POPE HIT THE MARK: AT ROOT OF CATHOLIC PROBLEMS IS LACK OF BIBLICAL SPIRITUALITY

SpiritDaily.com ^ | 10-05 | Spirit Daily

[Salvation]

POPE HIT THE MARK: AT ROOT OF CATHOLIC PROBLEMS IS LACK OF BIBLICAL SPIRITUALITY

He could not have hit it more squarely on the head. Pope Benedict XVI, toiling quietly, with little of the visibility enjoyed by his predecessor, nonetheless was giving hints that he is doing what he always has, what he is used to doing, what he did for a quarter of a century as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger: working behind the scenes to hold the world's most important institution together, and he is starting where it must start, where it needs to start, where so many of the problems reside: with the Bible.

A few weeks ago, in a major pronouncement (albeit one underreported in by the Christian media), he said, "Assiduous reading of sacred Scripture accompanied by prayer makes that intimate dialogue possible in which, through reading, one hears God speaking, and through prayer, one responds with a confident opening of the heart. If this practice is promoted with efficacy, I am convinced that it will produce a new spiritual springtime in the Church" [our italics].

Above all, he was saying, we must remember Scripture.

Added the Pope, in speaking about Europe, "many Christian things occur, but there is also a great fatigue, and we are so concerned with structural questions that the zest and the joy of faith are missing."

As he prepared for Youth Day last August, Benedict XVI loudly rejected the idea of Christianity as a religion of rules and prohibitions and said he hoped to use his trip to spur "a wave of new faith" -- the type of faith that brings results, displays miracles, and springs forth from the Bible."

Let us add that the root of crisis in the Church is how little the Bible is heeded and how much worldliness has infiltrated. Too often, we compromise with society and its trends (its politics, its fashions) because we want to be "with it." We also confuse the word "religious" with "spiritual."

Religion is supposed to lead to spirituality. Frequently, it does not. It is the best way to obtain spirituality -- the narrowest gate -- but too often it leads only leads to religiosity (and a reverence for the codes of man instead of those of God). 

The remedy is the book it is all based on. The Church is in desperate need of biblical spirituality. Biblical spirituality is living a life modeled after those set forth as historical examples. It is feeling the grace that flows from the pages. We have plenty of theology. We have enough canon laws. What we need now is familiarity with that remarkable book and the knowing that it is of true supernatural origin.

Reading the Bible on a regular basis allows us to feel the actual move of the Holy Spirit -- to reach God through our hearts instead of through our self-important thoughts.

The Pope's words mimic those of saints like Therese the Little Flower -- who once said that "above all it's the Gospels that occupy my mind when I'm at prayer; my poor soul has so many needs, and yet this is the one thing needful. I'm always finding fresh lights there, hidden and enthralling meanings."

What happened at our seminaries? The Bible was pushed away as ancient literature (and even mythology) and Catholics have now seen the result. Show us a skeptic (one who does not believe in healing or exorcism or prophecy), and we'll show you someone who does not read Scripture.

We have become too secularized and too busy reading complex theology -- the ideas of others about the Bible, or about the ideas of previous theologians about the Bible -- instead of the Bible itself. We formulate complex ideas to impress others.

In other words, we get so wrapped up in the words of man that we forget the Word of God -- which encourages us to exercise spiritual gifts and to believe in the simple movement of Him everywhere (including in current events). When we read Scripture, we understand more about current events than if we read the newspaper.

A Church that is not prophetic, that is not Bible-based, is not a Christian one. It is the very foundation for our precious sacraments!

Call it "aridity" : there is a great spiritual vacancy in the intellectualized Western Church and from the vacancy has erupted scandal.

Unlike other written works, the Bible is alive and of endless fascination for those who come to know its actual power. It informs every day. It relates to different things at different times. It pertains to every circumstance. As Saint Therese said, it has a hidden nature that can be enthralling.

And it tells us what Christians are supposed to do: pray with a living faith, cast out demons, heal, spread the Word, love, give. During the disaster of Katrina the worldly institutions fell while the spiritual ones -- the churches, the charities -- picked up the pieces.

It is in the Bible that we find the richness of wisdom. It is in the Bible that we feel the Holy Spirit.

God will speak to you there.

Need an answer? Remarkably and often miraculously, it's in the testaments. 

[resources: the Catholic Bible]

[todd1]

The Catechism is a great tool to use while Studying the Bible.

[Rhadaghast]

At what point will the Magistarium change the tradition of the church if Scripture contradicts it? Will it ever admit it was completely in error?

Do you know you can still buy indulgences? What part of scripture is that from? If the pope speak excathedre and it is not supported by scripture what then?

The tradition of man is warned against in scripture. That includes the teachings of "A" "The" church.

