| Author | |
lilac hill
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 15 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 643
|
| Posted: Aug 18 2005 at 10:20am | IP Logged
|
 |
|
This book"new Edition" 1994 was given to me.
Because it does not have an Imprimatur listed on the front, I was wondering if there were any problems with it.
Thanks for your assistance.
Viv
__________________
Viv
Wife to Rick (7/83), Mom to dd#1(6/87), dd#2(1/90), and dd#3(6/94) in central PA.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MacBeth
Forum All-Star
Probably at the beach...
Joined: Jan 27 2005
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2518
|
| Posted: Aug 18 2005 at 11:24am | IP Logged
|
|
|
A very useful book! Makes great kindling.
__________________
God Bless!
MacBeth in NY
Don's wife since '88; "Mom" to the Fab 4
Nature Study
MacBeth's Blog 
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JennGM
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17702
|
| Posted: Aug 18 2005 at 11:25am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Don't know about the book...but McBrien definitely has some "problems"...
__________________
Jennifer G. Miller
Wife to  & ds1  '03 & ds2  '07
Family in Feast and Feria
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MaryM
Board Moderator
Joined: Feb 11 2005
Location: Colorado
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 13104
|
| Posted: Aug 18 2005 at 2:10pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Interestingly, This Rock magazine has an article about Fr. McBrien in it's latest issue (July/August 2005). It mentions the book. This Rock does archive its issues on-line but not for several months after publication so this issue hasn't been added yet.
From the article (by Ronald Rychlak):
"The first edition of Catholism was published in 1981. Almost immediately the doctrinal committee of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops pointed out serious problems with it and asked McBrien to make revisions. The third edition was released in 1994-still without an imprimatur. After studying it for two years, the Secretariat for Doctrine and Pastoral Practices released a statement indicating that the book was inaccurate or misleading in describing Church teachings on the Virgin Birth, the ordination of women, and other issues. Not only had McBrien failed to remove the previously noted ambiguities from the previous editions, but had introduced new ones."
National Council of Catholic Bishops' Committee on Doctrine, "Review of Fr. McBrien's Catholicism", April 9, 1996 concluded that Catholicism should not be used in theological instruction.
__________________
Mary M. in Denver
Our Domestic Church
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
juliecinci
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 20 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 294
|
| Posted: Aug 18 2005 at 2:26pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Lol! Kindling!
My goodness, his writings are housed in one of my "this makes sense" files. 
I know I'm one of the few not-conservative Catholics on this forum. McBrien was one of the theologians whose writings made me interested again in the Catholic faith.
But I'm drawn to these kinds of Catholic theologians: Hans Kung is my favorite, and I also really found McBrien, Paul Knitter, Thomas Dubay and Elizabeth Johnson really helpful for sifting out how Catholics can think about specific doctrines when dealing with doubts.
So Viv, if you end up liking his writings, I just didn't want you to feel alone out here.  But I understand if they wrankle too.
Julie
__________________
Julie
Homeschooling five for fourteen years
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MacBeth
Forum All-Star
Probably at the beach...
Joined: Jan 27 2005
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2518
|
| Posted: Aug 18 2005 at 3:28pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
juliecinci wrote:
Lol! Kindling!
My goodness, his writings are housed in one of my "this makes sense" files.
I know I'm one of the few not-conservative Catholics on this forum. McBrien was one of the theologians whose writings made me interested again in the Catholic faith.
But I'm drawn to these kinds of Catholic theologians: Hans Kung is my favorite, and I also really found McBrien, Paul Knitter, Thomas Dubay and Elizabeth Johnson really helpful for sifting out how Catholics can think about specific doctrines when dealing with doubts.
Julie |
|
|
I'm going to be blunt here, Julie. I hope you'll forgive me, but there must be no misunderstanding here.
If you are being drawn to Catholicism by McBrien's writings, then you are not being drawn to Catholicism, but to something you wish Catholicism to be. There is no imprimatur, and no nihil obstat on Mcbrien's book. That he could not even find a liberal bishop to sign off on his work is telling.
It is not just a matter of "conservative" or "liberal". It is a matter of what the faith teaches; it is a matter of dogma. I know that word gets a lot of play among those who oppose church teachings, but it is a precise term of art in Catholic theology--a truth in faith and morals, revealed by God. If Mcbrien calls Original Sin a Myth (and he has), he is in error. It is not liberal. It is wrong. If he questions the perpetual virginity of Mary (and he does, Catholicism, pg 541), he is not liberal. He is in error. When he denies the sinless nature of Christ (pp. 562-3) he is in error. These statements, and many more, are not reconcilable with Catholicism.
