Weblog
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Monday, December 04, 2006
-
Grace and Sin
There are two kinds of grace: sanctifying grace and actual grace. Any gift of God can be called a grace, but these are the two chief kinds of grace.
“Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made…” (Romans 1; 20)
Sanctifying grace is a sharing in the life of God. It is a supernatural gift of God bestowed on us through the merits of Jesus Christ for our salvation. Sanctifying grace makes us holy and pleasing to God, it makes us adopted children of God and temples of the Holy Spirit. In short, sanctifying grace is the supernatural life of the soul. Sanctifying grace remains even after the death of the body, and it becomes the life of the soul in heaven.
“His divine power has bestowed on us everything that makes for life and devotion, through the knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and power. Through these, he has bestowed on us the precious and very great promises, so that through them you may come to share in the divine nature...” (2 Peter 1, 3-4)
“For those who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God. For you did not receive a spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you received a spirit of adoption, through which we cry, Abba, Father! The Spirit itself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs…” (Romans 8; 15)
Actual grace is a supernatural help from God which enlightens our mind and strengthens our will to do good and to avoid evil.
The soul is eternal – every soul created will go on forever either in heaven or in hell. As long as sanctifying grace is present in the soul, it goes on living even after the body dies. When the body dies, the soul retains this life and lives forever in heaven. Sanctifying grace is permanent and can only be lost by sin. If sanctifying grace is lost, the body may go on living, but the soul has lost the life of God. When the body dies, the soul goes to the eternal death of hell. Therefore, sanctifying grace is necessary for salvation.
Actual graces are temporary helpers that come to us when we need them, such as during a temptation or struggle. Actual grace is necessary to salvation for all who have attained the use of reason, because without it we cannot long resist the power of temptation.
“For the concern of the flesh is hostility toward God; it does not submit to the law of God, nor can it….But you are not in the flesh; on the contrary, you are in the spirit, if only the Spirit of God dwells in you… But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the spirit is alive because of righteousness. If the Spirit of the one who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, the one who raised Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also, through his spirit that dwells in you.” (Romans 8;11)
God created Adam and Eve with sanctifying grace. Because they disobeyed His command and ate the forbidden fruit that grew in the Garden of Paradise, they lost sanctifying grace. (Catholics believe that the Genesis account of the fall of man may have been metaphorical.) As a consequence, Adam and Eve became subject to death, suffering, and a strong inclination to evil, and were driven from the Garden of Paradise. This is known as original sin – not because it was the first sin, but because it comes down to us through Adam and Eve, the origin of mankind. We, their descendants, inherited their punishment and come into the world with original sin already in our souls instead of sanctifying grace. This may seem unfair. However, original sin does not take away from us anything to which we have a strict right as human beings, but only deprives us of the free gifts of God.
“Then the Lord God said: ‘See! The man has become like one of us, knowing what is good and what is bad! Therefore, he must not be allowed to put out his hand to take fruit from the tree of life also, and thus eat of it and live forever.” (Genesis 3; 22)
Original sin is not the only kind of sin; there is another kind, called actual sin, which we ourselves commit. Actual sin is any willful thought, desire, word, action, or omission forbidden by the law of God. This is where free will comes in – we choose whether or not to commit actual sin, whereas original sin is natural to everyone.
“So the Lord said to Cain: ‘Why are you so resentful and crestfallen? If you do well, you can hold up your head; but if not, sin is a demon lurking at the door: his urge is toward you, yet you can be his master.’” (Genesis 4; 6-7)
There are two kinds of actual sin: mortal and venial. Mortal sin is a grievous offense against God. It is called “mortal” sin because mortal means deadly, and mortal sin deprives the soul of sanctifying grace, which is the life of the soul. A sin is mortal when the evil done is seriously wrong or considered seriously wrong, and the sinner has full consent of the will.
Venial sin is a less serious offense against the law of God, which does not deprive the soul of sanctifying grace. A sin is venial when the evil done is not seriously wrong or when the sinner sincerely believes it is only slightly wrong, or does not give full consent to it. Venial sin does not deprive the soul of sanctifying grace; therefore, if the body dies while the soul is in this state, the soul will not be damned. The word “venial” comes from the Latin word venia, meaning grace, because souls in venial sin still possess sanctifying grace. However, venial sin weakens the soul’s ability to resist temptations to mortal sin, and it makes us less fervent in the service of God. No amount of venial sins can add up to a mortal sin, but increased negligence with venial sin will inevitably lead to mortal sin.
