How sufficient does the CC deem the Scriptures?

[Ani_Ibi]

The whole idea of making the Apostles’ writings “canon” is bizarre to me unless it is going to be THE “rule of measure”/"canon. Isn’t canonizing something raising it up and saying “this is the ideal”?

During the first couple of centuries the Church was growing in leaps and bounds. What started as a small number of small communities rapidly spread across the Mediterranean. Distance and time separated what illuminati said in one district from what folks heard in another district. And divergence and confusion manifested themselves. People were believing all sorts of things.

So the Bible was compiled from approved texts in use.

But the Bible did not replace the Real Presence. Christianity remained a very personal encounter – not a textual one.

Let us keep in mind that the original meaning of ‘logos’ was not just ‘the word’ but the Word Incarnate: very very specifically, the Second Person of the Godhead which was and is and ever will be Jesus Himself – not the Bible.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

JoyToBeCatholic:

I’m not comfortable with going outside of Scripture b/c I could be easily fooled by someone claiming that something is apostolic when, in fact, it may be man-made.

Fear is not of God. Jesus built his church on a person – not a book. Jesus gave the Apostolic succession to the Church which He built. On matters of faith and morals the teaching given to us through the successors of Peter – that teaching is infallible.

As for man-made things, why do you trust your own interpretation of Scripture? Is your own interpretation by its very nature not man-made? Do you believe that it is possible to understand what is read without interpreting it?

JoyToBeCatholic:

However, I trust that with God’s grace and the direction I receive through the Holy Spirit inspired Scriptures

Do you trust your individual interpretation of same? If so, on what basis?

JoyToBeCatholic:

that, if followed sincerely (as best as one can; laying aside personal preferrences, which, btw, can even be done in following a magisterium…)I can be led to Heaven.

The road to where is paved with good intentions?

You say ‘a magisterium.’ Is there more than one Magisterium?

JoyToBeCatholic:

Is this a wrong conclusion?

It is an illogical conclusion, given your premises. And whatever else an item of faith might be, it must be logical.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Isn’t that sufficient then? Isn’t that what sinful man needs? Isn’t that enough?

I suppose it is possible for a person to be saved from simply reading the Bible. But how does that person know to pick up the Bible in the first place? How does God get our attention? I do not know of a case where God has dropped a Bible on someone’s head.

Hint: there is a logic (and beauty) in Creation; a logic (and beauty) in lives lived righteously; a logic (and beauty) in lives lived in charity and harmony. Humans have the gift of logic and are attracted to beauty because beauty is the manifestation of a Divine Order which is nothing if not Perfect Resplendant Logic.

If this were not true, then why does any denomination go to the trouble of sending missionaries over and over again rather than just organizing one massive mailing campaign of Bibles?

 

[Ani_Ibi]

…its also like saying God gave the church magisterium an instruction manual, and the church decided to let the layman read it even though they couldn’t understand it…

it makes no sense to me…

It doesn’t make sense because it is a false dilemma. Where is it taught that folks must choose between the Bible and the Magisterium?

 

[JoyToBeCatholic]

During most of the Christian era, over 90% of the Church were illiterate and therefore could not read anything, let alone Scripture.

Also most did not enjoy the leisure time to peruse Scripture.

Also the Bible as such did not exist at all during the first 3 or 4 centuries AD, although individual books and written teachings did exist.

Also before the invention of the Gutenburg Press, bibles were costlier than gold and often chained to pulpits so that they would not be stolen.

So one must ask, sufficient to whom? To the rich? To the educated? To those with leisure time?

Certainly God preserved His Word. The writings of the Apostles weren’t just locked away until it was massed produced. They were read aloud in all the churches. Whether or not the church remained faithful to them in all aspects I do not know. The clergy had just as much responsibility to obey the writings as the layperson did.

If he would provide teaching to those folks, then what form(s) do you think it took over the centuries? Multiple choice:

a) the Bible
b) Sacred Art
c) Oral teaching
d) Songs and other forms of music
e) Plays

The teachings of the Apostles as read in the churches of God. Music, art, etc. was not used in the very early church, and when it was used, it wasn’t necessarily b/c the Apostles or Jesus taught them to.

 

[JoyToBeCatholic]

Not one person, one Church founded by Christ. Not the same thing at all.

The pope, no? He has the final say. The orthodox believe it is the bishops, but the RCC - the Pope. Correct me if wrong.