Perhaps your attraction comes from his other writings, and if you are drawn to the Faith, I am delighted!!  (We really need a [party] icon!) But if I had to recommend a book to someone who wanted to know what Catholicism was about, Catholicism would not be on my list.
We also need a [can of worms] emoticon!
__________________
God Bless!
MacBeth in NY
Don's wife since '88; "Mom" to the Fab 4
Nature Study
MacBeth's Blog
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
juliecinci
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 20 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 294
|
| Posted: Aug 19 2005 at 8:31am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Hi Macbeth.
Thanks for your post. I think I get where you're coming from. I would love a [can of worms] emoticon!
So are you saying that those who are Catholic but no longer hold to the traditional interpretation of the dogmas (whether because they stopped being able to believe in them or some other reason) need to leave the church?
Julie
__________________
Julie
Homeschooling five for fourteen years
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
juliecinci
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 20 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 294
|
| Posted: Aug 19 2005 at 8:39am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Mary, thanks for this article.
I think what I'm getting from reading it is that there is an orthodox set of beliefs as outlines in the catechism and through councils etc. that come from the Vatican. When some of these theologians are trying to deal with the advances in historical and textual criticism, advances in biblical scholarship etc., they tend to veer away from the established doctrines of the church... right?
So it sounds like they are pushing on the boundaries of the way the faith has been traditionally understood and that "act of pushing" is being evaluated and in some cases judged.
Am I close?
Julie
__________________
Julie
Homeschooling five for fourteen years
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
lilac hill
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 15 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 643
|
| Posted: Aug 19 2005 at 8:40am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Thank you all for the imput and Mary especially for the link, it helps me explain WHY we have 2 more inches of space on the shelf.
My greater understanding of my Catholic faith began when we started homeschooling thanks to some women who were inspirational role models.
My reading of theology and "things Catholic" has moved at a slow pace.(It was a evangelical babysitter who asked me why we had extra Biblical books--I did not know why, I did not even know there were other versions of the Bible  !) I have to admit that the Faith and Life textbooks we have used guides alot of my rabbit trails of learning.The catechism has been a helpful addition to my library.
Okay, looking to online role models--
how do you even know about MacBrien,Paul Knitter, Thomas Dubay and Elizabeth Johnson and their books? Do you read all that comes out by MacBrien and others and read it? Do you read reviews? Are you guided by the suggestions of others?
Sometimes I feel as if I am not engaging in a "real learning" of my faith because I am not reading the full texts, just the exerpted parts that are referred to in articles. A la CM I have tried doing my own private narrations which has cemented the little I know.
__________________
Viv
Wife to Rick (7/83), Mom to dd#1(6/87), dd#2(1/90), and dd#3(6/94) in central PA.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
juliecinci
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 20 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 294
|
| Posted: Aug 19 2005 at 8:57am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Question: What does this mean?
Quote:
| Again, the issue is handled simply as a "disputed question" in theology. The official teaching of the church is inserted in a section headed "arguments against," thus giving the impression that whatever doctrine the church may have on the question is not binding." |
|
|
This comes from the article about Fr. McBrien's book.
What does "binding" mean? Does that mean that if a Catholic doesn't agree with the teaching or hasn't drawn the same conclusions as those set forth by the magisterium that he or she isn't Catholic?
Quote:
| In the treatment of contraception-one of those matters pointed to in the Committee on Doctrine's 1985 statement as "confusing and ambiguous"--it might have been appropriate to mention that five popes since 1930 have consistently taught that contraception is intrinsically evil. For this and other reasons, Catholics who reject this teaching would be invited to reconsider their positions. The treatment of contraception in Catholicism, however, does not encourage such Catholics to undertake a reconsideration of their views on the matter, but rather confirms them in their lack of acceptance of magisterial teaching. |
|
|
So for Catholics to be in good standing, they must accept that contraception is evil or is that an opinion? I guess I'm wondering if Catholic dogma dictates what you must accept and believe in order to be Catholic, or if it reveals what Catholicism holds as normative for belief and practice, that is, it reveals what is held to be correct, but there is room for Catholics to either disagree or be in the struggle to find faith or whatever.
I guess I'm wondering what these life long Catholics are expected to do when they have intellectual differences with Catholic dogma.
