Using the Bible to support your belief and faith

[Cachonga]

CalCatholic:

I went to a secular school and grew up in a non religious family and the much of the above applies to me too. It was the times (50’s and 60’s). I had a second grade teacher who grabbed the back of my neck with her long finger nails and squeezed hard (leaving marks), I would never have dared to tell my parents because I would have gotten in trouble again (as mentioned above by someone). These were the days when the school could discipline you (religious or not).

Ah, the good ole days! When you didn’t have to walk through a metal detector to go to class, and the scariest thing wandering the halls was Mother Superior with a yard stick (or the Principal with the “Board of Education” for those in public school)! A “drive by shooting” involved someones bare backside pressed up against the car window (or hanging out of it) as it sped down the street. When you could go to a movie and know that “Dang!” would be the “dirtiest” word you would hear. When “Gay” had nothing to do with homosexuality (FACT: I attended Gay Junior High, named in memory of Minnie B. Gay. It’s now simply Memorial Middle School. BTW - we were the Raiders [yes, I was a Gay Raider!]). Looking at the way things are today, it’s real easy to believe that God’s judgment is here! Can anyone think of a better reason to read your Bible and seek God?

 

[pablope]

Thanks I 'll take a look.

A monsignor is usually a catholic priest…are you sure it was a monsignor who told you this? Just curious…

No. Monsignor, because he was the head of the parish.

Wow…I do not know what to say that a mosignor would respond to you like that…mad:

Well…I have a question…what do you think is the true application of Scripture?

True application of the scriptures will give an accurate understanding to those it was written to at the time and to those who benefit from it now.

Okay…thanks for your reply.

At the start of Christianity…they had no such scriptures as we have them today…and very few could read or write or had possession of a Bible as we have them today…so how do you think those first christians benefited…or how did they get an accurate understanding of Scriptures? How did those early Christians get the true application of Scripture?

They should never be used to try to substantiate a man made doctrine of belief that is not found in the Bible, or to have a valid application to something in contrast with Bible teaching.

Is this what you are referring to:

calledtocommunion.com/2009/07/ecclesial-deism/

‘Tradition’ becomes whatever one agrees with in the history of the Church, such as the Nicene Creed or Chalcedonian Christology.

This pick-and-choose approach to the tradition shows that it is not the fact that an Ecumenical Council declared something definitively that makes it ‘authoritative’ for Mohler. What makes it ‘authoritative’ for Mohler is that it agrees with his interpretation of Scripture. If he encounters something in the tradition that seems extra-biblical or opposed to Scripture he rejects it. For that reason, tradition does not authoritatively guide his interpretation. His interpretation picks out what counts as tradition, and then this tradition informs his interpretation.

They should never be used to try to substantiate a man made doctrine of belief that is not found in the Bible, or to have a valid application to something in contrast with Bible teaching.

Well…I provided you a link to how the Catholic Church uses Scripture…so do you still think the CC falls into this category?

Suffice it to say also…the Catholic Church was founded before any NT writing was ever written…or that the teachings of the CC were handed down from the Apostles and their successors before any NT book was written…would you then say the nothing the CC teaches is in contrast with Bible teaching?

By the way…what is your description of Bible Teaching?

 

[John17_3]

John 17 3, As you know there are 1.2 billion Catholics in the world, many are very faithful and read the scriptures every day, but as in any other faith, many are not. There are many more Catholics than Jehovah’s Witnesses in this world, so of course your going to run into many more that appear unfaithful!

I am sorry to say again your first impressions have spoken for your pretense. My desire to speak to others who may have shared my experiences and the effects on a social and spiritual level has nothing to do with numbers or who lived next door to you. Your first response was to bash neighbors associated with another religious group which is enough for me to disregard any further (name removed by moderator)ut. I appreciate the availability of this type of forum and wish to limit my association with like minded members.
Thank you for your response and have a nice day.

 

[John17_3]

pablope;11649605:

Thanks I 'll take a look.

