Can you really live by Sola Scriptura?

[BPPLEE]

Agreed.

Here is part of the problem: Many see the denial of 'Sola Scriptura' as the denial of Scripture. They cannot comprehend how Catholics could follow Scripture if it isn't Scripture alone. It's just unthinkable to them. But Sola Scriptura is a non-Scriptural meta-dogma that has failed in it's goals of revealing the meaning of Scripture or of correcting the Church or of unifying Christians in the truth. Manifestly it fails at all three because ... because it is a false starting point. The real necessary starting point is the teaching of the apostles and the authority of the apostles. The Sola Scriptura followers have either made themselves their own apostles or have followed other men who have made themselves their own apostles. And they can't even see that they have invented their own traditions opposed to the Tradition of the faith handed down to the apostles. It's a blindness. They have adopted traditions of teachers or of their own personal invention, all of it in rebellion to the apostles.

What do we all need? 1.) Chucking Sola Scriptura for Prima Scriptura, which is the actual position of the Catholic Church. See Dei Verbum from Vatican II for the simple idea of putting Scripture first, but not alone. 2.) Reclaim the apostolic Tradition, as found in the Fathers. Scripture interpretation was never supposed to have been independent of the community of faith. Such atomization makes only for thousands of denominations. 3.) The humility to not think that everybody is their own oracle of God. Again, Scripture interpretation was never supposed to be independent of the community of faith. There are authorities in the Church, successors of the apostles, whom we call bishops. 4.) We need to do some repentance for the times we all have put our own ideas ahead of the faith. There should be a variety of styles but there should be zero doctrinal differences among Christians. It's wrong. It's prideful.

Will we ever change? Nope. Even though Jesus himself begged the Father in John 17 for us to be united. Too much invested in hating on the brothers in Christ for that. Disagree and start up a new denomination. That's the ticket. Lie about your enemies. That's the ticket. Follow unbiblical meta-dogmas like Sola Scriptura so you can look down on traditional believers. That's the ticket. No wonder the fragmented Church is such a poor witness. See how they hate each other?

So for you it's Sola Catholic Church it seems. You make some valid points but seem to give all authority to the Church

 

[enoob57]

Agreed.

Here is part of the problem: Many see the denial of 'Sola Scriptura' as the denial of Scripture. They cannot comprehend how Catholics could follow Scripture if it isn't Scripture alone. It's just unthinkable to them. But Sola Scriptura is a non-Scriptural meta-dogma that has failed in it's goals of revealing the meaning of Scripture or of correcting the Church or of unifying Christians in the truth. Manifestly it fails at all three because ... because it is a false starting point. The real necessary starting point is the teaching of the apostles and the authority of the apostles. The Sola Scriptura followers have either made themselves their own apostles or have followed other men who have made themselves their own apostles. And they can't even see that they have invented their own traditions opposed to the Tradition of the faith handed down to the apostles. It's a blindness. They have adopted traditions of teachers or of their own personal invention, all of it in rebellion to the apostles.

What do we all need? 1.) Chucking Sola Scriptura for Prima Scriptura, which is the actual position of the Catholic Church. See Dei Verbum from Vatican II for the simple idea of putting Scripture first, but not alone. 2.) Reclaim the apostolic Tradition, as found in the Fathers. Scripture interpretation was never supposed to have been independent of the community of faith. Such atomization makes only for thousands of denominations. 3.) The humility to not think that everybody is their own oracle of God. Again, Scripture interpretation was never supposed to be independent of the community of faith. There are authorities in the Church, successors of the apostles, whom we call bishops. 4.) We need to do some repentance for the times we all have put our own ideas ahead of the faith. There should be a variety of styles but there should be zero doctrinal differences among Christians. It's wrong. It's prideful.

Will we ever change? Nope. Even though Jesus himself begged the Father in John 17 for us to be united. Too much invested in hating on the brothers in Christ for that. Disagree and start up a new denomination. That's the ticket. Lie about your enemies. That's the ticket. Follow unbiblical meta-dogmas like Sola Scriptura so you can look down on traditional believers. That's the ticket. No wonder the fragmented Church is such a poor witness. See how they hate each other?

Two things the Word of God says will continue on from here: souls of people, and His Word... that's it! So all your traditions and councils and and and will not! It's that simple!

 

[chevyontheriver]

Two things the Word of God says will continue on from here: souls of people, and His Word... that's it! So all your traditions and councils and and and will not! It's that simple!

Two things?

Actually a few more. One of them the gates of hell will not prevail against. That's Mt 16:18. So Traditions and Councils.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

So we should all let the Catholic Church interpret scripture for us?

