Heretics and Heresy

[InnerPhyre]

Well I understand that they were books and that many people like them, but it doesnt make the practices they advocate right practices.

Martin Luther for example didn't advocate practices as much as philosophy, and he could support some of it through the Bible.

And he even ditched books because they didn't support his philosophy. He wanted to take James and Hebrews out as well, but he was talked out of it. If you need to chop up scripture to prove your point....there's something wrong with your point.

 

[Lotar]

Neither of you have really read anything Martin Luther wrote, have you?

 

[Anti-Fear]

I did read some passages of his. I dont remember what they were about though. I should actually read what he wrote.
I learned about him mostly from my professor in medeival class.

Neither of you have really read anything Martin Luther wrote, have you?

 

[Oblio]

I'm still waiting for an answer to what authority ML had to edit the canon of Holy Scripture that has been used by Christians for 1500 years.

 

[SumTinWong]

I'm still waiting for an answer to what authority ML had to edit the canon of Holy Scripture that has been used by Christians for 1500 years.

What right did the Catholic church have to combine the two canons, that Jerome seperated? When Bishop Damascus of Rome asked him to prepare a revision of the Latin text to standardize the scriptures for the churches, the Latin Vulgate, he appended a second volume to the 66 inspired books. According to Jerome, the books in the second canon although edifying, should not be used for establishment of doctrine. Jerome himself excepted the canon as Josephus layed it out. To Jerome the language of divine inspiration in the OT era was Hebrew, and in the NT, Greek. The apocrypha were in Greek and therefore noncanonical. So, one of the very earliest sources said, no. The Catholic church received the Vulgate from this Jerome, and yet they still combined the two and called them inspired, against his learned position.

If Luther regulated these books to the back, or even took them out, isn't he in doing so, standing with the traditional canon?

Off to work, good Lord willing we will talk later!

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

What right did the Catholic church have to combine the two canons, that Jerome seperated? When Bishop Damascus of Rome asked him to prepare a revision of the Latin text to standardize the scriptures for the churches, the Latin Vulgate, he appended a second volume to the 66 inspired books. According to Jerome, the books in the second canon although edifying, should not be used for establishment of doctrine. Jerome himself excepted the canon as Josephus layed it out. To Jerome the language of divine inspiration in the OT era was Hebrew, and in the NT, Greek. The apocrypha were in Greek and therefore noncanonical. So, one of the very earliest sources said, no. The Catholic church received the Vulgate from this Jerome, and yet they still combined the two and called them inspired, against his learned position.

If Luther regulated these books to the back, or even took them out, isn't he in doing so, standing with the traditional canon?

Off to work, good Lord willing we will talk later!

For that matter what would give St. Jerome the authority to change what the Orthodox Church (which the RC was a member of) had already laid down as canon. This would require a council of Bishops acting as equals.

The Orthodox Church speaks of only one canon which they call the "long canon", it contains the Septuagint (OT before edit) and the apocrypha.

Are we going to wind up with a "Holy Pamplet"?

Forgive me...

 

[Oblio]

As orthodoxyusa alluded to, the canon of Scripture is rightly decided by the Church in Council, and not by individuals, and has been used by the Church for 1500 years. Those who change it outside this method are heretics.

 

[InnerPhyre]

Neither of you have really read anything Martin Luther wrote, have you?

Yep. We had to read Luther's gem "The Jews and their Lies" in my religious studies class.

 

[SPALATIN]

For that matter what would give St. Jerome the authority to change what the Orthodox Church (which the RC was a member of) had already laid down as canon. This would require a council of Bishops acting as equals.

The Orthodox Church speaks of only one canon which they call the "long canon", it contains the subtuigent (OT before edit) and the apocrypha.

Are we going to wind up with a "Holy Pamplet"?

Forgive me...

Subtuigent????

I think you mean Septuagent which is the Greek OT written by Alexandrian Jews.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Subtuigent????

I think you mean Septuagent which is the Greek OT written by Alexandrian Jews.

Thanks Scott,

I hate spelling, its my worst nightmare... I corrected the error...

Thanks again

Forgive me...

 

[Lotar]

Yep. We had to read Luther's gem "The Jews and their Lies" in my religious studies class.

Figures

 

[Oblio]

Subtuigent????

I think you mean Septuagent which is the Greek OT written by Alexandrian Jews.

Septuagint !

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Septuagint !

uggg

 

[SumTinWong]

For that matter what would give St. Jerome the authority to change what the Orthodox Church (which the RC was a member of) had already laid down as canon. This would require a council of Bishops acting as equals.

The early church needed few translations. Believers copied and circulated Scriptures in Greek that everyone could read.

But during the 4th century, Latin began to replace Greek as the common language(in the West anyway). Several Latin translations, often inaccurate, leaked into circulation. The Church needed an official translation.

Pope Damasus assigned the job to Jerome, his theological advisor and perhaps the most learned man of the time. Jerome’s translation, called the Latin Vulgate (meaning vulgar or common) became the Bible of the Middle Ages. As you probably know there have been disagreements on both sides about the contents of these books, and if they should be included, or read during church. Because a council said it was so, that did not end the arguments.

 

[SumTinWong]

As orthodoxyusa alluded to, the canon of Scripture is rightly decided by the Church in Council, and not by individuals, and has been used by the Church for 1500 years. Those who change it outside this method are heretics.

So if what I understand you saying is correct you view Jerome, a heretic, and the translation he created as heretical?

 

[Oblio]

The Holy Scriptures are the center of our Tradition, those who change it, change the faith, indeed Christianity itself. They are picking and choosing those beliefs that they agree with and are authoring a change in the fundamentals of the faith. This is IIRC the definition of heresy. The Church has always operated from a conciliar model (beginning explicitly in Acts 15) of goverment, to allow an individual the power to determine doctrine or Tradition or make infallible statements is counter to Orthodoxy.

 

[SumTinWong]

The Holy Scriptures are the center of our Tradition, those who change it, change the faith, indeed Christianity itself. They are picking and choosing those beliefs that they agree with and authoring a change in the fundamentals of the faith. This is IIRC the definition of heresy. The Church has always operated from a conciliar model (beginning explicitly in Acts 15) of goverment, to allow an individual the power to determine doctrine or Tradition or make infallible statements is counter to Orthodoxy.

What if an individual is asked by a church body, to do this, is he then a heretic(in this case Jerome)?

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

What if an individual is asked by a church body, to do this, is he then a heretic(in this case Jerome)?

A church body cannot define heresy, only an Ecuminical Council. If a church changes anything that is council related then it would be a heresy (false teaching) but that does not make the individual a heretic...

Back to post #1

Forgive me...

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

LLOJ subscribes

Original OP:

*snip*..................

Protestantism http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12495a.htm
This one will be the hardest as it is the most prevelant in modern influance.
I dont mean to offend with this one, sometimes the truth is hard to hear...


The Three Fundamental Principles of Protestantism:

• A. The Supremacy of the Bible; (solo scriptura)
  B. Justification by Faith Alone;
  C. The Universal Priesthood of Believers.

Forgive me.....

 

[Secundulus]

A church body cannot define heresy, only an Ecuminical Council. If a church changes anything that is council related then it would be a heresy (false teaching) but that does not make the individual a heretic...

Back to post #1

Forgive me...

LOL. This thread is now accusing the Catholic Church of heresy for providing the scripture in the common language.

Damned if you do. Damned if you don't.