Thanks for your help in these questions. I am still learning how Catholicism is set up.
Julie
__________________
Julie
Homeschooling five for fourteen years
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
momwise
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 28 2005
Location: Colorado
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1914
|
| Posted: Aug 19 2005 at 9:00am | IP Logged
|
|
|
juliecinci wrote:
| So are you saying that those who are Catholic but no longer hold to the traditional interpretation of the dogmas (whether because they stopped being able to believe in them or some other reason) need to leave the church? |
|
|
As someone who has been mislead and failed by a number of priests and theologians, I'm pretty sensitive to this issue. Whether McBrien wants to leave the Church or go to confession and submit to Her beauty are up to Him and God. Our prayers and sacrifices bring the graces for just this kind of thing.
I have heard of countless individuals who fell in love with Jesus and submitted to His teachings via the Church even when they couldn't understand some of them. I'm just curious: If someone "stops being able to believe," is there some reason to stay in a teaching position in the Church or is it possible all the media attention and stirring the pot give is something he enjoys?
I have a right to learn the truth from anyone in a position to teach what the Church teaches. It looks like we're at point in time when more and more Catholics want to demand that right. That's a great thing!
__________________
Gwen...wife for 30 years, mom of 7, grandma of 3.....
"If you want equal justice for all and true freedom and lasting peace, then America, defend life." JPII
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MacBeth
Forum All-Star
Probably at the beach...
Joined: Jan 27 2005
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2518
|
| Posted: Aug 19 2005 at 9:01am | IP Logged
|
|
|
juliecinci wrote:
So are you saying that those who are Catholic but no longer hold to the traditional interpretation of the dogmas (whether because they stopped being able to believe in them or some other reason) need to leave the church? |
|
|
Nope! I hope not!!  I'm saying that those who no longer hold to traditional interpretation should change their minds. 
I do not have the right (nor would I want to have that right) to tell anyone that she should leave the church. BUT, I am not sure why anyone would want to belong to any faith when one questions the fundamental precepts and dogmas. If I did not believe in the 5 precepts as a path to Nirvana, I would not want to be a Buddhist. If I did not believe that Joseph Smith received divine guidance, I would not join the Mormons. If I questioned Mohammed's claim that he is the prophet of Allah, I would not want to be a Muslim, and more to the point, if I were seeking information on my way to becoming a Muslim, I would not look to The Satanic Verses for my inspiration. If I were interested in any of these religions (even as an intellectual pursuit), I would go to the most orthodox writings and begin my studies there. If I were serious, I would make the time for reading opposing and non-orthodox views later; there is some great value in opposing views. If, in the end, after sincere and in-depth study, I determined that the opposing views are correct, I would be bound by my conscience to reject that faith.
Perhaps I spoke too rashly when I suggested that Viv burn the book. In this case, Viv, as a well-formed Catholic, might find the book challenging to her intellect rather than her faith (just speculating here, Viv ). OTOH, it does get cold at night in central PA...
__________________
God Bless!
MacBeth in NY
Don's wife since '88; "Mom" to the Fab 4
Nature Study
MacBeth's Blog
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: Aug 19 2005 at 5:32pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
lilac hill wrote:
This book"new Edition" 1994 was given to me.
Because it does not have an Imprimatur listed on the front, I was wondering if there were any problems with it.
Thanks for your assistance.
Viv
|
|
|
Oh Viv, awful book! I found a copy someone had left in our parish adoration chapel once and I promptly trashed it.
Why it's called "Catholicism" I don't know because what it puts forth isn't.
I'm with MacBeth - kindling.
God bless!
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: Aug 19 2005 at 5:33pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I think that it would be a sign of laziness if a devout Catholic never questioned anything in the teaching of the Church. However, to question intellectualy, to genuinely look for answers, is different from dissenting. Let's look closely at contraception. I've never used contraception. I got pregnant three months after I was married and I was thrilled. I got cancer eighteen months later. After treatment, my doctor advised contraception. My pastor advised contraception. I accepted my doctor's opinion as medical gospel and went to find another opinion from a different priest--something kept nagging at me. I di not believe that contraception was evil. I could even have argued that I had a grave reason not to get pregnant. I had a priest signing off on artificial contraception. But then a different priest challenged me. He asked me to step out in faith and just believe in the wisdom of the magesterium. Fifteen years later, I am so grateful that in the absence of intellectual assent, I could assent with my will in full faith. I didn't understand it; I just trusted that the Church, with 2000 years of maternal wisdom behind her, knew more than I did. Now, many years later, with a little wisdom of my own, I do believe that contraception is intrinsically evil. First there was faith; then there was knowledge.
