WHY THE MAGISTERIUM MAKES SENSE TO ME

I am married to a Korean national. I mention this not just because it is cool (and it is cool) but I’ve learned quite a few things about my Faith from being close to someone of a very different culture.

Because of my wife’s nationality I know quite a few Koreans by association. They come from education backgrounds that make your humble scribe feel quite inferior, or at least I’d feel that way if they weren’t so humble about it. And one of the core components of this education is learning the English language.

To me they do indeed speak English well. Some can even speak without the hint of a Korean accent. I know firsthand how difficult this is given my own extremely difficult time learning Korean.

However despite their best efforts I have come to notice that no matter how fluent they were certain ways they would speak seemed…well..awkward. For example, almost to a man, when one of my wife’s friends say something like they were sick yesterday they would say “My condition was not good.” This was true regardless of how well any of them spoke English. I pointed it out to my wife and she noted that it was more or less a direct translation of the Korean expression for having been sick in the past. Despite the quality of their English, they were still speaking Korean using English words.

Another time my wife was telling me about her college days and describing a particular student and his relationship to the students in her freshman group. There literally is no English word for the particular position that this person held. It is something of a cross between a mentor, a Resident Assistant, and a full blown teacher. The attempt of my wife to explain this concept actually took a bit of time, and my above description is my best attempt to explain this position.

What I’m trying to say is that one’s culture has a powerful effect on one’s exposure to concepts as well as how one is going to express themselves. The ability to communicate with one another is heavily dependent on the concepts being discussed and the modes of expression that the communicants share. The greater the disparity in either, the more communication it takes to attempt to bridge the gap.

At one point this started me thinking about the Bible. The books are written a long time ago by a culture with wildly different concepts and modes of expression than we have in modern English. And the New Testament was a translation of one culture into another, from the Jewish culture and language (Aramaic) to the Common Greek. Not only are these cultures different from ours (the Jewish and the Greek) but both cultures have grown and developed over time.

Just to give one example is the notion of “brother” in Jewish culture. The original Aramaic that Jesus and His followers spoke had no concept of “cousin.” To describe the relationship of one cousin to another they would say something like, “He is the son of my father’s brother.” Given how wordy this is they would simplify it to “he is my brother.”

Now someone might object to this by pointing out that the Common Greek had a word for cousin and if the authors wanted to say “cousin” they would have. But to me this doesn’t fly for two reasons. First, that knowledge of a language does not bestow the modes of expression the language uses. As in my first example, the Korean expressing that they were sick still use the Korean wording of the concept rendered into English. Second, given that Jesus and his people used Aramaic to communicate, it is actually more accurate to have a word for word translation, complete with ambiguity, rather than to impose a meaning on the words by trying to translate the wording into something more friendly to the new language.

These things led me to realize that if the Body of Christ has to go at Faith with a Bible Alone approach we are doomed. The time, culture and language separations are a huge obstacle to getting at the actual meaning of the texts, with all the nuance and subtlety that comes with theological understanding and the development of those concepts. This is readily apparent with our Protestant brethren, who continue to split into numerous sects and sects within sects.

The Bible is a product of the times and cultures that produced it. Despite the fact that it is the inerrant Word of God it still uses human culture and language to communicate to us. And because of the limits of both human language and cultural concepts, the existence of the Magisterium and Sacred Tradition simply make sense.

Our Lord provided us with an authoritative body that can express the Truths of Revelation over time and cultures without error. A body that has the authority to interpret the Sacred Texts and present them to all cultures and times. A body that lives and breathes with the cultures in time but stands above them. That such a body, the Magisterim, exists is not only to my mind beneficial, but necessary for preserving the Word of God and revealing the Word to us using the concepts and modes of communication we use.

My exposure to a foreign culture as different as the Korean one only illustrates the need for the Sacred Tradition, and the need for the authority of the Magisterium to guarantee the transmission of that Tradition. There is more to the Truth of the Word than our cultures and languages can transmit. The Magisterium exists to teach us in the ways we communicate today, and will exist to teach the cultures of the future. Through the Magisterium we overcome the Tower of Babel now and in the future.

