Is Sola Scriptura what Catholics now believe?

Status
Not open for further replies.
“NoelFitz said:
Phil19034
Thanks for your reply.
Besides quoting what I have quoted you write:
Click to expand...
The “divine wellspring” is Divine Revelation not scared (sic.) Scripture. Catholic (sic.) do NOT believe that the Word of God is limited to the written form.
Click to expand...
The Word of God is ambiguous for Catholics, as it can mean Jesus Christ (The Word was made flesh). In Pope Paul’s Dei Verbum it refers to the Bible, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
We understand the Word of God quite well in the context within which it is mentioned. The Catholic Church Teaches that the Word of God comes to us by Sacred Tradition. Sacred Tradition comes to us in oral and written form. Scripture is one of the manifestations of the written form.
You make a statement, but do not give justification. Why do you write ‘Catholic (sic.) do NOT believe that the Word of God is limited to the written form?’
Click to expand...
Because the Catholic Church Teaches that the Word of God comes to us, primarily, by Sacred Tradition.

Who says Catholic (sic.) do NOT believe that the Word of God is limited to the written form?
DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON DIVINE REVELATION DEI VERBUM
_ _
_1. Hearing the word of God with reverence and proclaiming it with faith, the sacred synod takes its direction from these words of St. John: “We announce to you the eternal life which dwelt with the Father and was made visible to us. What we have seen and heard we announce to you, so that you may have fellowship with us and our common fellowship be with the Father and His Son Jesus Christ” (1 John 1:2-3).
Click to expand...
Keep reading.

But in order to keep the Gospel forever whole and alive within the Church, the Apostles left bishops as their successors, “handing over” to them “the authority to teach in their own place.”(3) This sacred tradition, therefore, and Sacred Scripture of both the Old and New Testaments are like a mirror in which the pilgrim Church on earth looks at God, from whom she has received everything, until she is brought finally to see Him as He is, face to face (see 1 John 3:2).
Dei Verbum
Click to expand...
 
This from the (post Vatican II ) CCC . . .

.
CCC 76 In keeping with the Lord’s command, the Gospel was handed on in TWO WAYS:
  • orally “by the apostles who handed on, by the spoken word of their preaching, by the example they gave, by the institutions they established, what they themselves had received - whether from the lips of Christ, from his way of life and his works, or whether they had learned it at the prompting of the Holy Spirit”;[33]
  • in writing “by those apostles and other men associated with the apostles who, under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit, committed the message of salvation to writing”.[34]
Click to expand...
.

Emphasis, “the Gospel was handed on in TWO WAYS” mine.
 
Last edited:
I include below part of “The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church”, presented by the Pontifical Biblical Commission to Pope John Paul II on April 23, 1993,which may take a bit of the excessive heat out of my original post.

‘What characterizes Catholic exegesis is that it deliberately places itself within the living tradition of the church, whose first concern is fidelity to the revelation attested by the Bible. Modern hermeneutics has made clear, as we have noted, the impossibility of interpreting a text without starting from a “pre-understanding” of one type or another.
Catholic exegetes approach the biblical text with a pre- understanding which holds closely together modern scientific culture and the religious tradition emanating from Israel and from the early Christian community. Their interpretation stands thereby in continuity with a dynamic pattern of interpretation that is found within the Bible itself and continues in the life of the church.

Can I again emphasize that for Catholics revelation is based on the Bible, as interpreted by the Church?
 
Let me translate what your saying in simple terms, you believe the Catholic Church is now Protestant.
 
NoelFitz said:
I include below part of “The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church”, presented by the Pontifical Biblical Commission to Pope John Paul II on April 23, 1993,which may take a bit of the excessive heat out of my original post.

‘What characterizes Catholic exegesis is that it deliberately places itself within the living tradition of the church, whose first concern is fidelity to the revelation attested by the Bible. Modern hermeneutics has made clear, as we have noted, the impossibility of interpreting a text without starting from a “pre-understanding” of one type or another.
Catholic exegetes approach the biblical text with a pre- understanding which holds closely together modern scientific culture and the religious tradition emanating from Israel and from the early Christian community. Their interpretation stands thereby in continuity with a dynamic pattern of interpretation that is found within the Bible itself and continues in the life of the church.