Mr. Shea has made several comparisons to Mary as being the Ark and being the woman in Rev. who gave birth to a son. This may be church “doctrine” or “Tradition” or perhaps Mr. Shea’s conclusions, I do not know. But I ask you if you know or in a position to know, does Mr. Shea speak for the Church as a teacher? The only qualifications I could see was his conversion. Can you add to this? I do read a lot of various essays and serious explanatory papers on doctrine and such (from many “faiths”). I appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut.

 

[pablope]

Mary as the ark of the NT…and the woman in Rev…is a teaching of the Church…and was a very early view of the Early Church Fathers on Mary…so the teaching is very old indeed…and it is part of that Tradition.

But I ask you if you know or in a position to know, does Mr. Shea speak for the Church as a teacher? The only qualifications I could see was his conversion. Can you add to this? I do read a lot of various essays and serious explanatory papers on doctrine and such (from many “faiths”). I appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut.

Well…here is Mark’s page…mark-shea.com/about.html

He has written books/articles and appeared on TV/Radio. So does he speak for the Church…I would say he teaches to further deepen or explain the teachings of the Church. In the CC, writings are submitted to a censor liborum for checking if these writings are in accord with Catholic teaching and obtain an imprimatur and nihil obstat…and I am sure his writings have such approval from Church authorities. I hope this helps.

I provided you another article, which I hope that you take time to read and learn from.

 

[CalCatholic]

I am sorry to say again your first impressions have spoken for your pretense. My desire to speak to others who may have shared my experiences and the effects on a social and spiritual level has nothing to do with numbers or who lived next door to you. Your first response was to bash neighbors associated with another religious group which is enough for me to disregard any further (name removed by moderator)ut. I appreciate the availability of this type of forum and wish to limit my association with like minded members.
Thank you for your response and have a nice day.

Excuse me! Show me where I posted anything about my neighbors or bashing anybody??? It sounds like you just want to talk to people who agree with your dissatisfaction of the Catholic Church. You might want to try an ex-Catholic website.

 

[John17_3]

Hi John 17,
My sister in laws kids were raised in the JW organisation and when I talk with them about their experience they sound exactly like your post, and none of them are now practicing the JW religion they are alienated from their parents, I should say Mother, because their parents are divorced and their Mother remarried all with the approval of the JW organisation, I here stories of how they were beaten for not sitting quietly through the meetings and then being thrashed again at home for embarrassing them in front of the congregation, and all of this was done with a Bible verse for justification. The youngest is in a mental institution and was molested within the JW organisation from a very early age and will probably never live a normal life. And her Mother and Step Father do not support her but support the organisation and say she is just making it up? And they wonder why I get annoyed when they come into my home and tell my family that I worship the devil and I am demon possessed?
My point is that bad behaviour and character flaws within individuals is not relegated to just one faith tradition, It is a part of the human condition and your experience does not make the Catholic Church wrong and JW’s right or the other way around it just reiterates the fact that as humans we all need Gods grace in our lives to try and make us better human beings.

Hi and thanks for your response. I totally agree with you about many cases of such abuse in any organization. I have heard of many cases myself. There are no acceptable excuse for such abuse. I know many children withhold reporting parents or those in authority and many incidents come to light after many years. Most of the current priest scandals are 20 years old. But just like the CC most orgs. have tightened the abuse policies to include immediate reports to police or other child protection services. I know of one recently to some one I have known (or thought I knew) for a long time. So yes it happens everywhere.
I think my experiences that I described were not viewed as individual cases of abuse back then. (not sexual) But a overall acceptance of discipline. I got hit right in the church during mass I do believe the beatings was considered administrating God’s grace. I guess if a person did not go through it, it’s hard to explain.
But looking back and asking myself why did it stop? I want to show you a statement from a book called “The Sytematic Teaching of Religion” by Rev. Fuerst (S.T.D.)" “A textbook for the training of teachers of religion in the elementary schools and for Catechetical courses in Seminaries.” (I am typing this right from the book not cut and paste from a site.)
On page 184 under the heading "After the Use of reason has been reached"
I quote: A whipping after a particularly blameworthy (immodesty, theft, willfulness or a bare-faced lie) will be found to be the most effective means of inducing the child to mend his ways. If the use of this form of correction parents are prompted by true love of the child that it will be almost unnecessary to use it in later life."

