Interesting review of a book that challenges the Catholic Church’s and others’ claims to not have changed the Church’s position on a number of issues, including slavery, usury, marriage, etc.
The review’s description of the author:
"Among American Catholics, John T. Noonan Jr. is specially situated for this pursuit. He is a distinguished law professor; a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; and the author of many books on jurisprudence, legal history and ethics, and church law. In the 1960’s, when a papal commission re-examined Catholic teaching on contraception, a magisterial 1965 study by Noonan, tracing the history of the doctrine, was widely used to support change. In the 70’s, in equally learned arguments, he criticized the Supreme Court’s ruling for a right to abortion and campaigned for a constitutional amendment to protect the unborn. On the appeals court since 1986, he is known for granting stays of execution to death-row prisoners. So he is impossible to place in the polarized geography of liberals and conservatives – Catholic and non-Catholic. "
If you look at the original Greek and Hebrew of the bible, you will note that has never changed and that is what Christians should be following and have faith in. If you put your faith in a “church” or in man, you will always be disappointed.
How about those who have no faith?
If you look at the original Greek and Hebrew of the bible, you will note that has never changed and that is what Christians should be following and have faith in. If you put your faith in a “church” or in man, you will always be disappointed.
That goes for slavery, too? Don’t the Ten Commandments reference slaves (without condemnation)? Sorry, I can’t read Greek or Hebrew (shame on me) to get the original sense.
I find those who are non-believers or who have some sort of vendetta against the Catholic church, or Christians in general, love to research for inconsistencies throughout history. Of course, they do not focus on the teachings of Jesus, where there are no inconsistencies, but love to point out hypocrisies in a church or in any number of humans.
That’s probably because many Christians don’t seem to focus on the teachings of Jesus - at least the most vocal ones you hear about in the news are focused on things like gays and condoms and things like that. The other reason is that within the Catholic Church, things like (capital “T”) Tradition the the pronouncements of various councils and popes are given equal weight with what’s in the Bible. In my opinion, these are the opinions and or analyses of men are are therefore fraught with failabilty, yet are considered by many to be eternal divine truths. So that sort of invites ciriticisms of inconsistencies.
Who is giving those Traditions equal weight with the Bible?
Catholics or non-Catholics?
Interestingly enough, there seems to be a blow up of minute points of religions that in the grand scheme are not fundamental tenets of church doctrine nor are they discussed every week in church sermons, prayers, or sunday school classes.
Who is giving those Traditions equal weight with the Bible?
Catholics or non-Catholics?
Catholics
*Interestingly enough, there seems to be a blow up of minute points of religions that in the grand scheme are not fundamental tenets of church doctrine nor are they discussed every week in church sermons, prayers, or sunday school classes.*
I think may non-Christians find it confusing (and maybe illogical?) that there would be more or less important parts of a religion. My guess is for them it is an all-or-nothing deal. This is something that has confused me for a while. And then you throw in the whole “new covenant” thing and it makes many non-Christians (and some Christians as well) very confused about what is a key element to the faith and beliefs, and what should still be followed and what shouldn’t.
I don’t have any idea where you get your view on Catholics and their teachings. There are three readings in Church every Sunday. Let me think. Where do they come from?
Seems like every Sunday for the past 30 years they have been readings from the Bible. I can’t remember a single reading from a Counsel or recitation of Tradition, whatever that means.
Nothing has equal weight with the Bible. That is why they call it the Bible.
Confusing, surely…Especially if someone is making a comment about something that isn’t a part of their faith or in their basis of knowledge.
I am equally confused about the Mormon beliefs and “Traditions” but don’t go as far as to say they are evil or wrong. I ask questions and try to learn the history of the religion and why they might think that way. That goes for traditions in the Jewish, Hindu, or Buddhist religions.
However, it is ignorant to confuse tradition with teachings of the bible and saying that a whole group takes tradition as literally as the bible.
Sorry, can’t give a good answer to that question. I will concede that the Catholic Church has had terrible leadership for much of its 2000 years. As a good Catholic (OK, maybe not so good), I take that as proof it is the one true religion. Absent help from above, the religion would have disappeared centurys ago.
Brian826: yes, I have been to a few Catholic masses
Art: I mean infallibility in terms of spirtual doctrine, not politcal leadership (I made the same mistake too before vitus corrected me, but hey, I’m a dumb Prot My point is that while Protestants say that all spritual authority comes from the Bible alone, Catholics also believe in Tradition as another source. As defined here: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15006b.htm
Certainly the Church has developed a set of teachings that fall outside the topics directly addressed by the Bible, much as we have developed laws in addition to our Constitution. I am quite certain all religions do that, your characterizations of the Protestant religions not withstanding.
At Church we have readings over and over again from Paul and the like. We don’t have readings from Vatican II.
You seem to be confusing teachings with controversy. The disagreements get play in the news. The main line teachings do not, though they are far more important.
My point is that while Protestants say that all spritual authority comes from the Bible alone, Catholics also believe in Tradition as another source. As defined here: