SS practicing Christian: What do you say Scripture is?

[SyroMalankara]

I did not say that they have set up a parallel self-proclaimed Catholic jurisdiction anywhere.

I am saying that faithful obedient Catholics ,at all levels of leadership and authority, disagree on the interpretations of their Church’s teachings.

Are you denying that?

Not denying that disagreements can and do occur. But they get resolved. You ever hear of an anti-Trinitarian, adult-only baptism, saints-denying subsect functioning openly within the Catholic Church? There are dozens of “Christian” denominations that do so, with no mechanism to suppress them.

 

[benhur]

I should phrase this better, since Scripture came after the Gospel was entrusted to the Church.

The foundation of the Gospel is Jesus. The Gospel was revealed to Peter and the Apostles. Jesus founded His Church to minister the Gospel. He inspired founding leaders to write down the Sacred Traditions of the Gospel, and then used Church authorities (Bishops in Communion with Rome) to confirm and establish the body of Scripture (Canon).

Scripture is the Word of God, which has no authority above it. The Magisterium in Communion with the See of Peter, has authority to confirm divine interpretation. This authority is from Christ. It is no less authorative than Scripture. The Church is not the source of her authority any more than the authority which the writers of the Scriptures possessed when writing Scripture. And furthermore, Interpretation of Scripture and it’s authoritative confirmation is NOT revelation itself. Scripture and Tradition is Revelation.

Hi rc,

OK, just that I think the CC would say the magisterium has revelation authority, equal to scripture (and in harmony) That was the whole debate, whether the church has another leg/source for revelation (Word of God) besides Writ and apostolic tradition.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

Not denying that disagreements can and do occur. But they get resolved. You ever hear of an anti-Trinitarian, adult-only baptism, saints-denying subsect functioning openly within the Catholic Church? There are dozens of “Christian” denominations that do so, with no mechanism to suppress them.

HI Sy,

Straw man. Every denomination has authority or “mechanism” within itself to “suppress” '(interesting and telling word ). There are a few churches in my area that were once Roman Catholic. They were “suppressed” by the Catholic bishop, and just moved down the street with another name. Sounds familiar.

Blessings

 

[SyroMalankara]

HI Sy,

Straw man. Every denomination has authority within itself to “suppress” '(interesting and telling word ). There are a few churches in my area that were once Roman Catholic. They were “suppressed”, and just moved down the street with another name. Sounds familiar.

Blessings

I don’t know what you mean.

 

[Starwarsfan2]

Not denying that disagreements can and do occur. But they get resolved. You ever hear of an anti-Trinitarian, adult-only baptism, saints-denying subsect functioning openly within the Catholic Church? There are dozens of “Christian” denominations that do so, with no mechanism to suppress them.

It’s called excommunication

 

[guanophore]

 Do you think I cannot find Cardinals who disagree with Cardinal Kasper's interpretations of Church teachings?

Do you think I cannot find Bishops who disagree Archbishop Dolan’s interpretations of Church teachings?

Do you think I cannot ask you a few questions and find Catholic authorities who disagree with your answers?
for ex:
with what you know about Church infallibility: is Ordinatio Sacerdotalis to be considered an infallible teaching?
Are faithful Catholics who disagree with your interpretations of infallibility dissenters?

No, most of them are not well catechized in their faith. The point is that there is ONE FAITH, one teaching, one set of non-conflicting doctrines. Individuals may be out of order with it, but that does not change the One Faith.

Unity is not defined by those who depart from it. There were those who rejected the teaching of the Apostles. They were called heretics and schismatics. Or they were poorly catechized, and it was corrected, as in the case of Apollos.

What I am wondering is why you would spend any time/effort looking for dissenters or poorly catechized people.Why would you not rather spend effort on learning about the One Faith?

Does your interpretation of Amoris Laetitia allow for remarried Catholics to receive communion?

This s a pastoral document, not a doctrinal one. The correct answer is “it depends”.

another ex:

cor-mariae.com/index.php?threads/shock-admission-cardinal-casper-vii-deliberately-unclear.2759/

Cardinal Walter Kasper made the absolutely stunning admission that ambiguities were deliberately inserted into Vatican II documents – an admission that would pretty well vindicate all the alarms sounded by the likes of Michael Davies about “liturgical time bombs,” and the like. Specifically, Kasper is reported as admitting the following

“In many places, [the Council Fathers] had to find compromise formulas, in which, often, the positions of the majority are located immediately next to those of the minority, designed to delimit them. Thus, the conciliar texts themselves have a huge potential for conflict, open the door to a selective reception in either direction.”

does selective reception based on Vatican II make some one a dissenter?

It certainly can. There are boundaries in which liturgical practice can occur. Those who get outside of the boundaries usually do so out of ignorance, or rebellion.

 

[guanophore]

I did not say that they have set up a parallel self-proclaimed Catholic jurisdiction anywhere.

I am saying that faithful obedient Catholics ,at all levels of leadership and authority, disagree on the interpretations of their Church’s teachings.

Are you denying that?

Yes. If they are faithful Catholics, they will assent to the Church’s teachings.

The different interpretations lie in application - pastoral perogatives (how they are applied) not to the doctrine itself.

We have the freedom to interpret, but within specific boundaries. Going outside those boundaries is a departure from the One Faith, and the dissenter has lost their Catholicity.

 

[guanophore]

OK, just that I think the CC would say the magisterium has revelation authority, equal to scripture (and in harmony) That was the whole debate, whether the church has another leg/source for revelation (Word of God) besides Writ and apostolic tradition.

Blessings

No. There is no new revelation after the death of the last Apostle. The Magesterium has the duty to apply the One Faith that was handed down from the Apostles. It is their duty to preserve, protect, and promulgate the Divine Revelation that is found in the two equal and complimentary strands of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

HI Sy,

Straw man. Every denomination has authority or “mechanism” within itself to “suppress” '(interesting and telling word ). There are a few churches in my area that were once Roman Catholic. They were “suppressed” by the Catholic bishop, and just moved down the street with another name. Sounds familiar.

Blessings

Indeed, Schism is familiar no matter where it occurs. The difference is that these Churches can’t be mistaken anymore for being Catholic. They have lost their Catholic identity.

 

[clem456]

No. There is no new revelation after the death of the last Apostle. The Magesterium has the duty to apply the One Faith that was handed down from the Apostles. It is their duty to preserve, protect, and promulgate the Divine Revelation that is found in the two equal and complimentary strands of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

Indeed, Schism is familiar no matter where it occurs. The difference is that these Churches can’t be mistaken anymore for being Catholic. They have lost their Catholic identity.

And while revelation is complete in Christ, the community he founded is living. That authority he gave his community to teach and interpret is living.

 

[guanophore]

And while revelation is complete in Christ, the community he founded is living. That authority he gave his community to teach and interpret is living.

And this would be “the other leg”.

Hi rc,

OK, just that I think the CC would say the magisterium has revelation authority, equal to scripture (and in harmony) That was the whole debate, whether the church has another leg/source for revelation (Word of God) besides Writ and apostolic tradition.

Blessings

The authority to teach and preach, to bind and loose, is definitely part of the “stool”. No new revelation comes through the Magesterium, but the God uses it to guide the Church into “all truth”.

 

[benhur]

No. There is no new revelation after the death of the last Apostle. The Magesterium has the duty to apply the One Faith that was handed down from the Apostles. It is their duty to preserve, protect, and promulgate the Divine Revelation that is found in the two equal and complimentary strands of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

Hi G,

Understand there is no "new "revelation, but still there is revelation on an “old” matter, such as Assumption and IC for example , as declared as the “Word of God”, or as theopneustos, standing equal as and with Apostolic oral and Writ tradition. Hence adding another “leg” to “revelation”.

Indeed, Schism is familiar no matter where it occurs. The difference is that these Churches can’t be mistaken anymore for being Catholic. They have lost their Catholic identity.

