Name one Catholic teaching that contradicts Scripture

[sandusky]

Mickey:

I beg to differ. It is obvious that there were many other things that Jesus did. You have decided to emphasize one word. Here is where the emphasis is placed in regard to Sacred Tradition:

John 21:25
25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that would be written.

Mickey, you can emphasize whatever you wish to emphasize; OTOH, I am emphasizing what the H.S. emphasized: things which Jesus did. Even in what you emphasize, the antecedent of
if they were written… is still things which Jesus did. What God wanted written in Scripture is exactly what is written in Scripture, ie., God has said everything in his word, as your own catechism asserts, (and then further asserts that God had more to say in the form of tradition. That is a contradiction within the catechism.)

Your own Catechism states this:

III.
Christ Jesus—"Mediator and Fullness of All Revelation"
God has said everything in his Word

65
“In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son.” Christ, the Son of God made man, is the Father’s one, perfect, and unsurpassable Word. In him he has said everything; there will be no other word than this one. St. John of the Cross, among others, commented strikingly on Hebrews 1:1-2:

In giving us his Son, his only Word (for he possesses no other), he spoke everything to us at once in this sole Word – and he has no more to say … because what he spoke before to the prophets in parts, he has now spoken all at once by giving us the All Who is His Son. Any person questioning God or desiring some vision or revelation would be guilty not only of foolish behavior but also of offending him, by not fixing his eyes entirely upon Christ and by living with the desire for some other novelty.

 

[sandusky]

Mickey:

Papias

Whenever anyone came my way, who had been a follower of my seniors, I would ask for the accounts of our seniors: What did Andrew or Peter say? Or Phillip or Thomas or James or John or Matthew, or any of the Lord’s disciples? I also asked: What did Aristion and John the Presbyter, disciples of the Lord say. For, as I see it, it is not so much from books as from the living and permanent voice that I must draw profit (The Sayings of the Lord [between A.D. 115 and 140] as recorded by Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3:39 [A.D. 325]).
Cyril of Jerusalem

In regard to the divine and holy mysteries of the faith,
not the least part may be handed on without the Holy Scriptures.
Do not be led astray by winning words and clever arguments.
Even to me, who tell you these things, do not give ready belief,
unless you receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of the things which I announce.
The salvation in which we believe is not proved from clever reasoning,
but from the Holy Scriptures.

(From Cyril’s Catechetical Lectures 4:17).

 

[sandusky]

Fiat:

Sandusky:

Even if you believe 1 Cor. 7 speaks only of a spouse who becomes a believer after already having married an unbeliever, you somehow have to come up with an explanation as to why you think the 1 Cor. 7 spouse is now exempt from the 2 Cor 6:14 “command.”

Fiat

IMHO Fiat, you are much smarter than this question. The answer is a no-brainer. I will defer my answer until Wednesday morning, thereby giving opportunity to one of your fellows to answer it for you. If by Wednesday morning none has given the proper answer, then I will answer it for you.

Sandusky

 

[sandusky]

Prayer_Warrior:

Hmmm…noticibly absent is 2Thess 2:15: So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter. Does that count as a commandment? Are you holding fast to the traditions by mouth as well as letter?

So in your mind, Paul, in 2 Thess 2:15, is giving a “command,” while in 2 Cor 6:14, Paul is giving “advice.” Interesting. IMO it is selective and inconsistent thinking, but interesting nevertheless. (Your thinking does make the catechism come more into line concerning the disparity of cult.)

Prayer_Warrior:

A commandment is an edict–a decree or proclamation issued by one in authority. To me the One in authority is God-- His edicts or commandments I already posted. You assert that command is the same as a commandment. But to “command” is to DIRECT with authority. So, my use of the word “advice” may have been off the mark slightly; the commands by St. Paul are directing us to live our lives as God wills but I would not catagorize that as “commandments” of God.

You are entitled to your private interpretation of language and scripture.

Prayer_Warrior:

I stand by my view that Scripture is divinely inspired. I do not believe Paul was taking dictation from God. This is an Islamic view. This can clearly be seen from 1 Cor 1:16: (I did baptize also the household of Steph’anas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized any one else.) Did God forget who had been baptized? Of course not.

