Who Needs a Magisterium Anyway?

[Jaime]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' post='1025357' date='Jul 16 2006, 09:18 AM']
I need two magisteriums.
[/quote]

Take two magisteriums and call me in the morning

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='hot stuff' post='1026135' date='Jul 17 2006, 12:56 PM']
Take two magisteriums and call me in the morning
[/quote]

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='Jesuspaidtheprice' post='1026128' date='Jul 17 2006, 02:47 PM']The Church has engaged and practiced the interpretation of scripture since the earliest times of its existence. The denying this could actually work in the Catholics favor since it would then weigh against the idea that Catholics 'force' beliefs on their parishioners, a common thread of argument. What I would actually like to see is budge address the “Catholic question” by engaging in argument using scripture. Something it seems he is avoiding. Perhaps we can get somewhere instead of posting these nonsense articles as if it is suppose to prove something. I think a great discussion could take place on the sacrifice of the mass, its roots, as Catholics suggest, in John and on Calvary, and whether the explanation that it is the [i]representation[/i] of the sacrifice on Calvary “once and for all” is actually what the scriptures indicate. What do you say budge? I'll even help you out.[/quote]I think that a focus on the Biblical basis for the Mass--a point of contention between Catholics and Protestants--would only cloud the discussion of the need of a Magisterium.

It may even be more fruitful to focus on dogmas which the Catholic Church has defined, which are held by the overwhelming majority of non-Catholic Christians.

Going back to my example, the Catholic Church has set forth dogmas about God's self-revelation as a Trinity. While I find these to be some of the most difficult to understand Christian beliefs (i.e. they are only knowable by faith), Christian continue to be united in belief of these dogmas. If we had no authoritative interpreter of Holy Scripture, how could we authoritatively respond to those who hold beliefs that are contrary to the orthodox view of the Trinity? Wouldn't we Christians have to open the doors to the false interpretations that use Scriptural passages to turn Jesus into either a mortal prophet or a mortal who become divine? I wonder how St. Athanasius ([url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02035a.htm"]link[/url]) could have been the catalyst for rejecting Arianism ([url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01707c.htm"]link[/url]) as a belief incompatible with the catholic Christian Faith?

I find that the potential for misuse of Holy Scriptures has been acknowledged since the beginning. Holy Scripture speaks of another Gospel ([url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/galatians/galatians1.htm#v8"]Gal 1:8[/url]) and another Jesus ([url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/2corinthians/2corinthians11.htm#v4"]2 Cor 11:4[/url]). The various New Testament epistles contain a litany of corrections/admonitions for local churches. This leads me to believe that the New Testament Church had always understood itself as an authority--and universal mission--to interpret the Gospel. Finally, there is the oft-cited example of the Ethiopian eunuch who admits that he cannot interpret Holy Scripture "unless someone instructs (him)" ([url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/acts/acts8.htm#v31"]Acts 8:31[/url]).