When you decide to be Catholic, you decide not to abandon reason, but to temper it with faith.You can step out in faith and accept something even if you don't intellectually understand it and then, one day, with grace, you might actually find you embrace it with heart, soul and mind.
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Robin
Forum Pro
Joined: March 06 2005
Location: Louisiana
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 74
|
| Posted: Aug 19 2005 at 6:24pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Macbeth, you answered so perfectly!!
And yes, I would burn the book! Faith is too precious to endanger.
If never questioning anything in the teachings of the Church is lazy, then I'm lazy! I have never questioned anything my Mother the Church teaches and I have never felt the slightest need to. I totally believe everything that the Church has put forth as dogma, I believe everything that Our Holy Father has written in encyclicals and taught from the Chair of Peter. And I believe what the Catechism says. Actually, what I hear from the Church was in my heart before I ever heard it and it just strengthens my convictions. God has given us the Church as a gift to be the "Guardian of Truth" on this earth. It is the only place we can be sure that what we are getting is the pure Truth. Our Lord said it, I believe it. Period.
If I ever do have thougths against the teaching of the Church I would be convinced that it is a temptation and I would reject it instantly.
Julie, I don't know what issues you have with the teachings of the Church, but if you want to discuss them point by point, perhaps we would be able to help you better. There are many dissenting priests and teachers today, but if you look closely at the documents of the Church, the Catechism, and the Bible, you will always be able to find the Truth. It's not hard... if I can do it, anyone can. And remember that Faith is a gift and if we ask God He will give it. If we abuse it, we will lose it.
__________________
Robin Dupre
"If we become what God intended for us to become, we will set the world on fire." ~ St. Catherine of Siena
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: Aug 19 2005 at 7:01pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
juliecinci wrote:
So are you saying that those who are Catholic but no longer hold to the traditional interpretation of the dogmas (whether because they stopped being able to believe in them or some other reason) need to leave the church? |
|
|
No, but they should not be receiving the sacraments and in particular the Eucharist because when a Catholic says Amen at the reception of communion he is in effect saying "I believe all the Church teaches to be true".
juliecinci wrote:
I think what I'm getting from reading it is that there is an orthodox set of beliefs as outlines in the catechism and through councils etc. that come from the Vatican. When some of these theologians are trying to deal with the advances in historical and textual criticism, advances in biblical scholarship etc., they tend to veer away from the established doctrines of the church... right? So it sounds like they are pushing on the boundaries of the way the faith has been traditionally understood and that "act of pushing" is being evaluated and in some cases judged.
Am I close? |
|
|
It's about what is true. Jesus commanded the apostles to preach the Gospel, which had been promised beforehand by the prophets, and which He fulfilled in His own person and promulgated with His own lips. In preaching the Gospel, they were to communicate the gifts of God to all men. This Gospel was to be the source of all saving truth and moral discipline. "In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority." Indeed, "the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time." (ccc 75 & 77)
This is our safeguard. If someone steps outside this and pronounces something different from what is already taught, then they are, de facto, wrong . It really and truly is that simple. To say otherwise is in effect to call Christ a liar because he did indeed promise that the Holy Spirit would guide us into all truth and that no matter what the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church.
Quote:
Question: What does this mean?
Quote:
| Again, the issue is handled simply as a "disputed question" in theology. The official teaching of the church is inserted in a section headed "arguments against," thus giving the impression that whatever doctrine the church may have on the question is not binding." |
|
|
|
|
|
It means that Church teaching is being mis-represented as something other than what it is.
Quote:
| What does "binding" mean? |
|
|
It means it must be believed to be a Catholic in good standing.
Quote:
| Does that mean that if a Catholic doesn't agree with the teaching or hasn't drawn the same conclusions as those set forth by the magisterium that he or she isn't Catholic? |
|
|
Well technically one doesn't ever become un-Catholic but is either in line with the Church or isn't. If they aren't and they know it then they would be unable to participate in the sacraments as I said earlier.