Can I again emphasize that for Catholics revelation is based on the Bible, as interpreted by the Church?
Click to expand...
@NoelFitz - are you Catholic?

Because you are taking these quotes out of context. The Catholic Church teaches that we are like a three legged stool:
  • Sacred Scripture
  • Sacred Tradition (aka Oral)
  • Magisterial Teaching of the Church
If you remove any of the three, the stool falls.

The Catholic Church teaches that there is nothing in Sacred Scripture that contradicts Sacred Tradition and nothing in Sacred Tradition that contradicts Sacred Scripture.

When Catholics (and Orthodox) use the word “tradition” we either mean Sacred Tradition (with a capital T) or basic traditions (with a lower case t).

So perhaps you are getting a little confused, because Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture are equal to each other, one does not out rank the other.

I pray this helps.
 
Last edited:
“NoelFitz said:
Can I again emphasize that for Catholics revelation is based on the Bible, as interpreted by the Church?
Click to expand...
No. Let’s go through that again.
I include below part of “The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church”, presented by the Pontifical Biblical Commission to Pope John Paul II on April 23, 1993,which may take a bit of the excessive heat out of my original post.
Click to expand...
_‘What characterizes Catholic exegesis is that it deliberately places itself within the living tradition of the church,

Catholic exegesis begins from the point of view of the Tradition of the Church. In other words, we read Sacred Scripture within the context of Sacred Tradition.

whose first concern is fidelity to the revelation attested by the Bible.

Because that is the way to ensure that we are faithful to the REVELATION which is confirmed in the Bible. Sacred Tradition is the basis of the New Testament. Therefore, Sacred Tradition is attested, confirmed, in Scripture.

Modern hermeneutics has made clear, as we have noted, the impossibility of interpreting a text without starting from a “pre-understanding” of one type or another._

Interpretation of the Bible does not begin with the Bible, but from the culture from which it springs.

Catholic exegetes approach the biblical text with a pre- understanding which holds closely together modern scientific culture and the religious tradition emanating from Israel and from the early Christian community. Their interpretation stands thereby in continuity with a dynamic pattern of interpretation that is found within the Bible itself and continues in the life of the church.

Thus, Catholics interpret the Bible with a knowledge of the Doctrines of the Church which also take into consideration the findings of science and the knowledge of the ancient culture within which it was written. Thus, Catholic exegesis is in continuity of the life of the Church through the centuries.

Sorry, Noel. That’s far from a teaching of the Bible alone for understanding the Word of God.
Click to expand...
 
This isn’t exactly the most productive conversation:

“Hi, I believe that [whatever].”
“You are a heretic.”

This would be a bit better:

“Hi, I believe that [whatever].”
“That position is false because [reasons] and is therefore heretical to the Catholic Church.”

I think that’s what @Hereiam was trying to say.
 
I read that to mean that the Church uses revelation in the form of Tradition to properly interpret the meaning of Scripture.

And that quote in no way says that the Bible is the source of all of Christian doctrine.
 
NoelFitz, I am disappointed at the posts attempting to shout you down.

Thanks for bringing up this important topic.

One thing is certain: God is the source of all truth. I believe he reveals that truth by different modes. Can human language, mere written or spoken words, fully express all of the truth that God intends to reveal? I would argue no. We sometimes say “Actions speak louder than words.” At the very least, that saying acknowledges that it is not only words that speak. Jesus is called the Word, and his actions spoke louder than all the words in the Bible.

I really dislike copying and pasting big hunks of the Catechism, so I’ll just post this link:
The Transmission of Divine Revelation
That’s a tremendously rich, meaningful, beautiful passage.

God bless!
 
Last edited:
What’s not productive is you letting people post heresies on a Catholic
forum
 
Last edited:
That site has become a cess pool of False doctrine
 
Last edited:
NoelFitz said:
In the old day we used to believe there were two sources of revelation
Click to expand...
See I told you guys this would happen. I told you guys about the bad fruit of Scripture in the hands men (not speaking about the OP or anyone specific). This birthed the Anabaptists - opportunistic REBELS that sprung up during the Reformation. Like Satan in the desert, Scripture was used as a WEAPON in hopes to destroy Christ’s body on earth. They’re combat tactic was (and still is) to use Scripture as a LICENSE to oppose God - exactly like the Germanic Talmudist’s during the Reformation (hint hint!).

