Father Mitch Pacwa vs. Professor Ken Samples Debate on the Authority of the Catholic Church #3 of 4

story but the Lord has it slightly different words the number of books that are not quoted in the New Testament but certainly they are referred to and alluded to and we see in these books these seven books that are in the Canon that the Catholics have some references to Christ the Messiah who would suffer and die for us that was one of the reasons that the Fathers of the Church accepted these seven books the book of wisdom chapter two is filled with Messianic prophecy telling about Christ and it's hard not to see the words of accusation placed against the one who's called the Son of God in the book of wisdom are not exactly the same words used against Christ at the cross it's almost a quote from the words of those who are ridiculing Christ while he was dying being that almost as exactly the same words used in the Book of Wisdom chapter two to refer to the suffering of the Messiah these books do contain truth about Jesus our Lord and do tall call him the son of God and the church believed them because of that now not all the father's did accept it to be sure saint jerome himself did not accept those seven books he thought it would be better not to put them in so that we would be in more agreement with the jewish people remember he was learning Hebrew from rabbis and he wanted to make that kind of a touchstone with them but as it became clear that these holy sentence that wrong hippo and Carthage had accepted the 46 books of the Old Testament and not the 39 and that they accepted it because the evangelists and the Apostles including Paul had used the Septuagint therefore he also went along with it and he translated them and put them into his all game so they also became part of the Old Testament that he translated at Bethlehem I go through all this kind of detail in our history in our story because while on one hand many people in the evangelical and the Protestant circles don't want to see well this is just something that happened in history yes it is something that happened in history of course we live as members of the body of Christ in this world and our Lord used the events and the things of this world to communicate salvation to us human words in specific languages water bread wine oil the laying on of hands and touch and so of course it's going to be with all the different foibles and weaknesses of human life and that are entailed in the Incarnation but not with error and that the Lord who promised that the Holy Spirit would be given to us disciples to lead us into all truth would lead us into all truth through those who have been given that special charism that special office within the church to protect that apostolic tradition not all the traditions that come along at different times to be sure but the tradition that comes to us from the Apostles and it is a great joy for me to be able to attend Catholic Mass in the Eastern Rite churches and see how many of the same prayers that we say in the Latin Rite are similar to what we see in the Eastern Rites and in the Eastern Orthodox churches - why is that why is it that a Jewish convert said to me wait a minute when she first started to go into mass before she was baptized said wait a minute you guys got all these prayers must choose said of course we did all the big names in the Catholic Church are Jews Jesus Mary Joseph Peter Paul and Andrew of course we use Jewish prayers and the churches hold on to that apostolic tradition together and that this office especially as it is found in Peter which again would be a whole other topic for a dialogue and in the bishops speaking in union with Peter the rock on whom Christ built the church and these apostles who also have been given the authority in Matthew chapter 18 to teach the truth all of this is part of why we know about the tradition does it have the same thing do we sit at mass and read from the book of second traditions no of course we read the scriptures as I said and love the sacred scriptures but we also know that it's from that oral tradition that we have the essentials of how to celebrate Mass how to interpret the importance of baptism the practice of infant baptism the books of the Canon of Scripture and the understanding of what the words Bishop and priest mean press pattern episkopos and the itano's Deacon all the different you know traditions that come to us from the Apostles that we trace back including devotion to the saints all of this we look to as informing us we don't read it we don't have it in the same level of scripture as a text to proclaim in the church but it gives us the very possibility of knowing the context in which we can read the scriptures and understand them to the best of our limited human understanding as Christ gave them to the Apostles and that I hope and again as I recognize very much my friend can samples does not reject tradition he knows that it's important but also I hope that we can see in this tradition that comes to us from the apostles another basis not to divide us but to unify us and that we can see in this tradition a real source of God speaking to us as well as us searching together more fully in the scriptures themselves god bless thank you father Pacwa now father Pacwa and professor samples will engage in a dialogue with each other on the issue of authority once again as in the earlier sessions each speaker will have three questions to ask his counterpart and they'll be asked in alternative fashion the questioner will have one minute for his