Posted on 10/28/2011 6:59:29 AM PDT by markomalley
October 31 is only three days away. For Protestants, it is Reformation Day, the date in 1517 on which Martin Luther nailed his Ninety-Five Theses to that famous door in Wittenberg, Germany. Since I returned to the Catholic Church in April 2007, each year the commemoration has become a time of reflection about my own journey and the puzzles that led me back to the Church of my youth.
One of those puzzles was the relationship between the Church, Tradition, and the canon of Scripture. As a Protestant, I claimed to reject the normative role that Tradition plays in the development of Christian doctrine. But at times I seemed to rely on it. For example, on the content of the biblical canon – whether the Old Testament includes the deuterocanonical books (or “Apocrypha”), as the Catholic Church holds and Protestantism rejects. I would appeal to the exclusion of these books as canonical by the Jewish Council of Jamnia (A.D. 90-100) as well as doubts about those books raised by St. Jerome, translator of the Latin Vulgate, and a few other Church Fathers.
My reasoning, however, was extra-biblical. For it appealed to an authoritative leadership that has the power to recognize and certify books as canonical that were subsequently recognized as such by certain Fathers embedded in a tradition that, as a Protestant, I thought more authoritative than the tradition that certified what has come to be known as the Catholic canon. This latter tradition, rejected by Protestants, includes St. Augustine as well as the Council of Hippo (A.D. 393), the Third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397), the Fourth Council of Carthage (A.D. 419), and the Council of Florence (A.D. 1441).
But if, according to my Protestant self, a Jewish council and a few Church Fathers are the grounds on which I am justified in saying what is the proper scope of the Old Testament canon, then what of New Testament canonicity? So, ironically, given my Protestant understanding of ecclesiology, then the sort of authority and tradition that apparently provided me warrant to exclude the deuterocanonical books from Scripture – binding magisterial authority with historical continuity – is missing from the Church during the development of New Testament canonicity.
The Catholic Church, on the other hand, maintains that this magisterial authority was in fact present in the early Church and thus gave its leadership the power to recognize and fix the New Testament canon. So, ironically, the Protestant case for a deuterocanonical-absent Old Testament canon depends on Catholic intuitions about a tradition of magisterial authority.
This led to two other tensions. First, in defense of the Protestant Old Testament canon, I argued, as noted above, that although some of the Church’s leading theologians and several regional councils accepted what is known today as the Catholic canon, others disagreed and embraced what is known today as the Protestant canon. It soon became clear to me that this did not help my case, since by employing this argumentative strategy, I conceded the central point of Catholicism: the Church is logically prior to the Scriptures. That is, if the Church, until the Council of Florence’s ecumenical declaration in 1441, can live with a certain degree of ambiguity about the content of the Old Testament canon, that means that sola scriptura was never a fundamental principle of authentic Christianity.
After all, if Scripture alone applies to the Bible as a whole, then we cannot know to which particular collection of books this principle applies until the Bible’s content is settled. Thus, to concede an officially unsettled canon for Christianity’s first fifteen centuries seems to make the Catholic argument that sola scriptura was a sixteenth-century invention and, therefore, not an essential Christian doctrine.
Second, because the list of canonical books is itself not found in Scripture – as one can find the Ten Commandments or the names of Christ’s apostles – any such list, whether Protestant or Catholic, would be an item of extra-biblical theological knowledge. Take, for example, a portion of the revised and expanded Evangelical Theological Society statement of faith suggested (and eventually rejected by the membership) by two ETS members following my return to the Catholic Church. It states that, “this written word of God consists of the sixty-six books of the Old and New Testaments and is the supreme authority in all matters of belief and behavior.”
But the belief that the Bible consists only of sixty-six books is not a claim of Scripture, since one cannot find the list in it, but a claim about Scripture as a whole. That is, the whole has a property – i.e., “consisting of sixty-six books,” – that is not found in any of the parts. In other words, if the sixty-six books are the supreme authority on matters of belief, and the number of books is a belief, and one cannot find that belief in any of the books, then the belief that Scripture consists of sixty-six particular books is an extra-biblical belief, an item of theological knowledge that is prima facie non-biblical.
For the Catholic, this is not a problem, since the Bible is the book of the Church, and thus there is an organic unity between the fixing of the canon and the development of doctrine and Christian practice.