I know that was a bit long but it only shows the abuse was not from abusive individuals but a “teaching” Saying: " In Holy Scripture the Holy Ghost suggests the use of corporal punishment as a corrective for misconduct."
So as I said the beatings were to receive the grace of God.
(You may see how I really have done my homework - no one show me this I really read this book.)
I will stop this very long response so I thank you for your response and insight.

 

[John17_3]

Excuse me! Show me where I posted anything about my neighbors or bashing anybody??? It sounds like you just want to talk to people who agree with your dissatisfaction of the Catholic Church. You might want to try an ex-Catholic website.

Oh No!!! My sincere apology to you. The response was for “Modern Revert” whatever that means. His first response was about a JW family that lived next door and only had bad things to say, even saying the whole neighborhood felt the same way. Personally I do not approve of anyone “dissing” anyone else. So please accept my apology. Perhaps it is because I am new on this site. So sorry.

 

[John17_3]

I went to a secular school and grew up in a non religious family and the much of the above applies to me too. It was the times (50’s and 60’s). I had a second grade teacher who grabbed the back of my neck with her long finger nails and squeezed hard (leaving marks), I would never have dared to tell my parents because I would have gotten in trouble again (as mentioned above by someone). These were the days when the school could discipline you (religious or not).

I was just telling “Matt Guitar man” that corporal punishment was a part of training for teachers of religion. I’ll give you the quote from the book that is in front of my. (I did a lot of research)
"The Sytematic Teaching of Religion" by Rev. Fuerst (S.T.D.)" “A textbook for the training of teachers of religion in the elementary schools and for Catechetical courses in Seminaries.”
On page 184 under the heading “After the Use of reason has been reached”
I quote: A whipping after a particularly blameworthy (immodesty, theft, willfulness or a bare-faced lie) will be found to be the most effective means of inducing the child to mend his ways. If the use of this form of correction parents are prompted by true love of the child that it will be almost unnecessary to use it in later life."

So now you know they were told to do it and encourage the parents also.
Thanks for your response. Again my apology for my mistaken post.

 

[CalCatholic]

I was just telling “Matt Guitar man” that corporal punishment was a part of training for teachers of religion. I’ll give you the quote from the book that is in front of my. (I did a lot of research)
"The Sytematic Teaching of Religion" by Rev. Fuerst (S.T.D.)" “A textbook for the training of teachers of religion in the elementary schools and for Catechetical courses in Seminaries.”
On page 184 under the heading “After the Use of reason has been reached”
I quote: A whipping after a particularly blameworthy (immodesty, theft, willfulness or a bare-faced lie) will be found to be the most effective means of inducing the child to mend his ways. If the use of this form of correction parents are prompted by true love of the child that it will be almost unnecessary to use it in later life."

So now you know they were told to do it and encourage the parents also.
Thanks for your response. Again my apology for my mistaken post.

No problem, apology accepted.

 

[bmonk]

So now when I compare what the Bible says and what the Church teaches and how Catholics act I can not help to question, why the Bible is even quoted when supporting beliefs. Jesus said, “Why call me Lord if you do not do as I say?” I believe if the Bible was taught at an early age there would have been a serious difference in the world.
Would any older person feel like responding to this because you may relate to my experiences and observations?
I hope it is understood I ask in a conversational manner and do not wish to argue.
Thank you

My qualifications: Also born in the '50s, raised in an active Catholic family. We too rarely were taught about reading the Scriptures–it was assumed, I suppose, that we got enough at Mass. Bibles were not much available at home–except the big “family Bible” and a much-edited “Child’s Illustrated Bible” of some sort.

I am sorry for your experience, especially the abuse and abusive behavior–by parents, teachers, adults in general.

