What do you think is the biggest obstacle to unity between Catholic Christians and non–Catholic Christians?

[SSTeacher]

Hi Bob,

The trouble with the word “biblically” is that it’s open to the reader’s interpretation.

I was thinking that it might be possible to come up with a definition of the word that is acceptable to all parties. Funk and Wagnalls gives this definition:

Biblical (bib’li–kəl) adj. 1. Pertaining to, like, quoted, or derived from the Bible. 2. In harmony with the Bible. Also bib’li–cal. –Bib’li–cal–ly adv.

Thus you can have Seventh Day Adventists saying that the command to worship on the Sabbath was never rescinded, whereas it became a TRADITION in the very earliest church days to worship on Sunday as that was when Christ rose from the dead.

Good example. By the way, Seventh Day Adventists accuse the Catholic Church of promulgating that “error” and reference Canon 29 of the Synod of Laodicea.

Both parties have the same Bible.

The Catholic Bible is slightly larger than the truncated version used by non–Catholic Western Christians, who largely maintain that the Deuterocanonical books are not “biblical."

So all starting a discussion on “Biblical” would do is open up a whole bunch of personal opinions.

Discussion about what the word actually covers and describes would perhaps highlight the fact that personal interpretation is not inerrant, even though some people continue to suppose that it is.

That’s why we have the Church and the magisterium - to guide the formation of our opinions.

Right. So perhaps you’ll agree that coaxing people into reflecting upon how they form their opinions might help them to get a glimpse of their own assumptions. Know thyself, as Plato suggested.

I think it was GK CHesterton who commented when an Afghan chief was being presented with a Bible as the “secret of England’s greatness” that he could think of few things more puzzling for an Afghan chief to be given a book loaded with Middle Eastern mythology and history in no logical form.

I can now reveal that secret of England’s greatness is great Englishmen.

But then that’s the sort of pompous nonsense governments sometimes go in for. These days of course the Brits aren’t giving out Bibles or boasting about England’s greatness.

We never did boast. The idea that we did came about as a result of rumors spread by people from other nations based upon their personal interpretation of our phraseology, which was possibly sometimes couched in terms a little too subtle for them to comprehend. That’s my interpretation, anyway, based on the fact that I want to believe it to be so.

To understand the Bible to start with we all need guidance.

Hence the plethora of books about the Bible. A very helpful book about the Bible is 30 Days to Understanding the Bible in 15 minutes a Day by Max Anders. Max Anders is a Protestant pastor. In his opening chapter he explains why he wrote the book. He writes:

Many years ago, I decided I was going to master the Bible. I was going to begin with Genesis, read to Revelation, and I wasn’t going to put it down until I understood it. I soon became hopelessly entangled in a jungle of fantastic stories, unpronounceable names, broken plots, unanswered questions, and endless genealogies.

He then goes on to assert:

If you want to understand the Bible, you must first learn how the Bible is put together.

I certainly did - in my atheist days I could read the Gospels and get some sort of logical drift (although I had a couple of years of previous Sunday School under my belt), but if I turned to Leviticus or Numbers, then what the hell was that supposed to mean?

Good point. But who is qualified to teach and explain what challenging sentences found in the Bible actually mean? And at what point does learning how the Bible is put together connect with the teaching of sound doctrine?

Truly, Biblically, Scripturally,
Mick

 

[Bob_Crowley]

Good point. But who is qualified to teach and explain what challenging sentences found in the Bible actually mean? And at what point does learning how the Bible is put together connect with the teaching of sound doctrine?

Truly, Biblically, Scripturally,
Mick


It wasn’t so much the meaning of the word “biblical” I was referring to so much, as the fact that if someone calls themselves a “biblical” Christian for example (and there are plenty who do that), then what they mean to say is their particular interpretation of the Bible is correct.

I’m well aware that the Catholic Bible has the seven Deuterocanonical books, since I’m Catholic, ex-Protestant myself, and have the Catholic Bible. However I will say that when I read the Deutero Canonical books myself, they don’t seem to have quite the same sort of “spiritual” feel as the standard texts. I can’t explain it, but that’s the feeling I get. Whether I was a Protestant for too long I don’t know, but it’s a subtle feeling I get when I’m reading them. Maccabees 1 & 2 are useful history for example (and pretty bloody at that), but there seems to be a lack of prophetic (name removed by moderator)ut into the books.

