It’s ludicrous that Catholics claim that the Catholic church wrote the Bible, quote all kinds of men who they claim are *church fathers* as if that means anything (just like this article does), and then dismiss the Scripture written by really godly men as being of no account.
Catholics have things so backwards.
Bless you, sister.
Oh, now you've gone and done it. :) You've given me a good excuse to repost this from G.K. Chesterton's "The Catholic Church and Conversion":
"To this I owe the fact that I find it very difficult to take some of the Protestant propositions even seriously. What is any man who has been in the real outer world, for instance, to make of the everlasting cry that Catholic traditions are condemned by the Bible? It indicates a jumble of topsy-turvy tests and tail-foremost arguments, of which I never could at any time see the sense."The ordinary sensible sceptic or pagan is standing in the street (in the supreme character of the man in the street) and he sees a procession go by of the priests of some strange cult, carrying their object of worship under a canopy, some of them wearing high head-dresses and carrying symbolical staffs, others carrying scrolls and sacred records, others carrying sacred images and lighted candles before them, others sacred relics in caskets or cases, and so on. I can understand the spectator saying, 'This is all hocus-pocus'; I can even understand him, in moments of irritation, breaking up the procession, throwing down the images, tearing up the scrolls, dancing on the priests and anything else that might express that general view.
"I can understand his saying, 'Your croziers are bosh, your candles are bosh, your statues and scrolls and relics and all the rest of it are bosh.'
"But in what conceivable frame of mind does he rush in to select one particular scroll of the scriptures of this one particular group (a scroll which had always belonged to them and been a part of their hocus-pocus, if it was hocus-pocus); why in the world should the man in the street say that one particular scroll was not bosh, but was the one and only truth by which all the other things were to be condemned? Why should it not be as superstitious to worship the scrolls as the statues, of that one particular procession? Why should it not be as reasonable to preserve the statues as the scrolls, by the tenets of that particular creed?
"To say to the priests, 'Your statues and scrolls are condemned by our common sense,' is sensible. To say, 'Your statues are condemned by your scrolls, and we are going to worship one part of your procession and wreck the rest,' is not sensible from any standpoint, least of all that of the man in the street."
There, fixed it for you. We don't dismiss Scripture. We simply dismiss the solo interpretations which agonizingly wring ever more novel doctrines from snippets and individual words excerpted from any Bible the happens to float by the vicinity of the perpetrator.
1 Corinthians 11: 1 Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ. 2 1 I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you.
Church teaching predates NT Scripture because it comes directly from Jesus to the Apostles, from the Apostles to the Apostolic Fathers, to the Church Fathers, to us. The Reformation violates this passage from 1 Corinthians because the Reformation does not hold fast to the traditions passed down to it by the Church.
Catholics have things so backwards.
If you pay attention to Scripture, it not only that Catholics have things according to Scripture, it is also that non Catholics have so much so wrong.