If all people could “use the bible properly”, there would only be one set of “bible-Christian” beliefs, but there are not, not by a million miles. So what does that do to your assumption?

It tells me there are many people, Catholic and non-Catholic that refuse to obey the Bible (as there are millions of people who do not wish to obey the CC). It tells me there are professing Christians in all walks of life, culture and denominations who make the Bible mean what they want it to.

And all this talk of what is sufficient, that is just an attempt in most cases to avoid the teaching and the authority of the Church. What is sufficient is what is sufficient, and it varies for every individual. The thief on the cross had no bible, but he was given what was sufficient for him.

He had no sacraments or church either. God is supreme. He can do as He pleases. He’s not limited to the church.

 

[Atemi]

Hospital food is entirely sufficient to live indefinitely.

Equating the Word of God to be as satisfying as hospital food is horrible, Mike.

 

[Atemi]

Paul PRAYS to soldiers: “I pray you to take some meat…” (Acts 27:34).

Paul PRAYS to the Corinthians on behalf of Christ: “we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God.” (2 Cor 5:20).

My goodness, it seems Christians are praying to people all the time in Scripture. Surely Scripture does NOT teach, as has been claimed by some, that we are to only pray to the Father.

No Dave.

Emphatically, NO.

You are speaking semantically of a different English word that has nothing to do with true PRAYER or what Scripture teaches on it.

You are using the old english word of “pray” (ask) in these cases.

With that in mind, you thus have demons “praying” to Christ, the Pharisees “praying” to Christ, Jews “praying” to Pilate, Paul “praying” to a heathen man, and even Christ “praying” to His own disciples!

No. This only makes for a mess and is plainly false. This is not Christian PRAYER. In NONE of these cases is it PRAYER. The Scriptures were not written in old English, but in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

We must be able to tell the difference between asking someone (anyone) something and being in PRAYER. If not, then we would need to hit Scripture again to sort it out.

PRAYER, as taught by the Scriptures is only addressed to God alone. PRAYER is never addressed to men, dead or alive.

 

[JoyToBeCatholic]

But Scripture itself say that there are sometimes when you DO have to go outside of Scripture.

When you have a disagreement with your brother. Suppose that this person thinks that contraception is OK.

So you try and correct him, but he still disagrees.

What does Scripture tell us to do? Where does it tell us to go? Back to itself??? NO It tells us to go the the Church, the Church that is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth

And God’s Word is truth. When there is a disagreement, I would hope that the church he goes to will reason with him from the scriptures to help him see his error and not just tell him its wrong b/c the church says it is.

 

[JoyToBeCatholic]

As for man-made things, why do you trust your own interpretation of Scripture? Is your own interpretation by its very nature not man-made? Do you believe that it is possible to understand what is read without interpreting it?

My point is that if I can’t trust my evaluation of scripture, why should I trust my evaluation of the CC? Either way you have to make an evaluation. In my evaluation, I see the possibility that the CC claims are true, but when weighed against my evaluation of Scripture, I have a problem with it (as it has developed throughout the ages).

No matter how you slice it, everyone has to trust their own, man-made evaluation. Like it or not, you have had to trust your own judgement in choosing to believe the claims of the RCC.

You say ‘a magisterium.’ Is there more than one Magisterium?

I dunno. The orthodox have one and the RCC does too. What do you think?

It is an illogical conclusion, given your premises. And whatever else an item of faith might be, it must be logical.

Thats your opinion. We all have obstacles in judging b/c we are imperfect. I cannot be expected to make a perfect judgement about the church or scripture. I have to rely on the grace of God to lead me into His truth. In my limited, human capacity, it is more logical to follow my biblical convictions than to trust in someone else’s, which, in essence, is what the CC as asking me to do.

 

[dylanschrader]

It sounds like there’s a problem of ecclesiology here. We need to show how Christ founded the Church, how the Church has teaching authority, and how the Church is apostolic among other things.

Christ did found a Church. Besides claiming to do so himself (Mt. 16:18), he gathered “the Twelve” around him and gave them a share in his own authority (to teach, to cast out demons, to fulfill his command at the Last Supper, to baptize, etc.). Christ came to establish a new and eternal covenant sealed by his Blood and which should be extended to all nations by the apostles. As in the Old Testament, there is a particular priestly (now apostolic) office which sustains this covenant.

The structure of the Church founded by Christ is something given to the apostles. Thus, for example, they recognize the need to replace Judas with Matthias to preserve the structure of “the Twelve.” That’s apostolic succession. Later, St. Paul and others are given the same office by the laying-on of hands.