No difference. If a Southern Baptist loses its "credentials’’ as such, they can no longer be identified as Southern Baptist. They have lost there Sothern Baptist identity.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

I don’t know what you mean.

Hi SY,
What do you not understand of my post ?

 

[benhur]

And while revelation is complete in Christ, the community he founded is living. That authority he gave his community to teach and interpret is living.

HI clem,

Yes and it is that living community which has evolved in how it views its authority. That community did not begin thinking its authority was “theopneustos”,or equal to Apostolic oral or Writ tradition. At least they were distinct authorities. One was normative , the other more administrative. One administered the Truth as found in Apostolic tradition and its Writ. The "administration’’ did not become another source for the “Word of God” (which was already complete).

Blessings

 

[benhur]

And this would be “the other leg”.

The authority to teach and preach, to bind and loose, is definitely part of the “stool”. No new revelation comes through the Magesterium, but the God uses it to guide the Church into “all truth”.

Hi G,

OK. It is part of the stool. I would say it is a one legged stool then, as in the “Church” being the leg. What she carries on top, what she is a* pillar *of, is Apostolic tradition and their Writ, normative Truth.

Just do not see binding and loosing , though Holy Spirit guided, as theopneustos.

Do not see the “carrier” of Truth as inerrant as the Truth itself is. That idea evolved, was not from the beginning, in my opinion.

Blessings

PS- I think stool is self serving to CC purposes. I prefer the figure scripture uses, a “building”, its foundation is the prophets and apostles with succeeding generations being laid there upon, We are the living stones about to be added . My inference above of a one legged stool gives the indication of wobbliness, lacking a sure foundation. While the current living stones may be "wobbly’, even containing wood, hay and stubble, our inerrant foundation is not.

 

[rcwitness]

No difference. If a Southern Baptist loses its "credentials’’ as such, they can no longer be identified as Southern Baptist. They have lost there Sothern Baptist identity.

Yeah, like if you move to Wisconsin, you can’t be a Southern Baptist!

 

[guanophore]

Hi G,

Understand there is no "new "revelation, but still there is revelation on an “old” matter, such as Assumption and IC for example , as declared as the “Word of God”, or as theopneustos, standing equal as and with Apostolic oral and Writ tradition. Hence adding another “leg” to “revelation”.
No difference.

I see what you are saying, but we don’t call this “revelation” to distinguish it from the public revelation by God of HImself. We call it doctrinal development, which means that we are developing ways to apply what was once for all deposited to the Church to the present day.

For example, there was no in vitro fertilization when the deposit of faith was made, so it is something that technology has brought into our culture that needs to be addressed.

Dogmas are declarations of beliefs the church has held but perhaps not clearly articulated, like the Trinity and the Hypostatic union, the assumption and the IC.

 

[benhur]

Yeah, like if you move to Wisconsin, you can’t be a Southern Baptist!

Can a Chicagoan Catholic be a Roman Catholic ?

Thanks for the timely laugh.

Blessings

 

[rcwitness]

Can a Chicagoan Catholic be a Roman Catholic ?

Thanks for the timely laugh.

Blessings

Nope, that would be an Irish Catholic.

 

[benhur]

For example, there was no in vitro fertilization when the deposit of faith was made, so it is something that technology has brought into our culture that needs to be addressed.

Yes. Just that the sacredness of life, and murder being wrong is "theopneustos. Now what we make of that in applying it to vitro fertilization will be guided by HS, but not "theopnesutos, or unconditionally inerrant as the original and normative oral and Writ tradition.

Dogmas are declarations of beliefs the church has held but perhaps not clearly articulated, like the Trinity and the Hypostatic union, the assumption and the IC

Yes, and the folks that came up with “trinity” or hypostatic were very concerned about using unbiblical terms to describe biblical gems. I do not think they would say such terms are equal , infallible, theopnesustos ,as “Baptize in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost”, "or Let us make man in our image ", etc.

Blessings

 

[benhur]

Nope, that would be an Irish Catholic.

Hirc,

Perfect. I have to go , but thanks for the final laugh.

Blessings