Here is an exercise for you. Get a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and tell me anything in there that is unbiblical or antibiblical. There is no contradiction between the magisterial Catholic faith and scripture

 

[chevyontheriver]

So for you it's Sola Catholic Church it seems. You make some valid points but seem to give all authority to the Church

Not at all. It's Prima Scriptura. It's the Traditions taught by the apostles to their successors, and on and on. And it is a living functioning authority in the Church to arbitrate when we can't all agree.

For example, the liturgy is not spelled out in the New Testament. Are we to conclude that there is thus no liturgy? Or that the New Testament is just not a liturgical handbook and we need to look elsewhere for our liturgics? The Sola Scriptura answer is that there is no liturgy and whatever the congregation makes up is New Testament worship. One should wonder then how all of the ancient manifestations of New Testament worship are liturgical. Not everything is contained in the New Testament. So it's not Sola Scriptura but Prima Scriptura with Tradition.

And then what if we disagree? Who arbitrates? What if we disagree about an interpretation of Scripture? How does Scripture arbitrate a disagreement between you and I over the interpretation of Scripture. That's one of the functions of bishops (The folks Paul spent a lit of pages talking about, particularly in the Pastoral Epistles), and the primary function of councils (like the Jerusalem Council in Acts). Among other things, the Church arbitrates for us when we disagree. But it can't even do that when one of us (hypothetically speaking I hope) totally rejects the arbitrating function of the Church.

Now I hope you have had a chance to read what the Catholic Church says about the Word of God and how divine revelation works. Not yet? It's short and simple and can be read still this morning if you care to. See in particular paragraph 24.
Dei verbum

 

[fhansen]

The Catholic church is easily seen in it's departure from Scripture... so those that remain in it are willfully blinded by tradition and faith in the organization not Scripture!

And that sentiment is exactly what I found out for myself to be just plain and simply…wrong.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Here is an exercise for you. Get a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and tell me anything in there that is unbiblical or antibiblical. There is no contradiction between the magisterial Catholic faith and scripture

But ... but ... but ... call no man father. See. Proof positive Catholics got it all wrong.

If only people looked a tiny bit deeper on all of these things. If only. Which is why you recommending going through the Catechism of the Catholic Church is such a good idea. It would correct a lot of confusion on the part of people who were raised to be anti-Catholic, who don't really know any better.

 

[BPPLEE]

Here is an exercise for you. Get a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and tell me anything in there that is unbiblical or antibiblical. There is no contradiction between the magisterial Catholic faith and scripture

But would there be things in the Catechism that are not found in the Bible?

 

[chevyontheriver]

But would there be things in the Catechism that are not found in the Bible?

The point is for you to read it and see that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is profoundly Biblical even if it isn't what you grew up with. Do you dare to see what Catholic beliefs are as put forth by an authoritative Catholic source? Or do you prefer the often ignorant musings of anti-Catholics who learned everything they knew about the Catholic Church from other anti-Catholics? You pick.

 

[BPPLEE]

Not at all. It's Prima Scriptura. It's the Traditions taught by the apostles to their successors, and on and on. And it is a living functioning authority in the Church to arbitrate when we can't all agree.

For example, the liturgy is not spelled out in the New Testament. Are we to conclude that there is thus no liturgy? Or that the New Testament is just not a liturgical handbook and we need to look elsewhere for our liturgics? The Sola Scriptura answer is that there is no liturgy and whatever the congregation makes up is New Testament worship. One should wonder then how all of the ancient manifestations of New Testament worship are liturgical. Not everything is contained in the New Testament. So it's not Sola Scriptura but Prima Scriptura with Tradition.

And then what if we disagree? Who arbitrates? What if we disagree about an interpretation of Scripture? How does Scripture arbitrate a disagreement between you and I over the interpretation of Scripture. That's one of the functions of bishops (The folks Paul spent a lit of pages talking about, particularly in the Pastoral Epistles), and the primary function of councils (like the Jerusalem Council in Acts). Among other things, the Church arbitrates for us when we disagree. But it can't even do that when one of us (hypothetically speaking I hope) totally rejects the arbitrating function of the Church.

Now I hope you have had a chance to read what the Catholic Church says about the Word of God and how divine revelation works. Not yet? It's short and simple and can be read still this morning if you care to. See in particular paragraph 24.
Dei verbum

Thanks for the honest and civil discussion. I would look at Mark 10:42-44

 

[BPPLEE]

The point is for you to read it and see that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is profoundly Biblical even if it isn't what you grew up with. Do you dare to see what Catholic beliefs are as put forth by an authoritative Catholic source? Or do you prefer the often ignorant musings of anti-Catholics who learned everything they knew about the Catholic Church from other anti-Catholics? You pick.