Reading the earliest Christian writings (e.g., St. Ignatius of Antioch) shows the firm belief in apostolic succession and authority.

Reading the New Testament and the Church Fathers gives one a feel for what the Church Christ established looks like. Then, asking the question, “Does this Church still exist somewhere today?” only leads one as far as the Catholic Church.

I believe the Church because Christ told his apostles “whoever hears you hears me” and it is Christ’s guarantee that makes the Church credible. Her authority is not something that comes from herself; it is a gift.

 

[JoyToBeCatholic]

I suppose it is possible for a person to be saved from simply reading the Bible. But how does that person know to pick up the Bible in the first place? How does God get our attention? I do not know of a case where God has dropped a Bible on someone’s head.

Hint: there is a logic (and beauty) in Creation; a logic (and beauty) in lives lived righteously; a logic (and beauty) in lives lived in charity and harmony. Humans have the gift of logic and are attracted to beauty because beauty is the manifestation of a Divine Order which is nothing if not Perfect Resplendant Logic.

If this were not true, then why does any denomination go to the trouble of sending missionaries over and over again rather than just organizing one massive mailing campaign of Bibles?

That’s right . Fruit is definately of significance. If I were in a 3rd world country and never heard of Jesus and some murderous worm urged me to read his Bible and accept that it was the truth, I would throw it back at him. I trust the Apostles’ led exemplary lives of zeal and love for God; overcoming their fallen nature and practicing extroardinary virtue. And lives lived like that are not limited to those in the Catholic church. In fact, in my experience, I find little if any inspiration from those within the CC (aside from the little contact I’ve had with cloistered religious. I have, however, witness that level of devotion and love from God from Bible-only believing Christians.

 

[JoyToBeCatholic]

It doesn’t make sense because it is a false dilemma. Where is it taught that folks must choose between the Bible and the Magisterium?

The CC says I can’t understand the Bible. So I have to choose to put my trust in its magisterium to know the truth (according to the CC). I have to make a choice. I have to make an evaluation of both and decide which to follow. Go against my conscience and biblical convictions and believe the high claims of the church, or…

 

[dylanschrader]

The CC says I can’t understand the Bible. So I have to choose to put my trust in its magisterium to know the truth (according to the CC). I have to make a choice. I have to make an evaluation of both and decide which to follow. Go against my conscience and biblical convictions and believe the high claims of the church, or…

The Church doesn’t say that you can’t understand the Bible, but she does say that the task of authentically interpreting the Bible (and Tradition) belongs to the Magisterium–the teaching authority of the Church through the college of bishops.

This is perfectly in keeping with what is presented in the New Testament.

“First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation.” (2 Peter 1:20)

“If I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.” (1 Timothy 2:15)

Plus others, such as the case where St. Paul defers to St. Peter, the numerous cases where St. Paul appeals to his own authority as an apostle, etc.

The Church wants people to read the Bible, and of course people can understand it, but if I interpret something in the Bible to be contrary to the teaching of the Church, then my interpretation must be faulty. This principle of deference to the Church is witnessed to in the New Testament, for instance, and in the Church Fathers.

 

[JoyToBeCatholic]

I’ve go to get my taxes done… I’ll check back later>

Thanks!

 

[Randy_Carson]

I know the CC teaches that Scripture is sufficient, the question is, to what extent?

As an example: Scripture gives us a model for prayer. I know the Bible doesn’t explicity condemn saying prayers to angels, saints, etc., but if Scripture is sufficient, then it’s guide to prayer (in this instance) should be sufficient, no? So, why would we look to pray to anyone other than the Father?

I can think of many other practices and teachings like this that seem to go beyond what is sufficiently layed out in Scripture.

Thanks

The Bible is materially sufficient, but not formally sufficient.

Materially sufficient means that it contains everything we need to know for salvation.

Formally sufficient means that it contains everything we need to know for salvation and that it can be understood and interpreted properly by anyone.

Formal sufficiency would support sola scriptura - a position which Catholicism rejects.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[Randy_Carson]

The CC says I can’t understand the Bible. So I have to choose to put my trust in its magisterium to know the truth (according to the CC). I have to make a choice. I have to make an evaluation of both and decide which to follow. Go against my conscience and biblical convictions and believe the high claims of the church, or…

It might be more accurate to say that you can understand the Bible to a large extent, but that you should be willing to submit yourself to the teaching authority of the Catholic Church when you are in error.

