Private revealtion continued after death of last Apostle?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tobias2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tobias2

Guest
I have a fundamentalist friend who does not believe in private revelation.

That all revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle. Jesus taught everything there was to teach and his Apostles passed that on and then, no more revelation including private revelation after John dies.

I am having a hard time defending the existence of ongoing private revelation from Scripture.

Can anyone claify this for me.

Thanks
 
I am having a hard time defending the existence of ongoing private revelation from Scripture.

Can anyone claify this for me.

Thanks
Why would we use Scripture? I mean, we aren’t fundamentalists, we’re Catholics. Ongoing private revelation is when you pray and get an answer. So, use experience. Can he find somplace in Scripture where it days no one is going to get the kind of messages Paul did? No one will interpret tongues or speak in them?

Every time a person interprets Scripture for themselves in ways not taught for 2000 years, they are exhibiting private interpretation. If they think their interpretation is inspired, then they are also exhibiting what they believe to be private revelation.

OTOH, Jesus said He couldn’t tell us everything now because we could not bear it - well, He told His disciples that. And He said he would send an Advocate, The Holy Spirit. He also said He’d be with us to the end of the Age. I see no use for the Holy Spirit being sent to tell us anything if we cannot hear Him.

If all your friend has is a Bible, an incomplete copy of Scripture I imagine, then he’s worshipping a book. If there is no private revelation, than what does he have a relationship with besides words on paper?
 
I have a fundamentalist friend who does not believe in private revelation.

That all revelation ended with the death of the last Apostle. Jesus taught everything there was to teach and his Apostles passed that on and then, no more revelation including private revelation after John dies.

I am having a hard time defending the existence of ongoing private revelation from Scripture.

Can anyone claify this for me.

Thanks
I’m not sure just what you mean by “private revelation”. The Catholic Church recognizes that God sometimes communicates in a miraculous way with certain individuals (called “private revelation”), but any revelations given in that way are not binding. There is room for much deception in such private revelations and the first thing that must be determined is whether they are from God or from the devil, or just one’s own imagination and thinking. No true revelation from God would contradict Church teaching (Sacred Scripture is part of Church teaching).

The Church does believe that public revelation ceased with the death of the last apostle - and that those teachings were handed down both orally (Tradition - always written with a capital “T”) and written down (New Testament). All the truths required for our salvation are contained in Sacred Scripture (both Testaments) and Sacred Tradition. The Catholic Church does believe in the development (further understanding) of the truths contained therein.

Here are a few paragraphs from the Catechism of the Catholic Church on this matter - underlining is mine. You might like to go to the site and read to #95
vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__PL.HTM
#82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, “does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honoured with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.”

Apostolic Tradition and ecclesial traditions
#83 The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus’ teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. the first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition.
Tradition is to be distinguished from the various theological, disciplinary, liturgical or devotional traditions, born in the local churches over time. These are the particular forms, adapted to different places and times, in which the great Tradition is expressed. In the light of Tradition, these traditions can be retained, modified or even abandoned under the guidance of the Church’s Magisterium.

The Magisterium of the Church

#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.”
 
You’re friend is kind of right and wrong at the same time. All public revelation, which our faith is based on, ceased with the first advent of Christ. But private revelation is absolutely a part of Gods’ continued action in the lives of His people, with great benefit to us all, although discernment is certainly required. This is from the CCC:

**There will be no further Revelation

66 "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ."28 Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.

67 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called “private” revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church.

Christian faith cannot accept “revelations” that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfillment, as is the case in certain non-Christian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such “revelations”.**
 
I never get that kind of fundamentalist. Here they read Acts, see the apostles establish the precedent of replacing apostles lost (after Judas kills himself), see them establish the practice of ordaining bishops to teach authoritatively, see them gather in the council of Jerusalem to debate tough decisions and teach authoritatively…

Then even though the Sciptures NOWHERE say so, they conclude that this clear pattern of authority and delegation of authority ends with the death of the last apostle. If the bible doesn’t say so, where do they get this idea? Why would the Scriptures omit such an important detail?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top