Today Anabaptists number over 40,000 sects. But they ALL SHARE in a NEW and DIFFERENT BAPTISM which runs CONTRARY the catholic definition of baptism. From speaking in tongues, to ‘Salvation by a Book’ (their understanding of ‘Sola Scripture’), BOTH inventions are twined in the EVER GROWING web of ANABAPTIST INVENTIONS. I recent history we have partially caved into their fictions, false histories, and other dogmatic-sounding-slogans based on virtual-spirituality they pass off as being Christian.

The ‘Protestant Church’ (another label they have redefined) have always been WEAK in their ability to handle the Spiritual Warfare waged against them (ie: female priests). This issue makes reconciliation very difficult. Why? The Persona Christi cant he ‘invoked’ by a female because Jesus is a male (the real reason we can’t ordain women priests).

We know the ‘real core meaning(s)’ of 1 Tim 2:5 because Christ himself, IN PERSON, ‘REVEALED’ to the ‘first’ catholic clergy things like Persona Christi. The NT Scripture came not too long AFTER this and in itself does NOT REVEAL the meanings. The Bible does NOT keep the SECRETS OF HEAVEN and the Church does not openly publicize them.

In recent times we have become like Eve - we are beholding a tempting new fruit with our eyes. A fruit from of the Tree of Anabaptists. A tree which we feel is related to us. A tree in which we imagine is good because our ‘God breathed, Sacred Scripture’ fed that root. We are still in the process of discerning if it is good for food. But we have forgotten that there is ONE Tree of Life that we eat from - the Cross. And yes, that involves St. Peter’s Cross which is NOT in scripture. They are both the same tree with the one on earth being a live reflection of the one in heaven. One points up, one points down. Jesus cross is anchored up in the heaven, and St Peter’s cross is anchored here on earth, located at the Vatican, in ROME. Together, these Crosses connect the heaven and earth in communion. As Peter stone is Christ’s stone, Peter’s Cross is also Christ’s. Which is why we MUST have atleast foot in Rome (Romans 1:7 decrees Rome - NOT the Bible).

Why do you think Anabaptists HATE St. Peters Cross and have worked so hard to re-assign it as belonging to Satan? Very for those who have ears.

Remeber, these are the SAME PEOPLE trying to convince us that Scripture is a core foundation. Don’t be deceived.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps you’re confusing Divine Revelation with Sacred Scripture?
 
Last edited:
Sacred Tradition. Sacred Scripture. Magisterium. Always has been and always will be. What does the catechism have to say on this?
 
I think this can all be cleared up quite easily.

Sacred Scripture = Sacred Scripture
Tradition = as interpreted by the Church

No change there. To me, the real question of today’s Catholic Church would be:

Has conscience/discernment replaced Sacred Scripture and Tradition. And/or is it about to. Depends on who you talk to.
 
Last edited:
While I can empathize with BenjaminJ I agree with you a 100%. I really appreciate De_maria’s posts.

It is almost cliche to say "my faith was destroyed by this or that, but really growing in and around the Protestant church ended up with me being completely agnostic. I believed in God, but I could not stomach the brand of Christianity I was given. I was an Episcopalian surrounded by Baptists in the South. Sorry, but it was awful. I turned to new age stuff for years. That was somewhat soothing but empty. In the end it was the Catholic Church that saved me.

For me, it centered around authority and accountability. Faith alone made no sense for me at all. I just could not buy it. Sola scripturea just didn’t make sense, it was … incomplete. Being hateful or manipulative six days a week and still be saved? It made no sense, not to me.

I really admired Catholicism but I preferred holding on to earthly pursuits. That is until God thankfully sent me an array of health problems and catastrophes that lasted for four years. That is what it took and I am thankful for it all, it brought me back to God via the Catholic Church. Best thing that ever happened to me. I could easily write a book. [but no way!]

The message, the truth has to be delivered with love. If you fuss at someone, they are just going to be resentful. I am so sorry to go on and on, but the Catholic Church is the way. I love the Bible, but I also love the wisdom of the Saints and the Monastic Orders. Through the rosary, prayer and the sacraments, I have been transformed. [I still have to fight my passions, but I have the tools to do that now.]

Threads like this are wonderful proof and opportunities to bring people into the faith. Thank you guys for patiently explaining doctrine to those in need of hearing it!⛪
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top