Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Campion
CRI ... essentially sets themselves up as a Protestant magisterium, and anoints themselves the defenders of something they call "the historic Christian faith" (Who decides what that is? CRI, of course!).

But, according to their own doctrine, there should be no need for them to exist. If the Bible is perfectly sufficient, possesses final authority, and requires no authoritative human interpreter, then CRI's own doctrine precludes CRI's need to exist as much as it precludes the Pope's.

That's like saying that since the Roman Church is the only authoritative interpreter of Scripture and Tradition there should be no need for something like "Catholic Answers". CRI isn't any more a "magesterium" than "Catholic Answers" is.

In turn, I have a simple question for you. After the Church comes up with some purportedly infallible interpretation, who then interprets that infallible interpretation for you?

Cordially,

27 posted on 02/07/2006 8:26:26 AM PST by Diamond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: Diamond
That's like saying that since the Roman Church is the only authoritative interpreter of Scripture and Tradition there should be no need for something like "Catholic Answers". CRI isn't any more a "magesterium" than "Catholic Answers" is.

Your comparison doesn't hold water at all. Catholic Answers is obedient to the magisterium in Rome. To whom is CRI obedient, and why do they have any authority? To Scripture? To whose interpretation of Scripture? CRI's?

Moreover, CRI runs around criticizing people who are allegedly "in the Church" (by their definition). CA leaves that to the people who have the actual authority to do that sort of thing. The two organizations aren't equivalent.

After the Church comes up with some purportedly infallible interpretation, who then interprets that infallible interpretation for you?

This is the James White/William Webster "you gotta do private interpretation eventually" question.

It misses the point. The point is not to get everything perfect between my ears, the point is what interpretation governs the Church. So if there's serious disagreement about what an infallible pronouncement means, the bishops (or whoever is having the disagreement) go back to the infallible pronouncer and ask for a clarification.

32 posted on 02/07/2006 8:39:18 AM PST by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: Diamond

That is a false analogy. First, it is Protestantism that asserts that the Bible alone is sufficient, and that, as a consequence, the Spirit will guide all individuals to a knowledge of a single set of truths. Catholics do not say that, asserting that both Sacred Tradition and the magisterial authority are the other two legs, along with Scripture, upon which Truth stands. Second, the need for Catholic Answers DOES exist when we live in a world with a multiplicity of erroneous Biblical assertions due to the mistaken notion of Sola Scriptura. Catholics are not responsible for the non-Catholic surroundings they find themselves in, save only to attempt to correct them. Hence the need for CA.


39 posted on 02/07/2006 8:56:58 AM PST by magisterium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: Diamond
After the Church comes up with some purportedly infallible interpretation, who then interprets that infallible interpretation for you?

LOL...good question...but it's the Church itself again! Benedict comes out with a dogma, I can't believe the dogma hosoever I want to, I must believe it *in the sense that the Church intended it.* Final interpretation *always* rests with the Church, with the college of bishops and the occupant of the See of Peter at its head.

46 posted on 02/07/2006 9:25:49 AM PST by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson