Before you became Catholic, you relied on your interpretation of verses in scripture that led you to believe in the papacy and infallibility of the pope. What is to say that your interpretation of that scripture was indeed correct ? What if your interpretation was in fact incorrect ? What if your interpretation of tradition and history was incorrect ? Before you could come to any conclusions you would have had to test things in light of scripture as the Bereans were commended for. So how do you know your interpretations were correct when they themselves were no doubt fallible ?

-- anon (anon@hotmail.com), August 14, 2003

Answers

You don't know that YOUR interpretations are correct. That is just the point. You don't come into the Church because of YOUR interpretations of scripture. You come into the true Church because the Holy Spirit has given you a heart for truth, and you are drawn into the Church because of the fullness of truth which you find there. This means letting go of any personal interpretations you may have had, recognizing them as unauthoritative and unreliable. It is not until you recognize and accept your personal inability to define truth that you are able to actually find the fullness of truth where Jesus Christ placed it - in the Church which the Bible calls the Pillar and Foundation of Truth.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), August 14, 2003.

anon,

The Holy Spirit has lead you to this forum to learn the truth. I hope and pray that you will learn many things here.

God Bless!

-- Tryan Guess (noemail@none.com), August 15, 2003.

Actually, it was the Bible...and the infallibility of it...that led me from Pentecostal Protestantism to the Catholic Church. (Of course, it was the Holy Spirit who called me to the True Church of Christ, and I am forever grateful.) It was a love of Truth and Scripture--as the infallible Word of God--that actually got me started...once I found out the history and origins of the Bible and the Early Church, I couldn't be anything BUT Catholic (much to my initial dismay...hee hee).

Thanks be to God

-- Victoria (tecdork99@pvfnet.com), August 15, 2003.

Shalom Earthbound,

>>>Before you became Catholic, you relied on your interpretation of verses in scripture that led you to believe in the papacy and infallibility of the pope. What is to say that your interpretation of that scripture was indeed correct? >>>

To begin not all Catholics come out of Protestant churches so some never held a different opinion from our church however the few that did often can defend our Church better than those born and raised in her. This said how do Protestants know their interpretations are correct? Catholics share their interpretations with literally millions of others down through the ages. These interpretations are formed by scholars and men (and a few women) tested over time by our church and whose understanding are agreed upon though councils and Holy See. They are not perfect because Perfection comes only when the Perfect comes (1Cor.13.8-9) but we Catholics find this system far more supportive and sensible than the every man for himself doctrine of Sola Scriptura where each proclaims perfection in understanding Devine revelation (infallibility) and refuting the next guys claims if they do not agree.

>>>What if your interpretation was in fact incorrect? What if your interpretation of tradition and history was incorrect? >>>>>>

We are saved by grace not perfect interpretation and the Spirit promised to uphold our Church until the end, Matt.16.18-18. Therefore to trust in our Churches understanding is in our eyes to accept Yeshua at His word much like Peter our first pope did in the case of the Eucharist, Jn.6.68-69.

>>> Before you could come to any conclusions you would have had to test things in light of scripture as the Bereans were commended for. So how do you know your interpretations were correct when they themselves were no doubt fallible? >>>

Are the “Bereans” willing to go before a tribunal of scholars of our Church and test these interpretations against our Churches? Martin Luther wasn’t and his unwillingness to stand that test caused one of the greatest schisms in history because he also did not stop teaching his views and others followed his example with own “interpretations” (which did not always match his). Four hundred years later Hitler read some of his views and saw in his anger toward Jews and our Church a BIBLICAL reason for his “finial solution” and the Holocaust was this fruit. Therefore it is very wise to be careful with any who claim infallibility in Devine revelation and yet we Catholics only do so for an office that has existed for two thousand years that rests upon a Jewish Halachic teaching (not pagan as often claimed) and that has Biblical support every bit as strong (actually stronger) as those that claim otherwise. Further we see the charges leveled against this office as very similar to those of the Korite rebellion, which Jude claimed as “blemishes on your love feast” Jude.10-11, or the Blessed Sacrament of our Eucharist.