There is no catalog listing mortal and venial sins. Whether a sin is mortal or venial depends less on the action than upon the intention and the knowledge of the sinner, so these terms can be difficult to define. The terms "venial" and "mortal" can be thought of as alternate names for "guilty feelings" and "very guilty feelings." Since different sins naturally bring with them different levels of guilt, different levels of healing and punishment must exist to counteract them.
There are seven chief sources of actual sin: pride, covetousness, lust, anger, gluttony, envy, and sloth. These are not necessarily the greatest sins, but are the chief reasons people commit sin.
People are obliged to avoid the near occasion of sin – all persons, places, or things that may easily lead us to into sin.
“If your hand or foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter into life maimed or crippled than with two hands or two feet to be thrown into eternal fire. And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you two enter into life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into fiery Gehenna.” (Matthew 18; 8-9)
Many people consider the Catholic Church to be too structured or rule-bound because it uses words like “sanctifying” and “actual” grace, and “mortal” and “venial” sin. It may seem like we are trying to pigeonhole and plan everything. Many people have the mistaken understanding that the Catholic Church invented sanctifying grace, for example, and that we try to manipulate the reality of God’s grace to fit under this title. It is true that these terms are merely the invention of man and bear little significance in and of themselves. The purpose of these terms is not to limit God’s intricate plan to man’s organized structure; the purpose of these words is to clarify the exact meaning they convey. For example, the term “sanctifying grace” was invented from the mind of mankind. He could have chosen any other term to define this supernatural phenomenon, but the fact remains that he was merely putting a label on an existing reality. God’s law determined the truths I presented in this entry – man defined these truths according to revelation, so that later men could have some idea of the structure and organization of these intangible realities.
This entry may seem relatively insignificant to our purpose in this site. In trying to write about the more controversial issues facing the Faith, I have found that steps must be taken backward to this level before further information can be rightly understood. From a basic understanding of the way Catholics view grace and sin, spring topics such as Purgatory, salvation by works or by faith, the sacraments, and other controversial issues. If I have accomplished what I set out to do, this entry should lay the foundation for these topics.
Thursday, July 13, 2006
-
Catholicism and the Bible
Our word “Bible” comes from the Greek word biblia, meaning “the books.” Therefore, when we call it the Bible, we are literally saying it is the Book, the Book of Books. This special honor is entitled to the Bible because it was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and is therefore the word of God. The Bible is not the oldest book, but it is the first book to be printed (Gutenberg Bible, circa 1450) and has had the farthest-reaching influence in the religion of mankind of any book.
Jews as well as Christians accept the Bible as the word of God. However, there are differences in the number of books each possesses. Since the Bible did not drop from heaven pre-printed, it had to be determined which books were inspired by God and which ones were merely written from the mind of man.
The canon is the collection of books acknowledged as inspired by the Holy Spirit. In the Greek canon, the Old Testament contains 46 books. There are other books that are not in the canon which are called Apocrypha (meaning “hidden”) which were from purely human origin but claimed to have been divinely inspired.
In the Hebrew canon, there are 39 books in the Old Testament. Some people refer to the “extra seven books” as the Apocrypha, but the correct term for them is deutero-canonical, which means “belonging to the second canon.” The other thirty-nine books are called proto-canonical, that is, “belonging to the first canon.” This terminology was invented later for the sake of clarity. The deutero-canonical books (the seven books which are missing from the Hebrew canon) are: Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, Baruch, Tobit, and 1 and 2 Maccabees, as well as seven chapters of Esther and sixty-six verses of the third chapter of Daniel.
In the third century before Christ, many Jews still spoke the Hebrew language in Palestine; but Greek was becoming increasingly more prevalent there and throughout the Mediterranean. Greek was the common language of the Mediterranean by the time of Christ. Alexandria, Egypt possessed the biggest and best library of the time. In the 200’s (B.C.), a translation of the Hebrew canon into Greek was made by 70 Jewish scholars, and is therefore called the Septuagint (which means “the work of the Seventy.”) The Old Testament used by Catholics is based on the Greek canon.
The authenticity of this Greek canon was debated by some Jewish leaders into the third century after Christ. The criteria the Jews used to determine their canon were: The book had to be written in Hebrew, it had to be in conformity with the Torah, it had to be older than the time of Ezra, and it had to be written in Palestine. The Jews finally decided not to include seven books (the aforementioned deutero-canonical books) in their canon, on one or more of these grounds. The Old Testament used by Protestants and Jews is based on the Hebrew canon.
