Is there a "Catholic" way to study scripture?

  • Thread starter Thread starter anonymoususer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

anonymoususer

Guest
How may a Catholic’s approach to scripture be different than a Baptist’s or other Protestant’s?
 
I am not sure how those not Catholic study Scripture, but I always try to follow what the CCC says on how to read it.

The senses of Scripture

115 According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.

116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: “All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal.”

117 The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God’s plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs.
  1. The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ’s victory and also of Christian Baptism.
  2. The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written “for our instruction”.
  3. The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, “leading”). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem.
By following this and trying to understand the audiance and how it would be understod by a 1st century Jew I try hard not to put a 21st century interpretation on what I read or try not to put an interpretation on it that fits my purposes and not the authors.

Stillkickin
 
Faith has different meanings for a Catholic and an Evangelical Protestant. To the Protestant, faith means a trusting self-surrender of the complete man to the revealing God. For a Catholic, however, this act of cordial surrender is called faith, hope and charity.

To a Catholic, the word faith alone conveys the notion of an intellectual assent to the content of revelation as true because of the witnessing authority of God. The Catholic understands faith intellectually and supernaturally. Faith is the Catholic’s response to an intellectual message communicated by God.

But for the Catholic, God reveals Himself through the medium of the teaching of the living holy community called the Church. A Christian of the Reformation tradition believes that God makes Himself and his truth known through a collection of books called the Bible.

This book is the teacher, and all other teaching is commentary, good or bad. The divine message itself is restricted to the Book. Actually the Holy Spirit is the teacher, who uses his instrument, the inspired Book. Also, this is only true of Evangelicals of the Reformation tradition, because liberals hold a much more subjective view.

We can see the great difference between the Catholic and Protestant conceptions of the God-encounter. For the Catholic, the locus of meeting is the Church, which for its task of bringing men to God uses many means:
· The teaching of authorized masters, i.e., the bishops and their primate: the Pope;
· The liturgy;
  • books written by men of the Church under divine inspiration, the Scriptures,
  • the common beliefs and practices of Catholics stretched out over time and space.
The inspired books, which have God as their author in consequence of their inspiration, are ecclesiastical instruments for teaching, building and exhorting. They are not over the Church, but rather a part of the Church’s panoply to be used in her work of accomplishing the task of uniting man to God. The Church is a servant of the Scriptures.
Code: 
 It is the Church, which teaches, the Church, which sanctifies, the Church, which builds and vitalizes.  The Church is not a fruit of the Book but rather the Book is the fruit of the Church.

  Hence it is that the Catholic does not say in the first instance, “What does the Book say”? Rather he asks, “What does the teaching Church say”?  The Church and the Book say the same thing, and since the Book is in a peculiar sense God's Word, he will turn to the Book.
However, this is not his ultimate recourse. He has only one ultimate recourse, the Church herself, and the Book is accepted from her hand and with her explanation. The Book is not the proof but only a divine expression in human language of the Church’s teaching.

Over the Book stands the Church, while according to the Reformation conception, over the Church stands the Book. This fundamental vision of the Church causes the Catholic to look to the episcopate for doctrine, because the bishops are the authentic exponents of God’s message to the world.
Code: 
  The Church is an organized visible fellowship.  Because it is divine institution and dynamism, the Holy Spirit dwells in it, keeping it alive, keeping it true, and making it grow. The Spirit is the source of the life of the Church, but that life is the life of a body.
The body is made up of many members who are distinguished one from the other by functions for which they have a fixed structure. In the Body, the bishops have the function of teaching and guiding, and this task they perform through the power of the Spirit who transfuses the whole Body, making each member effective in his function.

The Body is one, and so the episcopate is one, and the unity of the episcopate is achieved through solidarity with the prime source of Episcopal power, the Bishop of Rome. In the Catholic vision the pope teaches in the name of the episcopate and the episcopate teaches in the name of the Church and the Church teaches in the name of Christ, and Christ teaches in the name of God.
Code: 
  Another element is that Catholicism insists that it teaches the preaching of Christ, and only that.  The Catholic believes that his beliefs are identical with those of the Apostolic Church, without a jot or title changed.
However, he knows that the syntheses made in an earlier day are shorter and more meager than the syntheses made now. The affirmations of the Council of Nicaea (325 A.D.) are fuller affirmations concerning the constitutional structure of Jesus than the original New Testament statements.