Still if your group is indeed serious about Scriptural studies, we have our own such studies into the Eucharist at http://www.angelfire.com/ny/Yeshuaslight/Eucharist.html, which you are all welcome to go though and challenge scripturally and we will be happy do defend L-rd willing.

Shalom, C & C

-- C.Foegen (cfoegen@angelfire.com), August 17, 2003.

Shalom Anon,

The above post was for you we somehow put the wrong name on it. Sorry for any confusion this may have caused you.

Shalom C & C

-- C.Foegen (cfoegen@angelfire.com), August 17, 2003.

But you see, you have the same problem you accuse protestants of having. You say that the scriptures lead you to the Catholic Church. Yet, according to the Catholic church, you are incapable of interpreting the scriptures by yourself.

Many claim that they were lead away from the Catholic Church by the teachings of scripture and yet they'll be told that they're wrong because they have no ability to do so. So I want to know, where do you draw the line ? It seems that as long as it gets your foot in the door, you allow it, just as long as all your authority of interpretation is subsequently passed over to the Catholic Church.

Once you hand your authority over, you have no right to test what is being taught by the scriptures, even though the Bereans were commended for this very thing.

Interesting that the Church claims infallibility by those scriptural passages in Matthew Chapter 16, and yet, still allows for loss of salvation, even though the gates of hell shall not prevail against the church. Oh I'm sorry, did you say that only applies to unbreakable doctrines ?

-- anon (anon@hotmail.com), August 17, 2003.

Jmj
Hello, "anon."

As a Catholic, I don't agree with the answers given to you above. I can appreciate why you don't find them convincing and satisfying.

You have been mistakenly thinking that interpreting certain verses in a certain way is what is needed for leading a non-Catholic to become a Catholic. Although that helps some people to come to a conversion, the most reliable and logical path to follow is different. Let me explain ...

Suppose one has arrived at a point of embracing Christianity, accepting the Bible as the written, inerrant word of God, and believing that Jesus founded a Church. What next?
The next step is not to rely on reading the Bible and then trying to interpret it to figure out where is that Church.
Nor is the next step to rely on some kind of "burning in the bosom" -- or as has been stated, the "Holy Spirit ... giv[ing one] a heart for truth" and "draw[ing one] into the Church because of the fullness of truth which you find there."

Neither of the above is dependable.
In the first case, one may misinterpret the Bible and get led into some bogus sect.
In the second case, one can be misled by other influences (emotions, the evil spirit, etc.) that are wrongly taken to be the "Holy Spirit." Even Mormons and Moslems think that God has "given them a heart for truth" and are convinced that they have found that truth in their false religions and their man-made scriptures.

What then is to be done? Rely on objective facts and logical reasoning. If you have already concluded (as I said earlier) that Jesus founded a Church, it follows (1) that one must carefully study the facts about the earliest Christian history and (2) that one must read the earliest Christian doctrinal writings, expecting this effort to reveal which body today IS that Church which Jesus founded.

Anon, I can tell you right now that everyone I know of who has taken this sensible, logical tack has concluded that the ancient Church of Jesus is the Catholic Church. With the foundational realization that one must join the Church, and with the aid of the early Church "Fathers," one's guided interpretation of Bible verses becomes easier, as does the acceptance of Catholic doctrines on the papacy, etc..

Anon, you have been misled about the meaning of the Bible verses that mention the Bereans. I'll paraphrase now from a Catholic apologetics site that helps folks to understand this subject correctly:
"Acts 17:11-12. Here we see the words, 'they searched the Scriptures.' This refers to the Berean Jews who used the Old Testament to confirm the oral teachings about the Messiah. The verses do not say the Bereans searched only the Scriptures. The verses do not say that they rejected what could not be found there (without being contradicted there). Nor do the verses say that gentiles (like us) must check the teachings of the Catholic Church against the Bible, to make sure that they are written there. Also, the statement that the Bereans were more "noble than those in Thessalonica" does not mean that their nobility came from checking St. Paul's words against the scriptures. Rather they are called "noble," because they were more reasonable and less violent than the Thessalonians described in verses 5 through 9. (Verses 2 and 3 show that checking against the scriptures was something St. Paul helped the Thessalonians do too.)"