The Septuagint was the translation used by Jesus and the New Testament writers. We know this because the majority of the Old Testament quotations found in the New Testament are from the Septuagint. Some Protestant authors have listed 340 places where the New Testament cites the Septuagint and only 33 places where it cites the Hebrew canon, which is about 90% Septuagint and 10% Hebrew canon. The earliest Christians of recorded history, (such as Irenaeus, who was taught by Polycarp, who was taught by John the Apostle) accepted the Septuagint as well, showing that it was acknowledged as the inspired word of God from the very time of Christ. Among the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran were ancient Hebrew copies of some of the seven disputed books; others of the disputed books were later found to be translations of the original Hebrew copies which had been destroyed. This means the Jews’ rejection of these books was insupportable on those grounds. Furthermore, various New Testament books give reference to the deutero-canonical books. Hebrews 1:3 shows dependence on Wisdom 7:26, Hebrews 11:35 on 2 Maccabees 6, Romans 9:21 on Wisdom 15:7, etc.
There are many websites out there claiming to present the truth on this major controversy. Instead of trying to convince everyone that I am honest, I will say that what I write here is the universal view of the Roman Catholic Church and can be verified as such. To give an example of the lies that can be found on some of these websites, I give here an excerpt from a public website. I wrote the truth in italics inside parenthases myself: "Roman Catholics Bibles have several more books in the Old Testament than Protestant Bibles. These books are referred to as the Apocrypha or Deuterocanonical books. (I have already explained that the term Apocrypha for these books is inaccurate and only came into use after the Protestant Reformation.) The Apocrypha were written primarily in the time between the Old and New Testaments. The nation of Israel treated the Deuterocanonical books with respect, but never accepted them as true books of the Hebrew Bible. (The truth is that the deuterocanonical books were debated from the time they were found until the time of Jesus, on the grounds I already mentioned.) The early Christian church debated the status of the Apocrypha, but almost always rejected them from being included in the Bible. (The truth is that some of the debated books were discerned to be inspired, aka the deutero-canonical books, and some were discerned as not inspired, which are not included in the canon. Some still chose to reject the books that were discerned as inspired; however, they were accepted and used by Jesus.) Probably the most conclusive argument against the Deuterocanonical books being included in the Bible is the fact that the New Testament nowhere quotes or alludes to any of the Apocryphal books. (This is also untrue, as can be seen in the quotes I provided which show dependence on those books. Also, the translation of the Bible which included the deutero-canonical books, the Septuagint, was used by Jesus and is the translation He considered the infallible word of God. He did not use the previous translation which did not include these books. Incidentally, the same site that denies the infallibility of the deuterocanonical books asserts that the Septuagint is accurate and infallible.) The Apocrypha / Deuterocanonical books teach many things that are not true and are not historically accurate. (The truth is that these books teach many things which were rejected at the time of the Protestant Reformation, and are therefore now considered untrue by Protestants.) The Roman Catholic church officially added the Apocrypha to their Bible after the Protestant Reformation because it supports some of the things that the Roman Catholic church believes and practices which are not in agreement with the Bible." (This is a bold-faced lie that is inconsistent with history. If anyone has doubts about this, I encourage you to look it up for yourself from a reliable source and back it up with other sources, not from the internet where people can just post their opinions as fact. The truth is that the Septuagint, which includes the deutero-canonical books, was used by Jesus and by Christians until the time of the Protestant Reformation, at which time Martin Luther proposed to adopt the Hebrew canon instead. The Hebrew canon did not include the deutero-canonical books at the time of Jesus or thereafter.)
Lies like the ones on the site I quoted above mislead large numbers of people by presenting prejudicial opinions and lies as facts. This is an outrage and a pity. "Some people... turned to meaningless talk, wanting to be teachers of the law, but without understanding either what they are saying or what they assert with such assurance." (1 Timothy 1, 7) I have no way of combating it except to try to present the truth to you and asking your prayers for all those who knowingly or unknowingly mislead others.
The Septuagint was later translated (in the 300’s) into the Latin Vulgate (Vulgate meaning “common” in reference to the language, since Latin was the common language of the time), and an early Germanic language. The modern English Douay Version (named for the Douay College in France where it was prepared) came when English was the common language. This English translation of the Old Testament was published in 1582 and the New Testament in 1609.