This should not be a question of conscience…I personally feel comfortable with the idea that I don’t have to “wonder and wander” through the scriptures and life with no certainty.

Because I have faith in Jesus Christ who is the Head of the Church and its builder, I can have confidence in the Church to keep me from going astray.

Our German Shepherd, Benedict XVI, is protecting the flock!

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[itsjustdave1988]

No Dave. Emphatically, NO.

I object Atemi, I strenuously object.

The Scriptures were not written in old English, but in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.

I agree. Which is why I cited the Protestant lexical source from Vine above, which describes the Biblical Greek word erotao as being translated “to pray” and “to ask.” You see, Catholics use the term pray like the old English (and the current Webster’s) defines it, to mean “humbly request.”

Vine’s Expository of NT words: “Greek: erotao - “to ask,” is translated by the verb to pray in Luk14:18,19; 16:27; Jhn4:31; 14:16; 16:26; 17:9,15,20; in Act23:18, RV, “asked” (AV “prayed”); in 1Jo5:16, RV, “should make request” (AV “shall pray”).”

Jesus: “And I will pray (Gk erotao) the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever” (Jn 14:16).

We Christians humbly request (Gk erotao) of our Father in heaven. We also humbly request of the Son. We also humbly request of the Holy Spirit. Yet we are encouraged by Scripture to also humbly request of our fellow Christian brethren to pray for us. If you don’t like using the English word, then simply substitute the Biblical word…

It is clear that Jesus erotao the Father, and Christians such as St. Paul erotao other people in Sacred Scripture, right? So why can’t Christians today erotao other Christians? Why must I only eroato the Father?

Furthermore, we don’t cotton much to the erroneous claim that the angels and saints in heaven cannot hear us when we ***erotao ***(ask), since Scripture testifies that even a mere human being like St. John, while “in the Spirit” (Rev 1:10), having been given the gift of seeing and hearing things in heave, could also hear and see many things beyond his natural power as a human being, such as hearing “every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea”. (Rev 5:13).

And so we can piously erotao (ask) of the angels and saints in heaven, just as the Psalmist did when he asked, “Angels of the Lord, bless the Lord…All you works of the Lord, bless the Lord.” And since we can erotao (ask), we do, as St. James encourages us to pray for one another because the prayer of the righteous availeth much.

So when Catholics erotao (ask) other brethren, or the heavenly saints and angels, we contend that we are not worshipping them as if they were Divine, but merely asking (Gk erotao) them to pray to God for us, and we always pray that prayer in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Some Protestants claim that we cannot **erotao **anybody except the Father. Other Protestants reject that claim as unBiblical and nonsensical. I too agree that such a claim is unBiblical and nonsensical. Scripture tells us otherwise. I can erotao all of God’s creation to pray to God.

 

[Brendan]

No Dave.

Emphatically, NO.

You are speaking semantically of a different English word that has nothing to do with true PRAYER or what Scripture teaches on it.

No, it is exactly the same word.

You are using the old english word of “pray” (ask) in these cases.

The modern verb ‘to pray’ means to ask as well. Check out Websters on the subject.
m-w.com/dictionary/pray

Main Entry: pray
Pronunciation: 'prA
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French prier, praer, preier, from Latin precari, from prec-, prex request, prayer; akin to Old High German frAga question, frAgEn to ask, Sanskrit prcchati he asks
transitive verb
1 : ENTREAT, IMPLORE – often used as a function word in introducing a question, request, or plea
2 : to get or bring by praying
intransitive verb
1 : to make a request in a humble manner
2 : to address God or a god with adoration, confession, supplication, or thanksgiving

PRAYER, as taught by the Scriptures is only addressed to God alone. PRAYER is never addressed to men, dead or alive.

You are confusing the word ‘Prayer’ with the word ‘Worship’. They are two different words and they are not synonymous

WORSHIP, in Scripture, is due to God alone, WORSHIP is never addressed to men.

PRAYER can be addressed to anyone.

 

[JoyToBeCatholic]

Ok, the prayer issue is slightly o.t., but I would like to clarify something:

Is it okay to pray (ask) a saint for anything other than intercessory prayer? IOW, what is the purpose of praying to/asking a saint anyway? If God is my Father, why am I asking other people for things? If I need something from Daddy, why can’t I confidently go directly to Him? Why in heaven’s name do I need to ask a friend to ask my Father for me???

Thanks