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), August 17, 2003.

You say: "Many claim that they were lead away from the Catholic Church by the teachings of scripture and yet they'll be told that they're wrong because they have no ability to do so. So I want to know, where do you draw the line?"

A: Many are led into the Catholic Church through the scriptures when they listen to the correct and authoritative interpretation of those scriptures presented to them by the Church, and through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, recognize them as the fullness of truth. Many are led away from the Catholic Church when, abandoning the biblical foundation of truth, the Church of the living God and its infallible teaching, they choose to follow the traditions of Luther, attempting to personally interpret the scriptures for themselves, thereby opening the door to untruth. Untruth always leads people away from God and His Church. Truth always leads people toward God, Who is truth, and His Church, which teaches truth.

"Once you hand your authority over, you have no right to test what is being taught by the scriptures, even though the Bereans were commended for this very thing".

A: You do not have the authority to "test" what is officially taught by the Church. The scriptures make it clear that our response to the fullness of truth as taught by the Church is acceptance and belief, not "testing". How could a fallible individual possibly expect to "test" the teaching of the infallible Church? By his own personal interpretations? What possible reason would there be to expect that the divinely inspired teaching of God's own Church would coincide with his own completely unauthoritative, uninspired guesses?? "Testing all things" means being honest in judging our personal thoughts, desires, and actions against the dictates of scripture AS TAUGHT BY THE CHURCH OF GOD. It does not mean judging the teachings of God's Church by comparing them to our personal ideas about scripture. That would be nothing less than absurd.

"Interesting that the Church claims infallibility by those scriptural passages in Matthew Chapter 16, and yet, still allows for loss of salvation, even though the gates of hell shall not prevail against the church"

A: The fact that the gates of hell cannot prevail against THE CHURCH does not mean that the gates of hall cannot prevail against an individual member of the Church. The gates of hell did not prevail against the Apostles, the first bishops of the Church. But they did prevail against Judas, one individual member of the Church. Likewise today, we see a few individual priests involved in public scandals, and even a few bishops involved in coverups of those scandals. Does this constitute a victory of Satan over the Church? Of course not! That CANNOT happen. Jesus said so. Jesus will be with the Church until the end of time. He said that too. But there will always be some individual members who will reject His presence in the Church, and forfeit their salvation as a result.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), August 17, 2003.

Shalom Anon,

You stated:

>>>But you see, you have the same problem you accuse Protestants of having. You say that the scriptures lead you to the Catholic Church. Yet, according to the Catholic Church, you are incapable of interpreting the scriptures by yourself. >>>

Actually our Church only claims that we must not "interpret" (actually we prefer, "inferring the meaning here") with those doctrinal teachings in which she, herself have established. Beyond that, our Catechism shows that we are allowed to read Scripture as well as study Scripture by following certain guidelines, which are basically common sense practices. In doing so she does state the following:

119. "'It is the task of exegetes to work, according to these rules, towards a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture in order that their research may help the Church to form a firmer judgment. For, of course, all that has been said about the manner of interpreting Scripture is ultimately subject to the judgment of the Church which exercises the divinely conferred commission and ministry of watching over and interpreting the Word of God.'[DV 12 # 3.] But I would not believe in the Gospel, had not the authority of the Catholic Church already moved me. [St. Augustine, Contra epistolam Manichaei 5, 6: PL 42, 176.]"

Please note that she holds the final say on those interpretations because to leave this to the laity would bring the same division we see among Protestant sects. Yet the laity are allowed to learn " 'the surpassing knowledge of Jesus Christ' (Phil 3:8) by frequent reading of the divine Scriptures" Cat. 2653. In the vast majority of cases these studies go nowhere.

