I am not sure why you mention the Roman Catholic Church, but since you mentioned it, the RCC claims authority based on the Bible (which the members of the Church wrote and chose), and the Apostolic tradition, reorganizing that not everything the early Church believed is written in the Bible. The interpretation is based on the collective interpretations of the early Christian apologists who wrote in the cultural and linguistic milieu that produced the Bible.
The Protestants base their interpretation on literal reading of the Bible translations (most of them faulty or doctrinally "doctored"), and in the cultural milieu far removed from anything even close to the linguistic or cultural atmosphere and values of the 1st century Middle East—individually as the "church of one", and as each man or woman his or her own pope (and magisterium).
As for its treatment of various parts of the Bible, the Catholic is based on the Gospels (not on Paul, as some claim), and the Gospels are the only scripture sitting on the altar. When Pauline Epistles are read, it is read by laymen, and the congregation sits. When the Gospels are read, they are read by ordained individuals (deacons, priests, bishops), and the congregation stands.
Despite the RCC's lip service (forced by the Reformation)that all scripture is "God's word", the Catholic Church (both east and west) doesn't treat all parts of the scriptures equally.
Well sure. That changes everything.
Kosta, by your own admission, you’re not even sure God exists. Previous posts of yours indicate a disbelief in Scripture and its authenticity and validity and inspiration.
Two points result from that.
One is that since you appear to have rejected it as a point of authority or even of fact, you have disqualified yourself from speaking authoritatively on it.
The other is that esquirette ought to know your postitions on Scripture and God.
esquirette, you are correct in your assessment of what the Catholic church does concerning Scripture. The RC church is trying to lay claim as the only way to God with these assertions. Since the average lay person is (according to the Catholic church) incapable of interpreting Scripture correctly himself, as evidenced by kosta’s assertions here as well, then of necessity, it claims that since it is responsible for the Bible, it is the only entity which can properly interpret it.
Of course, the fact that almost 2,000 years have passed between the men who consolidated Scripture into one convenient, easy to access resource, and the men now who claim authority to be the ones to *correctly* interpret it, is rather irrelevant in Catholic’s eyes.
Despite the RCC's lip service (forced by the Reformation)that all scripture is "God's word", the Catholic Church (both east and west) doesn't treat all parts of the scriptures equally.
However, this part we have seen as true, even on these threads.
Correct. On Christmas Day, I had the honour of reading both the first and second readings (Isaiah and Paul). The congregation sat. I am a simple layman. The Gospel was read by our permanent deacon after being blessed by our priest and the entire congregation stood. Before the reading of the Gospel, the entire congregation crosses their forehead, lips and heart and prays that God will be ever in their mind, on their lips and in their heart. That does not happen before the letters of men are read.