I agree with your idea that discussion would bring up various interpretations. The modern Protestant heresy of the “Rapture” is based on what appears to be a simple interpretation of one Pauline quote. So who decides what it means? In the end we all have to use our brains even to read the Bible, so obviously there must be some personal interaction with the text.

As an Australian, we sort of felt that the greatness of the English was somewhat overstated. But then we had a lot of Irish to start with.

As to the statement as “But who is qualified to teach and explain what challenging sentences found in the Bible actually mean? And at what point does learning how the Bible is put together connect with the teaching of sound doctrine?”, it’s going to depend on one’s depth of knowledge about the subject. I had the fortune to have a very wise Protestant Pastor when I did become a Christian, and it just happened he ran a bit of a mini-course on the history in th eBible not long after I joined his church. So I learned quite a bit from that. But it didn’t tell me how it was put together.

To be honest, I don’t think we could p(name removed by moderator)oint when the Bible became the Bible. It circulated in the form of OT scrolls, NT papyrus, word of mouth, cross quotes from Church fathers, common sayings and the like for years, before it reached it’s final form. In the end we accept it on authority. Even the Protestants do that.

 

[Brother2]

Peter, the faith versus works debate on here has frustrated me for some time. I think a lot of us talk past each other on this issue and there are some serious misperceptions on both sides.

As a Protestant, I was always taught (and still believe) that we are saved by faith alone–that we can NEVER merit salvation and that it is a free gift of grace. However, I was also taught that (contrary to the mischaracterizations of OSAS I occasionally read on here) if I am saved, if I love the Lord, I WILL obey him, I WILL do good works. Good works, of necessity flow from living in a state of grace, good works flow from the love of the Lord. Good works don’t earn us our salvation but must accompany it.

Thank you brother khutcheson, you are spot on there. So many opinions on this thread and all interesting I may add!

However, having been on this Forum for a few weeks now i get the impression that Roman Catholic Church tends to think they explain the Bible, that the Church Fathers in Tradition should have the last word. Leaning towards infallibility.

I don’t believe that any human being can claim that, or any church organisation, including my own. So how do we know what Scripture means? Best to start with you observations brother khutcheson I think and then read out from there.

The Old Testament was basically God’s Church on earth at the time, God used them to carry out His judgments on people and nations who had committed the ‘unpardonable sin’, whom God knew would never change. That helps to understand the old Testament.

May God bless all here. Michael.

 

[Prodigal_Child]

Is it,

a) Disagreement as to whether salvation is an event or a process?
b) Disagreement about the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception?
c) Disagreement about praying for the dead?
d) Disagreement about the existence of purgatory?
e) Disagreement about how to understand baptism?
f) Disagreement about the doctrine of Transubstantiation?
g) Disagreement about confession of one’s sins being heard by a priest?
h) Disagreement about the perpetual virginity of the Mother of God?
i) Disagreement about the papacy and papal infallibility?
j) Some other doctrine or factor?

Curiously,
Mick

The BIGGEST issue is undoubtedly the authority of the church. Everything else springs from there. You can spend a thousand years fixing those ten issues one at a time, or you can spend 100 years fixing just the authority of the church, and everything else will follow.

 

[Chris_LaRock]

The BIGGEST issue is undoubtedly the authority of the church. Everything else springs from there. You can spend a thousand years fixing those ten issues one at a time, or you can spend 100 years fixing just the authority of the church, and everything else will follow.

It would seem as though people within Catholicism don’t respect the authority of the Church. How do you expect those on the outside to?

We have self proclaimed Catholic leaders in government who willfully violate the teachings of the church, and are yet to be disciplined or excommunicated for it.

 

[Prodigal_Child]

It would seem as though people within Catholicism don’t respect the authority of the Church. How do you expect those on the outside to?

We have self proclaimed Catholic leaders in government who willfully violate the teachings of the church, and are yet to be disciplined or excommunicated for it.