However, sometimes Catholics may get led a bit off the path, but our Church has a process to help them back on track again, if they are humble. Occasionally the Church does indeed find a person who is indeed "led by G-d" in understanding certain Scriptures, even in the manner to which Lucia did, who had been given this knowledge through our Blessed Mother at Fatima. Yet even these must go through that same testing process, not because these need correction per se but rather to be tested for we are to test ALL spirits. And to be proven true, there must be some refining which means they also will share in His cross in some way. For example, St. Joan D'arc was to die for her people's freedom; Lucia was called a heretic by many, including close members of her family even after the Church accepted what she saw; and Saint Bernadette who suffered cancer and cruel treatment by a leader who constantly sought to "humble her" so that she through her faith and simplicity she would one day end up humbling that leader. Each one held to their faith while still obedient to the Church.

Therefore our blessed Church does recognize that even pebbles can sometimes be given that great gift of inspiration to help the Church establish the correct path and understanding. But it is through humility (to avoid corruption) can they truly achieve the level that HaShem calls them, even enough to stand against the enemy himself as did Saint Steven who was stoned, Joan D'arc who was burned, St. Ireneaus who died at the hands of the Roman dictators, Saint Paul who was crucified (as was our first pope, St. Peter) thus be called into this union is not for the faint of heart.

>>>Many claim that they were lead away from the Catholic Church by the teachings of scripture and yet they'll be told that they're wrong because they have no ability to do so. >>>

In our eyes those saying this either do not understand what came of Vatican II or they are Protestants claiming to be Catholics to make our Church look bad. As we already showed above, Catholic laity are allowed to read the Scriptures, they just are not allowed to put themselves above HaShem's earthly shepherd. To claim that HaShem has revealed things is not only uncommon, but indeed a cross to bear.

>>> So I want to know, where do you draw the line? It seems that as long as it gets your foot in the door, you allow it, just as long as all your authority of interpretation is subsequently passed over to the Catholic Church. >>>

This happens to be how we see the teachings of Vatican II and those passages from the Catechism we quoted (as well as many more). Indeed our local church offers many courses in studying Scripture and many local parishes even pay for their laity to take these courses. Further in recent years, excellent Apologetic sites have sprung up on the Internet to teach these same skills so that Catholics should be able to find out how to study Scripture "according to these rules" taught by our Church, whether they have funds for Seminary or not. So where do we draw the line? We draw the line at where one knows the proper way to study Scripture, testing the spirit in those things "revealed" and humbly allowing G-d's shepherd on earth to oversee our own understanding.

>>>Once you hand your authority over, you have no right to test what is being taught by the scriptures, even though the Bereans were commended for this very thing. >>>

Just as a child can't talk back to their parent, and a member of America cannot break the civil laws so too are Catholic bound by "the faith of our fathers". Put simply, why must we keep remaking the same wheel over and over again if the one made over the last two thousand years works excellently and is better than any of the existing competition? There other Scripture passages still to be studied in areas of uncharted territories within the Word that a Catholic could go into, like a garden for even the sages state that the Word is a garden; and as they do so, do not uproot a single plant in the ecclesiastical garden. Through these efforts it can help set doctoral teachings or even help to make the "tilling" of that garden all the more fruitful.

>>>Interesting that the Church claims infallibility by those scriptural passages in Matthew Chapter 16, and yet, still allows for loss of salvation, even though the gates of hell shall not prevail against the church. Oh I'm sorry, did you say that only applies to unbreakable doctrines? >>>

Infallibility is attached to those issues of moral teaching, not of every word spoken by the Church. And yet, Yeshua did mention that the denial the Ruach HaKadosh is unforgivable. So we should try to remember that many are called but only a few are taken, and trust that Yeshua does protect the salvation of those few.

Shalom, C & C

-- C.Foegen (cfoegen@angelfire.com), August 18, 2003.