Skip to main content

The Bible - A Catholic Book

+
JMJ

It never ceases to amaze me the amount disinformation about the origins of the Bible.

I was once browsing at a bookstore and found a book about the Catholics by Protestants and it claimed that the Catholic only set the Biblical Canon at the Council of Trent.

This is FALSE.



The canon was first established at the Synod of Rome in 382 and has been unchanged since that time. The Council of Trent simply reaffirmed it.

Here's an excerpt from Catholic Answers: Didn't the Catholic Church add to the Bible?
Around this time there were no less than five instances when the canon was formally identified: the Synod of Rome (382), the Council of Hippo (393), the Council of Carthage (397), a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse (405), and the Second Council of Carthage (419). In every instance, the canon was identical to what Catholic Bibles contain today. In other words, from the end of the fourth century on, in practice Christians accepted the Catholic Church's decision in this matter.
By the time of the Reformation, Christians had been using the same 73 books in their Bibles (46 in the Old Testament, 27 in the New Testament)--and thus considering them inspired--for more than 1100 years. This practice changed with Martin Luther, who dropped the deuterocanonical books on nothing more than his own say-so. Protestantism as a whole has followed his lead in this regard.
One of the two "pillars" of the Protestant Reformation (sola scriptura or "the Bible alone") in part states that nothing can be added to or taken away from God's Word. History shows therefore that Protestants are guilty of violating their own doctrine.

For further reading - have a look at "Where we got the Bible".

P^3

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Vatican and SSPX – An Organizational Culture Perspective

Introduction The recent and continuing interactions between the Vatican and the SSPX have been a great opportunity for prayer and reflection.  The basis for the disagreement is theological and not liturgical. As noted by Dr. Lamont (2012), the SSPX theological position on the four key controversial aspects of the Second Vatican Council are base on prior theological work that resulted from relevant magisterial pronouncements.  So it is difficult to understand the apparent rejection of the theological position of the SSPX.

A Reply to Martin Blackshaw’s FLAWED Remnant article titled: FLAWED: SSPX Advice on Abortion-tainted Vaccines

 + JMJ    An article has appeared in the Remnant (link to article) and I am afraid that there are a number of flaws in it that need to be addressed. The author, Martin Blackshaw, believes that both the Church and the SSPX are misapplying the principle of Moral Theology called 'Cooperation In Evil'.  Unfortunately, Mr. Blackshaw rests most of his arguments on citing authors that support his position, without considering the possibility that they are wrong. This highlights a key factor in this crisis: ignorance of the faith and its application . I don't am not singling out Mr. Blackshaw for this criticism, I have observed that it applies to laity and religious, superior and subject a like.  No one seems immune in this enduring crisis, myself included.  I further believe that this ignorance is why so many Catholics, both traditional and non, rely on their gut feeling or "Catholic conscience" for charting their way through this crisis of the faith.  While...

SSPX and the Resistance - A Comparison Of Ecclesiology

Shining the light of Church Teaching on the doctrinal positions of the SSPX and the Resistance. Principles are guides used to aid in decision making.  It stands to reason that bad principles will lead to bad decisions. The recent interactions between Rome and the SSPX has challenged a number of closely held cultural assumptions of people in both sides of the disagreement. This has resulted in cultural skirmishes in both Rome and the SSPX. Since it is the smaller of the two, the skirmishes have been more evident within the SSPX.  The cultural fault-line that Bishop Fellay crossed appears to be linked to two points of Catholic Doctrine: Ecclesiology and Obedience.  The cultural difference of view points is strong enough that it has resulted in the expulsion of a number of members.  It should also be noted that some other priests expelled since the beginning of the latest interactions (starting in 2000) held the same view points and have joined with the l...

Doctrinal Preamble April 15, 2012 vs Protocol 1988

+ JMJ Reproduced below are the Doctrinal Preamble of Bishop Fellay (2012) and Protocol of Archbishop Lefebvre (1988) for comparison. Perhaps when I have time I will add detailed commentary.  Now, given that Archbishop Lefebvre stated that there was nothing wrong with the 1988 text of the protocol, comparing it with that of Bishop Fellay ... where's the problem? Are as  Kaesekopf of Suscipedomine wrote : ...can someone explain why trads would reject this? Or rather, why a sedeplenist trad (who accepts the validity of the NO) would reject this?  Update: To make a comparison easier,  I have inserted the comparable elements of the Protocol developed by Archbishop Lefebvre with that of Bishop Fellay.  I have also included my own commentary in blue . Last thought, when I first read the preamble I thought ... ok so what's the problem?  Now I that I've read it again ... I still ask: What's the problem?  It was based on the Protocol signed by Ar...

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3