Interpretation entrusted SOLELY to ...

Stella1000 said:
Throw us an example of a debated Scripture verse and I'll point to the Churches teachings. Lets refer to another thread about the woman of Revelation. Some of those references would be...

1904 St. Pius X, Ad diem illum. ash 36. 458–59
1950 Pius XII, Munificentissimus Deus. AAS 42. 762–63
1987 John Paul II, Redemptoris Mater
Click to expand...

Haydock Catholic Bible Commentary on Rev 12
A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet. By this woman, interpreters commonly understand the Church of Christ, shining with the light of faith, under the protection of the sun of justice, Jesus Christ. The moon, the Church, hath all changeable things of this world under her feet, the affections of the faithful being raised above them all. --- A woman: the Church of God.
It may also, by allusion, be applied to our blessed Lady [the Virgin Mary]. The Church is clothed with the sun, that is, with Christ: she hath the moon, that is, the changeable things of the world, under her feet; and the twelve stars with which she is crowned, are the twelve apostles: she is in labour and pain, whilst she brings forth her children, and Christ in them, in the midst of afflictions and persecutions. (Challoner) --- On her head....twelve stars, her doctrine being delivered by the twelve apostles and their successors. (Witham)

Q: What do the "interpreters commonly understand " this to mean?

A: The Church is the common interpretation; not Mary

so is Haydock's interpretation authentic, official or infallible?
 
1Thess521 said:
the issue is that Carm-posting Catholics play loose and sloppy with their categorizations of Catholic interpretations:
You stated "authentic interpretation"
Ding uses the phrase "official interpretation"
and Ramcam2 asks if my pastor's interpretation is "infallible"

Which is it?
Click to expand...
Good to have you back. You are correct they are unclear on what has been interpretated.
 
Stella1000 said:
Perhaps your difficulty comes down to not knowing the history of Christianity so well. For example, did you realise that throughout the history of Christianity, there have been conflicts over the meaning of Scripture writings? Hence there has been a history of discussion, debate, study by theologians and scholars within Christianity. Eventually for Christian unity an authentic interpretation has been made in each case where essentials of belief are at stake. These are recorded and preserved as part of the deposit of faith. You can find documents and doctrinal statements by knowing which issue you want clarified. For example, if you want to know the scriptural genesis for the doctrine of Original Sin, the Church has those records preserved and at this stage of history, they can be easily accessed in libraries all over the world.

There isn't a verse in scripture that states 'Original Sin' in doctrine form, but there are collections of verses that together show the way to that conclusion. Can you understand how it works in the light of that? You can't just scroll through a list and find a verse that states the doctrine of Original sin, which seems to be what you are expecting should happen.
Click to expand...
Oh peanut gallery know the history of Christianity just not your revisionist history.
 
PeanutGallery said:
I understand the list of verses, which deals with issues that arise from the Word of God, that have been authentically interpreted by the Magisterium of the Church, is not accessible.

CCC-100 The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted SOLELY to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and to the bishops in communion with him.
Click to expand...
No, there is no 'list of verses' according to your parameters.
 
1Thess521 said:
the issue is that Carm-posting Catholics play loose and sloppy with their categorizations of Catholic interpretations:
You stated "authentic interpretation"
Ding uses the phrase "official interpretation"
and Ramcam2 asks if my pastor's interpretation is "infallible"

Which is it?
Click to expand...
Carm posting Catholics would love to understand how you resolve conflicts around Scripture without any recognised authoritative body serving that purpose? We can't see it happening in any meaningful way.
 
Stella1000 said:
Carm posting Catholics would love to understand how you resolve conflicts around Scripture without any recognised authoritative body serving that purpose? We can't see it happening in any meaningful way.
Click to expand...
But the RCC changes its teachings just look at the new view on Judas. Centuries and centuries of him being condemned in hell, now the new lukewarm view among the nova RC is that is heresy. So you have conflict with those within the RC who still hold to the old view. How is the RC going to resolve that conflict, we don't see it happening in any meaningful way.

Oh let us be honest RCs cannot even resolve the dispute about who is the real pope, is there a pope, is the present pope acceptable.
 
1Thess521 said:
Haydock Catholic Bible Commentary on Rev 12
A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet. By this woman, interpreters commonly understand the Church of Christ, shining with the light of faith, under the protection of the sun of justice, Jesus Christ. The moon, the Church, hath all changeable things of this world under her feet, the affections of the faithful being raised above them all. --- A woman: the Church of God.
It may also, by allusion, be applied to our blessed Lady [the Virgin Mary]. The Church is clothed with the sun, that is, with Christ: she hath the moon, that is, the changeable things of the world, under her feet; and the twelve stars with which she is crowned, are the twelve apostles: she is in labour and pain, whilst she brings forth her children, and Christ in them, in the midst of afflictions and persecutions. (Challoner) --- On her head....twelve stars, her doctrine being delivered by the twelve apostles and their successors. (Witham)

Q: What do the "interpreters commonly understand " this to mean?

A: The Church is the common interpretation; not Mary

so is Haydock's interpretation authentic, official or infallible?
Click to expand...
Mary is the archetype of the Church so there's a natural correspondence in interpreting the vision and it's meaning.
 
