Observe how he deftly uses the word “explain” when referring to himself but uses “interpret” when referring to the same thing done by none Catholics. If it weren’t for double speak would Catholics have anything to say?
Because that is what I try to do: I convey the meaning of the text and do not build my own theories about it. If my explanation is inaccurate, any better informed Catholic is invited to correct me, and I will study the Church doctrine and will adhere to it more closely in the future. That is the difference.
Generally, this is what Catholics are supposed to do: not interpret for themselves but explain the fixed meaning, -- well, to the extent that it is fixed, that is, -- sometimes there is a wider berth of ways to understand and explain the passage.
no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation. For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost. (2 Peter 1:20-21)
 'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, ' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.' 'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.' |