Rome and "The Gift of Scripture"

[ContraMundum]

From the Sunday Times (UK)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1811332,00.html


The TimesOctober 05, 2005
Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible

By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent
http://images.thetimes.co.uk/images/trans.gif
THE hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church has published a teaching document instructing the faithful that some parts of the Bible are not actually true.

The Catholic bishops of England, Wales and Scotland are warning their five million worshippers, as well as any others drawn to the study of scripture, that they should not expect “total accuracy” from the Bible.
“We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical precision,” they say in The Gift of Scripture.



......The document shows how far the Catholic Church has come since the 17th century, when Galileo was condemned as a heretic for flouting a near-universal belief in the divine inspiration of the Bible by advocating the Copernican view of the solar system. Only a century ago, Pope Pius X condemned Modernist Catholic scholars who adapted historical-critical methods of analysing ancient literature to the Bible. .....

EDITED SO AS NOT TO BREAK COPYRIGHT LAWS.

[TomUK]

I disagree with the attitude Rome often takes to scripture, but in this instance i agree with them (apart from their claim that Matthew 27 shouldn' be taken literally seems to pander to politics more than theology).

The Times sensationalist headline however is poor-things can be true without be literal.

[gitlance]

Episcopalians hardly take all of the Bible literally.

What is the point?

The Church created the Bible, can she not use her sure charism of truth to properly interpret it?

[Naomi4Christ]

The Church created the Bible, can she not use her sure charism of truth to properly interpret it?

What do you mean by this statement?

[karen freeinchristman]

The Church giveth and the Church can taketh away.

[Fish and Bread]

I have no problem with what these Cardinals are saying. They have good points. Some might say that the wording they use is a little unfortunate in places, but they have a duty to their flocks to be clear about they're saying, especially as the rise of religious fundamentalism is beginning to reopen the idea of creationism as a viable concept in the public conciousnesss. People are lost to Christiandom everyday because it often seems hostile to science. Christianity and objective observations about God's creation must be compatible, or else Christianity is a lie. The Church of Rome, rightly, has begun to realize this and made theological reforms over the centuries to make Christianity capatible with the observed reality of the world.

[Yahweh Nissi]

Interesting.

Indeed, the article's title is simply incorrect and the way it puts things is misleading, but what the RC bishops actually seem to be saying seems to be sensible IMO, and I do not think that, as an evangelical, I would disagree with them.

Love YN.

[Tetzel]

Episcopalians hardly take all of the Bible literally.

What is the point?

The Church created the Bible, can she not use her sure charism of truth to properly interpret it?

So why is it necessary for the RCC to re-interpret what it has previously interpreted differently?

[longhair75]

slightly off topic, but: It's karen freeinchristman's 44 BIRTHDAY TODAY!happy birthday!

[Tetzel]

It's stuff like this that makes me believe that the supposed equality of tradition and scripture as the norms of the RCC is not a true claim. Scripture is not equal and in line with tradition if it needs to be whipped into line by ecclesiastical authority! The need to do such suggests that tradition has become deformed an out of line with scripture. Furthemore the fact that a document that the Church generated no longer squares with the Church is indicative of a mutable tradtion.

[Andy Broadley]

I really can't see what the fuss is here.

Is the RC church any different in this respect from the Anglican church, or the Salvation Army? (Can't speak for any others I'm afraid)

[Andy Broadley]

Probably the most important post in the thread.

[Fish and Bread]

I really can't see what the fuss is here.

Is the RC church any different in this respect from the Anglican church, or the Salvation Army? (Can't speak for any others I'm afraid)

There is a strong movement afoot in Southern Baptist and non-denominational evangelical churches to interpret the creation account in Genesis absolutely literally. I have a non-denominational friend who believes that the world was created in seven actual days.

Anglicans and Catholics generally oppose such unscientific claims and believe in theistic evolution of some sort, in accord with modern scientific claims. We believe that faith and science are two sides of the same coin and will always be compatible with one another if viewed properly. One can't seperate God from his creation.

[Andy Broadley]

There is a strong movement afoot in Southern Baptist and non-denominational evangelical churches to interpret the creation account in Genesis absolutely literally. I have a non-denominational friend who believes that the world was created in seven actual days.

Anglicans and Catholics generally oppose such unscientific claims and believe in theistic evolution of some sort, in accord with modern scientific claims. We believe that faith and science are two sides of the same coin and will always be compatible with one another if viewed properly. One can't seperate God from his creation.
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

Which is why the article tells us nothing new.

[higgs2]

There is a strong movement afoot in Southern Baptist and non-denominational evangelical churches to interpret the creation account in Genesis absolutely literally. I have a non-denominational friend who believes that the world was created in seven actual days.

Anglicans and Catholics generally oppose such unscientific claims and believe in theistic evolution of some sort, in accord with modern scientific claims. We believe that faith and science are two sides of the same coin and will always be compatible with one another if viewed properly. One can't seperate God from his creation.

