***I infer from the above that you think the Church has a license to declare that the Bible means whatever the men of the Church say it means. That’s fine, but it does mean by definition that your Magisterium is greater (in your minds) than the scriptures themselves. Remember, for you the scriptures don’t have anyone to defend them. Your men move in and declare. Of course, I already knew that this is the true position of the Church, but I’ve not heard it confirmed by a follower. I saw your statement as leading strongly in that direction.***
Scripture does not self-authenticate. It was written by the Church, ordered by the Church, the text was selected and the book was printed and disseminated. The interpretation of the Bible rests alone with the folks who wrote it and their successors.
Shakespeare wrote a body of works that everyone and his dog have attempted to understand. Therefore we have many thousands of understandings of his works, all or nearly all of which differ from what the author originally intended to convey. If Shakespeare had left a teaching institution specifically dedicated to teaching what he actually wrote, I submit that that body would be a lot closer than Joe Sixpack or Arnold Artsie coming up with his own understanding based upon whatever whim, mood or substance was in effect at the time.
OK, I'm glad we're getting somewhere. I will take your TOTAL repudiation of the Catechism as simply your own personal opinion. :)
Shakespeare wrote a body of works that everyone and his dog have attempted to understand. Therefore we have many thousands of understandings of his works, all or nearly all of which differ from what the author originally intended to convey. If Shakespeare had left a teaching institution specifically dedicated to teaching what he actually wrote, I submit that that body would be a lot closer than Joe Sixpack or Arnold Artsie coming up with his own understanding based upon whatever whim, mood or substance was in effect at the time.
Irrelevant. Shakespeare would have no power to control what happened after he was gone. While your claim of knowledge of Shakespeare's original intent is unique, I do not see any substantiation. There is no comparison here. You appear to deny that God is an active Being in our lives, yet you claim what you claim with the Eucharist. I observe a disconnect.