I suspect there was also a response to the Reformation: “See what damage those folk did when they read the Scriptures without guidance! It’s dangerous! We can’t go there!” (There was a similar response to contemplative prayer, such as Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross wrote on: “That is for experts! You amateurs need not try!”) It is sad that it took us 450 years to get over the hurt of the Reformation.

Another factor was the Dark Ages, when so much was lost. When the ordinary person was not literate, and had little or no free time to consider their way of life, when even the Clergy was largely unlettered, the message of the Bible was hard to teach in all its details. Abuse often became common, simply because that’s how life was. And it took a long time to begin to adapt to a more educated clergy, and then laity in general. Too long.

However, in the years since I became an adult, I have seen a much-needed opening to reading and studying the Scriptures. Monasteries have rediscovered Lectio Divina, and made it available to the ordinary faithful person. Bible Study groups have developed in many, many parishes.

We have also begun to be much more active in living the Gospel. We have Stewardship groups, we have dioceses keeping an eye on clergy and other workers to end the problem of abuse, we have many embracing more deliberate ways to live the faith, we have many laity becoming oblates to live a more devoted life to God. We have a long way to go–but at least it is an important goal for us these days!

 

[John17_3]

**

My qualifications: Also born in the '50s, raised in an active Catholic family. We too rarely were taught about reading the Scriptures–it was assumed, I suppose, that we got enough at Mass. Bibles were not much available at home–except the big “family Bible” and a much-edited “Child’s Illustrated Bible” of some sort.

I am sorry for your experience, especially the abuse and abusive behavior–by parents, teachers, adults in general.

I suspect there was also a response to the Reformation: “See what damage those folk did when they read the Scriptures without guidance! It’s dangerous! We can’t go there!” (There was a similar response to contemplative prayer, such as Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross wrote on: “That is for experts! You amateurs need not try!”) It is sad that it took us 450 years to get over the hurt of the Reformation.

Another factor was the Dark Ages, when so much was lost. When the ordinary person was not literate, and had little or no free time to consider their way of life, when even the Clergy was largely unlettered, the message of the Bible was hard to teach in all its details. Abuse often became common, simply because that’s how life was. And it took a long time to begin to adapt to a more educated clergy, and then laity in general. Too long.

However, in the years since I became an adult, I have seen a much-needed opening to reading and studying the Scriptures. Monasteries have rediscovered Lectio Divina, and made it available to the ordinary faithful person. Bible Study groups have developed in many, many parishes.

We have also begun to be much more active in living the Gospel. We have Stewardship groups, we have dioceses keeping an eye on clergy and other workers to end the problem of abuse, we have many embracing more deliberate ways to live the faith, we have many laity becoming oblates to live a more devoted life to God. We have a long way to go–but at least it is an important goal for us these days!

**
Thank you for your very insightful reply. I was hoping to met with those who have a desire to converse in a informative and conversational quality. I would like to get back to you later I need to go now. Are you a monk with a monastery background?
Ok Ok I’m getting yelled at. Talk later. Thanks

 

[bmonk]

**

**
Thank you for your very insightful reply. I was hoping to met with those who have a desire to converse in a informative and conversational quality. I would like to get back to you later I need to go now. Are you a monk with a monastery background?
Ok Ok I’m getting yelled at. Talk later. Thanks

I am–but sometimes for that very reason, I cannot check things out or talk long.

 

[Dave_Noonan]

It is a shame that so many Catholics were not raised reading the bible. But anyone born around the time of Vatican II should know full well that the Church has always encouraged knowledge of scripture. St. Jerome in the 4th century said that ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ. Yes, I believe there was a time when some clergy were instructed to dissuade Catholics from reading the bible unless they were scholars because they felt they did not have the capacity to properly interpret it within the context of Church teaching.

Still today I have Catholic students who show up to my classes on the Bible and tell me they are instructed NOT to read the Bible, outside of what they hear in Mass because to do otherwise would lead to personal interpretation. (One student told me that because the Bible is holy, it can only be read out loud during the Mass.) Not all Catholic students think this, but it happens with relative frequency. I was also told by one student–in fact he wrote this at the bottom of his final exam–that he went to twelve years of Catholic school and they never talked about the Bible. I do find this difficult to believe.