Although I am forever indebted to my Evangelical brethren for instilling and nurturing in me a deep love of Scripture, it was that love that eventually led me to the Church that had the authority to distinguish Scripture from other things.
Many Protestants lack the tradition (small T) of prayer and with that they have no inkling of the concepts of Visio Divina and Lecio Divina and the role of symbolism and imagery in both. The consequence is that we are left essentially having to defend Mozart to the deaf and Michelangelo to the blind.
By their fruits shall ye know them.
http://www.decaturfirst.org/worship-casual_service.html
CAYA Service
Our "Come As You Are" CAYA service is held in the Chapel on Sycamore Street at 11:00 a.m. This service features contemporary instruments and music. Attire is casual.
For the location of the chapel, please click on the Visitor’s Guide below.
Visitor's Guide to DFUMC
Come As You Are / CAYA Worship
Decatur First UMC has a contempory Come As You Are / CAYA worship service each Sunday in the Chapel at 11:00 a.m.
CAYA Service Come As You Are 11:00 a.m. Chapel
Thanks to everyone who joined us for our Faith in Flip-Flop series during the summer! If you missed it, or just want to hear one of the messages again, we will be posting the sermons on our Multimedia page soon. Check back here for the link... Percolate!
Got questions? Wanna talk theology? Need a break during the week? Every Tuesday evening, you can join Rev. Katy Hinman and Rev. Nathan Hilkert, Pastor of the Lutheran Church of the Messiah, for Percolate – an informal gathering to discuss faith and theology and how they relate to our lives today. During October, our conversation will revolve around the ―Tough Questions‖ that are being discussed in CAYA worship on Sunday morning. This is not a formal or long-term study and you do not have to attend CAYA to participate – everyone is welcome to drop in. Join us on Tuesdays from 6:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. at Java Monkey at 425 Church St. Grab a cup of coffee, a snack, and come percolate with us!
Contemporary and Inspirational
At the CAYA service we create an exciting and inspirational worship experience, so that you can encounter God in a profound way that is comfortable and natural for you. Although the arrangement of the service and the music--from our worship band--are more contemporary in nature, the fundamentals of the service are rooted in United Methodism.
We want you to feel at ease, so please feel free to move around - and if you have children, move around with them!
For this service you may enter the Chapel through the front wooden doors that face Sycamore Street.
Come in, pour yourself a cup of coffee, enjoy a light snack, and savor a few moments of fellowship and conversation before worship begins.
For more information about the CAYA service please contact Dr. Katy Hinman at khinman@decaturfirst.org and at 404.378-4541 x.102.
I have been to a number of Methodist (my grandparents were Methodist), Presbyterian, Anglican and Church of Christ services. No kneeling, no bowing, no bending the knee, nothing of the kind.
One last thing. I HAVE kneeled MANY times and even "prostrated" myself flat on the floor in deep, intense prayer to God.
I believe you; I would not believe certain others.
But it is NOT something I want to do in front of others - I obey Jesus who said to pray in secret and not to be seen by others. You cannot know another's heart, nor can you know what they do in private.<{P> Very often what they do in public and post on forums reflects their hearts.
Stop judging people by how they act in public worship and look at the "fruit of the Holy Spirit" in their lives. Kneeling prayer is not listed as a fruit, ya know.
The first great Commandment of Christ speaks of loving God with your whole being to the limit of your strength. Drinking coffee in a padded chair, while following your children around and discussing sports or the neighbour's yard or that chick's hairdo during a casual service does not indicate that one is that concerned about God.
Hmm, how many of them wear petticoats anymore?
Verily I say you have your reward? The arrogance, shear pomposity, and utter ignorance of that statement astounds me.
I take it that the accuracy offends.
First of all, how could you possibly know what “most Protestants” do in the privacy of their lives? Second, bragging about what “priests”, ie Pharisees and Sadducees, do was soundly rebuked by Jesus in His statement “for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men.”
It ain't bragging if you do it. It ain't bragging if it is not done in order to be seen, but in order to worship the Lord God Almighty. Jesus told us to pray in secret, but He also demonstrated semipublic prayer. So did the early Church in Acts. The martyrs did what they did because they worshipped God, not because they wished to be seen.
You CAN'T know what tyou are claiming to have knowledge of. It's not possible.
If you call a very industrious man a lazy layabout, he will likely snicker and forget the remark as soon as it passes. If you call a lazy layabout a lazy layabout, he will likely be very indignant and take offense.