I want to hope that this pope is leading people to be lead of the Holy Spirit, but you must understand his meaning of these words. Holy Spirit in the RCC cannot contradict the RCC. Therefore B16 cannot be referring to the third person of the God head, B16 out ranks Him.

[jo kus]

The difference between literal history and history

I believe the Church uses the term "pre-history" when refering to the first 11 Chapters of Genesis. Probably based on much of what you said - although some of the writers didn't actually witness what they wrote about. (Like Luke or Moses) I have read a good case for Genesis being small sections of writings from the actual "Patriarchs" preceding Abram that were later compiled into one book, Genesis. Who can say. The point is that God desires a particular message to be brought out in the Scriptures, and it is up to the Church to teach it formally, as well as the individual to practice some sort of Scriptural spirituality to take meaning from these writings in his own walk with Christ. (which presumes one not take a meaning that is the opposite of the Church) I don't see the point of arguing about whether Jonah was a real historical account or not. Perhaps for Protestants who deny the existence of a teaching Church, it is a problem and they thus defend its literalness against all evidence. But for a Catholic, we can read Scripture spiritually as well as literally. We realize that God can speak through various literary genres, to include parables or legendary stories.

Regards

[todd1]

I just started a 24 week time line based Catholic Bible Study last night. Usually I would go to a Pentecostal Bible study but I have now found a new bible study home. It was great to be able to fellowship with other Catholics who believe in the Sacraments, and pray the Rosary. I enjoyed my old bible study but it would make me upset when people would tell me that I wasn't saved and my baptism was invalid.

[jo kus]

At what point will the Magistarium change the tradition of the church if Scripture contradicts it? Will it ever admit it was completely in error?

The Tradition of the Church and the Scripture come from the same source, God. Thus, they CANNOT contradict. If they appear to in your eyes, it is because you are misinterpreting something. I don't know what you have in mind here, but I have argued every conceivable Protestant argument, and have not found any case with merit yet.

Do you know you can still buy indulgences? What part of scripture is that from?

Without detailing your misunderstanding of indulgences, the Church has the authority to bind and loosen in Matthew's Gospel, Chapter 16 and 18. The Church has ALWAYS understood those verses as the ability to make such decisions for the sake of the entire Church. The concept of indulgences are Scriptural, as Martin Luther himself wrote before he left the Church.

The tradition of man is warned against in scripture

You are confusing terms. "Tradition of men", as Christ puts it, means something that keeps men from God. It is NOT a Tradition that is made up by man! Christ specifically refers to Korban, the practice of avoiding one's duty to their parents - a practice that kept a person from God so that he could keep access to his money. A tradition like the rosary, for example, does NOT keep a person from God, but focuses one's attention on Christ - this can hardly be considered a "tradition of men" in the sense Christ meant. A good example of "tradition of men" is Sola Fide. It is an invention of men (and not found in Scripture) that tends to deny the utility of love. This keeps man from God, since God is love.

B16 cannot be referring to the third person of the God head, B16 out ranks Him.

Utterly ridiculous. Which Pope EVER said he outranked God? Or even insinuated it? Please, brother.

Regards

[Alex Murphy]

Pope Discovers Principle of Sola Scriptura!

I was going to say that, but you beat me to it!

Don't tell the guy who posted the The Vanity of Their Minds: Sola Scriptura thread!

[HarleyD]

It needs to be emphasized. Thanks for posting.

[diamond6]

I'm Catholic and part of a women's Bible Study.

I love it!

[Kolokotronis]

"Do you know if it is for information and knowledge, for spirituality primarily, or a combination of both? I have seen versions of all three. Do they focus on a book, or a theme?"

I think the focus always has to be on the advancement of spirituality but clearly gaining knowledge is an important component of any Bible Study. Usually, whether it is a period with a specific book or a specific theme, the writings and reflections of the Fathers or of a recognized, holy and perhaps modern spiritual father are read in conjunction with the Bible lest there be any question about whether or not what is being taught is based in the Holy Tradition of The Church or merely the speculations of the church of Fr. K, for example.

[Gamecock]

Hehehe


You beat me to it.....

[HarleyD]

"The story of Jonah, for example, CAN be taken as a parable or a story. It may or may not be literally true. However, the truth that God meant to say THROUGH the story is inerrant."

I don't see this as an over-reaction by a newsman but as a simple positional statement from the Catholic Church. Your statement above is indicative of that position.

With all due respect I think this is where Catholics get themselves into trouble and it relegates the scriptures down to nothing more than stories. Consequently how do you know the virgin birth of Mary isn't a story? Or how about Abraham? Based upon traditions? Who's to choose what is a story and what isn't? The Church?

