Hello all, quick question...

[nadroj1985]

I would like to hear the Catholic point of view on interpreting the Bible. While my main focus is to learn about this POV, I would also like to offer my own perspective on it and see how a Catholic would respond to this. I know that I am not allowed to do this in the OBOB forum, but there never seems to be anyone in the Interdenominational Forum, so starting the thread there would be somewhat useless. My question is, where can I ask this question that will provide me with a lot of Catholics that can answer, and an environment where we can debate a bit?

 

[thereselittleflower]

Well, it depends on what you mean by a debate . . if you mean discuss, try to find out more about our view point, understand it better and see how it compares to yours, the best way is to ask questions here, starting with a specific question . . then ask questions to clarify something that is not clear . .

But if someone starts becoming antagonistic to our view point, and actually debating with us, then that is not allowed . .

There is no IDD anymore regarding informal discussion of the type you seem to be interested in . . so this is really the best place to ask . .


Peace in Him!

 

[Michelina]

The important thing to remember is to CONSIDER what we say seriously and really try to understand it before you respond. Simply repeating your position -without any evidence that you have taken some time to consider it- will tick people off and get you booted.

I like discussing things with nonCatholics, but only when they show the same courtesy that is given to them.

 

[nadroj1985]

Here is my problem. In the OBOB rules, Erwin says that all that can be allowed is for me to ask you what your ideas are, and for you to tell me. The rules seem to say that it stops there. I am not here to tell you your beliefs are wrong or anything like that. I'd just like to have an honest discussion about this where we can both present our views about things. Thanks for your help guys

 

[Michelina]

Here is my problem. In the OBOB rules, Erwin says that all that can be allowed is for me to ask you what your ideas are, and for you to tell me. The rules seem to say that it stops there. I am not here to tell you your beliefs are wrong or anything like that. I'd just like to have an honest discussion about this where we can both present our views about things. Thanks for your help guys

We have discussions all the time. If anyone gets out of line, we have moderators to intervene.

 

[nadroj1985]

Okey-dokey. Then I guess we can begin......

What is the Catholic belief on interpreting the Bible? I've heard before that the Church has a set belief of its interpretation and that Catholics adhere to it. True? If so, then what happens when someone disagrees with the Church's interpretation?

 

[Veritas]

Okey-dokey. Then I guess we can begin......

What is the Catholic belief on interpreting the Bible? I've heard before that the Church has a set belief of its interpretation and that Catholics adhere to it. True? If so, then what happens when someone disagrees with the Church's interpretation?

Welcome and thanks for asking.

To start with, go to this link and begin reading section III, paragraph 109:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a3.htm#III
These are the instructions from the Catechism of the Catholic Chuch for biblical interpretation. After reading, if you have further questions, just ask.

 

[BornCath]

I would like to hear the Catholic point of view on interpreting the Bible. While my main focus is to learn about this POV, I would also like to offer my own perspective on it and see how a Catholic would respond to this. I know that I am not allowed to do this in the OBOB forum, but there never seems to be anyone in the Interdenominational Forum, so starting the thread there would be somewhat useless. My question is, where can I ask this question that will provide me with a lot of Catholics that can answer, and an environment where we can debate a bit?

##I was a lurker in many forums before I decided to post in this forum because I found posters here more down to earth than those of the other forums. Try forums.catholic-convert.com which I found rigid & rigorous but
fair just as the people in this forum are fair. Most posters there are heavy in Catholic apologetics & my warning to you is if you are a protestant of whatever brand now, you may not get out of there other than as a Catholic. Good luck!

PS: There are more protestant converts to Catholicism there than cradle Catholics so they'll have a good understanding of where you're coming from.

 

[nadroj1985]

OK I read the site you sent me, and I was fine with it all the way up to this part:

"For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God."

Is it saying that the Church can interpret the Bible but no one else can?

 

[Michelina]

OK I read the site you sent me, and I was fine with it all the way up to this part:

"For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God."

Is it saying that the Church can interpret the Bible but no one else can?

Yes. Private interpretation is unscriptural.

The Magisterium (The Teaching Authority of the Church) was given to us by Jesus as a gift of His Mercy to preserve unity (cf. John 17) and as a vehicle for the Holy Spirit to use to guide us into all truth.

 

[Veritas]

OK I read the site you sent me, and I was fine with it all the way up to this part:

"For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgement of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God."

Is it saying that the Church can interpret the Bible but no one else can?

No. I can't believe after reading all that, that you came to that conclusion. It would seem that you had a pre-conceived notion that you sought to prove perhaps. What the Catechism is saying is that, you are free to interpret within the guidelines stated but that ultimately, the Church is the arbiter on matters of faith and morals. Now, why is this? When Jesus said, He would send the Holy Spirit who would guide unto all truth, to whom was he speaking? Just anybody? No, it was to the Apostles.

God speaks to all of us through the Holy Scriptures and we are free to read and allow God's written word to enlighten us. But no one can read and personally interpret scripture and determine doctrine from it. The scripture's themselves speak against this. We can already see the result of doing so. It's called Protestantism. And to date there are over 30,000 different denominations all claiming the bible as their sole and final rule of faith. Well, unless they're all reading different bibles, they're just interpreting the same bible for themselves in different ways...known as private judgement, which the Catholic Church rejects for legitimate reasons.

Does this help?

 

[nadroj1985]

Yes. Private interpretation is unscriptural.