>>While (to my knowledge) no one has ever stated that a person must honor Mary in order to gain salvation,<<

'We pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory. Hence, if anyone, which God forbid, should dare wilfully to deny or call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has completely fallen from the divine and Catholic faith….It is forbidden to any man to change this, Our declaration, pronouncement, and definition or, by rash attempt, to oppose and counter it. If any man should presume to make such an attempt, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul' (Munificentissimus Deus [A.D. 1950], 44-45, 47; taken from Selected Documents of Pope Pius XII [Washington: National Catholic Welfare Conference])

If you have received Christ as your Savior, you have the Holy Spirit dwelling in your body and the Spirit of God will reveal truth to you.

Then I guess you haven't received Christ as your savior, because there's a whole bunch of people who make the same claim that disagree with your doctrines.

Either that or the "revelation" you claim is a lot less comprehensive than you are willing to admit.

Well, I guess you could be turning away from what the Spirit is revealing to you for the sake of your doctrines, but beside these there are no other choices that square with observable fact.

Who do you think the politicians model their legislative motivations from?

“Make new rules and declarations. It’s our job!” is their unspoken motto it seems.

For soul saving and godly living, the scriptures are more than adequate. The vanity of needing ‘more facts’ to proclaim is certainly nothing new. Pride. That is just what gives way to new ‘prophets’ like Mowhamhead and Joe Smith.

I honestly don't know anyone who sees Mary as a goddess -- Catholics simply ask Mary to pray to God for them, much like many people on Free Republic ask others here to pray for them also. That "worship" accusation that some people make is simply a false claim.

When faithful Catholics kneel to pray (to God), they sometimes use artistic statues or icons of Mary or other saints to draw their mind and attention to the person depicted in the artistic representation who they are asking to also pray for them or with them to God. They are not bowing down to worship anyone but God. You are misinterpreting what is going on.

lol! Well pass me a kleenex. I had no idea that you knew so much about “my doctrines” compared to “a whole bunch of people doctines”. You see, papertyger, it doesn’t matter what you think, or I think, or anyone thinks. It’s what God SAYS that matters. Observable fact is not what God is looking at. It’s the heart. Fortunately for me, what you “observe” is irrelevant. My concern is standing before Him, an unashamed workman, who is approved unto Him. Because I studied His Word rightly divided. And preached the gospel of the grace of God and God’s reconciliation to man by the finished work of Christ. BTW: are you saved? Or are you just attributing the “truth” you believe to a religious institution that told you what God’s truth is?

Then it's back to the 5 senses for gratification. Which is exactly what the RCC does. Feeds the 5 senses

EXACTLY!! Everything about them is worldly because The Vatican/RCC is worldly. And they use their own understanding (sense) which they are told specifically not to do because God's way are higher. They use their own understanding of what a mother is. But who does Jesus consider His mother and brother - those who Hear His Word and Obeys It. They cannot 'get' that because they are leaning on their sense/earthly knowledge - willful disobedience. They get that deception from man and they believe man and not God. Who wants to be bothered with that type - when after they have been given The Truth and they rejected it over and over.

I left that cult with all it's pompous attitude - man before God. You won't find humility there but pride. What satan's kingdom is built on.

So, when it says there that if a Catholic willfully goes against a dogmatic teaching of the Church, they thereby separate themselves from the Catholic Church, you somehow interpret that to mean that the Catholic Church is judging that person to be denied salvation by God?

That is NOT what it says. In fact, the Catholic Church has never presumed to do God's job of judgment on ANYONE -- not even Judas Iscariot.

The Catholic Church teaches that judgment and salvation are solely the province of Almighty God.

There is a HUGE difference between that and the quote you provided, which says that Catholics who willfully go against dogmatic Church teachings effectively remove themselves from good standing in the Church.

>> So, when it says there that if a Catholic willfully goes against a dogmatic teaching of the Church, they thereby separate themselves from the Catholic Church, you somehow interpret that to mean that the Catholic Church is judging that person to be denied salvation by God?<<

NO, I didn’t. The RCC did.

The mass is declared by Trent to be a propitiatory sacrifice and necessary for salvation:

In this divine sacrifice...that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner who once offered himself in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross...This sacrifice is truly propitiatory...If any one saith, that the sacrifice of the mass is only a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving; or that it is a bare commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the cross, but not a propitiatory sacrifice...and that it ought not to be offered for the living and dead for sins, pains, satisfactions and other necessities: let him be anathema (The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent. Found in Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1910), Doctrine on the Sacrifice of the Mass, Chp. II, p. 180, Canon III).