Thanks but I will stick to the Bible. I won't judge you for your beliefs but I may disagree. I have been to a Catholic Church on many occasions when I dated a Catholic girl but have never read the Catechism.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Thanks for the honest and civil discussion. I would look at Mark 10:42-44

It fits. There is authority in the Church in as much as Jesus is an authority. His was a servant leadership. The Church is supposed to have servant leadership too. But the Church is made up of sinners so we fail at it. Doesn't negate the authority. Even Jesus said to obey the Jewish authorities. Just not to act like them if they were not the examples they should be.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Thanks but I will stick to the Bible. I won't judge you for your beliefs but I may disagree. I have been to a Catholic Church on many occasions when I dated a Catholic girl but have never read the Catechism.

So you choose to ignore what the Catholic Church says about itself and just go with what you were told by other anti-Catholics. I guess I couldn't expect more than that.

 

[fhansen]

But would there be things in the Catechism that are not found in the Bible?

People will never understand Catholicism unless they study it's teachings for themselves-and why those teachings are what they are. Especially on the matter of most importance, the main reason for division, that of justification.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Hmmm, I don’t see the scripture that says God only gives His Holy Spirit to the Church and specifically the Catholic Church, I noticed no scripture was quoted either.

I think we should stick with the scriptures and the scriptures show clearly:

The Holy Spirit comes to those who have not harden their hearts to convict us of our sins John 16:8 Hebrews 3:7

We are warned not to grieve away the Holy Spirit- the unpardonable sin. Ephesians 4:30

The Holy Spirit is promised to be given when we have turned from sin (repent) and are baptized Acts 2:38

Sanctification comes from the Holy Spirit Titus 3:5

The Holy Spirit comes to those(individuals) who obey God. Acts 5:32, John 14:15-18

The love of God is poured out by the Holy Spirit Romans 5:5

The Holy Spirit will teach us all things John 14:26 1 Corinthians 2:13 1 Thessalonians 1:6

Our bodies are a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit which is why we could keep them clean 1 Corinthians 6:19 2 Timothy 1:14

Not one of these scriptures tell us we receive the Holy Spirit through the church. God talks to each of us through His Spirit for those who have not harden their hearts. You keep pointing people to your church when we should be pointing to Jesus.

1 Timothy 2:5
For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,

Paul says it very clearly in 2 Thes 2:15

Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.


He is basically saying the He is of the Apostles, and hold to the traditions taught to them. He does not say, now people go home and read your bibles to interpret for yourselves. There is no where in the Bible in which it says an individual will be kept free from error if they do not submit to the Church. It says the opposite in fact, as Romans 1 states

[22] For professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. [23] And they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man, and of birds, and of fourfooted beasts, and of creeping things. [24] Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. [25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.


We are not of the generation that rebelled against the Church and went off on our own, we are their fruits. God only calls us to account for what we are able to understand. Back then, everyone thought they knew better, even though they were instructed in the faith, they chose to rebel. If they had been correct, and it was appropriate to leave the Church, we would have had an era of peace and people would have followed the reformers. Instead they all broke off on their own, and the secular world which used to be subject to the Church also rebelled and we wound up with bloody wars, the French Revolution, World War I and World War II, crushing oppression form communist dictators that resulted in widespread famine and millions of deaths. The Reformation is not working. Sin is worse today than it ever was.
You can say that it was not the reformer's fault, it was unbelievers, but you can't tell me that the secular authorities and intellectuals were not emboldened by that spirit of rebellion against the Church.
Human nature has concupiscence, we want to rule, not be ruled. Pride is the greatest sin and humility the greatest virtue. God says He desires obedience rather than sacrifice. Psalm 51
[18] For if thou hadst desired sacrifice, I would indeed have given it: with burnt offerings thou wilt not be delighted. [19] A sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit: a contrite and humbled heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.

1 Samuel 15
[22] And Samuel said: Doth the Lord desire holocausts and victims, and not rather that the voice of the Lord should be obeyed? For obedience is better than sacrifices: and to hearken rather than to offer the fat of rams.

The Authority was given to the Church when our Lord spoke to Peter in Matthew 16

[18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.


Hmmmm, building a church, keys to the kingdom of heaven, authority of binding and loosing. Wow that is some pretty big authority that has nothing to do with individuals studying the word of God on their own and rebelling against the Church.

Jesus gives us the authority structure in Matthew 18

[15] But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.

[16] And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. [17] And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.