There are 27 books in the New Testament, the same number according to all Christian religions but rejected by the Jews along with the seven from the Old Testament. Some trouble came up when determining the canon of the New Testament just as it had with the Old Testament. Which books were inspired by the Holy Spirit and which ones were not? Some of the books in question were Hebrews, Jude, Revelation, 2 Peter, Shepherd of Hermas, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of Thomas, the letters of Barnabas, and the letters of Clement, among others. The Catholic Church determined which books were the inspired word of God and belonged to the Bible, and which ones did not belong because they were not inspired. The Church used special criteria for determining the canon of the New Testament, such as its authorship by an apostle or someone with a close connection to an apostle, the book’s acceptance at the time of Christ or the Apostles, the book’s consistency in doctrine and moral content, etc. The teaching authority of the Church was trusted with this decision because of its infallibility. (See the May 6th entry for explanation of infallibility.) The Church itself did not determine the canon, but the Holy Spirit working through the Church which Jesus established inspired its leaders to know the truth. Without the direction of the Church, we would not know which books of the Bible were inspired.
“We are obliged to yield many things to the Papists (Catholics) - that they possess the Word of God which we received from them, otherwise we should have known nothing at all about it.” – Martin Luther, Commentary on St. John, chapter 16.
Therefore, it is contradictory for modern Protestants to accept the canon of the New Testament, which the Catholic Church determined, while also refusing to accept that the Church has this power. It is an historical fact that Catholics determined, by the guidance of the Holy Spirit through the Church, which books comprise the Bible. To trust that the Bible is the Word of God is to trust in the authority of the Church.
The Catholic Bible has 73 books altogether, Old and New Testament. (Sometimes you may hear that Catholics have 72 books, which is because Jeremiah and Lamentations are sometimes put together in one book.) This canon was confirmed by various bishops, the Council of Hippo, and the Council of Carthage. Pope Saint Innocent I declared infallibly in 405 A.D. that this is the canon of the Bible. This means that the following list is the complete Word of God; being complete, nothing can be added to or taken away from the canon. This canon includes everything God intended the Bible to include.
This is the canon of the Bible. The parentheses contain alternate names, in an attempt to avoid confusion.
The Old Testament
Genesis
Exodus
Leviticus } The PentateuchNumbers
Deuteronomy
Josue (Joshua)
Judges } Included in the category of the Pentateuch
Ruth
1 Kings (First Samuel)
2 Kings (Second Samuel)3 Kings (First Kings)
4 Kings (Second Kings)
1 Paralipomenon (First Chronicles)
2 Paralipomenon (Second Chronicles) } The Historical Books
1 Esdras (Ezra)
2 Esdras (Nehemias or Nehemiah)
Tobias (Tobit)
Judith
Esther
1 Machabees (1 Maccabees)2 Machabees (2 Maccabees)
Job
The Psalter (the Psalms)
Proverbs
Ecclesiastes } The Wisdom Books
The Canticle of Canticles (Song of Songs or Song of Solomon)
Wisdom
Ecclesiasticus (Sirach)
Isaias (Isaiah)
Jeremias (Jeremiah, sometimes including Lamentations)
Lamentations (when not included in Jeremias)
Baruch
Ezechiel (Ezekiel)
Daniel
Osee (Hosea)
Joel
Amos } the Prophetic BooksAbdias (Obadiah)
Jonas (Jonah)
Micheas (Micah)
Nahum
Habacue (Habakkuk)
Sophonias (Zephaniah)
Aggeus (Haggai)
Zacharias (Zechariah)
Malachias (Malachi)The New Testament
The Gospel according to Matthew
The Gospel according to Mark } The Gospels
The Gospel according to Luke
The Gospel according to John
The Acts of the Apostles
Letter to the Romans (sometimes called “Epistles” instead of “Letters”)
First Letter to the Corinthians
Second Letter to the Corinthians
Letter to the Galatians
Letter to the Ephesians
Letter to the Philippians
Letter to the Colossians
First Letter to the Thessalonians
Second Letter to the Thessalonians
First Letter to Timothy
Second Letter to Timothy
Letter to Titus
Letter to Philemon
Letter to the Hebrews
Letter of James
First Letter of Peter
Second Letter of Peter
First Letter of John
Second Letter of John
Third Letter of John
Letter of Jude
Revelation (Apocalypse)
When the Protestant Revolution began, Martin Luther proposed to adopt the 39-book Old Testament according to the Hebrew canon instead of using the canon of the Catholic Church which he was breaking away from. His main reason for doing so was that he did not agree with some of the doctrines proclaimed in these seven books, such as praying for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:42-45). The Old Testament came to the Protestants in this way in the early 1500’s, before which time the Septuagint had been universally accepted by Christians. Luther also proposed to exclude the books of James, Esther, and Revelation on the same grounds. Also, in his German translation of Romans 3:28, Luther deliberately added a word - “alone.”
“Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith alone without the deeds of the law.”
It is easy to see that Luther did not have a sound idea of the Sacred Scriptures, which invalidates his decision to leave out the seven books from the Old Testament.
The Protestant translation of the Bible, first published in 1611, was called the “Authorized Version” and was dedicated to King James I, therefore it is now known as the “King James Version” Bible.
Catholics are notorious for not reading or knowing the Bible. However, this is not Catholic doctrine or teaching or tradition, and Catholics are encouraged by the Church to read ‘the Good Book’ whenever possible. The Word of God is a tremendous gift, what St. Gregory calls “a letter which Almighty God addressed to mankind;” therefore, all true Christians desire to be familiar with it. No Catholic is obligated to read the Bible in order to find the truth or achieve salvation, since it is written,
“Thus faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes through the word of Christ” (Romans 10; 17).
However, the first half of the Mass is the Liturgy of the Word, in which three readings are proclaimed from the Bible, so practicing Catholics will hear the Word of God at least once a week anyway. Though it is not an obligation to read the Bible on your own time, several Popes and saints have urged this practice. The Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, in 1884, said “It can hardly be necessary to remind you, beloved brethren, that the most highly valued treasure of every family library, and the most frequently and lovingly made us of, should be the Holy Scriptures.” Catholics may know which Biblical translations are approved by the Pope if they notice the Latin word Imprimatur (which means “it may be printed”) written near the front or the back of the Bible, or any book for that matter.
The Catholic Church does not deny that the Bible is flawless and perfect; the Catholic Church simply denies that the Bible is the sole rule of Faith.
Tradition and Scripture are the two sources from which the Church draws God’s truth, revealed to mankind, and they are of equal importance. In fact, each alone is sufficient to establish a truth of our holy Faith.
“Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours” (2 Thessalonians 2:15).
No one can deny that traditions are passed on both by Sacred Scriptures and by word of mouth - therefore making the Bible only one of two sources.
Tradition can either contain a revealed truth not found in Scripture, or explain more clearly and definitely a doctrine less clearly expressed in Scripture. It does not happen that Scripture contains a truth not found in Tradition, because Tradition can develop over time and therefore incorporates all that is contained in Scripture, even newly discovered truths. Tradition and Scripture are only the remote rules of faith, however; the Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church is the proximate (direct) rule of faith. This is because the Catholic Church alone has received from God the authority and the guidance necessary to interpret infallibly the doctrines He has revealed, either in Scripture or in Tradition. The Church cannot teach anything that is not contained in one or the other of these two sources. No Catholic doctrine truly contradicts the Sacred Scriptures.
Catholics believe that God is the ultimate authority, not the Church, not Tradition, not the Bible. But this statement contradicts itself because God made the Church, invented Tradition, wrote the Bible, and therefore dwells within them. Bible-believing Christians submit, not to the authority of the Bible itself, but to the authority of God, who dwells in the Word He inspired. Without God, the Bible coud not exist; even if it could, it would be worthless without God. Catholics are among those who believe this. Likewise, Catholics submit, not to the authority of the Church itself, but to the authority of God, who dwells in the Church He founded. Without God, the Church could not exist; even if it could, it would be worthless without God.
If something else is necessary in addition to the Bible, doesn't this mean that the Bible is lacking in some respect, which means it is not perfect? This is a reasonable doubt, except that it fails to explain why God then bothered to create a Church. If all that is necessary is the reading of the Bible and acceptance of its truths, which would be the case if the Bible were the sole rule of faith, why did God create a Church? Catholics know that one reason He created the Church was to preserve, interpret, and protect from heresy His truths, which are also recorded in the Bible. It was further necessary for God to leave us His Church because He knew that problems unforeseen at the time of the Bible would present themselves and that the people would need a wise and infallible interpreter to apply Biblical principles to modern problems. The fact that the Bible is flawless and perfect might seem to imply that the Bible is the sole rule of Faith, but this is not explicit and cannot reasonably be assumed.
The Bible alone is enough to establish a truth of the Holy Faith because it is the flawless and complete Word of God; but is not the embodiment of the religion Jesus founded. Tradition alone is also enough to establish a truth of the Holy Faith because it is also under the infallible guidance of the Holy Spirit. Together, the Bible and Tradition are the complete package from God to mankind. The Catholic Church can be described as this perfect combination of the Bible and Tradition.
Now, almost all Protestants believe in sola scriptura, which means “Bible alone” and claims that the Bible alone is the authority in matters of faith. This is contrary to Catholic doctrine and is inaccurate biblically, historically, and logically.
First of all, sola scriptura goes against the Bible itself, which tells us that we need more than just the Bible alone. The Bible says that not everything is recorded there, that we must also follow tradition as passed down by the Apostles in action, letter, or word of mouth.
“There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written” (John 21:25). This is not to suggest that the Bible is imperfect or that the Scriptures are not enough. This is to reiterate that the Bible does not contain everything of significance, such as every custom of the Church or every event in the life of Jesus.
“I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you” (1 Corinthians 11:2).
“We instruct you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to shun any brother who conducts himself in a disorderly way and not according to the tradition they received from us” (2 Thessalonians 3:6).
Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Bible alone is the rule of faith.
Moreover, the Bible alone cannot be used as the definitive answer for all truth since it can be interpreted differently by everyone who reads it. The Bible itself says that the Scriptures are hard to understand, which expresses the need for an infallible interpreter.
“...In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures” (2 Peter 3:15-16).
People can lead themselves astray with erroneous interpretations if they use the Scriptures alone as their guide without an infallible interpreter. In addition to the Bible, there must also be some institution through which God enables men to interpret Scripture rightly. This institution would have to have authority over the Bible since it was to determine its meaning. We know from the Bible that this institution is the Church that Jesus founded, which He promised would remain until the end of time and be guided by the infallible Holy Spirit. Clearly, the Bible is not the only authority. Though the Bible is perfect and complete, it can be taken out of context, misinterpreted, distorted, etc. if used as the sole rule of faith.
The Bible itself (1 Timothy 3:15) says that the Church, not scripture alone, is “the pillar and foundation of truth.”
The U.S.A. was founded on the Constitution, a written document, but the founding fathers also left a living, continuing authority in place to guard and officially interpret that Constitution for later generations. The founding fathers knew that it would lead to endless divisions if everyone acted as his own interpreter. God certainly has more wisdom than the founders of this country and would not have left a written document to be the only rule of faith without a living, continuing authority to guard and infallibly interpret it.
The original Christian religion founded by Christ has splintered into over 33,000 denominations because people think that they can read the Bible alone, without any guidance or official interpretation, and decide for themselves what the truth is. This idea does not come from God and was unheard of for 1500 years before the Protestant Reformation.
As described above (paragraph nine), the Church determined which books are included in Scripture. Without the infallible Church, it would be impossible to determine which books were inspired by God and therefore trustworthy. The true and complete Word of God would not exist without the Church to determine which books are the Word of God and which ones are not. It is clear that an authority other than the Bible determined which books constitute the Bible.
Protestant Biblical scholar Credner said, “Protestants have built a new church on the foundation of Scripture, first without understanding, then without the will to understand, that Scripture itself rests on nothing but Tradition.”
Catholics trust that the authority of the Church is infallible because it is promised in the Bible, which we know is infallible by the authority of the Church; these two go hand in hand as equal partners and would be groundless without each other. Neither could stand alone without the existence of the other because God created them to depend on each other for verification.
It is clear that Jesus founded a Church with divine authority to govern in His name through the instrument of His Apostles, promising that that Church would last until the end of time. The Apostles transmitted the Word of God into written form. The New Testament, then, grew from the Church under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Christianity was not founded on the New Testament, but on apostolic instruction, of which the New Testament is a summary and a record. It is groundless to claim that Christianity is based solely on Scripture when Christianity existed before the Scripture was written.
Saturday, May 06, 2006
-
Papal authority and infallibility.
The popes are guardians of doctrine; they only preserve existing doctrine and cannot change it. (Doctrine is the basic principles of a religion - the elements of faith, such as those contained in a creed. These cannot be changed by anyone ever. Doctrine is essentially what we believe, which is why it cannot be changed. Things like not eating meat on Fridays and hearing Mass in Latin are customs, not doctrine, and can therefore be changed. This is not to demean the importance of these practices, which are very much a part of the Church life and tradition and have special significance.)