Quote:
| So for Catholics to be in good standing, they must accept that contraception is evil or is that an opinion? I guess I'm wondering if Catholic dogma dictates what you must accept and believe in order to be Catholic, or if it reveals what Catholicism holds as normative for belief and practice, that is, it reveals what is held to be correct, but there is room for Catholics to either disagree or be in the struggle to find faith or whatever. I guess I'm wondering what these life long Catholics are expected to do when they have intellectual differences with Catholic dogma. |
|
|
Catholic teaching does indeed require belief for one to be a Catholic in good standing. Even so I do realize that for some there is a struggle, but faith seeks understanding and " By faith, man completely submits his intellect and his will to God. With his whole being man gives his assent to God the revealer. Sacred Scripture calls this human response to God, the author of revelation, "the obedience of faith". To obey (from the Latin ob-audire, to "hear or listen to") in faith is to submit freely to the word that has been heard, because its truth is guaranteed by God, who is Truth itself. (ccc 143-145) Church teaching on contraception is clear. It is "intrinsically evil" (ccc 2370).
I have to go, it's time to get the little ones ready for bed. If you want to discuss this more I'd be happy to.
God bless!
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: Aug 19 2005 at 7:11pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Some people erroneously believe that Catholics are to obey without thinking. They worry that if they read critically and look for answers and weigh the writings of Augustine against those of Aquinas, or Piux X against John XXIII, they are heading towards a slippery Protestant slope, where interpretation is personal. On the contrary, we are encouraged by the Church to question. Consider the following:
Magisterium. The teaching authority of the Church (not of any
person), which dogmatically must be founded upon Sacred Scripture and Sacred
Tradition, the two fonts of the Deposit of Faith. Its mission is to teach the
Faith transmitted by Catholic Tradition. The magisterium has the duty to
preserve Tradition, but at the same time it is also preserved by Tradition. In
the person of the Apostles, the magisterium is at the origin of Tradition, but
afterwards the magisterium has the mission of keeping intact the Deposit of
Faith, to transmit it to successive generations in all of its fullness, and to
safeguard it against all corruption. In turn, Tradition constitutes the rule of
the magisterium, to which it must always make reference and whence it must draw
its solutions to current problems. The examination of particular acts of the
magisterium to test their conformity to Tradition, i.e., what the Church has
always believed and taught throughout the centuries, is a far cry from
subjective Protestant private judgment, as it uses a genuinely objective
criterion. (Rev. Canon Rene Berthod)
It seems we are to examine particular acts and to look at them in light of Tradition. We are not discouraged to use our intellect; indeed, we are encouraged to ask questions and to seek answers.The twofold approach of Scripture and Tradition sets Catholicism apart. If we abandon Tradition or pick and choose as McBrien does, we abandon the Catholic Faith. It cannot be Catholic if it is outside the teaching Tradition of the church of the ages.
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
juliecinci
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 20 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 294
|
| Posted: Aug 19 2005 at 8:12pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Elizabeth wrote:
| The examination of particular acts of the magisterium to test their conformity to Tradition, i.e., what the Church has always believed and taught throughout the centuries, is a far cry from subjective Protestant private judgment, as it uses a genuinely objective criterion. (Rev. Canon Rene Berthod) |
|
|
How is Protestant faith subjective and Catholic faith objective? Protestants would say that the Bible is the final authority for determining beliefs and practices. They consider the Bible to be their objective criteria for matters of faith. In fact, they'd say they put their trust soly in the revealed word of God and in no man.
I don't see how the Tradition is objective any more than the Bible is, actually. Both of them require a person to first choose to accept that the teachings of the Church or the Bible (or both) are from God alone. At that point, each can be considered objective. But in both cases, it is a private judgment on the part of the individual to assent to the belief that the Tradition or the Bible is infallible for determining matters of faith. We can say that the Spirit is the one to impart faith - both Protestants and Catholics say this - as a way to get around the idea that individuals choose, but in all cases, the individual experiences a choice, or at least, feels that he or she is assenting. Both Protestants and Catholics affirm this.
I can see, as Macbeth pointed out, that to tweak the faith beyond what Tradition teaches begs the question: why be a Catholic at all? Or even more, why be a teacher of Catholicism?
This is a question I'd like to ask some of my professors.
Thanks for interesting dialog.