I find your interpretive process fascinating.

Prayer_Warrior:

Remember the historical aspect of Scripture as well as their content. The Epistles of Paul were his letters responding to specific situations in the Church. He was providing the Church with direction. The Catholic Church does not contradict the directions given in any of Paul’s Epistles. How could it? The New Testament is a collection of works from the original Church of Christ–the Catholic Church. This being the case, it is not the job of the Catholic Church to “interpret” Scripture, but rather, to explain it.

The Church cannot explain until it has interpreted. The two go hand-in-hand.

 

[Fiat]

Sandusky:

I will anxiously wait until Wednesday, then. Hopefully your answer will address the “cleanliness of the children” issue which is raised in the passage. (hint hint).

Also, I presume you will speak of the difference between a sacramental marriage and a non-sacramental one?!

Fiat

 

[MariaG]

I don’t think anyone is going to get their minds changed on this, but I did find an article on New Advent interesting.

The basic point is that although Paul did tell the people of Corinth that you should not unequally yoke yourself, but the history of the Church show us that it was not practiced for quite some time. So Paul preached the ideal. Much as Paul also exhorted us to serve God unmarried. We see how widespread that practice is.

Mixed Marriage.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[sandusky]

Fiat:

Sandusky:

I will anxiously wait until Wednesday, then. Hopefully your answer will address the “cleanliness of the children” issue which is raised in the passage. (hint hint).

You hope in vain, Fiat. I will simply answer your simple question.

Also, I presume you will speak of the difference between a sacramental marriage and a non-sacramental one?!

Fiat

No I will not speak to that either, as Paul does not speak to that.

The thread asks anyone to show a Catholic teaching that contradicts scripture. I say that the dispensation for disparity of cult violates 2 Cor 6:14. Stick with that.

I certainly don’t expect any Catholic to buy what I have shown. With that in mind, I intend to keep my statements confined to what I said. Please, no more rabbit trails.

Sandusky

 

[Fiat]

sandusky:

You hope in vain, Fiat. I will simply answer your simple question.

No I will not speak to that either, as Paul does not speak to that.

The thread asks anyone to show a Catholic teaching that contradicts scripture. I say that the dispensation for disparity of cult violates 2 Cor 6:14. Stick with that.

I certainly don’t expect any Catholic to buy what I have shown. With that in mind, I intend to keep my statements confined to what I said. Please, no more rabbit trails.

Sandusky

Sandusky:
So let me get this straight…You are going to show us how Catholic teaching contradicts scripture but yet you are not actually going to address Catholic teaching when discussing the issue of mixed marriage???

Your integrity is on sinking sand.

Fiat

 

[sandusky]

Fiat:

Sandusky:
So let me get this straight…You are going to show us how Catholic teaching contradicts scripture but yet you are not actually going to address Catholic teaching when discussing the issue of mixed marriage???

Your integrity is on sinking sand.

Fiat

Fiat, if what I have stated with respect to the dispensation on disparity of cult and Paul’s command in 2 Cor 6:14 is in error with respect to Catholic teaching on mixed marriage, then spell it out, and I will stand corrected, and you will have given me my comeuppance, and instruction on Catholic teaching of marriage to boot.

Sandusky

 

[Mickey]

God has said everything in his word

It is not either/or my friend. It is Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

Jerome

Don’t you know that the laying on of hands after baptism and then the invocation of the Holy Sirit is a custom of the Churches? Do you demand Scripture proof? You may find it in the Acts of the Apostles. And even if it did not rest on the authority of Scripture the consensus of the whole world in this respect would have the force of a command. For many other observances of the Churches, which are due to tradition, have acquired the authority of the written law (*The Dialogue Against the Luciferians *8 A.D. 382]).

 

[Mickey]

Cyril of Jerusalem

In regard to the divine and holy mysteries of the faith,
not the least part may be handed on without the Holy Scriptures.
Do not be led astray by winning words and clever arguments.
Even to me, who tell you these things, do not give ready belief,
unless you receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of the things which I announce.
The salvation in which we believe is not proved from clever reasoning,
but from the Holy Scriptures.

