The Bible is "man's feeble attempts"??? Well, that explains a lot. I know Kosta's view is along these lines, but I didn't know it was the Latin view also. I was confused because of what the Catechism says (all emphasis added):
105 God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."69
"For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and the New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself."70
106 God inspired the human authors of the sacred books. "To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more."71
107 The inspired books teach the truth. "Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures."72
On a level of basic principle, I have little problem with this. However, this is not what I am seeing from Apostolics on this thread. What gives? :)
FK: I was confused because of what the Catechism says... "God is the author of Sacred Scripture...written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit...they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself...God inspired the human authors of the sacred books...though [God] acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more...[t]he inspired books teach the truth....we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures"
That's what I call the "truth" by fiat." Sounds positively "protestantized." Unfortunately, the RCC has been suffering from "protestantitis" for a few decades, especially the American Catholic Church, and especially the one on the West Coast.
Even if all this were true, the fact is that (1) there is no proof of any of this and (2) it does not account for errors, disagreements, and inconsistencies that have plagued the New Testament scriptures all along.
The claim that the authors were "consigned to writing whatever [God] wanted written, and no more" is simply not true when one considers that +Paul speaks of "his gospel" or when he explicitly states, on more than one occasion, that the commandments he is giving are not from the Lord but from him personally.
Despite the fancy definitions and allegations that the Holy Spirit worked "inside" the authors, the Church still gives credit to the authors (smart approach in my opinion), thus always leaving the door open for "human variation," of which there is abundance.
Ultimately, the Catechism you cite does not say how one is to determine the truthfulness of these allegations, and also does not say that anyone can read and "extract" the message of truth found in the scriptures, and I would be the first to admit that the Bible does express certain things we know that are not to be found in the natural world, things not of this world.
You know, we are all "inspired" from the moment we wake up until we fall asleep. Something "inspires" us to do things all day long. My problem with this terminology used is that (1) it is loaded with implications and (2) it is "fluff" without substance.
Something moves us and motivates us to do things, to think about, to wish and to search. The trick is knowing what drives us. Some people believe they are being used by God to do things; others simply do what they are "inspired" to do and leave the reasons behind.
***The Bible is “man’s feeble attempts”??? Well, that explains a lot. I know Kosta’s view is along these lines, but I didn’t know it was the Latin view also. I was confused because of what the Catechism says (all emphasis added):
105 God is the author of Sacred Scripture. “The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.”69
“For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and the New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself.”70
106 God inspired the human authors of the sacred books. “To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more.”71
107 The inspired books teach the truth. “Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures.”72***
Read the Catechism closely: Scripture teaches that Truth which God wants us to know via Scripture. And remember that this is translation of translation. The Holy Spirit allows the Truth to be known, utilizing man’s attempts to write down what God has made known.