question and the respondent will have five minutes to respond the first question will be asked by professor samples Mitchell this also has to do in some ways with the relationship of tradition and the written word of God it has to do with the nature of the authority of the church a number of Protestant apologists have suggested that the real question here is Sola scriptura from the Protestant side but in some ways while this is not what Catholics say that maybe this is what Catholics imply that the Catholic position is Sola ecclesia meaning this what is Scripture the church tells you what is the interpretation of Scripture the church tells you what is tradition the church tells you what is the interpretation of tradition the church tells you the question is is this placing the church above those authorities first of all as I earlier mentioned not only is Jesus Christ the truth personified and the Word of God made flesh but also he is radically the church he's the one who says to Saul on the road to Damascus Saul Saul why are you persecuting me not why are you persecuting them because what you do to Christ you do we want to do to the church you do to him so much so that st. Paul goes on to identify the church as the body of Christ and in one sense just as we have to look to Christ as the very source for the scriptures and for interpreting Scripture we also have to look to Christ as the source of the church and for understanding things now the problem is in how we define the church some of the times when people say the church says that the in tradition means this the church says the scripture means this so usually referring to the church as simply the Magisterium and in fact the Catholic Magisterium gives very few official interpretations of Scripture there are not many texts that the Catholic Church says officially you have to interpret the Bible this way rather the Catholic Church does leave a great deal of latitude in interpreting Scripture so long as you don't interpret it in such a way as to deny the basic truths of the Christian faith and that as a matter of fact when we read in the Catholic catechism we see that there are different ways of interpreting the sense of Scripture and that one's prayerful looking at the analogical senses spiritual sense the exterior literal sense of Scripture the moral sense of Scripture that different kinds of fruit can be gained by the individual who examines the Texas scripture and the church has nothing to say you know to that and say the fine you know enjoy it I don't have a sense of sitting there with the Bible when I pray and as a matter of fact the church not only has me pray the scriptures at the liturgy but also in my devotions that Protestants call them my praying of the Divine Office is Scripture but also but they're not sitting the same you better watch what you say we are watching you young man that's not what's going on it's rather that the church leaves a lot of leeway so long as I maintain the inherent mysteriousness of the faith by never denying that Jesus is God and man by never denying the oneness of God and the three nests of persons never denying that Jesus Christ churches his body here on earth and he's the head of that body and so on so the church is not going around telling me interpretations of all this and the documents that the church has are public documents this is not the Masonic Lodge we don't have secret documents we don't have secret handshakes even that we except me the Knights of Columbus have those I don't know but we don't have but but this is public and any Catholic as well as any process you self know you are allowed to go read st. Agustin we haven't locked him away but rather we want Catholics to see what we have from the tradition I recommend that Catholics get a hold of a book called the faith of the early fathers by Jergens William Jergens to see at least an initial list of the things from the Fathers of the Church and see this so that people can know it and read it for themselves we don't interpret every single thing some things we do when there are decrees but otherwise not now father Pacwa will ask his first question um one of the points that you made is how sometimes it's you know it's not bad to have these divisions that exist among the Christians when a certain body stops teaching the gospel it's better to move on the question I have comes from a problem from Ephesians chapter 4 verse 4 that the strive to preserve the unity of the spirits of the bond of peace there's one body and one spirit as you also call to one hope of your call one Lord one faith one baptism one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all that oneness reflects Christ's prayer in John 17 and elsewhere how how is it that were to ever have that one faith in one baptism and oneness in the church if this if the division that you say are a positive feature well I think that I would modify what I mean by positive thing I don't think that Christians dividing is a good thing I do think however Mitch that liberalism and I don't mean Jane Fonda and Michael Dukakis I mean liberal theology at this point liberalism has greatly affected both our churches and in effect sometimes the very truths of the gospel are denied by these people and forces in one way though could I turn the question around when I look at again the splitting of the Western and Eastern Churches when I look at the Latin and Greek churches granted they had some real differences differences as to the authority of the differences as to the Filioque clause differences no doubt politically