Replies

DEPROGRAMLIBERALISM and aMOREPERFECTUNION continue to paddle in the shallow waters of “Bible Christianity” and here’s why.

They want a list of traditions. This is the kind of sophomoric demand that is beyond absurd. Tradition is “source” of information. It is source that informs and clarifies. This is what Catholics refer to as the “sacred tradition” which serves as a clarifier and authenticator of the written text. Apparently, these Bible Christians seem to think the books in the Bible fell from the skies and re-assembled themselves in the manner in which we find them. The written texts and traditions are both complementary since they reinforce each other as the true Word of God.

The Bible Itself states that their are “oral” teachings and traditions that are to be carried on to the present-day (2 Thessalonians 2:15; 1 Corinthians 11:2; 2 Timothy 2:2; Romans 10:17; 1 Peter 1:24-25). These teachings are what the Catholic Church considers “Sacred Apostolic Tradition.” This type of “Tradition” never changes. It is the Word of God passed down by the Apostles themselves. If oral tradition is not to be followed, why then did St. Paul write that Christ said something that is not recorded in the Gospels (Acts 20:35)?

St. Paul must have “heard” this saying, not read it from any Gospel or “Scripture,” thereby, proving that some things Christ said were not recorded in the Gospels (John 21:25) and were passed on orally among His disciples. They are just as valid as anything written since St. Paul himself used one of these oral passages in one of his own epistles.

No serious historian disputes the fact that the Bible as a whole was not compiled until the late 4th century. It was compiled by a Catholic saint (St. Jerome) at the request of a Catholic pope (St. Damasus I) after some three hundred years of careful study that establishes the written Word of God. This was through Divine Revelation based on Petrine authority. This is no different than Christ’s affirmation to Peter that his recognition of Jesus as the Son of God was not by earthly flesh and blood. The written Word of God was in the end “revealed” to the early Church Fathers (theologians) acting under authority of the successors of Peter to affirm these texts as the true Word of God.

So how were the early Christians saved if they did not possess the entire written “Word of God” to follow His teachings? Well, naturally, they were the Body of Christ and were taught through “oral” teachings by the Church, not by writings.

Central to this belief is presence of the resurrected Christ in the Eucharist. A belief at the very core the early Church fathers, the saints and martyrs.

Is the Bible to be taken literally – “word for word?” NO!

Even a rudimentary understanding of apologetics will inform that the Bible was written by different authors with different literary styles at different times in history and in different languages. Therefore, the writings should be interpreted with these circumstances in mind and hence without the benefit of traditions the written text is worse than incomplete, it is useless.

Protestant historian J.N.D. Kelly, an authority on early Christian beliefs affirms when he answers his own question.

“[W]here in practice was [the] apostolic testimony or tradition to be found? . . . The most obvious answer was that the apostles had committed it orally to the Church, where it had been handed down from generation to generation. . . . (Early Christian Doctrines, 37).

Does the Bible state it is the sole or final authority of Christianity? NO. In fact, Christ said that the Church is to resolve disputes among Christians, not Scripture as recorded by Matthew 18:17: “And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.”

This is the Catholic Church with Petrine authority. This is why leading Protestant and Evangelical theologians who converted to Catholicism have uniformly concluded, to paraphrase them, that Protestantism is a mass of contradictions and amounts to nothing more than unadulterated rot that is fed by bottom-feeding fish in the shallow waters.

This indeed is the swirl of heresies that spin around mega-congregations from Joel Osteen, Jim Jones, David Koresh, to Billy Graham. They all gulp the same Bible Christianity Kool-Aid some by the gallons (Jim Jones); others by the quart (Joel Osteen) and some live off its aerated froth (Billy Graham).

You will now know why renowned essayist Hillaire Belloc was so right when he wrote in his book ‘The Great Heresies,” that unlike other heresies Protestantism spawned a “cluster of heresies.”

The incomparable Catholic intellectual tradition from Augustine to Aquinas to Newman and Benedict would regard all of Bible Christianity as a sad caricature from the snake handlers who use Mark 16:18 ( – “They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them”) as the scriptural basis of their belief to the utterly vapid corner street Foursquare Church pastors who use Matthew 18:20 (“For where two or three are gathered together unto my name, there am I in the midst of them.”) for their kumbaya in their “coffee and doughnut” halls for Sunday Services.

This is old Grandma’s recipe for “Christianity Light.” No need for the Mass, the sacraments, an acceptance of the Eucharist, Marian dogmas, and liturgical practices like Ash Wednesday or the Catholic Stations of the Cross.

They completely ignore the royal “unto my name” which means unto “all what I have commanded you to do.” We thus come back full circle to the Great Commission given to Peter: “Go forth and teach….whatsoever thou shall bind…whatsoever thou shall loosen.” This is first and foremost a teaching AUTHORITY.

Not every Jack and Jill and corner street Billy Graham-type or Moonies-type soapbox preacher gets this authority. We have One Truth, One Church, for all peoples, and for all time.

This brings us to DANIEL 1212.

DANIEL 1212 brilliantly encapsulates in a single sentence all what is so wrong with Bible Christianity and why we have some 30,000 different varieties of Protestant heresy when he writes that Catholics follow their “pastors as docile sheep.”

This now gives “him” the warrant to expostulate upon another stock of scriptural quotes he keeps pulling out to allow him play the role of “internet” theologian.

In essence he is really offering us “his” version of God’s Word or shall we say sect number 30,001.

Someone needs to gently tap him on the shoulder and remind him of the stellar list of Catholic converts from mathematicians and philosophers and from every religion and stripe, atheists and agnostics included who converted to Catholicism. “Docile sheep”? Among these “docile sheep” are automobile executive Henry Ford Jr., the diplomat Clare Booth Luce, wife of Time/Life publisher Henry Luce, and Louis Budenz, editor of the Communist Party USA’s newspaper, The Daily Worker.

COMMERCECOMET gives us a truly stunning display of his erudition worthy of a Nobel Laureate by labeling fellow Catholic FReepers as having a “giant blind spot when it comes to Catholicism.” It must follow the same applies to those Lutheran theologians who after years of study converted to Catholicism. Some “giant blind spot?” Like Jupiter’s Dark Spot that has lasted for hundreds of years?

EDITOR-SURVEYOR disputes the contention that Torah means “law” Maybe he should take this up with a former Chief Rabbi of Britain, Lord Jonathan Sachs, who in his blog “Orthodox Union,” (www.ou.org) writes: “the primary meaning of the word Torah – namely law.” (Apologies, Sir, I did not mean to embarrass you.)

To end this post let us all agree with Daneil 1212 who quotes with seeming approval Benedict’s superb treatise “Dominus Iesus” when in referring to non-Catholic Christians, Benedict says: “those who are baptized in these communities are, by Baptism, incorporated in Christ and thus are in a certain communion, albeit imperfect, with the Church.”

The obvious corollary of this is that the Church is indeed perfect and non-Catholic Christians are imperfect. And the degree of this imperfection.? Well, let’s see what the Christ says:

“Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.”

This again is why we must again echo the reasons why America’s pre-eminent Lutheran, Rev. Richard Neuhaus on his conversion to Catholicism wrote that he found “the fullest expression of Christ in the Catholic Church.”

Britain’s famous (and perhaps one of the world’s renowned) convert to Catholicism, Cardinal Henry Newman could not have put it better:

“To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.”

Enough said.