However, the Catholic insists that the doctrine of Nicaea is the identical doctrine of the New Testament. Nicaea detailed formally and clearly what was implicit in the scriptural formulas. Cardinal Newman called this the development of dogma.
 
I am a former southern Baptist who has always been a lover of the Scriptures, so I can at least give my twist to it.

When I studied the Bible as a Baptist, I often relied on commentaries from modern day scholars and Bible teachers and preachers. I always had those who I trusted, but I was always very descerning and I never agreed with one person or denomination completely. I had a great deal of independance (I was taught that) and never felt that there was an authoritative interpreter of the Bible in the same sense that I understand the Catholic Church and Her authority to interpret the Bible infallibly.

Stillkickin gave great points, and those senses of Scripture is the standard that a Catholic exegete needs to follow. But a Catholic who is simply doing a Bible study will get the greatest benefit from a sound Catholic Study Bible with footnotes that are faithful to orthodox teachings of the Church. For advanced Bible study, the Early Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church are awesome, they provide great insight to the Bible, and there are many commentaries written by them on the Bible. St. Thomas Aquinas’ Catena Aurea is an awesome commentary on the 4 Gospels, actually second to none!

Unfortunately our Protestant brothers and sisters rarely tap into the rich teachings of the Doctors and Fathers of the Catholic Church, and they mostly rely on subjective interpretations from post-Reformation expositors.
 
copland said:
But a Catholic who is simply doing a Bible study will get the greatest benefit from a sound Catholic Study Bible with footnotes that are faithful to orthodox teachings of the Church. For advanced Bible study, the Early Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church are awesome, they provide great insight to the Bible, and there are many commentaries written by them on the Bible. St. Thomas Aquinas’ Catena Aurea is an awesome commentary on the 4 Gospels, actually second to none!
Click to expand...
Good point copland.

Also if you have access, Jeff Cavins has some great Bible Studies that a group can do. Our Parish has been involved in them and I have learned a great deal from them. There are several they have put togther:

1 - The Great Adventure Bible Study
2 - Adventures in Matthew
3 - Adventures in Acts
4 - Adventures in Revelation

And will probably do Adventures in Exodus next fall. I would recommend these to anyone wanting to study Scripture.
 
anonymoususer said:
How may a Catholic’s approach to scripture be different than a Baptist’s or other Protestant’s?
Click to expand...
You must read
JESUS OF NAZARETH, his baptism to the transfiguration (Book 1) by Josept lRatzinger.

With all the “speculative Theologiies” abound, his book may help you (as it has helped me) have a better understanding .
 
Catholic Answers sells a book by Mark Shea titled Making Senses Out of Scripture. This book explores how to read the Bible for all 4 senses as expressed in the Catechism:
The literal sense (Literary sense) and the the three spiritual senses: the spiritual direction of fiaith (analogical sense), the spiritual direction of hope (anagogical sense) and the spiritual direction of love (tropological or moral sense). I think it may be the most helpful book on reading scripture and enabling one to apply it, which I’ve read.

Lettera gesta docet, quid credas allegoria, moralis quid agas, quo tendas anagogia. (Translation: The Letter speaks of deeds; Allegory to faith; the Moral how to act; Anagogy our destiny.)
 
The Catholic Catechism gives some good guidelines in articles 111-114:
111
But since Sacred Scripture is inspired, there is another and no less important principle of correct interpretation, without which Scripture would remain a dead letter. “Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was written.”
Click to expand...
The Second Vatican Council indicates three criteria for interpreting Scripture in accordance with the Spirit who inspired it.
Click to expand...
112
  1. Be especially attentive “to the content and unity of the whole Scripture.” Different as the books which comprise it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God’s plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.
Click to expand...
The phrase “heart of Christ” can refer to Sacred Scripture, which makes known his heart, closed before the Passion, as the Scripture was obscure. But the Scripture has been opened since the Passion; since those who from then on have understood it, consider and discern in what way the prophecies must be interpreted.
Click to expand...
113
2. Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church.” According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (“according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church”).
Click to expand...
114
3. Be attentive to the analogy of faith. By “analogy of faith” we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.
Click to expand...
rocketrob
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top