There are prophesies in scripture that are not clear. Certainly there have been various scriptural interpretations for what God is telling us for centuries. But I have to accept the Bible as God's word or reject it entirely. It doesn't contain stories or myths. It is the history of God's elect as put together by God-not a bunch of church fathers trying to pick and choose.

I mean this kindly. Catholics are quick to accept Mary appearing on a cheese sandwich, in a tunnel on a New Jersey expressway, or in a corn field in Spain but they cannot reconcile themselves to God's divine intervention of creating His written word. Our Lord Jesus referred to some of the more controversial events in scripture as fact; Noah, Daniel, and, (yes) Jonah. Yet we have people saying Jonah was "just a story" but believe Mary appeared on a cheese sandwich.

For some of the other criticism that has appeared the pot shots are unwarranted. If I was a Catholic I would be outraged that such a thing would come from the Vatican, not Harley. The early church fathers never felt these were "stories" but live events and believed in the inerrant of God's word. The took pains to separate the "inspired" word from the rest of the documents. I wonder what Augustine or Jerome would say to some of the "brilliant" people in the Vatican these days?

All their work is now being discarded and undermined not only by the Catholics but a great many churches. For what reason-because the "theory" of E-V-O-L-U-T-I-O-N isn't spelled out? It doesn't sound "scientifically" accurate. Rubbish!! What makes us so smart? But sometimes, sadly, it is much more important to just go along with the crowd than to be true to God. In one of our previous discussions I said there were lines in the sand for me. This is one of them.

God's word is holy, righteous and just. Faith comes from hearing and hearing by the word of God. To minimize it important is to minimize His Son because Christ is "the Word". We just do not understand what we have.

[Romish_Papist]

No, Sola Scriptura is not what he is getting at, nor is Sola Scriptura to be found in the Bible. ;)

[Romish_Papist]

Very well said.

[jo kus]

I agree. You don't find too many Bible studies that include the interpretations of the Fathers. That is why I enjoy the Navarre Bible series. Are you aware of any other Bible study books or notes that detail the Father's interpretations of Scriptures? I know Aquinas wrote one for the Gospels (some day, I'll buy it! It is about $100), but I am not familiar with any that cover particular books of the Scripture, like Romans. The other option is much more difficult, to sort through all of the Fathers who happen to write something about a book. Anyway, the Fathers are an excellent place to go for Bible studies - and I enjoy using their quotes when I am teaching - this gives the people a sense of history and unity with those people from long time ago (plus, they know it is not my theology, but the Church's theology).

Brother in Christ

[JohnRoss]

Like hell.

[Aristotle721]

"Catholics, are you currently in a Bible Study group?"

God willing, I will lead a unique Bible Study group soon - a Gregorian chant schola.

Practically all of the texts of the Gregorian chants (Introit, Gradual, Alleluia/Tract, Offertory, Communion) are taken directly from Scripture.

Granted, we will not study very much of the Bible during our study sessions (a.k.a. rehearsals), but those texts will be ingrained deeply into the consciousness of the singers.

Please pray for the success of this effort.

[Kolokotronis]

"Are you aware of any other Bible study books or notes that detail the Father's interpretations of Scriptures? "

Off hand, no. Much is available on line, however and the Fathers often wrote sermons about specific passages or books of the Bible. The source we use is a complete set of the writings of the Fathers we have in the Church library. It takes up 2-3 large shelves and is quite expensive, but very well indexed and cross referenced.

[Rytwyng]

The Catholic Church is not going to become Protestant.

Nobody expects or wants that.

A call for more biblical literacy is not equal to the Pope validating Protestantism's sola scriptura error.

Sola Scriptura was intended as a corrective measure against medieval Catholic abuses. As I noted above, it wasn't intended to eliminated all non-scriptural practices and traditions, only those that CONTRADICT scripture.

The argument that's beginning in the Protestant world right now, is -- since the medieval abuses are long in the past, maybe it's time to stop protesting? There are, of course, 2 sides to the argument and I see merit on both. But 5 years ago, I would never have even DREAMED about going back to Rome; now, the idea is at least discussable.

[Campion]

THE hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true.

The Catholic bishops of England, Wales and Scotland are

It's nice of them to identify "the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church" with "the Catholic bishops of England, Wales, and Scotland", isn't it? I guess the rest of the world just doesn't count.

Is it okay with the UK Times if I identify "the hierarchy of the worldwide Anglican Communion" with "Vicky Gene Robinson, the openly homosexual Episcopalian bishop of New Hampshire"?

By the way, I might point out that not only are "the Catholic bishops of England, Wales, and Scotland" not identical to "the Roman Catholic hierarchy", but the Pope pulls rank over both groups.

[Campion]

Do you know you can still buy indulgences?

Flatly banned by the Council of Trent over 500 years ago. Get with the times.