(From Cyril’s Catechetical Lectures 4:17).

Excellent! Then you must also agree with this!

Cyril of Jerusalem

The bread and the wine of the Eucharist before the holy invocation of the adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, but the invocation having been made, the bread becomes the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ (Catechetical Lectures 19:7 A.D. 350]).

 

[Fiat]

sandusky:

Fiat, if what I have stated with respect to the dispensation on disparity of cult and Paul’s command in 2 Cor 6:14 is in error with respect to Catholic teaching on mixed marriage, then spell it out, and I will stand corrected, and you will have given me my comeuppance, and instruction on Catholic teaching of marriage to boot.

Sandusky

You have not explained Church teaching on the dispensation for disparity of cult; nor have you explained sacramental marriage. You have only mentioned “disparity of cult.”

Fiat

 

[Mickey]

sandusky:

Your own Catechism states this:

Ah, but you have forgotten passages from the Catechism such as these:

The Magisterium of the Church

85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome. 86 "Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith."48

 

[MariaG]

Fiat:

You have not explained Church teaching on the dispensation for disparity of cult; nor have you explained sacramental marriage. You have only mentioned “disparity of cult.”

Fiat

Actually, Sandusky did present Catholic teaching. Way way back

**

originally posted by Sandusky
1633

In many countries the situation of a mixed marriage (marriage between a Catholic and a baptized non-Catholic) often arises. It requires particular attention on the part of couples and their pastors. A case of marriage with disparity of cult (between a Catholic and a non-baptized person) requires even greater circumspection.

1634
Difference of confession between the spouses does not constitute an insurmountable obstacle for marriage, when they succeed in placing in common what they have received from their respective communities, and learn from each other the way in which each lives in fidelity to Christ. But the difficulties of mixed marriages must not be underestimated. They arise from the fact that the separation of Christians has not yet been overcome. The spouses risk experiencing the tragedy of Christian disunity even in the heart of their own home. Disparity of cult can further aggravate these difficulties. Differences about faith and the very notion of marriage, but also different religious mentalities, can become sources of tension in marriage, especially as regards the education of children. The temptation to religious indifference can then arise.

1635
According to the law in force in the Latin Church, a mixed marriage needs for liceity the express permission of ecclesiastical authority. In case of disparity of cult an express dispensation from this impediment is required for the validity of the marriage. This permission or dispensation presupposes that both parties know and do not exclude the essential ends and properties of marriage; and furthermore that the Catholic party confirms the obligations, which have been made known to the non-Catholic party, of preserving his or her own faith and ensuring the baptism and education of the children in the Catholic Church.

In 2 Cor 6:14-7:1, God gives an explicit command: “Do not be bound together with unbelievers…

**

 

[Fiat]

Please forgive me. I missed that.
I suppose what I’m looking for is Sandusky’s explanation as to how the Church’s teaching of a disparity of cult as it prevents a sacramental marriage conflicts with St. Paul’s teachings, exactly.

Fiat

 

[sandusky]

Fiat:

Please forgive me. I missed that.
I suppose what I’m looking for is Sandusky’s explanation as to how the Church’s teaching of a disparity of cult as it prevents a sacramental marriage conflicts with St. Paul’s teachings, exactly.

Fiat

Forgive me, Fiat; I assumed that you had read that.

As there is no grand language in either statement, I offer Paul’s simple statement in 2 Cor 6:14:

“Do not be bound together with unbelievers…"

The CCC simply states:

1635
According to the law in force in the Latin Church, a mixed marriage needs for liceity the express permission of ecclesiastical authority. In case of disparity of cult an express dispensation from this impediment is required for the validity of the marriage. This permission or dispensation presupposes that both parties know and do not exclude the essential ends and properties of marriage; and furthermore that the Catholic party confirms the obligations, which have been made known to the non-Catholic party, of preserving his or her own faith and ensuring the baptism and education of the children in the Catholic Church.

Simply restated:

Paul says believers are not to be bound (in marriage) to unbelievers, while the RCC says it will permit a believer to be bound (in marriage) to an unbeliever.