We see that the Church has greater authority than two Christians arguing about scripture, and if they won't listen to the Church, they are as heathens and publicans


Everyone wants to be a king. We know better than our peers and our so called superiors. We can read the Bible, we don't need anyone else, but what does Jesus say? Does He want kings? Does He want everyone to be on their own? Not according to Matthew 18.

[3] And said: Amen I say to you, unless you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. [4] Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, he is the greater in the kingdom of heaven. [5] And he that shall receive one such little child in my name, receiveth me.

[6] But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea.

Little children are obedient to authority, because they know that they do not know everything. Peter was given authority in the Church, and he shared it with the Apostles under his care. We have no right to rebel against the Apostolic faith and go out on our own.
Even when Paul talks about withstanding Peter to his face, did not rebel against Peter and start a new church and call Peter's Church the harlot of Babylon and those that follow her carry the mark of the beast. That is not what happened, and Paul did not use scripture to withstand Peter, but simple logic, How can you, being a Jew, yet live like a gentile, then compel gentiles to live like Jews? Peter changed his mind, as it is the mark of any great leader to admit when he is wrong. He corrected his behavior, but did not abdicate his position as head of the Church.

I submit in obedience to approximately 2000 years of Church history. Not one teaching of the Catholic Church can be shown to be unbiblical. Read the catechism and tell me which one. We cannot lean to our own understanding, nor our own conscience. Understanding is incomplete, and conscience is not always correct, as the Bible says there is a way that seems right to a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death (prov 14:12)

You will disagree with everything I wrote, but what you cannot do is say the Catholic Church is unbiblical. You may point to people that call themselves Catholic, even priests and bishops and point out that their behavior in unbiblical, but you cannot show me from the Catechism, one teaching that is against the word of God

 

[boughtwithaprice]

But would there be things in the Catechism that are not found in the Bible?

why ask me that question when you can find out for yourself? Read it and let me know. You will note that all the teachings in there come with a plethora of references to back up what the teaching claims. I find it a very satisfying intellectual exercise

 

[boughtwithaprice]

The understanding- if absolute truth is dictated by the objective truth of Scripture
in which written format is to be taken in a hermeneutic process to arrive at thus sayeth The Lord... God has already told us where the truth lies

John 17:17 (KJV)
[17] Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

Thus what I have said previous sets one on the right path to knowing truth! The study is work and obedience to God

2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV)
[15] Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

2 Timothy 3:15 (KJV)
[15] And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
[16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
[17] That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

ok, your quote does say that you have to rightly divide the word of truth. Study is always a good thing, but how do you know that you are doing it right, if you do not follow the Apostolic faith? The Apostles had the original authority of the Church, and all those that broke off from them are in rebellion. We are not instructed to reinvent the wheel every generation, we submit to the authority of those that came before us

 

[BPPLEE]

So you choose to ignore what the Catholic Church says about itself and just go with what you were told by other anti-Catholics. I guess I couldn't expect more than that.

I'm not anti Catholic. I have enough to read and learn just trying to get through the Bible. I'm not ready to learn everything about another denomination just so I can critique it. I have respect for Catholics I just disagree with the Church. Not a hill I choose to die on though. I don't think the Church has more authority than the scriptures. That's probably the difference between us.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Paul says it very clearly in 2 Thes 2:15

Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.


He is basically saying the He is of the Apostles, and hold to the traditions taught to them. He does not say, now people go home and read your bibles to interpret for yourselves. There is no where in the Bible in which it says an individual will be kept free from error if they do not submit to the Church. It says the opposite in fact, as Romans 1 states

[22] For professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. [23] And they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man, and of birds, and of fourfooted beasts, and of creeping things. [24] Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. [25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.


We are not of the generation that rebelled against the Church and went off on our own, we are their fruits. God only calls us to account for what we are able to understand. Back then, everyone thought they knew better, even though they were instructed in the faith, they chose to rebel. If they had been correct, and it was appropriate to leave the Church, we would have had an era of peace and people would have followed the reformers. Instead they all broke off on their own, and the secular world which used to be subject to the Church also rebelled and we wound up with bloody wars, the French Revolution, World War I and World War II, crushing oppression form communist dictators that resulted in widespread famine and millions of deaths. The Reformation is not working. Sin is worse today than it ever was.
You can say that it was not the reformer's fault, it was unbelievers, but you can't tell me that the secular authorities and intellectuals were not emboldened by that spirit of rebellion against the Church.
Human nature has concupiscence, we want to rule, not be ruled. Pride is the greatest sin and humility the greatest virtue. God says He desires obedience rather than sacrifice. Psalm 51
[18] For if thou hadst desired sacrifice, I would indeed have given it: with burnt offerings thou wilt not be delighted. [19] A sacrifice to God is an afflicted spirit: a contrite and humbled heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.

