Pope Francis tells atheists to abide by their own consciences

“You don’t need page numbers”

How are we supposed to look up the Catholic church authorized interpretation of these verses, to verify that your use conforms to that interpretation, if you won’t provide a standard citation?

If you won’t provide the specific references, the most logical implication is that you cannot provide them. If you cannot provide them, then the logical implication is that your use of these Scriptures does not conform to an authorized Catholic interpretation, and that you have been engaging in private interpretation, which is what you are accusing others of doing. So, if you want to refute that implication, you DO need to provide page numbers.

That is not a logical deduction that you make. The Catholic Church does not make interpretation based on Scripture alone. Valid scriptural interpretation emanate from other sources as well such as received Sacred Tradition and Revelation. This is a coherent whole of interpretation. This is why we get our theological learning from consulting the Catechism that embodies Scriptural interpretation from these several sources. We don’t interpret Scripture like some commercial contract with annotated legal interpretations on each section and provision.

“We don’t interpret Scripture like some commercial contract with annotated legal interpretations on each section and provision.”

So, you admit your church hasn’t provided to you any specific interpretation for the verses you quoted?

How exactly can you claim to stand on their authority when you quote them then? How is anyone else supposed to be assured that the manner in which you are using those verses is consistent with the teachings of your church, who you claim has sole authority for interpreting them?

Of course the Church has provided authoritative Scriptural interpretation but not in the sense in which you demand this as if this were a legal document with annotated references to verses and sections. Scriptural interpretations attach to understanding and executing God’s Divine Plan. This is why the early Church Fathers deemed only certain books to be part of the Bible. That itself was a profound interpretative act. The Bible did not fall from the skies. Thus, this alone constituted a “specific” interpretation. We find this in the Catholic Catechism and in the works and books of our saints and theologians. What you are requesting of the Catholic Church is to offer is something in the nature of a “legal” interpretation like a commercial contract. Unfortunately, this is exactly what the “Sola Scripturalists” like the Billy Grahams, Robert Schullers, Joel Osteens, Jeremiah Wrights, David Koreshs’, Jim Jones’ and every other street corner Protestant pastor happens to do and we end up with 35,000 heretical Christian sects and where every other Tom, Dick, and Harry claiming authoritative interpretation of scripture.

For example, the Catholic Mass, the Sacraments, the Holy Eucharist, Confession etc., are all products of scriptural interpretation in the light of sacred tradition and revelation. Now if you wish me to submit to you a compendium of books that draw on these sources to affirm these beliefs I’d be willing to give it a try. However, if as I trust, you are really sincere in this search, then with relative ease you could easily tap into an ocean of theological material to justify these beliefs and practices. A Catholic university library is a place to start. There are also a number of Catholic Question and Answer websites. You may start with Pope Benedict XVI (Formerly Cardinal Ratzinger’s) epic treatise on “Iesus Dominus”!

On the other hand, if you are unwilling to do this and rest comfortable in your “own” interpretation of scripture, I can be of no help to you anymore than we could convince the Jimmy Swaggarts or TD Jakes’ of the error of their own interpretations.

“What you are requesting of the Catholic Church is to offer is something in the nature of a “legal” interpretation like a commercial contract.”

No, I haven’t requested anything of the Catholic Church. I’m requesting it of you, Steelfish. You are the one who made the pronouncement that, unless one is a successor to Peter, one cannot quote Scripture authoritatively. You are not a successor to Peter, I believe, and yet you quoted Scripture as if it carried some authority. When pressed, you basically claimed that you are deriving some vicarious authority by relying on the interpretation of your church, which can claim succession from Peter.

Now, it only stands to reason that in order for you to use the authority of your church to cover your quotation of Scripture, you must be quoting that Scripture in a manner which is consistent with the interpretation of your church. I just want to verify that. Yet, you can’t point me to any one source where that can be easily verified. It defies reason to think that your use of those verses can be consistent with an interpretation which you cannot seem to produce, and which you now seem to be admitting doesn’t actually exist.

What I did say was that only the Catholic Church can authoritatively interpret Scripture. And the Catholic Church uses scriptural text, context, sacred tradition, and revelation as handed down from Christ to Peter and his successors. Scripture after all was written some 60 years after the death of Christ and the early Church Fathers set forth the definitive books we now call the Bible. Now, if you do not believe in this then you are in the company of those who are against the great theologians that have lived including several successors to Peter and the likes of Aquinas, Augustine, and Benedict XVI whose works are studied in all the great universities of the world.

When I quote Scripture in accordance with the Catholic Catechism and the various doctrines set forth in Church encyclicals, you press on to have me footnote my interpretation with chapter and verse. This is what you requested before and then you yet continue to insist that you are not seeking a legal interpretation like in a commercial contract. Herein lies an inherent contradiction. Why? Because Scriptural interpretation can never be bounded by text alone. The context, sacred tradition, and revelation provides what the text means but does not say.

So when we Catholics quote Scripture we are quoting the teachings of the Church. Now if you point out to me that any of my scriptural quotes go against Church teaching as found in the Catechism, Church doctrines, Church Encyclicals, then let me know. But its absurd to me or any other Catholic to separate out for you the various strands that interweave Catholic beliefs.

I have provided you with a list of treatises beginning with the Catholic Catechism, the superb insights by Benedict XVI in his profoundly erudite books: “On the Way to Jesus Christ,” Jesus of Nazareth,” Jesus, the Apostles & The Early Church,” and his most recent, “The infancy Narratives,” and yet you seem reluctant to inform yourself of Church beliefs and the reasons therefor.

Now if you specifically let me know where I have deviated from Church teaching, then I can hopefully clarify. But to do that you would first have to be very informed and take on the task of doing some very serious reading. But instead you appear to refuse to do so. I let it be known to you that Church interpretation is a product of many modalities of interpretation, and yet you keep requesting single threads of proof (chapter and verse, as you previously put it) when what we have is an interwoven tapestry of interpretation and its central designs are found in the Catechism and liturgical practices. It is to this body of beliefs that my interpretation of Scripture is anchored to.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.