Interpretatio contra Roma

[ViaCrucis]

So I'm a nerd. I like nerdy things, including language and theology. As such I enjoy non-English theological terms. One of the fun bonuses I like about Lutheranism is that there are a lot of Latin terms and phrases that get used a lot.

in a recent discussion elsewhere on site I decided to use a phrase, interpretatio contra Roma, which I hope is accurate and means "interpretation against Rome". Over the many years I've dabbled on the internet engaging in religious and theological discussions and debates a noted trend--which I doubt anyone here would disagree with--is how often it seems some people have deliberately chosen to engage in theology and Biblical interpretation with the foregone conclusion that Catholicism is wrong, things are Roman/Romish/Popish etc and therefore innately wrong. Rather than having an actual argument, it's simply anti-Catholic sentiment.

So I figured this sort of behavior, or way of doing biblical interpretation (or theological interpretation of any sort) should have a name: interpretatio contra Roma.

I'll admit that, at least at some level, it's at least a little pretentious attempting to coin a Latin phrase, but let's pretend for a moment I'm not being terribly pretentious and fill me in on y'alls thoughts on this.

Also, feel free to let me know I'm being pretentious, no worries, I won't be offended.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[RC1970]

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

So I'm a nerd. I like nerdy things, including language and theology. As such I enjoy non-English theological terms. One of the fun bonuses I like about Lutheranism is that there are a lot of Latin terms and phrases that get used a lot.

in a recent discussion elsewhere on site I decided to use a phrase, interpretatio contra Roma, which I hope is accurate and means "interpretation against Rome". Over the many years I've dabbled on the internet engaging in religious and theological discussions and debates a noted trend--which I doubt anyone here would disagree with--is how often it seems some people have deliberately chosen to engage in theology and Biblical interpretation with the foregone conclusion that Catholicism is wrong, things are Roman/Romish/Popish etc and therefore innately wrong. Rather than having an actual argument, it's simply anti-Catholic sentiment.

So I figured this sort of behavior, or way of doing biblical interpretation (or theological interpretation of any sort) should have a name: interpretatio contra Roma.

I'll admit that, at least at some level, it's at least a little pretentious attempting to coin a Latin phrase, but let's pretend for a moment I'm not being terribly pretentious and fill me in on y'alls thoughts on this.

Also, feel free to let me know I'm being pretentious, no worries, I won't be offended.

-CryptoLutheran

Might I suggest an addendum: Trollus Interpretatio Contra Roma.

 

[Tigger45]

When I invite people to church they usually comment afterward how 'Catholic' it was. They're referring to the liturgy and lack the knowledge of significance behind it.

 

[tz620q]

Might I suggest an addendum: Trollus Interpretatio Contra Roma.

That does seem to be the case most of the time. I have seen several posters drop in one of these controversial and often insulting posts and then virtually disappear from the thread while the rest of us duke it out. I wonder how they read "Blessed are the peacemakers." and convince themselves that they are being Christian. Actually one of the most attractive characteristics of the Lutherans that post here (short one notable exception, who will themselves remain anonymous solely by themselves) is the insistence on truth above bias and charity above victory.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I certainly see it as a trend. And in some of the circles I come from, there was a theological bias that "Catholics are wrong, therefore everything will be interpreted against anything they taught" .... interesting considering they believe in the Trinity, the Resurrection, the Virgin Birth ...

Somewhere in there are people trying to avoid falling into error, and I want to at least admire their caution. But on the other hand, frankly, I think it's a very lazy way to develop one's beliefs, not to mention dangerous. But does it happen - certainly it does, and I think we all would agree with that.

I have enough trouble with that myself. In taking my husband to either Lutheran or Orthodox liturgies, that is the complaint I get - that it is "too Catholic" ... and not because anyone said anything that related to what he believes is a particular Catholic error in doctrine, but just the "feel" of the service. It's an uphill battle when someone is deeply formed by such entrenched teaching ...

