Posted on 03/30/2002 7:53:37 PM PST by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
To each other, sure. ;-)
To Jesus, no. Joseph isn't Jesus' blood father, and Mary didn't have an other children.
SD
Gallstones but no pain? That's blessing enough. :) I'll send my prayers, but she's going to be fine. That's a routine kind of thing.
How many issues can a man discover that if taken to its end conclusions won’t clash with your Church doctrine?
If a man is guided by Gods Spirit to a truth that differs from that of the magisterium, he must either abandon his new truth or never mention it anyone else, but he may then submit it to the hierarchy for their evaluation, which will be rejected if it goes against Church doctrine.
What would motivate a Catholic to use Gods Holy Spirit when anything he’s shown will be shot down by his Church leaders?
JH
Do you accept this on pure faith that your Church can't be deceived?
JH
Really? Even if the Church hasn't spoken...Like I said, you don’t understand, and the snide way you responded makes it appear you don’t particularly care to. That is up to you, but out of abundant foolishness, I’ll explain what it does mean.Catholic Catechism
100 The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him.
What you have done here is so typical. You’ve taken one sentence and ignored the entire rest of the book, not to mention the context for that sentence. 100 was under the “In Brief” heading. It is a summary, yet you seem to want to consider it absent the text it was summarizing.
What that phrase means is that when the Magisterium makes an interpretation, and proclaims it as binding, then we are to accept that. It does not mean, like you seem to think, that if the Magisterium hasn’t spoken we are to somehow think nothing at all about the verse.
That would be nonsense, especially if you actually read the Catechism. The Catechism is intended to assist the laity in learning their faith:
Through the harmonious and complementary efforts of all the ranks of the People of God, may this Catechism be known and shared by everyone, so that the unity in faith whose supreme model and origin is found in the Unity of the Trinity may be strengthened and extended to the ends of the earth.After the section you quote, section 100, it goes on to explain, in detail through several paragraphs, culminating in an exhortation to the faithful, whom are supposed to use this catechism to enrich their faith, that they should read the Scriptures:
133 The Church "forcefully and specifically exhorts all the Christian faithful. . . to learn the surpassing knowledge of Jesus Christ, by frequent reading of the divine Scriptures. Ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ.112Thus, as Catholics we are commanded to read the Scriptures. Between those two sections, your # 100 and the above quoted #133, the catechism itself gives broad guidelines on things to consider when interpreting Scripture.
Why would it do this if Catholics weren’t supposed to read and interpret it? Makes no sense, and thus your proposition is silly, and must be rejected. This should be obvious to anyone who goes beyond that simple little summary that was strip mined out of a long section on the Scriptures.
However, we don’t have stop with the instructions after your quote. We could also learn what the Church meant by reading what came before it. The words that were being summarized in the “in brief” section are important to what the phrase means. In fact, just a couple paragraphs before hand, the Church says:
The supernatural sense of faithSo you see, if you cared to read the sections around the one you quoted, it would be clear what the Catholic is to do. He is forcefully and specifically exhorted to frequently read the divine Scriptures (133). He is to “share in understanding and handing on revealed truth.” (91). He is, through the contemplation and study of believers, to ponder these things in his heart. (94) He is to apply “right judgment” to it, and then apply it more fully in daily life. (93).91 All the faithful share in understanding and handing on revealed truth. They have received the anointing of the Holy Spirit, who instructs them53 and guides them into all truth.54
92 "The whole body of the faithful. . . cannot err in matters of belief. This characteristic is shown in the supernatural appreciation of faith (sensus fidei) on the part of the whole people, when, from the bishops to the last of the faithful, they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals."55
93 "By this appreciation of the faith, aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth, the People of God, guided by the sacred teaching authority (Magisterium),. . . receives. . . the faith, once for all delivered to the saints. . . The People unfailingly adheres to this faith, penetrates it more deeply with right judgment, and applies it more fully in daily life."56
Growth in understanding the faith
94 Thanks to the assistance of the Holy Spirit, the understanding of both the realities and the words of the heritage of faith is able to grow in the life of the Church:
- "through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts";57 it is in particular "theological research [which] deepens knowledge of revealed truth".58
- "from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which [believers] experience",59 the sacred Scriptures "grow with the one who reads them."60
- "from the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth".61
This would have been hard to miss, had you read these sections with an honest eye. I don’t know where you got your quote, and whether you read these sections or not, but you should before you go on in this discussion.
patent +AMDG
Well, to be honest I’ve never tried to count. How many angels dance on the head of a pin?You misunderstand where a Catholic must defer. If the Church hasn’t spoken on an issue, the Catholic is as free to hold his own various opinions as the Protestant is. When you consider that it is the Word of an infinite God, I think you have to assume that a truly "total interpretation of Scripture" isn't really possible for a human.How many issues can a man discover that if taken to its end conclusions won’t clash with your Church doctrine?
If a man is guided by Gods Spirit to a truth that differs from that of the magisterium, he must either abandon his new truth or never mention it anyone else, but he may then submit it to the hierarchy for their evaluation, which will be rejected if it goes against Church doctrine.Exactly. If you make up a new truth, frankly you should suspect it. We have 2000 years of Christian history now, what makes you think you are the first to be guided by God to the interpretation of His Scriptures?
You would have to have a supreme ego to think this. You are welcome to “your new truths.” I’ll stick with God’s old truth.
