Handout from Theology On Tap
As I was driving into work today I realized that I never posted the handout from Theology On Tap. This is a single sheet which broadly outlines the approach to Bible study which I suggested in my talk. Here it is:
Tag: Bible
TOT: How to read the Bible for all its worth….
It has taken me a while, but I finally got around to editing the audio from my recent Theology On Tap session entitled “Reading the Bible for all its worth”. The audio quality wasn’t great, but I’ve cleaned it up the best I can. For the benefit of those who couldn’t attend my talk, I have created a YouTube video which plays the audio synchronized with my slides:
Extra Files
The video doesn’t contain the Q&A after the talk or the “Mega Bible Study” discussion which took place afterwards. The audio for these sections is available below:
Audio PlayerMain Talk (Download)
Audio PlayerQ&A (Download)
Audio PlayerMega Bible Study (Download)
Handout (Download)
Win fabulous prizes!
In my talk I recommend looking for one thing at each Sunday Mass to take away for your spiritual nourishment during the rest of the week and I suggest writing this down in a Mass Journal. I have six Mass journals to give away!
Simply leave a comment below describing an insight from a recent talk, sermon or Bible study which touched you. It doesn’t have to be earth shattering, just something which you might record in your new Mass Journal! The first six comments will win.
Bible Alone? Part 4
Over the last few days I’ve been looking at the subject of Sola Scriptura. Today I would like to discuss the alternative to Sola Scriptura which I realized made more sense of both history and the Biblical data…
The Alternative: Apostolic Authority
Ironically, the answer itself was in Scripture. After the Ascension, writing the New Testament wasn’t the priority because it wasn’t what Jesus commanded the Apostles to do. At the Great Commission Jesus told His disciples to “teach” all nations what He had taught them (as opposed to write a book). If you wanted to know the truth in c. 30AD you would go to Jesus. Who would you go to after the Ascension? You would go to the Apostles He taught and commissioned. It was this living Tradition that sustained the Church – primarily by orally passing on to others what Jesus had taught. Jesus wanted to found a Church, not a book club.
In the Book of Acts, when there was a disagreement over the question of Gentile circumcision, the Christians didn’t use Scripture to decide the answer, but called a Church Council. I could only think of one Church today which still calls [Ecumenical] councils to resolve matters of doctrine and practice…
The more I read Scripture, the clearer it became that the Early Church was one which exercised authority (1 Corinthians 16:16, Hebrews 13:17) given to her by Christ – to forgive sins, no less! Even in my most anti-Catholic moments I could still clearly see that Matthew 16 showed Christ giving Peter a special authority. I could only think of one Church today which claimed to still have that same authority passed on from Peter….
“If a man does not hold fast to this oneness of Peter, does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he confidence that he is in the Church?” – St. Cyprian (A.D. 251)
Bible Alone? Part 3
For the last two days I have been looking at the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura. Yesterday I looked at the problem of doctrinal unity and interpretation created by this doctrine. Today I would like to look at the other problem which I saw as I began to reconsider my allegiance to this belief.
Problem #2: The Bible’s origin and teaching
The second problem which really started to trouble me was the Bible itself. A monk from my home parish asked me the question: “Which came first? The Church or the Bible?”. The answer was obvious – the Church came first.
I recall another time when I was ranting about Catholics not reading their Bibles (I still do!). This monk asked me how the early Christians grew in their faith without each having access to their own leather-bound New Jerusalem Bible.
My thinking had been somewhat backwards and these two questions gave me pause for thought.
Bible alone? Part 2
Yesterday I began speaking about the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. A lot could be written concerning the problems with this Formal Principle of the Reformation, but I will leave that to better minds. Instead, over the next two days I would just like to focus on the two main problems which drove me to consider more deeply the validity of the doctrine. After being involved in the Protestant world for a few years, two problems nagged at me:
Problem #1: Correct interpretation
This first problem was one that I saw first-hand. In my various non-Catholic wanderings, I had encountered some great pastors: faithful, holy and insightful. I was greatly encouraged by their witness and learned a great deal from them.