Infallibility does not mean that the Pope never makes mistakes or that he never sins - or even that he cannot personally hold erroneous views in matters of faith. Papal infallibility does not mean that the Pope is perfect like Jesus. Infaillibility means that the Pope, when acting as Head and Teacher of the whole Church, is prevented by the special assistance of the Holy Spirit from making a mistake or error in doctrine of faith or morals. The Pope teaches infallibly when "he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals." (Vatican I and II) Therefore, the Pope's infallibility is limited to doctrine, to matters of faith and morals - not to Church customs, sports, literature, or most things in everyday life. The Pope decides all such matters of faith and morals according to the tenor of infallible Holy Scripture and Tradition. His infallibility comes into play only when the Pope "proclaims by definitive act," that is, in a formal, public statement. An offhand comment over lunch doesn't count.
The Pope is the bishop of Rome and also the living head of the Church. The Holy Spirit guarantees that the Pope and any bishop will teach truly whenever he reiterates what the Church has always taught - aka, doctrine. (The Church has always taught the historical reality of the resurrection, for example, and an individual bishop teaches infallibly when he reiterates this teaching. All bishops, when united with the Pope in ecuminical councils, also teach infallibly on matters of faith or morals.)
Christianity is not a philosophy or a system of human wisdom - it is the Revelation of God. Christ promised His own assistance and the assistance of the Holy Spirit to His Church so that it would become the
"pillar and ground of truth" (I Tim. 3, 15).
God's revelation is proposed to us, not by men, but by God Himself.The conscience of each man dictates his own actions, but conscience is enriched by the directions of the infallible teaching authority of the Church. Reason tells us that the vast majority of men, from want of time, application, or talent, cannot attain to certain knowledge even of the truths of natural religion. History tells us that wherever the right of individual private judgement was set up as the sole judge in matters pertaining to revelation, it has invariably led to disentegration of the Christian Faith itself. Protestantism rebelled against the infallible teaching authority of the Church four centuries ago, and how much of the Christianity taught by Christ is there to be found today in the numberless sects into which they were divided?
"I will ask the Father, and He shall give you another Paraclete, that He may abide with you forever, the Spirit of truth.... But when He, the Spirit of truth is come, He will teach you all truth" (John 14,16: 16,13).
You who assert that the infallibility of the Bible is the only infallibility, are you certain that your interpretation of the Bible is correct? If you are infallibly certain, then you assert for yourself, and of course for every reader of the Scripture, a personal infallibility -- while simultaneously denying it to the Pope.
If you are not infallibly certain that you understand the true meaning of the Bible, then of what use to you is the Bible since it cannot be interpreted correctly? God would not have revealed His truth to man without leaving him a means of ascertaining its precise meaning.Christ did not abandon us to this end when He ascended into heaven and was no longer able to physically explain things to us. In order that the truth which God reveled to us would not perish, He promised to send the Holy Spirit to teach all truth, and He designated someone to continue His work, someone through whom the Holy Spirit would act in a special way. The teaching body to which Christ promised infallibility is composed of the Pope and the Bishops united with him, for they are the successors of St. Peter and the other Apostles, who made up the original teaching body of the Church. Jesus said to Peter,
"I have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not..." (Luke 22:32).
Of the hundred and more Christian sects now existing, doesn't each take the Bible as its standard of authority, and doesn't each member draw from it a meaning different from that of his neighbor? Yet the Holy Scriptures can have only one meaning, and not a variety of meanings or contradictory meanings. It is well to drink the water of life; but of what use is this water since you acknowledge that it may be poisoned in passing through the medium of your interpretation?
But Christ has given man a leader - a person to whom he gave the keys to the kingdom of heaven, who will preserve His teachings and will not permit them to be shredded by the conflicting opinions of men.
The doctrine of the infallibility of the successor of St. Peter is not a "new doctrine," but a definition of the method which Christ willed and provided that His Church should be kept infallibly in the path of Divine truth and saved from the assaults of her foes.
Bible-believing Christians acknowledge that the authors of the Bible were not perfect men who were equal to Christ -- but nevertheless these Christians believe that what the Biblical authors recorded was perfectly true and without doctrinal fault. This is by no special talent or omniscience of the writers, but by the Holy Spirit alone. This is the same principle applied to the Pope; infallibility in modern times is carried in him. He is not a perfect person, but teaches infallibly because he is under the protection of the Holy Spirit to guide the Church as an instrument of God. The Pope is not necessarily more sacred than any ordinary man, but is the chosen Vicar of Christ on earth.