 

[Korah]

I probably should PM this instead of exposing my denomination to scorn here on "Traditional Theology", but you mention "Lutheran". First let me start by gullibly spreading the rumor that the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod is troubled by all kinds of doubtful beliefs and practices such as (gasp!) contemporary music in church services. My guess is that the Lutheran Church you take your husband to is likely enough itself LCMS but more old-fashioned at your parish, it's WELS, or it might even be my denomination ELCA in a more traditional parish or particularly traditional service.
Now the true confessions (no rumor here). I doubt your husband would be upset (though I am) at how "Catholic" my ELCA 10:30 service is. Rousing songs, upbeat sermons (where's the deep spiritual teachings our same pastor used to give before he ran out of sermon topics, he even for awhile tried to get us on board with the Charismatic Renewal), ladies more than men as the readers and Communion assistants (or go to a parish where even the pastor is female)--no problem there, right? The problem might be the need to slip out at the end before Communion, held weekly with everyone coming up to the Communion rail. If that won't alarm him, you're free (if baptized) to go up and take open communion.

 

[mark46]

I probably should PM this instead of exposing my denomination to scorn here on "Traditional Theology", but you mention "Lutheran". First let me start by gullibly spreading the rumor that the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod is troubled by all kinds of doubtful beliefs and practices such as (gasp!) contemporary music in church services. My guess is that the Lutheran Church you take your husband to is likely enough itself LCMS but more old-fashioned at your parish, it's WELS, or it might even be my denomination ELCA in a more traditional parish or particularly traditional service.
Now the true confessions (no rumor here). I doubt your husband would be upset (though I am) at how "Catholic" my ELCA 10:30 service is. Rousing songs, upbeat sermons (where's the deep spiritual teachings our same pastor used to give before he ran out of sermon topics, he even for awhile tried to get us on board with the Charismatic Renewal), ladies more than men as the readers and Communion assistants (or go to a parish where even the pastor is female)--no problem there, right? The problem might be the need to slip out at the end before Communion, held weekly with everyone coming up to the Communion rail. If that won't alarm him, you're free (if baptized) to go up and take open communion.

You think that an Eastern Orthodox Christian would find your service more comfortable than a more "Catholic" LCMS or ELCA service?

 

[mark46]

I probably should PM this instead of exposing my denomination to scorn here on "Traditional Theology", but you mention "Lutheran". First let me start by gullibly spreading the rumor that the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod is troubled by all kinds of doubtful beliefs and practices such as (gasp!) contemporary music in church services. My guess is that the Lutheran Church you take your husband to is likely enough itself LCMS but more old-fashioned at your parish, it's WELS, or it might even be my denomination ELCA in a more traditional parish or particularly traditional service.
Now the true confessions (no rumor here). I doubt your husband would be upset (though I am) at how "Catholic" my ELCA 10:30 service is. Rousing songs, upbeat sermons (where's the deep spiritual teachings our same pastor used to give before he ran out of sermon topics, he even for awhile tried to get us on board with the Charismatic Renewal), ladies more than men as the readers and Communion assistants (or go to a parish where even the pastor is female)--no problem there, right? The problem might be the need to slip out at the end before Communion, held weekly with everyone coming up to the Communion rail. If that won't alarm him, you're free (if baptized) to go up and take open communion.

ELCA has both high and low church parishes, and has services with a wide variety of music. As with other denominations, a parish might have several eucharistic services, each with a different "style" of worship.

 

[Korah]

Your Post #9 seems to state the same as I stated--it all depends upon which parish and/or which service you go to.
Your Post #8 seems (to me) to misunderstand Kylissa's dilemma with her husband. I infer him to be an ordinary type American male who has no use for "smells and bells". ANY High-Church service would turn him off. I recommended to Kylissa that she search around to find whatever Lutheran (why "Lutheran", is that his heritage?) nearby is low-church or contemporary, regardless of whether it is one denomination or the other. Far as I know LCMS is on-the-whole as "loose" as ELCA (except non-members can't take Communion there, so select a week when none is offered).

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Far as I know LCMS is on-the-whole as "loose" as ELCA (except non-members can't take Communion there, so select a week when none is offered).

Not even close; you must have just dropped in from another planet.

You need to stick to your own Church (which I'm not all that sure that you know a whole lot about either) and let those of us who are LCMS, LCC and WELS speak for ourselves.

Last warning.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I appreciate the replies, but ... as noted, I am Orthodox. I cannot receive communion myself at another Church, and really want to be in my own Church every time there is a Liturgy.

The situation is rather complicated in my own home - I wasn't asking for advice so much as just commenting on how things can seem to some people. But I appreciate the effort.