Stella1000 said:
Mary is the archetype of the Church so there's a natural correspondence in interpreting the vision and it's meaning.
Click to expand...
" By this woman, interpreters commonly understand the Church of Christ"
It may also, by allusion, be applied to our blessed Lady [the Virgin Mary].

so is it "Mary by allusion" or is it Mary?

or is this where you tell us it doesn't matter?
 
Last edited:
1Thess521 said:
" By this woman, interpreters commonly understand the Church of Christ"
It may also, by allusion, be applied to our blessed Lady [the Virgin Mary].

so is it Mary by allusion or is it Mary?
Click to expand...
I can and have cited documents of the Church above, for example Pius Xs 1904 Encyclical AD DIEM ILLUM LAETISSIMUM...

24. Leaving aside charity towards God, who can contemplate the Immaculate Virgin without feeling moved to fulfill that precept which Christ called peculiarly His own, namely that of loving one another as He loved us? "A great sign," thus the Apostle St. John describes a vision divinely sent him, appears in the heavens: "A woman clothed with the sun, and with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars upon her head" (Apoc. xii., 1). Everyone knows that this woman signified the Virgin Mary, the stainless one who brought forth our Head. The Apostle continues: "And, being with child, she cried travailing in birth, and was in pain to be delivered" (Apoc. xii., 2). John therefore saw the Most Holy Mother of God already in eternal happiness, yet travailing in a mysterious childbirth. What birth was it? Surely it was the birth of us who, still in exile, are yet to be generated to the perfect charity of God, and to eternal happiness. And the birth pains show the love and desire with which the Virgin from heaven above watches over us, and strives with unwearying prayer to bring about the fulfillment of the number of the elect.
 
Stella1000 said:
I can and have cited documents of the Church above, for example Pius Xs 1904 Encyclical AD DIEM ILLUM LAETISSIMUM...

24. Leaving aside charity towards God, who can contemplate the Immaculate Virgin without feeling moved to fulfill that precept which Christ called peculiarly His own, namely that of loving one another as He loved us? "A great sign," thus the Apostle St. John describes a vision divinely sent him, appears in the heavens: "A woman clothed with the sun, and with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars upon her head" (Apoc. xii., 1). Everyone knows that this woman signified the Virgin Mary, the stainless one who brought forth our Head. The Apostle continues: "And, being with child, she cried travailing in birth, and was in pain to be delivered" (Apoc. xii., 2). John therefore saw the Most Holy Mother of God already in eternal happiness, yet travailing in a mysterious childbirth. What birth was it? Surely it was the birth of us who, still in exile, are yet to be generated to the perfect charity of God, and to eternal happiness. And the birth pains show the love and desire with which the Virgin from heaven above watches over us, and strives with unwearying prayer to bring about the fulfillment of the number of the elect.
Click to expand...
which is it?
"Everyone knows that this woman signified the Virgin Mary, "
or
" By this woman, interpreters commonly understand the Church of Christ"
 
Last edited:
Stella1000 said:
Mary is the archetype of the Church so there's a natural correspondence in interpreting the vision and it's meaning.
Click to expand...
Mary is not a type of the church. Thats the rcc elevating a creature to dizzying heights....again. Your quote from Pius X says "What birth was it? Surely it was the birth of US, who still in exile..." (emphasis mine)

How is that birth described in Rev 12 us, when verse 5 says this;

Rev 12:5 She gave birth to a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne,

So according to your pope WE will rule with a rod of iron? And apparently 'male child' leaves the women out of the picture. So much for catholic exegesis.

Chapter 12 starts off by saying its a 'sign of a woman'...its not a literal woman.
 
1Thess521 said:
which is it?
"Everyone knows that this woman signified the Virgin Mary, "
or
" By this woman, interpreters commonly understand the Church of Christ"
Click to expand...
It's both. Lumen Gentium 1964

63. By reason of the gift and role of divine maternity, by which she is united with her Son, the Redeemer, and with His singular graces and functions, the Blessed Virgin is also intimately united with the Church. As St. Ambrose taught, the Mother of God is a type of the Church in the order of faith, charity and perfect union with Christ.
 
Stella1000 said:
It's both. Lumen Gentium 1964

63. By reason of the gift and role of divine maternity, by which she is united with her Son, the Redeemer, and with His singular graces and functions, the Blessed Virgin is also intimately united with the Church. As St. Ambrose taught, the Mother of God is a type of the Church in the order of faith, charity and perfect union with is thChrist.
Click to expand...



Is it Mary or a type of Mary?
 
Last edited:
Stella1000 said:
Perhaps your difficulty comes down to not knowing the history of Christianity so well. For example, did you realise that throughout the history of Christianity, there have been conflicts over the meaning of Scripture writings? Hence there has been a history of discussion, debate, study by theologians and scholars within Christianity. Eventually for Christian unity an authentic interpretation has been made in each case where essentials of belief are at stake. These are recorded and preserved as part of the deposit of faith. You can find documents and doctrinal statements by knowing which issue you want clarified. For example, if you want to know the scriptural genesis for the doctrine of Original Sin, the Church has those records preserved and at this stage of history, they can be easily accessed in libraries all over the world.

There isn't a verse in scripture that states 'Original Sin' in doctrine form, but there are collections of verses that together show the way to that conclusion. Can you understand how it works in the light of that? You can't just scroll through a list and find a verse that states the doctrine of Original sin, which seems to be what you are expecting should happen.
Click to expand...
Naw we doant no nuttin bout no histry ceptin the silver war dey larnd usin hyar in redneke ha skule!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top