"The Church has a human side, of course, as we who are Catholics know all too well. But let us always keep firm hold on the fact of the divine side of the Church. This is much more important, for it is literally the one solid upstanding rock in a world that seems falling to pieces into chaos. The Church's divine side: it is the life of Christ going on still. The body of men we call the Church is Christ's Body, and the mind of the Church is the Mind of Christ (because of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit). She thinks Christ's thoughts and teaches His doctrine, even draws it out further according to need, with the sureness that comes of being identical with Him... Remembering His promises, with the Spirit of Truth within her to bring back to her mind whatsoever He has said, she is always sure that she can decide right." (Rev. F. H. Drinkwater)
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
-
Some Fundamentals of Roman Catholicism:
• Belief in Deity
One God in the Blessed Trinity, composed of three persons: the Father (God), the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit, which together comprise one God Almighty. Jesus Christ is God's only incarnation, fully God and fully human. Catholicism is a Christian religion, the definition of a Christian being any follower of Christ. All Catholics are Christians, but not all who claim Christianity are Catholic.
• Origin of Universe and Life
A literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis is accepted, but the Church maintains that God gave humankind both supernatural revelation (from the Bible) and natural revelation. Science may be harmonized with the book of Genesis, in that a "day" in the Bible is not defined as a 24-hour day. God created the universe from nothing, so if the "Big Bang" theory is true, then God created this event. If evolution occured, it is under the choice and control of God.
• After Death
Every soul is eternal from its creation; it will live forever, either in heaven or in hell. Reward and punishment are relative to one's behavior during earthly life. Upon death, God immediately judges who will go directly to heaven or hell; many will go to purgatory for purification before entering heaven. Pope John Paul II has described hell as the condition of pain that results from alienation from God, perhaps not an actual place. When Christ returns at the end of the world, he will judge all humans. All the dead will be bodily resurrected.
• What about evil?
With the fall of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Paradise, original sin entered the world along with such consequences as human suffering. All, therefore, are sinners and are prone to the influence of Satan. Salvation is found through the Church. Through Baptism, original sin is wiped away, but not its consequences.
• Salvation
All are offered salvation through the atonement of sins brought about by Christ's death. All are able to go to heaven because of Christ's resurrection. Catholics must have faith in God in the Blessed Trinity, practice the Faith, and receive the sacraments in order to acheive salvation. Catholics acknowledge one baptism, which cleanses all sin and bestows sanctifying grace, which enables one to enter heaven. After commission of a mortal sin, which deprives the soul of sanctifying grace, the state of grace must be restored through the sacrament of Reconciliation (confession). The commission of mortal sin results in the inability to receive sacraments, except Reconciliation.
• Suffering
Some suffering is caused by the inheritance of original sin (mortality originating from Adam and Eve's disobedience to God), which includes vulnerability to illness and disease. Suffering is also God's design to test, teach, or strengthen belief in Him; the greater the suffering of innocent believers, the greater will be their reward after life.
• Contemporary Issues
Homosexual acts are sinful. Matrimony, as a sacrament, is permanent; divorce and remarriage are not acceptable without an annullment, which is only granted for severe reasons. Catholics are 100% Pro-Life. Abortion, contraception, and euthanasia are forms of murder. The death penalty is rarely justified. War is rarely acceptable.
• Saints
The Community of Saints is the whole assembly of heaven; a saint is anyone in heaven. Certain people are canonized "Saints" by the Church based on strict criteria including evidence of a moral lifestyle, works, etc and miracles. The community of saints is asked to intercede on behalf of sinners, and certain Saints are often asked for specific intercession. Mary, the mother of Jesus, is a highly revered Saint, though she is not worshipped.
• Other Beliefs
The pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth for the Roman Catholic Church. He and the magisterium (the teaching authority of the Church) clarify doctrine, and in their teaching of doctrine, are infallible.
Top Tags - Weblog
GuiltyCatholic
-
- Member Since: 6/9/2005
Connect
Weblog Archives
About Me
-
Not one hundred in the United States hate the Roman Catholic Church, but millions hate what they mistakenly think the Roman Catholic Church is. -- Bishop Fulton J. Sheen
Chatboard (0)