In EVERY religious group, you have a large majority of nominal believers who only talk the talk, who show up for holidays and potlucks and want their kids in whatever programs are important, who believe only what they want to believe and do only what they want to do, AND you have a minority who faithfully walk the walk. Please don’t tell me that you judge every group by its nominal believers!

 

[Brother2]

It would seem as though people within Catholicism don’t respect the authority of the Church. How do you expect those on the outside to?

We have self proclaimed Catholic leaders in government who willfully violate the teachings of the church, and are yet to be disciplined or excommunicated for it.

Yes,but I think he puts them right when they call on him for tea! Nothing like a dose of the promise of hellfire to keep them right…

I have to agreee that the infallibility is the biggest block to ‘unity’, we are right and all you out there are wrong…especially when in many ways they are the ones who are…??

The pope does not hold the keys, the Lord Jesus Christ holds the keys of heaven and hell, neither is the pope or peter the rock on which the church was built, the Lord Jesus Christ is the Rock on which His Church is built!! One mis- translated verse is what the Roman Catholic System is built on…

Now I repeat many times, I mean no harm to Roman Catholics, it is the system…just like when they have a go at my System…one good turn deserves another…

May God bless ALL here. Michael.

 

[dzheremi]

The BIGGEST issue is undoubtedly the authority of the church. Everything else springs from there. You can spend a thousand years fixing those ten issues one at a time, or you can spend 100 years fixing just the authority of the church, and everything else will follow.

What does this mean? How do we “fix” the authority of the Church? And here I thought that the authority within the Church was pretty well fixed on the Pope and the Magisterium! Or do you mean that that’s the problem?

 

[Anna_Scott]

I’ve been thinking of the original question and come to the conclusion that the biggest obstacle to unity is the almost total lack of knowledge of the history of the Church, especially the Church Fathers, among those outside the Church! What say you? bob

Bob:

Several years ago, I started studying the history of Judaism, Christianity, and how the Catholic and Protestant Bibles came into being. I was astonished by the history of Christianity and the beliefs of the Church Fathers.

I didn’t realize how much violence, persecution, and oppression occurred in the name of “Christianity.”

I am a Protestant. I was shocked to find that Martin Luther, called one of the
Great Protestant Reformers, wrote “On the Jews and their Lies.” This is beyond offensive; it is evil anti-Semitic ranting. Hitler even quoted Luther in Mein Kampf. Luther apparently added fuel to the fire that helped Hitler find justification for his crimes against humanity-primarily the Jewish people. But then, the Pope of that time was nick-named Hitler’s Pope. So, I guess we all have to acknowledge serious offenses of the past, committed by both religions.

I quickly realized the importance of studying our history, whether we are Protestants or Catholics. We all need to know the origin of the beliefs we hold. I think study and conversation venues, such as this Forum, can help bridge the gap between Protestants and Catholics.

 

[Prodigal_Child]

What does this mean? How do we “fix” the authority of the Church? And here I thought that the authority within the Church was pretty well fixed on the Pope and the Magisterium! Or do you mean that that’s the problem?

I worded this badly. I don’t mean you fix the authority of the church. I mean that you fix the problem of non-Catholics with the authority of the church.

 

[Anna_Scott]

I’ve been thinking of the original question and come to the conclusion that the biggest obstacle to unity is the almost total lack of knowledge of the history of the Church, especially the Church Fathers, among those outside the Church! What say you? bob

Bob:

I wanted to add something regarding my reply to you on June 2nd. I have become very good friends with a Jewish couple (met them 5 years ago.) They are retired and are in their 80’s. Their families immigrated to the U.S. before the Holocaust. I will not give their names. The wife told me a few months ago, that her husband has been sending checks to a group of Catholic Nuns for years. I was rather startled.

She said many years ago, her husband learned that this group of Nuns had helped Jews escape during the Holocaust. The Nuns ended up in the U.S. So, for all these years, this Jewish man has been sending checks to help support these Catholic Nuns. His wife said there are only a few Nuns still living. Most of the Nuns have passed away. He stills sends the checks.

I think we can all learn something from this Jewish couple, whether we are Protestant or Catholic.

 

[Disciple96]

Bob:

But then, the Pope of that time was nick-named Hitler’s Pope. So, I guess we all have to acknowledge serious offenses of the past, committed by both religions.