The Sacrifice of the altar... is no mere empty commemoration of the Passion and death of Jesus Christ, but a true and proper act of sacrifice. Christ, the eternal High Priest, in an unbloody way offers himself a most acceptable Victim to the eternal Father as He did upon the Cross...In the Mass, no less than on Calvary, Jesus really offers His life to His heavenly Father...The Mass, therefore, no less than the Cross, is expiatory for sins (John Hardon, The Question and Answer Catholic Catechism (Garden City: Image, 1981), Questions #1265, 1269, 1277).

**When faithful Catholics kneel to pray (to God), they sometimes use artistic statues or icons of Mary or other saints to draw their mind and attention to the person depicted in the artistic representation who they are asking to also pray for them or with them to God.**

I know, I know, there is no worshipping the images. But, is it THAT hard to pray, that one needs icons or images ‘to draw their mind and attention’ to seek and commune with God?

I’ve seen people with their rosary w/crucifix or medallion to some ‘saint’ hanging from their rearview mirror, and being absolute jerks behind the wheel.

How would you like to have a friend come up to you and repeat the same exact words over and over EACH time you made contact. The Lord spoke of people thinking they would be heard for ‘their much speaking’.

As far as asking of the deceased to pray for/help us, the only biblical cases of that were bad scenarios (king Saul and the sorceress, and the parable of the rich man and Lazarus). Asking of one that has passed from this life?.....Jesus clearly said to ask him.

lol! Well pass me a kleenex. I had no idea that you knew so much about “my doctrines” compared to “a whole bunch of people doctines”.

Yup! It's guaranteed by virtue of the positions you've adopted just on this thread.

You see, papertyger, it doesn’t matter what you think, or I think, or anyone thinks. It’s what God SAYS that matters.

But that's why I'm no longer an evangelical. They make many "biblical" promises that God doesn't seem to feel any obligation to keep.

Observable fact is not what God is looking at. It’s the heart. Fortunately for me, what you “observe” is irrelevant.

Now that's just ridiculous. If your only standard for judging heresy is your heart, how do you know YOU'RE not the deluded heretic rather than the one you "feel" is heretical?

My concern is standing before Him, an unashamed workman, who is approved unto Him. Because I studied His Word rightly divided. And preached the gospel of the grace of God and God’s reconciliation to man by the finished work of Christ.

We shooters have a saying "practice doesn't make perfect: it make permanent."

Saint Paul tells us to test all things, hold fast that which is good.

How do you know you're not just reinforcing the same mistakes with your "studies?"

NOT

at the time Christ made the distinguishing statement.

What’s y’all’s problem with believing

CHRIST’S OWN WORDS?

Oh, right . . . the power-mongering magicsterical trumps Jesus . . .

yet y’all deny idolatry.

The daffynitionary wins again.

Incredible.

Don’t you know better than to argue with people who say your favorite color is really green when you tell them it’s blue? ;o)

Yes, we'd better accept that new favorite color, and learn to like it, whether we like it or not. :-)

I'm also still trying to figure out all the references in this thread to the Greek word which is translated as "church", but claiming those references should really be translated "assembly" instead.

Like virtually all words, in all language dictionaries, Biblical Greek-English dictionaries have several different meanings for nearly every single word entry in the dictionary. The Greek word that roughly looks like "ekklesia" using the English alphabet is no exception. In the three Biblical Greek-English dictionaries I have (including Strongs for the King James Version of the Bible), one English word given for ekklesia is "church" , another is "assembly", and there are several others.

It is very telling that the translators who translated that word for both Matthew 16:18 and 1 Timothy 3:15 for the vast majority of the Bible translations in current use in the English speaking world (in both the Catholic sphere and the Protestant sphere) translate that word to "church". To argue against that, one has to say that the Holy Spirit allowed all those Bible translators to get that "church" word wrong and only gives the "correct" translation to those individual readers/self-translators who try to use it then to argue against the Church that Jesus Christ founded.

The list of translations that use the English word "church" include the "Revised Standard Version", the "King James Version", the "New International Version", the "American Standard Version", the "Douay-Rheims Version", the "English Standard Version", the "New American Standard Version", the "New International Reader's Version", the "New King James Version", the "Today's New International Version", and many other English translations.

Most mainstream Protestant Churches today also accept that "church" translation of that Greek word "ekklesia", although some of them have a different view of what the term "church" means in relation to the church's "visibility" vs. "invisibility".

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.