I totally agree,in fact that's exactly what we've been telling the Catholics who insist we're wrong! Of course we know that 'catholic' means 'universal'- in other words, any baptized believer, regardless of whether they buy the whole Catholic package. For some reason, this seems to frost the hard-core Catholics when we 'rebellious' types claim their name. :)
As for the many interpretations of scripture, we agree here also. I feel that people have a tendency to read Scripture according to their personal bias or advantage- myself included. I guess it's part of being human and noodling through divine revelation. I just reject any outside voice that presumes an air of infallible superiority. I know that preachers, priests and popes are subject to the same limitations as I am, so I'm not going to filter my right to communicate with my Father through another man's sonship, no matter who he is. I'll gladly listen, after all we are to edify one another, and make my own judgment based on what I believe God has already told me. But I can't tell you how many times I've run across this 'top-down' hierarchical attitude from a preacher, as if I'm not a valid conduit of Christ's anointing, just because I don't make a living off of offerings from a congregation! (Yes, it really gets that ludicrous.) But when it comes to me teaching or edifying them, no no, I'm not good enough- it's all a one way street.
Meanwhile, I'm doing more of Christ's work through my business (feeding the poor, reaching out to the lost, etc.) than they are by sitting inside a church office all week writing a three point sermon.
I'd better stop now, it sounds like I'm ranting! lol
Well, you just send them to their Catechism, specfically 1271:
Baptism constitutes the foundation of communion among all Christians, including those who are not yet in full communion with the Catholic Church: "For men who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in some, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church. Justified by faith in Baptism, [they] are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church." "Baptism therefore constitutes the sacramental bond of unity existing among all who through it are reborn."
That'll learn 'em ;-)
As for the many interpretations of scripture, we agree here also. I feel that people have a tendency to read Scripture according to their personal bias or advantage- myself included. I guess it's part of being human and noodling through divine revelation. I just reject any outside voice that presumes an air of infallible superiority. I know that preachers, priests and popes are subject to the same limitations as I am, so I'm not going to filter my right to communicate with my Father through another man's sonship, no matter who he is. I'll gladly listen, after all we are to edify one another, and make my own judgment based on what I believe God has already told me. But I can't tell you how many times I've run across this 'top-down' hierarchical attitude from a preacher, as if I'm not a valid conduit of Christ's anointing, just because I don't make a living off of offerings from a congregation! (Yes, it really gets that ludicrous.) But when it comes to me teaching or edifying them, no no, I'm not good enough- it's all a one way street.
You're right - that does sound like a rant. Hahahaha...but I think a justified one. You have some great arguments (with me at least) and its incredibly frustrating to be dismissed out of hand because you don't sit around all day pondering your navel.
I also agree with you on the fallibility of man - from Popes on down. However, I also believe that Scripture, as Truth, has a concrete, set meaning - and this is where self-interpretation scares me. Anyone can twist their logic and the words of the Bible to make it say just about anything. A frightening concept, when you look at things people have done in "the name of God" throughout history.
That said, I want to clarify the position of the Church (to the best of my knowledge). It seems that a lot of non-Catholics think we simply give up our own minds and hearts and follow the Church blindly around. I absolutely assure you that is not the case. The only times we are required to give our full assent to a teaching of the Church are, on matters of faith and morals, when:
1) EVERY Bishop in the world is teaching the exact same point (i.e., abortion is wrong);
2) When, in a Council, the College of Bishops makes a definitive teaching (i.e., the Hypostatic union of Christ); or
3) When the Pope speaks ex cathedra (which has happened, most believe, seven times in the last 2000 years - not all that common)
If I, as a faithful Catholic, had a disagreement with my Priest, a Bishop, it is my duty to go and discuss it with them. Now, this requires that I first educate myself and form my conscience. However, assuming I did that, I am completely within my rights to disagree with the Church, provided I was open to their perspective and actually willing to learn.
Just wondering...did you know these positions of the Church? I always wonder on these boards just how fully the "other side" understands us, and how well we explain ourselves.