I didn’t think to count em.
Assumptions are rarely if ever accurate.
>>It ain't bragging if you do it.<<
Actually it’s bragging IF you do it and make sure others know.
>>It ain't bragging if it is not done in order to be seen, but in order to worship the Lord God Almighty.<<
What makes you think He was talking about intent? In the same passage He said to go in your “closet” to make sure others DIDN’T see it regardless of intent.
You are obviously unaware of the rules of the Caucus threads. No "spewing" or references to non-caucus denominations or faiths is permitted or the caucus designation will be revoked.
Thank you for your ignorant rant.
You want to make a big deal about kneeling?
Fine.
Why don't Catholics pray lifting up holy hands to God as mentioned in Scripture by the same guy who states that every knee shall bow?
Is it time now to judge a Catholic's level of spirituality or spiritual maturity based on outward appearance?
We do.
"Is it time now to judge a Catholic's level of spirituality or spiritual maturity based on outward appearance?
You do.
Prove that they were independent. Even the Book of ACTS mentions the first ecumenical council at Jerusalem, and that James was made Bishop. I would like to see a credible historical source that proves your point. I have plenty of secular proof of my position.
I’d say let’s first get back to basics and ask which God they are kneeling to.
CCC841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day.
If the official postion of the CC is that they worship the same god as the Muslims we need to determine if the Catholics on this site agree with the official position of the CC or not. Either they agree with the CC or they don’t. We need to know so we know who and what we are talking about here. Are they going to break with the official position of the CC or remain in agreement with it?
Actually, in the Eastern Church, the proper stance for prayer and worship is STANDING! (No pews in old country churches)
Actually, in the Eastern Church, the proper stance for prayer and worship is STANDING! (No pews in old country churches)
Not in any Catholic mass I've ever seen.
Therefore we can conclude that Catholics don't do it at all.
No, you would have to prove that there was an overall governing authority. The letters to each of the churches was addressed to an independent church. Whether it was the seven churches mentioned in Revelation or in the other letters to the Romans, the church at Corinth, Ephesus or wherever. The message to each of the churches in Revelation is particularly telling. Each of those churches were given commendations and warnings independently of any overall “church”. Each of those churches were obviously acting independent of the others or the same commendations or warnings would have been given to all of them if they had been under one governing authority defining practices and doctrine. No edicts were given to the churches from a central hierarchy.
Assumptions are rarely if ever accurate.
If I let go of a hammer in a positive gravity environment, I don't need to watch it fall to know that it has.
>>It ain't bragging if you do it.<<
Actually it’s bragging IF you do it and make sure others know.
We've been doing it for 2000 years and some people still don't get it.
>>It ain't bragging if it is not done in order to be seen, but in order to worship the Lord God Almighty.<<
What makes you think He was talking about intent? In the same passage He said to go in your “closet” to make sure others DIDN’T see it regardless of intent.
Acts 2:42y They devoted themselves to the teaching of the apostles and to the communal life, to the breaking of the bread and to the prayers.z
Community prayer was practiced by the fledgling Church.
Acts 4: 31* As they prayed, the place where they were gathered shook, and they were all filled with the holy Spirit and continued to speak the word of God with boldness.i
Community prayer was practiced by the fledgling Church.
Acts 20: 36When he had finished speaking he knelt down and prayed with them all.
Dearie me, even Paul engaged in this devilish deed. But what of our Lord? While it is true that He promoted private prayer and gave us numerous examples, he also gave us:
John 11: 41So they took away the stone. And Jesus raised his eyes and said, “Father,* I thank you for hearing me. 42I know that you always hear me; but because of the crowd here I have said this, that they may believe that you sent me.”n
Jesus even began His ministry with public prayer:
Luke 3: * 21o After all the people had been baptized and Jesus also had been baptized and was praying,* heaven was opened 22* p and the holy Spirit descended upon him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.”
Are you going to tell me that this event was not for the benefit of the onlookers?
We do. Every Mass. I thought that you claimed that you were Catholic.
Now if you were going to be accurate, you'd post the preceding paragraphs which show the Church's position on non Catholic Christians and Jews. We say that (since Islam is considered an offshoot of both Christianity and Judaism) they have a very imperfect view of the Perfect God. Sorta like the LDS and the Calvinists.
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.