Along those lines, today is Evolution Sunday! http://www.uwosh.edu/colleges/cols/rel_evol_sun.htm :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

[Andy Broadley]

Along those lines, today is Evolution Sunday! http://www.uwosh.edu/colleges/cols/rel_evol_sun.htm :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
I'm losing my touch.

There's a flippant remark in there somewhere, but I can't think of it.

[higgs2]

I'm losing my touch.

There's a flippant remark in there somewhere, but I can't think of it.


Maybe your sockpuppet can think of one! ^_^ ^_^ ^_^

[JoshuaCh1v9]

Maybe your sockpuppet can think of one! ^_^ ^_^ ^_^
Well, I would say that Evolution pretty well described him getting out of bed for church this morning. Apart from the fact that evolution probably took less time, had less trouble finding a matching pair of socks, and didn't burn the toast.

[higgs2]

Well, I would say that Evolution pretty well described him getting out of bed for church this morning. Apart from the fact that evolution probably took less time, had less trouble finding a matching pair of socks, and didn't burn the toast.
LOL :D

[Andy Broadley]

Well, I would say that Evolution pretty well described him getting out of bed for church this morning. Apart from the fact that evolution probably took less time, had less trouble finding a matching pair of socks, and didn't burn the toast.
Gee thanks buddy.

Honestly, you make him a site supporter and this is how he thanks you....

*sulks*

[ContraMundum]

The Church giveth and the Church can taketh away.

"Sola Ecclesia"

[Andy Broadley]

"Sola Ecclesia"
As opposed to a sola eclipse....

[karen freeinchristman]

"Sola Ecclesia"

I am not exactly in favour of it, in case anyone wondered.

[Naomi4Christ]

Why the Latin :scratch:

[Yahweh Nissi]

Why the Latin :scratch:

I assume it is to make the point; "... as opposed to 'sola scripture'" - one of the great slogans of the Reformation asserting the traditional protestant view of the authority of the Bible. (Which I entirely agree with - in my earlier post I was agreeing with what the RC bishops seemed to be saying in this article about how we should take scripture, not the view that the magisterium of the church has an authority equal to scripture). At the time, Latin was kind of a common European language, at least in 'learned' circles. Over two centuries later, Newton wrote his great work in latin for the same reason.

[pmcleanj]

At the time, Latin was kind of a common European language, at least in 'learned' circles. Over two centuries later, Newton wrote his great work in latin for the same reason.
For that matter, not sixty years ago, schoolboys were still learning Latin for the same reason. My father recalls writing current events essays in Latin (having to invent phrases like "Atomicus Bombus" to do so), and being expected to converse with visiting Masters in Latin if any one of them was not English speaking.

We've lost that scholarly standard in only half a century.

[Naomi4Christ]

For that matter, not sixty years ago, schoolboys were still learning Latin for the same reason. My father recalls writing current events essays in Latin (having to invent phrases like "Atomicus Bombus" to do so), and being expected to converse with visiting Masters in Latin if any one of them was not English speaking.

We've lost that scholarly standard in only half a century.

I did Latin at school, and my 12 year old is studying it at his prep school.

Latin is a language
As dead as dead can be
It killed the ancient Romans
And now it's killing me.

[Wiffey]

LOL...my mother had to learn to speak Latin when she was in school. I had to try to cobble together enough to understand some of my primary source material when I was an undergrad studying medieval history. Luckily I spoke Spanish, so understanding Latin wasn't too big a stretch. As the root of all romance languages, Latin can be pretty useful.

On another note, if you look directly at a sola ecclesia, it can ruin your retinas!

[karen freeinchristman]

(having to invent phrases like "Atomicus Bombus" to do so)

hehehe ^_^

[aixia]

I would love to learn Latin! My parents, having gone to Catholic schools all their lives including college, learned it, but I went to a public school in the middle of nowhere which barely offered Spanish, let alone Latin. It always seemed to be offered opposite a course for my major in college too. Someday I want to go back and pick up a few college courses in it just for fun.

Pretty frightening to want to pick up Latin for fun, huh? :eek:

As to the original post, the Catholic Church in recent years has encouraged Catholics to look at Scripture as inspired, but not literal. After all, Jesus spoke in parables regularly, and he meant people to think about the meaning of things, not simply believe blindly. This really is not a change, it's pretty much the status quo. The cardinals may not have said things well, but they certainly aren't giving some new opinion on things.

[Naomi4Christ]

Pretty frightening to want to pick up Latin for fun, huh? :eek:



You would soon see the errors of your ways.

[karen freeinchristman]

the Catholic Church in recent years has encouraged Catholics to look at Scripture as inspired, but not literal. After all, Jesus spoke in parables regularly, and he meant people to think about the meaning of things, not simply believe blindly. This really is not a change, it's pretty much the status quo. The cardinals may not have said things well, but they certainly aren't giving some new opinion on things.

I agree. I think there is much in Scripture that is not literal.

As far as languages go, I do wish I could learn Greek and Hebrew.

[aixia]

You would soon see the errors of your ways.
LOL! You're probably right!