However, I began to notice that, even within the same parish, there was quite often a considerable diversity in theological opinions. Within the home groups there was also considerable latitude in belief and when a dispute arose, there wasn’t a clear path towards finding a resolution other than asking one of the church staff, and even then you couldn’t guarantee that you’d get the same answer from two different staff members. There was also a mild form of dissension in that the Pastor’s Sermon was often critiqued after the service and it would be discussed as to whether or not everyone agreed with it.
Denomination Diversity
These are only personal, anecdotal impressions, of course. However, when you consider different denominations, these interpretive disputes can be seen more clearly. Some denominations believe in infant baptism, others do not. Some denominations believe that baptism actually does something in the soul of the one being baptised, others affirm that it is just an outward symbol. Likewise, some denominations affirm some concept of Jesus’ real presence in the Eucharist, while others say that it is, again, just a symbol. Some denominations have female pastors, others say that’s invalid. Some affirm the Trinity, others deny it. This lack of doctrinal unity in the Protestant world concerned me greatly.
Right at the dawn of the Reformation you had Luther and Zwingli, two early leaders of the Reformation, disagreeing over the correct interpretation of “This is my body” – Luke 22:19. Each presented his own private, fallible interpretation of that passage, but with no Church Authority to resolve the dispute, there was no possible way to resolve the deadlock.
Bible alone? Part 1
Today I’d like to speak about “Bible Alone” Christianity, also known by its Latin name, “Sola Scriptura”.
Sola Scriptura is an important issue to discuss because it underpins virtually all of Protestantism. It was the Formal Principle of the Reformation. This topic has come up in every discussion I’ve ever had with non-Catholics. It is the major Protestant presupposition and, although the Catholic Faith can certainly be defended from Sacred Scripture, this presupposition really needs to be tackled early on in any Catholic-Protestant dialogue.
This article is another of those half-written posts which languished in my “Drafts” folder for a long, long time. I had intended to write a substantial and thorough article concerning Sola Scriptura since my own realization concerning the shortcomings of this doctrine was the tipping point in my return to the Catholic Church.
However, once again, my desire to write a thorough post has prevented me from writing anything at all. I resisted writing until I had time to do the subject matter justice. So, once again I am forced to return to the words of G.K. Chesterton “If something is worth doing, it’s worth doing badly”. Rather than waiting until I can do a perfect job I’m just going to sit down, write something and get it out there. So, please put on your crash helmets…here we go…
Catholic Biblical Interpretation
The Catechism of the Catholic Church offers three main guidelines for the interpretation of Scripture.
#112 (1) Be especially attentive “to the content and unity of the whole Scripture”. Different as the books which compose it may be, Scripture is a unity by reason of the unity of God’s plan, of which Christ Jesus is the center and heart, open since his Passover.
#113 (2) Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (“. . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church”81).
#114 (3). Be attentive to the analogy of faith.82 By “analogy of faith” we mean the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the whole plan of Revelation.
But what do each of these mean? Here’s my paraphrase:
1. Be especially attentive “to the content and unity of the whole Scripture”
Does my interpretation fit within the overall context of the passage, that particular book of Scripture and all the books of the Bible? How does it fit in within God’s fatherly plan (oikonomia)
2. Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”
Is my interpretation in line with the consensus of the Early Church Fathers, the Saints, the councils and popes and the Liturgy of the Church throughout the centuries?
3. Be “attentive to the analogy of faith”.
The “analogy of faith” is sometimes called the “rule of faith” and refers to the standard for belief. For the Catholic this means: does my interpretation logically and coherently fit into the Catholic Faith, which is the complete revelation of Jesus Christ as revealed in Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and taught by the Magisterium, the teaching authority of the Church? If it conflicts with other parts of the faith, the interpretation is probably wrong.
The article Catholic Biblical Interpretation first appeared on RestlessPilgrim.net