What would motivate a Catholic to use Gods Holy Spirit when anything he’s shown will be shot down by his Church leaders?I think you have a stilted understanding of the fruits of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit isn't here solely to help you learn the Bible, though that is part of it. The goal is to bring you to God, and that is quite a bit more than some book learnin'. As to learning the book, the goal isn't to not be shot down, the goal is to learn the faith.
Not to mention which, the “Church leaders” rarely spend any time worrying about what I believe. Frankly, it would be nice to see them start a bit. However, I am not at all worried they will be out and about soon shooting down my interpretations.
patent +AMDG
God, the ultimate author and finisher of our faith, entreats us to ask Him to provide us with His wisdom (i.e. His truth), and promises to honor such requests by (infallibly) providing such wisdom to us.Quester
Yes. But how does that address whether that wisdom is delivered personally and individually, or whether it comes through the institution He founded for the purpose of transmitting his Good News?
SD
Actually, I leave it up to God as to how He wishes to communicate His wisdom to me.
As He has with you, per your testimony, He has communicated His truth to me by way of a variety of mediums (i.e. the church, His written Word, Bible teachers and commentaries, etc.).
However, the Protestant teaching and tradition is that the written Word (in the form of the Old Testament and New Testament writings), as opened for the individual's understanding by the Holy Spirit, are the standard for the discernment of God's truth.
I trust Peter (through his written record) for his teaching of God's message to me, but it is a bit much to expect me (unless I am so directed by God, Himself) to infallibly trust any others of the lineage of men who may or may not have followed Peter in his questionable role as 'leader' of the Apostles.
At least I know that Peter walked with JESUS. This is testified to by Peter, himself, as well as other New Testament writers.
However, I simply do not know that any of the supposed successors to Peter walked with JESUS as Peter did. And there is no way for me to know this, unless God reveals it to me directly, and this He hasn't done.
Quester
Also, are you saying that whenever you ask God a question, you get an infallible answer?
SD
I know that God is faithful to provide His truth to me, and so He has and does infallibly. Whether I receive God's message infallibly is, to some degree, up to me (for God can choose to overcome my biases, if he so wills).
My responsibility, however, is to be receptive to God word, as He is pleased to send it my way.
Source?
Holy Tradition.
Wow. Haven't posted here in many months and I can just jump right in. OK, back to obscurity. Christ Bless, all!
100 The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him.
Now define "solely" and tell me where you fit in.
=====================================================================================
What that phrase means is that when the Magisterium makes an interpretation, and proclaims it as binding, then we are to accept that. It does not mean, like you seem to think, that if the Magisterium hasn’t spoken we are to somehow think nothing at all about the verse.
Of course, it makes no difference to you that I never said that. I do say that, according to the catechism, you are not allowed/qualified to make an "authentic" interpretation which is contrary to the magisterium.
======================================================================================
So you see, if you cared to read the sections around the one you quoted, it would be clear what the Catholic is to do. He is forcefully and specifically exhorted to frequently read the divine Scriptures (133). He is to “share in understanding and handing on revealed truth.” (91). He is, through the contemplation and study of believers, to ponder these things in his heart. (94) He is to apply “right judgment” to it, and then apply it more fully in daily life. (93).
And, finally, he must defer to the magisterium for an "authentic" interpretation.
=====================================================================================
This would have been hard to miss, had you read these sections with an honest eye. I don’t know where you got your quote, and whether you read these sections or not, but you should before you go on in this discussion.
From the Catechism, of course.
=====================================================================================
Canon 752 While the assent of faith is not required, a religious submission of intellect and will is to be given to any doctrine which either the Supreme Pontiff or the College of Bishops, exercising their authentic magisterium, declare upon a matter of faith or morals, even though they do not intend to proclaim that doctrine by definitive act. Christ's faithful are therefore to ensure that they avoid whatever does not accord with that doctrine.
Why don't you simply submit your intellect and will to the magisterium and be done with it?
God be with you.
Why don't you simply submit your intellect and will to the magisterium and be done with it?This was already explained to you. Because the Magisterium hasn’t spoken on every issue. In fact, your very own question explained it. You asked “Really? Even if the Church hasn't spoken...” So, one does not submit his intellect and will to the Magisterium when it hasn’t issued anything to submit too.
I’m amazed you find this concept difficult.
patent +AMDG
I stated, If a man is guided by Gods Spirit to a truth that differs from that of the magisterium, he must either abandon his new truth or never mention it anyone else, but he may then submit it to the hierarchy for their evaluation, which will be rejected if it goes against Church doctrine.
You highlighted the words "his new truth, with "his" in red.
Please explain why you chose to ignore the first part of the sentence when I asked "if a man is guided by Gods Spirit," and you chose to bring attention to "his new truth", which if I had said, “ God's new truth," it would have been a little presumptuous of me to say?
JH
Please explain why you chose to ignore the first part of the sentence when I asked "if a man is guided by Gods Spirit," and you chose to bring attention to "his new truth", which if I had said, “ God's new truth," it would have been a little presumptuous of me to say?(1)Every man who creates a new version of the truth thinks he is guided by God's spirit. None of them were promised this solely in their capacity as men.
I would go into more, but I have a hard time typing at the moment, I’m trying to convince our smallest to sleep a bit, and if I’m lucky that only leaves one free hand.
God bless
patent +AMDG
Prayer ping and let me know
My best friends husband had to have his appendex out a real emergency ..as a result they discovered his prostrate cancer that would not have been evident for a couple years..that was 15 years ago he is still kicking..
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.