it, again. The Holy Spirit would again assist the Church and the faithful in elaborating what is need. But, indeed, incommensurate value would be lost, an endless wealth.

The fact remaining, both tradition and scripture are unrepeatable, but there could be a second tradition, not ever a second scripture.
 
Just to add:

Around the 12th and 13th century for example they had a completely different mindset of what we have today about recording history. Writing chronicles was generally considered not very important and frequently chronicles regarding certain kings would only be written one or two generations after their death.
 
Well, the Bible was taken away from peoples at many times and places. First that comes to mind is the Soviet Empire.

When I was a kid, the “Red Menace” was so feared in certain Evangelical circles that we were encouraged to memorize as much of the Bible as we could. “Thy Word have I hid in my heart”. This way, when the Communists took over America we could still have the Bible from the memories of all who had memorized portions.

From a very young age memorization was important. My dad’s best friend has memorized the entire KJV New Testament. I have very large portions of Scripture memorized.

The Church has survived without Bibles.

We have to remember, the Catholic Church gave us the Bible. It is another Catholic document.
 
Last edited:
How interesting that just today I was thinking about how cool it would be to have the new testament memorized, and now you mention this.

I agree with you. But it’s my firm conviction that scripture is unhelpful in a vacuum. I’d rather take the church on faith without being able to see the originals than think up all of church doctrine out again for ourselves.
 
Todd_Easton said:
I don’t like the implication of the poll question that Bible, at least the New Testament, is a also a Catholic document…
Click to expand...
Like it or not, it’s true. At the time there was only one body of Christians, and it was the Catholic Church.
 
Last edited:
StephieNorthCo said:
It’s a both-and thing. The RCC can not do without either, and remain the RCC.
Click to expand...
Yes Stephie, I know it’s a both-and thing. Therefore my question (in the first post of this thread) starts with the word “imagine”. It’s an imaginary situation. It’s like “what if Martians landed today?” If you don’t want to answer it because you consider it an impossibility, that’s okay. I’m not demanding that you participate. Thanks.
Todd_Easton said:
I don’t like the implication of the poll question that Bible, at least the New Testament, is a also a Catholic document, albeit the only divinely-inspired one.
Click to expand...
Actually I didn’t intend to imply that. I do have an opinion on that matter (see lower down in this post), but I didn’t launch this poll to discuss that. The point of the poll is really just to get people to wonder which they value more. (And if people can’t decide, that’s fine. I’m puzzled that some point out that the question presents an “impossility”. Of course it is. It’s just a thought experimtent.)
neophyte said:
Questions that start by assuming something that’s not possible even in principle aren’t worthy of my time.
Click to expand...
Then why not just not comment at all? Ah… because voicing your disdain for someone else’s thread/post/poll feels kinda good, doesn’t it? 😉
adgloriam said:
The fact remaining, both tradition and scripture are unrepeatable, but there could be a second tradition, not ever a second scripture.
Click to expand...
A fair argument. Btw, I actually don’t like the fantasy movies that show at the cinema. I stopped going about a decade ago for that reason. I do very much like old fantasy stuff.
adgloriam said:
Around the 12th and 13th century for example they had a completely different mindset of what we have today about recording history.
Click to expand...
Yes, and there’s a lot for us to be learned from that…
TheLittleLady said:
The Church has survived without Bibles.
Click to expand...
Most definitely!
TheLittleLady said:
We have to remember, the Catholic Church gave us the Bible. It is another Catholic document.
Click to expand...
I agree, but that’s a contentious position to take. (Non-Catholic Christians obviously don’t appreciate it much.)

Anyway, so far the result of the poll is perfectly balanced among Catholic responders (37% vs. 37%), with the remaining 26% being non-Catholics who’d prefer to keep the Bible – no surprise there.
 
Last edited:
Sorry I replied keep the Catholic documents. I know you answered this to someone else but the Bible is a Catholic document and also Christianity isn’t about being a book person. Jesus never said He would leave us a book. Without the Catholic Church, no Bible.
 
Last edited:
MagdalenaRita said:
Sorry I replied keep the Catholic documents. I know you answered this to someone else but the Bible is a Catholic document.
Click to expand...
Why are you sorry? (I also replied to keep the Catholic documents.)

As for the Bible being Catholic document, I agree. That’s what I said above, see my reply to the TheLittleLady.
 
Last edited:
How can you have Catholicism without the
Bible? The Mass would be missing the first
half.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top