etc but in one respect there was a split in Christendom long before the Reformation and I think that while Protestants have not always done well and and frankly I think a lot of the fragmentation in Protestantism has a lot more to do with sin and ego and things of that nature frankly there are many groups in so-called Protestantism that don't hold the Sola scriptura they have a liver shiver and so they start a new denomination based upon some experience now I do think though that there are a couple points that still need to be made striving to keep the unity of the faith I think is something all of us must do and Protestants may not have collectively done a good enough job of following our Lord's admonition in John 17 I'm willing to admit that but even when the apostles were living even when Paul and John were living there were schisms and while I don't see schisms as a positive thing in and of itself I think there are benefits that come out of these and certainly the Creed's came out of our battles with heresy and so I don't want to give you the impression that it's a positive but I don't think that Sola scriptura leads to all of this denominationalism because the church struggled even when the apostles were alive now professor samples will ask his second question Mitchell this is a philosophical question and as you know my my training really as is as a philosopher and so Colossians 2:8 applies watch those who give you hollow and deceptive philosophy so I'm putting you on guard now my concern Mitch is could you speak to the issue that the Roman Catholic claim to infallibility it almost seems like a non falsifiable claim the the analytic philosophers of the 20th century have said that you know if something cannot at least be theoretically falsified how could you even ever offer evidence that it's true it almost seems at times that the Catholic Church tells us that the Pope is infallible and the church is infallible and that's the way it is it's almost a logical opera or e azam is there any way to falsify this catholic claim theoretically I'm not sure I thought about this from a philosophical point of view but certainly the way to falsify it is to say the Pope is as dumb as a box of rocks every time he speaks that would falsify it in other words that the Pope or worse and this is oftentimes the accusation the Pope speaks simply to maintain a position of power and that the Pope speaks simply to have control over people politically and economically and that therefore he can be disregarded and not only the Pope but actually and this is certainly the claim of many philosophers that Christianity has been deceptive from the beginning and that these for instance you have somebody like Dominic Crossan who had been a priest one time but now says that Jesus was crucified they threw his body in the garbage and on the garbage dumping dogs ate his body there was no resurrect that would be one way to falsify the claim of the church the question is is the church's claim to present the truth acceptable and as a matter of fact you yourself and I both 100% accept that testimony of the church because that's the only way we can have that testimony that Jesus Christ did die on the cross and was not given a drug and later on resuscitated from a drug State it's only on the basis of the testimony of the church that we believe that he rose from the dead and we believe this not from witnesses who later changed their mind is in the Book of Mormon and then went back and forth isolated but rather we believe it from witnesses who did not believe it at first until they sought and then we preferred to be executed and tortured rather than change their story that Jesus who is raised from Jesus who died was also raised from the dead we believe that as an infallible Authority and that we accept their testimony as being that which is behind the scripture because their testimony is a testimony internally acceptable when we look at the New Testament we believe that these are not crazy people these are people who those simple in their background are incredible geniuses who get PhDs around the world to fill libraries with book trying to understand the depth and never being able to plumb that depth but then also we look at their testimony of blood and we accept that as an infallible testimony from the church and it's the church all of those martyrs it's the Church of martyrs of this century the three hundred thousand Orthodox priests who died in Stalin's camps as well as those who died in Hitler's camps and all the other martyrs of the the Church and China and other places Protestant and Catholic alike we continue to give a testimony and I accept that as an infallible testimony now I also include in that in terms of the teaching authority the Magisterium of those who received that gift from the Apostles and pass it on through their successors the bishops in particular the Bishop of Rome but if I don't accept the church as an infallible teacher I can't be here as a Christian you can't either if you don't accept it but it's accepting it at what point and who does this continue to be taught that's the would be the difference between us but we do accept infallible teaching from the church it says here in first Timothy chapter 3 that um you should know how to behave in the household of God which is the Church of the Living God the pillar and the foundation of truth sometimes translated as the pillar and the bulwark of truth and under Bott and undeniably great is the mystery of devotion now seeing is how the scripture is the source that says