Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible

[Guest]

Catholic Church no longer swears by truth of the Bible
By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent


article at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 32,00.html


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 is timely, coming as it does amid the rise of the religious Right, in particular in the US.

Some Christians want a literal interpretation of the story of creation, as told in Genesis, taught alongside Darwin’s theory of evolution in schools, believing “intelligent design” to be an equally plausible theory of how the world began.

But the first 11 chapters of Genesis, in which two different and at times conflicting stories of creation are told, are among those that this country’s Catholic bishops insist cannot be “historical”. At most, they say, they may contain “historical traces”.

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.

In the document, the bishops acknowledge their debt to biblical scholars. They say the Bible must be approached in the knowledge that it is “God’s word expressed in human language” and that proper acknowledgement should be given both to the word of God and its human dimensions.

They say the Church must offer the gospel in ways “appropriate to changing times, intelligible and attractive to our contemporaries”.

The Bible is true in passages relating to human salvation, they say, but continue: “We should not expect total accuracy from the Bible in other, secular matters.”

They go on to condemn fundamentalism for its “intransigent intolerance” and to warn of “significant dangers” involved in a fundamentalist approach.

“Such an approach is dangerous, for example, when people of one nation or group see in the Bible a mandate for their own superiority, and even consider themselves permitted by the Bible to use violence against others.”

Of the notorious anti-Jewish curse in Matthew 27:25, “His blood be on us and on our children”, a passage used to justify centuries of anti-Semitism, the bishops say these and other words must never be used again as a pretext to treat Jewish people with contempt. Describing this passage as an example of dramatic exaggeration, the bishops say they have had “tragic consequences” in encouraging hatred and persecution. “The attitudes and language of first-century quarrels between Jews and Jewish Christians should never again be emulated in relations between Jews and Christians.”

As examples of passages not to be taken literally, the bishops cite the early chapters of Genesis, comparing them with early creation legends from other cultures, especially from the ancient East. The bishops say it is clear that the primary purpose of these chapters was to provide religious teaching and that they could not be described as historical writing.

Similarly, they refute the apocalyptic prophecies of Revelation, the last book of the Christian Bible, in which the writer describes the work of the risen Jesus, the death of the Beast and the wedding feast of Christ the Lamb.

The bishops say: “Such symbolic language must be respected for what it is, and is not to be interpreted literally. We should not expect to discover in this book details about the end of the world, about how many will be saved and about when the end will come.”

In their foreword to the teaching document, the two most senior Catholics of the land, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, Archbishop of Westminster, and Cardinal Keith O’Brien, Archbishop of St Andrew’s and Edinburgh, explain its context.

They say people today are searching for what is worthwhile, what has real value, what can be trusted and what is really true.

The new teaching has been issued as part of the 40th anniversary celebrations of Dei Verbum, the Second Vatican Council document explaining the place of Scripture in revelation. In the past 40 years, Catholics have learnt more than ever before to cherish the Bible. “We have rediscovered the Bible as a precious treasure, both ancient and ever new.”

A Christian charity is sending a film about the Christmas story to every primary school in Britain after hearing of a young boy who asked his teacher why Mary and Joseph had named their baby after a swear word. The Breakout Trust raised £200,000 to make the 30-minute animated film, It’s a Boy. Steve Legg, head of the charity, said: “There are over 12 million children in the UK and only 756,000 of them go to church regularly.

That leaves a staggering number who are probably not receiving basic Christian teaching.”

BELIEVE IT OR NOT

UNTRUE

Genesis ii, 21-22

So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept he took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man

Genesis iii, 16

God said to the woman [after she was beguiled by the serpent]: “I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.”


Matthew xxvii, 25

The words of the crowd: “His blood be on us and on our children.”


Revelation xix,20

And the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who in its presence had worked the signs by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshipped its image. These two were thrown alive into the lake of fire that burns with brimstone.”


TRUE

Exodus iii, 14

God reveals himself to Moses as: “I am who I am.”


Leviticus xxvi,12

“I will be your God, and you shall be my people.”