Those are contradictory positions

 

[Fiat]

sandusky:

Forgive me, Fiat; I assumed that you had read that.

As there is no grand language in either statement, I offer Paul’s simple statement in 2 Cor 6:14:

“Do not be bound together with unbelievers…"

The CCC simply states:

**1635 **
According to the law in force in the Latin Church, a mixed marriage needs for liceity the express permission of ecclesiastical authority. In case of disparity of cult an express dispensation from this impediment is required for the validity of the marriage. This permission or dispensation presupposes that both parties know and do not exclude the essential ends and properties of marriage; and furthermore that the Catholic party confirms the obligations, which have been made known to the non-Catholic party, of preserving his or her own faith and ensuring the baptism and education of the children in the Catholic Church.

Simply restated:

Paul says believers are not to be bound (in marriage) to unbelievers, while the RCC says it will permit a believer to be bound (in marriage) to an unbeliever.

Those are contradictory positions

Sandusky:

I cannot say I agree with your assessment. What is at issue is “believer,” and the Catholic Church has always seen degrees of belief, as evidenced in Scripture where St. Paul commands the Church that she is to accept those that are “weak in faith.” Therefore, as there are degrees of belief, so too does the Catholic Church acknowledge this in her definition of marriage. The Sacramental marriage is the Church’s ideal marriage, and as such, it can only take place where the two ministers share a positive correlation of belief: Catholic baptism/profession of faith.

While the Church permits marriage between ministers with a negative correlation of belief, their marriage cannot be sacramental.

The Church would acknowledge that even a Muslim has some degree of “belief” even though it is imperfectly expressed.

Fiat

 

[sandusky]

MariaG:

I don’t think anyone is going to get their minds changed on this, but I did find an article on New Advent interesting.

The basic point is that although Paul did tell the people of Corinth that you should not unequally yoke yourself, but the history of the Church show us that it was not practiced for quite some time. So Paul preached the ideal. Much as Paul also exhorted us to serve God unmarried. We see how widespread that practice is.

Thank you Maria.

You are, IMHumbleO, the most gracious person that I have encountered on this forum.

It is my hope that you will not leave the Catholic Church (and I am certain that you will not) because of this one discrepancy; I do understand that it is the Church you love.

 

[sandusky]

Fiat:

Sandusky:

I cannot say I agree with your assessment. What is at issue is “believer,” and the Catholic Church has always seen degrees of belief, as evidenced in Scripture where St. Paul commands the Church that she is to accept those that are “weak in faith.” Therefore, as there are degrees of belief, so too does the Catholic Church acknowledge this in her definition of marriage. The Sacramental marriage is the Church’s ideal marriage, and as such, it can only take place where the two ministers share a positive correlation of belief: Catholic baptism/profession of faith.

While the Church permits marriage between ministers with a negative correlation of belief, their marriage cannot be sacramental.

The Church would acknowledge that even a Muslim has some degree of “belief” even though it is imperfectly expressed.

Fiat

Thank you, Fiat; I understand your disagreement.

 

[Kirane]

The Bible appears to condemn the making of a statue or of praying before one:
“You shall not make for yourself a graven image or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: you shall not bow down to them or serve them” (Ex. 20:4–5)
(8)You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; (9)you shall not bow down to them or serve them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,… Deut. 5:8-9; RSV
Also, here in Los Angeles county, and other places in southern California, there were several Masses during Chinese New Year celebration with dragons going up and down the Church. Children were told to touch the dragon as it was moving up and down the aisles of the Catholic Church as this would give them “good luck”. It is taught in Catholicism that it is “good luck” to be able to touch a dragon as he is going up and down the Church. This Catholic pratice seems to be contrary to Scrip;tures:
“Men worshiped the dragon, for he had given his authority to the beast, and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast, and who can fight against it?” And the beast was given a mouth uttering haughty and blasphemous words, and it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months; it opened its mouth to utter blasphemies against God, blaspheming his name and his dwelling, that is, those who dwell in heaven. Also it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them. And authority was given it over every tribe and people and tongue and nation, and all who dwell on earth will worship it, every one whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb that was slain” (Revelation 13:4-8 RSV) (see also Revelation 13)