I’ve asked on a couple of threads before where exactly these notions come from, but no one has been able to offer an explanation.

 

[CalCatholic]

Still today I have Catholic students who show up to my classes on the Bible and tell me they are instructed NOT to read the Bible, outside of what they hear in Mass because to do otherwise would lead to personal interpretation. (One student told me that because the Bible is holy, it can only be read out loud during the Mass.) Not all Catholic students think this, but it happens with relative frequency. I was also told by one student–in fact he wrote this at the bottom of his final exam–that he went to twelve years of Catholic school and they never talked about the Bible. I do find this difficult to believe.

I’ve asked on a couple of threads before where exactly these notions come from, but no one has been able to offer an explanation.

Dave, I have been teaching in RCIA for the last 8 years and the majority of the people coming through our doors are baptized Protestants. Most of the know very little about the Bible. Now if I apply the same reasoning that you do above, I would conclude that Protestants don’t read their Bibles very much, and know just the basics about Jesus. Now I know that that is not the case, but that is a little snapshot from my experience.

There are 1.2 Billion Catholics all over the world, and are there some that were told that they don’t need to read the Bible because they get all the scripture they need in Mass, no doubt! I came to the Catholic Church only 10 years ago, and my experience has been the opposite. When they found out in RCIA that I had been studying the scriptures even before I came to the Church, once I completed RCIA, I was asked if I would like to attend a three year Catholic Bible Institute at a local Catholic University (which was sponsored by our Archdiocese).

I just pulled out my 1950 Catholic Bible, and in the opening pages, the Holy See is granting an indulgence to those Catholics who read the Bible at least a quarter of an hour a day. So from at least this time on the Vatican has promoted the daily reading of scripture to all Catholics! I am sure there are others on this forum which have even older Bibles (or are really old themselves ) which could add more information.

 

[Dave_Noonan]

Dave, I have been teaching in RCIA for the last 8 years and the majority of the people coming through our doors are baptized Protestants. Most of the know very little about the Bible. Now if I apply the same reasoning that you do above, I would conclude that Protestants don’t read their Bibles very much, and know just the basics about Jesus. Now I know that that is not the case, but that is a little snapshot from my experience.

There are 1.2 Billion Catholics all over the world, and are there some that were told that they don’t need to read the Bible because they get all the scripture they need in Mass, no doubt! I came to the Catholic Church only 10 years ago, and my experience has been the opposite. When they found out in RCIA that I had been studying the scriptures even before I came to the Church, once I completed RCIA, I was asked if I would like to attend a three year Catholic Bible Institute at a local Catholic University (which was sponsored by our Archdiocese).

I just pulled out my 1950 Catholic Bible, and in the opening pages, the Holy See is granting an indulgence to those Catholics who read the Bible at least a quarter of an hour a day. So from at least this time on the Vatican has promoted the daily reading of scripture to all Catholics! I am sure there are others on this forum which have even older Bibles (or are really old themselves ) which could add more information.

I think maybe you missed my point. Someone (parents, priests, catechists, or all of the above, I honestly don’t know, but would like to) is still today instructing Catholic young people that they are not allowed to read the Bible outside of Mass. It’s isn’t so much that they are hearing “you’re getting enough Bible at Mass,” it’s that reading of the Bible outside of Mass (and alongside a priest to do the interpretation) is prohibited–or at least strongly discouraged. I’m not in any way equating this to official Catholic teaching, but this is what young people report they are being told.

 

[CalCatholic]

I think maybe you missed my point. Someone (parents, priests, catechists, or all of the above, I honestly don’t know, but would like to) is still today instructing Catholic young people that they are not allowed to read the Bible outside of Mass. It’s isn’t so much that they are hearing “you’re getting enough Bible at Mass,” it’s that reading of the Bible outside of Mass (and alongside a priest to do the interpretation) is prohibited–or at least strongly discouraged. I’m not in any way equating this to official Catholic teaching, but this is what young people report they are being told.