I quickly realized the importance of studying our history, whether we are Protestants or Catholics. We all need to know the origin of the beliefs we hold.

Speaking of the importance of studying our history, might I suggest that the myth of “Hitler’s Pope” is exactly that, a myth. There are those who call Pope Pius XII by that exceedingly offensive and undeserved name. But that is not history. That’s anti-catholic bigotry. (Not saying that it’s bigotry on your part, but on the part of those who started this vicious fiction.)

If you want to learn more about it, here are some links. At the very least, please research it some more before making such a slanderous statement.

catholicleague.org/pius.php
piusxiipope.info/
users.binary.net/polycarp/piusxii.html

 

[Anna_Scott]

Speaking of the importance of studying our history, might I suggest that the myth of “Hitler’s Pope” is exactly that, a myth. There are those who call Pope Pius XII by that exceedingly offensive and undeserved name. But that is not history. That’s anti-catholic bigotry. (Not saying that it’s bigotry on your part, but on the part of those who started this vicious fiction.)

If you want to learn more about it, here are some links. At the very least, please research it some more before making such a slanderous statement.

catholicleague.org/pius.php
piusxiipope.info/
users.binary.net/polycarp/piusxii.html

Disciple96:
I give to you and anyone else who was offended by my post, my most sincere apology. I was simply mentioning some things I found in researching the history of Judaism and Christianity.

I agree that to give any person such a nickname, as “Hitler’s Pope,” is indeed bigotry. Until I started to study history, I did not know that such a nickname existed. I have never heard it spoken in a Protestant Church. I did not mean to be offensive to the Catholic faith. I will do some research on Pope Pius XII, as you suggested.

As for Martin Luther, I have read “The Jews and their Lies,” at least as much of it as I could take. I stand behind my opinion of that writing. If anyone is offended by my opinion of Luther’s writing, I urge you to look this up on the Internet and judge for yourself.

Again, I am very sorry to have offended you.

 

[Anna_Scott]

Speaking of the importance of studying our history, might I suggest that the myth of “Hitler’s Pope” is exactly that, a myth. There are those who call Pope Pius XII by that exceedingly offensive and undeserved name. But that is not history. That’s anti-catholic bigotry. (Not saying that it’s bigotry on your part, but on the part of those who started this vicious fiction.)

If you want to learn more about it, here are some links. At the very least, please research it some more before making such a slanderous statement.

catholicleague.org/pius.php
piusxiipope.info/
users.binary.net/polycarp/piusxii.html

Disciple96:

The following is a cut-and-paste of my reply-post #499- to Bob Mckissik:

"I wanted to add something regarding my reply to you on June 2nd. I have become very good friends with a Jewish couple (met them 5 years ago.) They are retired and are in their 80’s. Their families immigrated to the U.S. before the Holocaust. I will not give their names. The wife told me a few months ago, that her husband has been sending checks to a group of Catholic Nuns for years. I was rather startled.

She said many years ago, her husband learned that this group of Nuns had helped Jews escape during the Holocaust. The Nuns ended up in the U.S. So, for all these years, this Jewish man has been sending checks to help support these Catholic Nuns. His wife said there are only a few Nuns still living. Most of the Nuns have passed away. He stills sends the checks.

I think we can all learn something from this Jewish couple, whether we are Protestant or Catholic."

 

[Disciple96]

Disciple96:

The following is a cut-and-paste of my reply-post #499- to Bob Mckissik:

"I wanted to add something regarding my reply to you on June 2nd. I have become very good friends with a Jewish couple (met them 5 years ago.) They are retired and are in their 80’s. Their families immigrated to the U.S. before the Holocaust. I will not give their names. The wife told me a few months ago, that her husband has been sending checks to a group of Catholic Nuns for years. I was rather startled.

She said many years ago, her husband learned that this group of Nuns had helped Jews escape during the Holocaust. The Nuns ended up in the U.S. So, for all these years, this Jewish man has been sending checks to help support these Catholic Nuns. His wife said there are only a few Nuns still living. Most of the Nuns have passed away. He stills sends the checks.

I think we can all learn something from this Jewish couple, whether we are Protestant or Catholic."

