Words?

  • Thread starter Thread starter StephenL
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

StephenL

Guest
Do we Catholics take thewords of The Bible literally all time? If not why not?
Thanks and
God Bless!
 
No. Not all passages are meant to be taken literally. Some Biblical passages are poetic. Others are apocalyptic. Both of those use imagery to convey meaning separate from the literal meaning of the words.
 
StephenL said:
Do we Catholics take thewords of The Bible literally all time? If not why not?
Thanks and
God Bless!
Click to expand...
Catholics interpret the Bible in a “literal” sense, while many fundamentalists, Evangelicals, and others interpret the Bible in a literalist sense.

The “literal” meaning of a passage of Scripture is the meaning that the author of that passage of Scripture intended to convey. The “literalist” interpretation of a passage of Scripture is: “that’s what it says, that’s what it means.”

Let me give you an example to illustrate the difference. If you were to read a passage in a book that said it was “raining cats and dogs outside”, how would you interpret that? As Americans, in the 21st Century, you would know that the author was intending to convey the idea that it was raining pretty doggone hard outside. That would be the “literal” interpretation…the interpretation the author intended to convey. On the other hand, what if you made a “literalist” interpretation of the phrase, “it’s raining cats and dogs”?

The “literalist” interpretation would be that, were you to walk outside, you would actually see cats and dogs falling from the sky like rain. No taking into account the popularly accepted meaning of this phrase. No taking into account the author’s intentions. The words say it was raining cats and dogs, so, by golly, it was raining cats and dogs! That is the literalist, or fundamentalist, way of interpretation.

If someone 2000 years in the future picked up that same book and read, “It was raining cats and dogs outside,” in order to properly understand that passage in the book, they would need a “literal” interpretation, not a “literalist” interpretation. Now, think about that in the context of interpreting the Bible 2000-3000 years after it was written.
 
StephenL said:
Do we Catholics take thewords of The Bible literally all time? If not why not?
Thanks and
God Bless!
Click to expand...
The senses of Scripture

CCC115 According to an ancient tradition, one can distinguish between two senses of Scripture: the literal and the spiritual, the latter being subdivided into the allegorical, moral and anagogical senses. The profound concordance of the four senses guarantees all its richness to the living reading of Scripture in the Church.

CCC 116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed by the words of Scripture and discovered by exegesis, following the rules of sound interpretation: “All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal.”

CCC 117 The spiritual sense. Thanks to the unity of God’s plan, not only the text of Scripture but also the realities and events about which it speaks can be signs.
  1. The allegorical sense. We can acquire a more profound understanding of events by recognizing their significance in Christ; thus the crossing of the Red Sea is a sign or type of Christ’s victory and also of Christian Baptism.
  2. The moral sense. The events reported in Scripture ought to lead us to act justly. As St. Paul says, they were written “for our instruction”.
  3. The anagogical sense (Greek: anagoge, “leading”). We can view realities and events in terms of their eternal significance, leading us toward our true homeland: thus the Church on earth is a sign of the heavenly Jerusalem.
CCC 118 A medieval couplet summarizes the significance of the four senses:

The Letter speaks of deeds; Allegory to faith;

The Moral how to act; Anagogy our destiny.

CCC 119 “It is the task of exegetes to work, according to these rules, towards a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture in order that their research may help the Church to form a firmer judgment. For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God.”
But I would not believe in the Gospel, had not the authority of the Catholic Church already moved me.
 
Nobody thinks that the parables Jesus told were about actual people. He would start out, “There was a man…” but not even the most hardcore Bible-thumpin’ protestant thinks this guy was real.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top