BTW, the "too Catholic" is generally such things as a visible Corpus on a Cross, and yes, smells and bells will do it too, as will vestments or anything "high Church".

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I appreciate the replies, but ... as noted, I am Orthodox. I cannot receive communion myself at another Church, and really want to be in my own Church every time there is a Liturgy.

The situation is rather complicated in my own home - I wasn't asking for advice so much as just commenting on how things can seem to some people. But I appreciate the effort.

BTW, the "too Catholic" is generally such things as a visible Corpus on a Cross, and yes, smells and bells will do it too, as will vestments or anything "high Church".

Chanting anything; liturgy, prayers, psalms, responses. We get one of two responses; 'I don't get that chanting stuff' and I usually get a blank stare when I explain it comes form both our Jewish heritage and it was the norm in all churches until very recently. The other more common response is a look of awe; most like it.

The other thing that they do not get is the celebrant facing the altar (back to the congregation).

 

[Anhelyna]

Hmmm - re celebrant facing the Altar, an interesting thing I was once told was that a good shepherd leads his flock from the front - he doesn't look round knowing that they are following him

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Hmmm - re celebrant facing the Altar, an interesting thing I was once told was that a good shepherd leads his flock from the front - he doesn't look round knowing that they are following him

That is how I see it; but in situations where congregations don't have an altar that actually is an altar, then there is no point I guess. The concept of an "altar" can be viewed as "catholic" as well; rather than Judaeo-Christian.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Chanting anything; liturgy, prayers, psalms, responses. We get one of two responses; 'I don't get that chanting stuff' and I usually get a blank stare when I explain it comes form both our Jewish heritage and it was the norm in all churches until very recently. The other more common response is a look of awe; most like it.

The other thing that they do not get is the celebrant facing the altar (back to the congregation).

Two more good points ... yes, those are seen as foreign as well.

 

[All4Christ]

That is how I see it; but in situations where congregations don't have an altar that actually is an altar, then there is no point I guess. The concept of an "altar" can be viewed as "catholic" as well; rather than Judaeo-Christian.

The altar was a very important part of the Pentecostal Church I used to be a part of....so I think that particular concept is a bit more universal. It was very symbolic and congregational though.

 

[Athanasias]

The altar was a very important part of the Pentecostal Church I used to be a part of....so I think that particular concept is a bit more universal. It was very symbolic and congregational though.

What I always thought was ironic was how my southern baptist and non denominational friends would have altar calls and not even a real used altar. In the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox the altar makes sense because it is there you approach the real sacrificial altar of our Lord and receive the real living sacrifice of our Lord himself in the Eucharist. Now thats a real altar call!

 

[~Anastasia~]

What I always thought was ironic was how my southern baptist and non denominational friends would have altar calls and not even a real used altar. In the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox the altar makes sense because it is there you approach the real sacrificial altar of our Lord and receive the real living sacrifice of our Lord himself in the Eucharist. Now thats a real altar call!

I remember my earlier days in the church, knowing it was an "altar call" and trying to figure out what the "altar" was in that case. It WAS very confusing - I arrived at different answers in different church buildings, and none of them squared with the altar mentioned in Scripture.

 

[All4Christ]

What I always thought was ironic was how my southern baptist and non denominational friends would have altar calls and not even a real used altar. In the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox the altar makes sense because it is there you approach the real sacrificial altar of our Lord and receive the real living sacrifice of our Lord himself in the Eucharist. Now thats a real altar call!

I remember my earlier days in the church, knowing it was an "altar call" and trying to figure out what the "altar" was in that case. It WAS very confusing - I arrived at different answers in different church buildings, and none of them squared with the altar mentioned in Scripture.

Very true to both.

I don't question the meaning and importance to those who use it though; they truly do think they are following what Scripture says. The altar means so much more in the Orthodox Church and other liturgical churches, but it was extremely important to me back then as well. Communion (though symbolic) was prepared there at the altar (a long area with a step up with areas to kneel - or stand if desired - and pray), prayed over and offered to God, the prayers of the people were offered at the altar and the anointing of the sick was there as well. I think often people are truly trying to do things the right way, but don't understand how much more is out there. I really believe that if people truly experienced and understood what an altar really should be (or the other parts of the liturgy, faith, worship, etc.), many more would try to attain that in some form.