Julie
__________________
Julie
Homeschooling five for fourteen years
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MaryM
Board Moderator
Joined: Feb 11 2005
Location: Colorado
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 13104
|
| Posted: Aug 20 2005 at 1:14pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I haven't had a chance til now to jump back into this discussion and will go back to one of the earlier quesitons. I have many other thoughts but not enough time now to post them. I hope this isn't too scattered.
juliecinci wrote:
| I think what I'm getting from reading it is that there is an orthodox set of beliefs as outlines in the catechism and through councils etc. that come from the Vatican. |
|
|
Since orthodox means "right (straight, true) teaching" as opposed to hetordoxy or heresy (teaching in opposition to "right teachings") there is of course an orthodox set of beliefs held by the Catholic faith. The orthodox teaching of the Church is the whole deposit of faith given to us by Jesus through the apostles and their successors. The deposit of faith includes both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. The catechism and councils of the church are some of the means through which the Church imparts or makes clear this teaching. All this is held in faith as true teaching.
juliecinci wrote:
| When some of these theologians are trying to deal with the advances in historical and textual criticism, advances in biblical scholarship etc., they tend to veer away from the established doctrines of the church... right? |
|
|
Unfortunately they often outright reject them. Most reliable scholarship proceeds slowly and tends to be in consonant with Catholic belief.
The Church recognizes the insight that genuine scholarship (historical, biblical, etc,) can provide us. An important truth about critical sholarship is that it needs the leaven of Catholic belief in order to remain accountable. There is an article in This Rock (April 2005) on biblical criticism which I think you might find helpful/intersting to read. (Again unfortunately it isn't yet posted on their website - but I can get you a copy if interested). Anyway the article also quotes some of John Paul II's teachings which encourage this scholarship "faith... has no fear of reason but seeks it out and has trust in it"
"by faith, reason is set free from the fragility and limitations deriving from the disobiendence of sin and finds the strength required to rise to the knowledge of the Triune God" (Fides et Ratio 43:2) Full document Fides et Ratio can be found here.
juliecinci wrote:
or if it reveals what Catholicism holds as normative for belief and practice, that is, it reveals what is held to be correct, but there is room for Catholics to either disagree or be in the struggle to find faith or whatever. |
|
|
Many here have articlulated so well how people assent their mind and heart to the teachings of the Church even if they do not fully understand them.
I think a couple quotes from the saints illustrate this
"I believe in order that I may understand" – St. Augustine
"Faith seeking understanding (fides quaerens intellectum)" - The motto of St. Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109)
Even those Catholics who are still in the phase of “faith seeking understanding” and “properly forming their consciences” are asked by the Church to be obedient to it.
If Catholics really believe that Jesus Christ came and died for the forgiveness of our sins, founded a Church whose bishops still lead in union with the Holy Father (the successors of the apostles), and that the Holy Spirit speaks for Jesus through those bishops, why wouldn’t we want to be obedient to her?
More later. I've got to run.
__________________
Mary M. in Denver
Our Domestic Church
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MacBeth
Forum All-Star
Probably at the beach...
Joined: Jan 27 2005
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2518
|
| Posted: Aug 20 2005 at 1:50pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
juliecinci wrote:
How is Protestant faith subjective and Catholic faith objective? Protestants would say that the Bible is the final authority for determining beliefs and practices. They consider the Bible to be their objective criteria for matters of faith. In fact, they'd say they put their trust soly in the revealed word of God and in no man.
|
|
|
That's an easy one!
Protestant beliefs are subjective from the perspective of the individual. Each may find what he wishes to find in the scriptures, and we can see this clearly if we drive around and see the many Protestant sects represented by different churches. Catholics may not interpret scripture as it suits us. We have very clearly defined beliefs. If a Protestant disagrees with his church, he may leave and found his own church...a reform of a reform of a reform of a reform, ad nauseum. How many times has this happened since the protestant revolt? If we find we disagree with church teachings, we have an objective (from our perspective) source to turn to--The Church. While a protestant may take a scripture passage and interpret it as he see fit ("This is My Body" really means this is a symbol of...), we may not do that, but look to the teaching of the church on that interpretation as our objective source.
Just as an example, in another thread we are discussing the "matter" used for the Body and Blood of Our Lord. Some Protestants say it does matter, that you must use unleavened wheat bread and grape wine, while others claim it does not matter what one uses--even coconut milk or grape cool-aid--if that's all one has on hand, or if they decide (again, subjectively) that wine is a no-no. Catholic teaching says that a priest must use grape wine and unleavened wheat bread.
Another example is birth control. Protestants may interpret scripture in such a way that they may determine when their "quiver is full" and stop having children, even by artificial means. For Catholics, we look to church teaching, which is crystal clear.
__________________
God Bless!
MacBeth in NY
Don's wife since '88; "Mom" to the Fab 4
Nature Study
MacBeth's Blog
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Domestic Church
Topic: Catholicism by Richard P. McBrien