Exodus xx,1-17

The Ten Commandments

Matthew v,7

The Sermon on the Mount

Mark viii,29

Peter declares Jesus to be the Christ

Luke i

The Virgin Birth

John xx,28

Proof of bodily resurrection

JOIN THE DEBATE
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/debate

[Guest]

Devin,

To be honest the RCC saying such things doesn't suprise me at all. I had a Catholic Priest at the University of Portland flat out tell me the Bible was nothing more than a historical document. Even as a non-christian at that time his statement almost made me throw up. It seems Semiramis religion is getting a stronger foothold in the RCC each day.

Pray for them in Jesus name,

Jim

[Guest]

Devin, we must be careful not to put all Catholics into this groupe. I know some people who are Catholic, but not Roman Catholic, who I believe to be born again and are following Christ in word and in deed.

Like Jim said we need to pray not only for the Roman Catholics, but the Baptist, The Penticostals, The Methodist and all other denominational people who have strayed from the word and trying to climb into heaven another way.

[Guest]

i just posted the article, i'm not really surprised, and i'm sure many catholics arent even aware of this, and many never will be

[Guest]

Hello, Jim,

It seems Semiramis religion is getting a stronger foothold in the RCC each day.

I don't know if you are serious about this comment, but the claims linking Roman Catholicism to Nimrod and Semiramis are essentially flawed. Ralph Woodrow, whose book "Babylon Mystery Religion" spread these claims, later came to reject the theory. His 1997 book "The Babylon Connection?" refutes his prior work, which had been based on insufficiently critical research.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/091693 ... F8&s=books

Shalom,
Emmet

[Guest]

Hi Emmet,

The comment of nimrods wife was sort of tongue in cheek. It just seems to me that the RCC is falling even more down the slippery slope and walking farther away from God.

God Bless you,

Jim

[Guest]

Hello, Jim,

Thank you for clarifying!

Shalom,
Emmet

[Guest]

The Catholic church, as an institution, does not hold to Sola Scriptura. The Bible and nebulous "Church Tradition" are on equal footing as far as a source of truth and "The Church" has the role and responsibility to properly interpret it to the church members. This latest is just one more way that they show that the Church is the final authority, not the Bible. This makes the Church as the ultimate source of truth and sometimes they need to remind people of that.
D.

[Guest]

Hello, D,

The Catholic church, as an institution, does not hold to Sola Scriptura. The Bible and nebulous "Church Tradition" are on equal footing as far as a source of truth and "The Church" has the role and responsibility to properly interpret it to the church members. This latest is just one more way that they show that the Church is the final authority, not the Bible. This makes the Church as the ultimate source of truth and sometimes they need to remind people of that.

I don't know that we should say that the motive here is to show that the Church is the final authority. It may be more accurate to say that, because the Church is the final authority for the Catholic faith, there is less necessity within the faith to approach the bible in a certain way. Identifying portions of the bible as sacred fiction does not knock the foundation out from under Catholicism, so there is less motivation for the Catholic Church to exclude such a perspective. As such, Catholics are more open to being influenced by modern thought that discounts the historicity of portions of the bible. Bible-based Christians, on the other hand, are more likely to feel that they cannot afford to entertain such an idea without undermining their entire faith.

By the way, I see this is a problem with bible-based Christianity. People's faith should not be based upon a book, but upon God. Some folks, it might seem, believe in God only because the book tells them to! But the book is only a tool to help people come to know God and build a real and present relationship with him. When God becomes the foundation of one's faith, then it is unnecessary to feel threatened if a portion of the book should fall short of one's preconceived expectations.

Also, on an incidental note, there is no reason why "nebulous 'Church Tradition'" should not be regarded on more-or-less equal terms with the Christian bible. As the Catholic Church is quick to point out, the bible is itself a product of Church Tradition, having been compiled through the traditional practice and discernment of the church. Both Church Tradition and the bible are the aggregate fruit of the Christian community; both have drawn upon the inspiration of the holy spirit, and both have been susceptible to the distortive influences of human activity.

Shalom,
Emmet

P.S.: edited once for content

[Guest]

By the way, I see this is a problem with bible-based Christianity. People's faith should not be based upon a book, but upon God.

I agree. Sola Scriptura is only one of the "Solas". It is not the sole foundation for Christianity, but it is, in the context of the church or tradition or some prophet, considered our primary source for truth.
D.