1 Samuel 15
[22] And Samuel said: Doth the Lord desire holocausts and victims, and not rather that the voice of the Lord should be obeyed? For obedience is better than sacrifices: and to hearken rather than to offer the fat of rams.

The Authority was given to the Church when our Lord spoke to Peter in Matthew 16

[18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.


Hmmmm, building a church, keys to the kingdom of heaven, authority of binding and loosing. Wow that is some pretty big authority that has nothing to do with individuals studying the word of God on their own and rebelling against the Church.

Jesus gives us the authority structure in Matthew 18

[15] But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.

[16] And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. [17] And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.

We see that the Church has greater authority than two Christians arguing about scripture, and if they won't listen to the Church, they are as heathens and publicans


Everyone wants to be a king. We know better than our peers and our so called superiors. We can read the Bible, we don't need anyone else, but what does Jesus say? Does He want kings? Does He want everyone to be on their own? Not according to Matthew 18.

[3] And said: Amen I say to you, unless you be converted, and become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. [4] Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, he is the greater in the kingdom of heaven. [5] And he that shall receive one such little child in my name, receiveth me.

[6] But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea.

Little children are obedient to authority, because they know that they do not know everything. Peter was given authority in the Church, and he shared it with the Apostles under his care. We have no right to rebel against the Apostolic faith and go out on our own.
Even when Paul talks about withstanding Peter to his face, did not rebel against Peter and start a new church and call Peter's Church the harlot of Babylon and those that follow her carry the mark of the beast. That is not what happened, and Paul did not use scripture to withstand Peter, but simple logic, How can you, being a Jew, yet live like a gentile, then compel gentiles to live like Jews? Peter changed his mind, as it is the mark of any great leader to admit when he is wrong. He corrected his behavior, but did not abdicate his position as head of the Church.

I submit in obedience to approximately 2000 years of Church history. Not one teaching of the Catholic Church can be shown to be unbiblical. Read the catechism and tell me which one. We cannot lean to our own understanding, nor our own conscience. Understanding is incomplete, and conscience is not always correct, as the Bible says there is a way that seems right to a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death (prov 14:12)

You will disagree with everything I wrote, but what you cannot do is say the Catholic Church is unbiblical. You may point to people that call themselves Catholic, even priests and bishops and point out that their behavior in unbiblical, but you cannot show me from the Catechism, one teaching that is against the word of God

There is no where in scripture that says the “Church” is the Catholic Church that we have today. The scripture you posted does not show your church has greater authority than Jesus or that traditions are above the commandments of God.

For me Jesus is the final word on this matter:

Matthew 15:3 He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ 5 But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God”— 6 then he need not honor his father or mother.’ Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition. 7 Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying:

8 ‘These people draw near to Me with their mouth,
And honor Me with their lips,
But their heart is far from Me.
9 And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ ”

Mark 7:7 And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men—

There is nothing wrong with traditions if it is not placed over the commandments of God according to words of Jesus Christ.

You will disagree with everything I wrote, but what you cannot do is say the Catholic Church is unbiblical.

I’ll let these quotes from the Roman Catholic church speak for themselves:

Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; —she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174

Perhaps the boldest thing, the most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday. "The Day of the Lord" (dies Dominica) was chosen, not from any directions noted in the Scriptures, but from the Church's sense of its own power. The day of resurrection, the day of Pentecost, fifty days later, came on the first day of the week. So this would be the new Sabbath. People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become 7th Day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy.
—Sentinel, Pastor's page, Saint Catherine Catholic Church, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995

Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'
—Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.

Sunday is a Catholic institution, and... can be defended only on Catholic principles.... From beginning to end of Scripture there is not a single passage that warrants the transfer of weekly public worship from the last day of the week to the first.
—Catholic Press, Aug. 25, 1900

Something we we warned about in scripture- this change did not come from God. Daniel 7:25. Should we follow man or God?

 

[chevyontheriver]

I'm not anti Catholic. I have enough to read and learn just trying to get through the Bible. I'm not ready to learn everything about another denomination just so I can critique it. I have respect for Catholics I just disagree with the Church. Not a hill I choose to die on though. I don't think the Church has more authority than the scriptures. That's probably the difference between us.

Did you even bother to read that teeny tiny little Dei Verbum document that I gave you the link to in post 165? The one I responded to your statement that: "So for you it's Sola Catholic Church it seems. You make some valid points but seem to give all authority to the Church".

If you want to continue to believe that for me it's Sola Catholic Church and that I give all authority to the Church then I can't stop you. You get those 'facts' somehow from your Bible alone. I donno how, but you are comfortable that way. No surprise.