the church is the pillar and bulwark of truth how is it that we would see the Bible as that it doesn't say that the scripture again not in any way to take one bit away from the truth of the scripture and it's its inerrancy and acceptance but it does say here inside the Bible that the truth is a pillar would you like to comment on that well since you quoted the Bible I guess I have to respond to it I don't disagree with 1st Timothy chapter 3 and let me again say that I don't deny Mitch that the Christian community the church played an important role in recognizing the Canon I do not deny that the church plays a foundational role in terms of embracing the gospel message proclaiming the witness of Jesus Christ I think though the difference would be you would say that it is the church's testimony that Jesus lived died and rose again I would say that it was the eyewitness apostles who made this claim and so again I think fine-tuning the issue of the church I believe that the Christian Church is a pillar and foundation but the church does not arise of its own the church has a certain Authority if and when it submits to God's revelation now I think maybe I can illustrate this by dealing with the Canon I don't dispute with you either that there were many lists and I think that the question of the Canon is a bit missing many issues in the Christian church have been messy but I still dispute the idea that somehow the church said these books are inspired and thus they are that is the church recognized that these were apostolic books they recognized the inherent authority of those books because they were apostolic they in effect recognized what we Protestants would call the self-authenticating nature of God's Word now it's difficult when you conceive of the idea of who would God appeal to to confirm his word well you couldn't appeal to anyone above God and therefore God's Word must be self-authenticating it must have a certain nature to it thus when the church submits to the divine revelation when the church proclaims the gospel it is the pillar and the foundation and in the words of Augustan I have no problem with with Augustine saying if it were not for the church I would not have believed because the church serves a very strong foundational process again as a Protestant I don't want to have the Bible or the church I want the church to rest upon a solid divine foundation which I assert is the Bible professor samples will now ask his third and final question Mitchell I want to build on my second question I was once in a debate with an atheist and I said to the atheist what would it take for you as an atheist to stop being an atheist and become a Christian theist he said to me nothing you could ever say to me would convince me to become a Christian I said well at that point you've made up your mind you're not willing to look at the evidence you've argued that we can falsify the claim of the Magisterium by appealing to certain things now there have been times in church history where popes have been designated or condemned as heretics I'm gonna mention one specific Pope Honorius who was condemned by the six General Council and that condemnation was backed up by Pope Leo the second now without committing death by a thousand qualifications if Pope's are heretics what does that do to infallibility of course it is possible for Pope's to be heretics so matter-of-fact Dante even puts Pope's in Hell and the reason for it is that we distinguish and that's one as a matter of fact one of the great gifts of the first Vatican Council is that its declaration on infallibility makes very specific that infallible Authority it's not when the Pope wakes up and says I feel infallible it's going to rain today that's not an infallible teaching and he can be wrong on that that the church has to be teaching on assuming the Pope has to be teaching on faith and morals and he has to be say specifically that he's teaching ex cathedra and as I recall in the case of Pope Honorius that the condemnation was for accepting a semi Aryan statement that was misrepresented to him he signed it thought thinking it would bring peace and once he realized that this was an error he also repudiated the statement and that you know he was condemned as a heretic for doing something that was incorrect but he and therefore that's where the condemnation of him as a heretic came in but it also was through misrepresentation his own misunderstanding we don't teach that the Pope knows everything and we don't we do teach that when he teaches on faith and morals you know that he is infallible and when he's saying that he's doing so speaking from as the authority of his chair this is to me a great gift that we have in the church guaranteed not because we feel that but because Jesus Christ our Lord said to st. Peter you are rock and on this rock I will build my church and that the gates of Hell will not prevail against it I give to you the keys of the kingdom whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven keys were an Old Testament image of being a prime minister now and then the binding and the loosing was the kind of language used in Pharisaic Judaism for binding Authority and this is an extremely important gift to give to the church but it comes from Christ as a gift and as a grace now seeing as how this promise of Peter being the rock and at the gates and on which Christ we build the church and the

Channel: Kathy Johnson

Views: 25,002

Rating: 4.8894472 out of 5

Keywords:

Id: Majg3y2byPo

Length: 30min 27sec (1827 seconds)

Published: Wed Nov 15 2017