I did read that. I was responding to calling Pope Pius XII “Hitler’s Pope” which is a fiction, a slander and incredibly offensive.

 

[Anna_Scott]

I did read that. I was responding to calling Pope Pius XII “Hitler’s Pope” which is a fiction, a slander and incredibly offensive.

Disciple96:

Did you read my apology in my post #501?

I think what just happened between the two of us, demonstrates the need for an open Forum, such as this. It can really help us to understand each other and what is offensive to one another. Sometimes we just don’t know.

 

[Disciple96]

Disciple96:

Did you read my apology in my post #501?

I think what just happened between the two of us, demonstrates the need for an open Forum, such as this. It can really help us to understand each other and what is offensive to one another. Sometimes we just don’t know.

I just now saw that post and read it. Apology accepted. But it’s the Vicar of Christ on earth who people (other people, lots of other people) slander with those horrible words, the Pope who did what he could do when faced with a terrible situation.

I figured you just hadn’t read a lot about it and were referring to something you’d seen or heard. There’s a lot of that out there and I wanted to offer a correction because a lot of people read these posts, you know. Even after they’re archived, folks will be pullling them up when they Google topics for a long time to come.

The atrocities of Hitler leading up to WWII caught everyone off guard, even people within Germany. No one imagined that he would go so far or be so evil. It was something so outrageous and unbelievable, no one thought it could be true. When other countries realized what was happening, a lot had happened already. Perhaps everybody could have done more. Do we speak of, then, “Hitler’s U.S.”? “Hitler’s Britain”? No, we don’t. Because it would be a lie. And that’s what calling Pope Pius XII “Hitler’s Pope” is too. A lie.

 

[ferdie]

Speaking of the importance of studying our history, might I suggest that the myth of “Hitler’s Pope” is exactly that, a myth. There are those who call Pope Pius XII by that exceedingly offensive and undeserved name. But that is not history. That’s anti-catholic bigotry. (Not saying that it’s bigotry on your part, but on the part of those who started this vicious fiction.)

If you want to learn more about it, here are some links. At the very least, please research it some more before making such a slanderous statement.

catholicleague.org/pius.php
piusxiipope.info/
users.binary.net/polycarp/piusxii.html

Anne:
After reading “The Myth of Hitler’s Pope”, read “Icon of Evil: Hitler’s Mufti and the Rise of Radical Islam”. Same author, David Dalin a Jewish Writer.
http://books.google.com/books?id=_-IbsuxSQxcC&pg=PP1&dq=inauthor:David+inauthor:G+inauthor:Dalin

 

[Anna_Scott]

I just now saw that post and read it. Apology accepted. But it’s the Vicar of Christ on earth who people (other people, lots of other people) slander with those horrible words, the Pope who did what he could do when faced with a terrible situation.

I figured you just hadn’t read a lot about it and were referring to something you’d seen or heard. There’s a lot of that out there and I wanted to offer a correction because a lot of people read these posts, you know. Even after they’re archived, folks will be pullling them up when they Google topics for a long time to come.

The atrocities of Hitler leading up to WWII caught everyone off guard, even people within Germany. No one imagined that he would go so far or be so evil. It was something so outrageous and unbelievable, no one thought it could be true. When other countries realized what was happening, a lot had happened already. Perhaps everybody could have done more. Do we speak of, then, “Hitler’s U.S.”? “Hitler’s Britain”? No, we don’t. Because it would be a lie. And that’s what calling Pope Pius XII “Hitler’s Pope” is too. A lie.

I am so relieved that you accepted my apology. What you said here is true, and I appreciate hearing your perspective on this. You are right, we don’t hear “Hitler’s U.S.” or “Hitler’s Britain.”

 

[Anna_Scott]

Anne:
After reading “The Myth of Hitler’s Pope”, read “Icon of Evil: Hitler’s Mufti and the Rise of Radical Islam”. Same author, David Dalin a Jewish Writer.
http://books.google.com/books?id=_-IbsuxSQxcC&pg=PP1&dq=inauthor:David+inauthor:G+inauthor:Dalin

Ferdie:

Thank you for the reading suggestions. I will add them to my list.