Dave, your missing my point. You say Catholic young people are being told not to read scriptures (and I am not disputing this) but we are talking about some young people in your area who you have come in contact with, this maybe a local problem. Your post makes it sound like that this is happening all over. But I see the opposite in events like World Youth Day, Los Angeles Religious Education Congress youth day, ‘Youcat’ (youth catechism), in my local area scripture study is stressed! Who knows where these kids you talked to heard this, I would be interested to know.

 

[Dave_Noonan]

Dave, your missing my point. You say Catholic young people are being told not to read scriptures (and I am not disputing this) but we are talking about some young people in your area who you have come in contact with, this maybe a local problem. Your post makes it sound like that this is happening all over. But I see the opposite in events like World Youth Day, Los Angeles Religious Education Congress youth day, ‘Youcat’ (youth catechism), in my local area scripture study is stressed! Who knows where these kids you talked to heard this, I would be interested to know.

Since this is at a large public university in California, it’s difficult for me to tell where this is coming from—which is why I’ve posed the question here several times. But in my experience it’s far from just an isolated incident restricted to a couple of students. And these students are generally appreciative of the education in the Bible they receive at the university, are very engaged and interested in the material, but are just left wondering why they can’t get or, in their minds, aren’t allow to get, the same thing in their parish.

Because I’m not Catholic, because this is not a religious setting, and because I’m not their parents, I really don’t feel like it’s my place to tell these students that they are being mis-educated in their faith.

 

[Matt_Guitar_Man]

I was educated in Catholic schools in a Catholic home in outback or regional Aus.
Born 64. 1st communion 72 recieved a childs comprahension level of the gospels as gift from the parish. Bording school 77 religiouse ed every child recieved a copy of the good news bible. 80 (2 years left of school) chose a theological steam text was the jerusalem bible. After leaving school and mixing with all sorts of people out of curiosity investigated the penticostal movement I was astounded by their ignorance of scripture especially the bible as a whole. I am 50 and it doesnt appear much has changed.

 

[bmonk]

Still today I have Catholic students who show up to my classes on the Bible and tell me they are instructed NOT to read the Bible, outside of what they hear in Mass because to do otherwise would lead to personal interpretation. (One student told me that because the Bible is holy, it can only be read out loud during the Mass.) Not all Catholic students think this, but it happens with relative frequency. I was also told by one student–in fact he wrote this at the bottom of his final exam–that he went to twelve years of Catholic school and they never talked about the Bible. I do find this difficult to believe.

I’ve asked on a couple of threads before where exactly these notions come from, but no one has been able to offer an explanation.

You might ask them–it might even help. But I have a couple of suspicions–although little to back them up.

1. Back before Vatican II, reading the Bible was looked on with suspicion by Catholics–after all, look at how those Protestants went astray by reading it without the benefit of the authority of the Church to guide them. Best leave it to the experts–Scripture Scholars and monastics (much as contemplative prayer was reserved for the experts too).
2. They may have heard a response to a criticism that Catholics do not know the Bible, which replied that we get much of the Bible at Mass–the readings, so much else of the Mass’s structure and texts–and misheard it as that’s all that we really need, or should get.
3. Religious Education is often sadly deficient (what do we really expect, when the parents leave it to the parish program, and the parish program only gets about 24 or 30 hours per year? And when the teachers themselves are going on what they learned 10 or 20 years back . . . Oh, and that it’s primarily for the kids, and only for the kids.) and it is hard to cover all that is needed. Even Catholic Schools tend to have only a brief time for religion each day.

As a result, most Catholics tend to carry a lot of mistaken impressions and ideas with them:

We didn’t learn much about the Bible, so it must not be important, or necessary, or it’s too holy for us.

All that’s needed to earn heaven is to be good, go to Sunday Mass, and throw a couple of bucks into the collection.

I actually heard one person say:

I don’t need to go to Why Catholic? because I learned all I needed to know about my faith by first communion.

(I was too astonished to ask if that person learned all that was needed to know about the English language, or math, or science, or relationships, or life itself, by second grade.)

. . . and so on.