The Magisterium (The Teaching Authority of the Church) was given to us by Jesus as a gift of His Mercy to preserve unity (cf. John 17) and as a vehicle for the Holy Spirit to use to guide us into all truth.

OK I read the chapter in John, and it says nothing that I can see about appointing a teaching authority. If I've missed it please point it out for me. It does say that Jesus wishes for all of us to be one, but couldn't that mean that we should all follow his message of love for God and each other? It doesn't necessarily mean that we all should look at the Bible the same way.

 

[Veritas]

OK I read the chapter in John, and it says nothing that I can see about appointing a teaching authority. If I've missed it please point it out for me. It does say that Jesus wishes for all of us to be one, but couldn't that mean that we should all follow his message of love for God and each other? It doesn't necessarily mean that we all should look at the Bible the same way.

Is there more than one truth?

 

[nadroj1985]

No. I can't believe after reading all that, that you came to that conclusion. It would seem that you had a pre-conceived notion that you sought to prove perhaps. What the Catechism is saying is that, you are free to interpret within the guidelines stated but that ultimately, the Church is the arbiter on matters of faith and morals. Now, why is this? When Jesus said, He would send the Holy Spirit who would guide unto all truth, to whom was he speaking? Just anybody? No, it was to the Apostles.

God speaks to all of us through the Holy Scriptures and we are free to read and allow God's written word to enlighten us. But no one can read and personally interpret scripture and determine doctrine from it. The scripture's themselves speak against this. We can already see the result of doing so. It's called Protestantism. And to date there are over 30,000 different denominations all claiming the bible as their sole and final rule of faith. Well, unless they're all reading different bibles, they're just interpreting the same bible for themselves in different ways...known as private judgement, which the Catholic Church rejects for legitimate reasons.

Does this help?

OK first of all please don't accuse me of having ulterior motives. I am here to learn and I read the full passage. If we get to where we're accusing people of things then I would hope that the mods shut the thread down, even though it is providing me with help.

Where do you draw the line on where we can be enlightened and where we must agree with the Church?

Also, what is meant by private judgment and why does the Catholic Church reject it?

 

[Michelina]

...what is meant by private judgment and why does the Catholic Church reject it?

Scripture rejects it. It would make no sense to establish a Church and then not create a mechanism to preserve its Unity. (John 17 is about the intense desire of Jesus for unity. The authority of the bishops+pope is stated multiple times elsewhere.)

 

[nadroj1985]

Scripture rejects it. It would make no sense to establish a Church and then not create a mechanism to preserve its Unity. (John 17 is about the intense desire of Jesus for unity. The authority of the bishops+pope is stated multiple times elsewhere.)

All I'm saying is that the unity you are talking about may not necessarily be doctrinal. All Christians are united under the banner of love. Couldn't this be what Jesus is talking about?

 

[Michelina]

All I'm saying is that the unity you are talking about may not necessarily be doctrinal. All Christians are united under the banner of love. Couldn't this be what Jesus is talking about?

No, nad, we are to be one in mind and heart, just as Jesus and the Father are One in mind and heart. Also, We are to worship in spirit and in TRUTH. Jesus did not die in order to establish a smorgasbord or a debating society. In Matt 16, He said he would build His Church, not His churches. He wants Unity and the Magisterium is the way He effects what He wants.

Attachment to one's right to a private opinion is very democratic. But we belong to a monarchy where Christ is King and Peter His Vice-Regent. King David gave the keys of his kingdom to his servant, just as his Descendent gave the keys to Peter.

 

[Veritas]

Here's what scripture has to say about private interpretation:

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation,because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." 2Pet. 1:20-21
Although it speaks here of "prophecy", the same would apply to all biblical interpretation. The "men moved by the Holy Spirit", would in the case of the Catholic Church be the Magisterium which we define as the teaching authority of the Church. As Michelina has pointed out, without this authority, there would be no unity and thus Christ's prayer for us to be "perfectly one" would be impossible. Notice how Jesus stated why in His prayer that unity was important? "So that the world would know that You sent me".

Scripture also speaks to us of not being divided.
"I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment." 1Cor. 1:10 If we are all interpreting scripture for ourselves and coming up with different conclusions, how can we be "united in the same mind and judgement"?

 

[nadroj1985]

No, nad, we are to be one in mind and heart, just as Jesus and the Father are One in mind and heart. Also, We are to worship in spirit and in TRUTH. Jesus did not die in order to establish a smorgasbord or a debating society. In Matt 16, He said he would build His Church, not His churches. He wants Unity and the Magisterium is the way He effects what He wants.

I didn't say he died to establish a debating society. I'm saying that we are all different, so naturally we are going to have different views on things. I really think that we can still be unified in love and that doctrinal differences are much less important than love.

Here is the crux of the issue for me. I really can't see myself completely agreeing with someone else on everything in the Bible. There will always be differences in doctrine among different people. There cannot, however, be any disagreement, I don't think, on Christ's main message--love.

 

[Filia Mariae]

Here is the crux of the issue for me. I really can't see myself completely agreeing with someone else on everything in the Bible. There will always be differences in doctrine among different people. There cannot, however, be any disagreement, I don't think, on Christ's main message--love.

Some of these people marching around with "God hates f*gs" signs seem to have missed boat on that one.

Even if we do agree that Christ's central message was one of love (which I am assuming that you and I do), we can disagree vehemently on what constitutes a loving action or attitude.