Every day, Catholics are invited by coworkers, neighbors,
and even family members to "ecumenical" Bible studies. Should they
go? Certainly all of us would benefit from more study of Scripture, but as
someone who has been a part of a number of Protestant Bible studies—I’ve even
taught them—I discourage Catholics from attending them because of the
foundational premises and principles in operation at these studies.
Protestants are delighted to have Catholics attend their
Bible studies, but it is often not because they want to hear and discuss the
Catholic perspective on Scritpure. Instead, they see it as an opportunity to
bring them to the "true Gospel"—to evangelize them, to get them
saved. In many cases, though certainly not all, the non-denominational Bible
study is the Trojan Horse that infiltrates the Catholic’s mind and succeeds in
drawing him away from the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church—to join a Protestant
group. Most of us have a family member or friend who has been affected in this
way.
An unwary Catholic who steps into the Protestant Bible study
usually does so with no intention of leaving the Catholic Church. They just
want to study the Bible. The Catholic usually has a hard time finding a good
and welcoming Bible study in Catholic circles—but this is changing.
First, while the Bible study may call itself
"non-denominational," Catholics and Orthodox are not usually included
under this umbrella. While they may be invited, you’ll rarely find them in
leadership.
Protestants think of themselves as people of the Book, not
hampered by human tradition. They think of Catholics as, at best, followers of
traditions for whom the Bible is secondary. That is a huge misconception:
Protestants are also people of tradition. No one reads the Bible
objectively. People who claim to "just read the Bible" really read it
through the eyes of a tradition they’ve already accepted, whether that be
Fundamentalist, Calvinist, Pentecostal, Baptist or one of many others. Everyone depends
upon tradition, but not everyone recognizes it.
"Bible Christians," based on their tradition,
study the Bible with these premises:
There is no binding authority but the Bible alone.
There is no official binding interpretation or interpreter.
The Bible is perspicuous (i.e., easy to understand) and can
be interpreted and understood by anyone.
An individual can and should read the Bible and interpret it
for himself.
Catholics, based on their Tradition, study the Bible with
different premises:
The authority of the apostles and the Church preceded the
Bible, and the Tradition of the Church is an equally infallible authority (2
Thess. 2:15; CCC 80–83). The Bible is part of the apostolic Tradition.
The authoritative interpretation of the Bible is the
prerogative of the Catholic Church (1 Tim. 3:15; Matt. 18:17; CCC 85-88).
The Bible is not always easy to understand (2 Pet. 3:15-16)
and needs to be understood within its historical and contextual framework and
interpreted within the community to which it belongs.
Individuals can and should read the Bible and interpret it
for themselves—but within the framework of the Church’s authoritative teaching
and not based on their own private interpretation (2 Pet 1:20-21).
These basic differences place the Catholic and Protestant
worlds apart even though they are opening the pages of the same book and
accepting it as an authoritative revelation from God. The Catholic position is
biblical and has been espoused from the first days of the Church. The
Protestant position is unbiblical and is of recent origin. The Catholic is in
full continuity with historical Christianity; Protestants are in discontinuity.
Catholics attending a non-denominational Bible study need to
be aware of these differences and be ready not only to filter out false
conclusions but also to guard themselves against the false underlying
assumptions (e.g., that everything has to be found and proven explicitly in the
Bible).
Catholics who are unaware often begin to adopt a Protestant
mentality without knowing they are doing so, gradually learning to suspect the
Catholic Church and trying to prove everything from the Bible.
Let’s Take Just One Example: Baptism
But what difference do these premises make? Let’s take the
example of 1 Peter 3:18-21:
For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous
for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the
flesh but made alive in the spirit; in which he went and preached to the
spirits in prison, who formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the
days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight
persons, were saved through water. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now
saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a
clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Notice the words in italics. What does it say? To Catholics
it makes perfect sense because Christians have always taught (until the
Reformation) that baptism is essential for salvation. As Catholics, we can draw
from a wealth of other biblical and patristic passages that consistently and
continuously teach a seamless garment of doctrine—the constant teaching of the
Church, of all Christians.
A few examples:
Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one
is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."
(John 3:5)
This has always been understood to mean water
baptism, until descendants of the Reformation denied it and came up with new
interpretations, such as that the water refers to the water in the womb, the
word of God, or even a synonym for the Spirit (as in "water, even the
Spirit"). There is no consensus among Protestants.
Other examples are Acts 2:38 and Acts 22:16. The first says,
"And Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the
name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive
the gift of the Holy Spirit.’"
The second one says, "And now why do you wait? Rise and
be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name."
These verses agree with the words of Jesus, Titus 3:5, and
the rest of the New Testament about the necessity and importance of baptism.
But many Evangelicals will offer in reply a list of verses that say salvation
is by faith (e.g., John 3:16) and argue that since he can find twenty-five
verses that say salvation is by faith, it can’t be by baptism.
Can we cut two verses out of the Bible because we find ten
others that seem to contradict? Heavens, no! We have to find a way to explain and
accept both and harmonize them into a cogent theology. That is what Catholics
have been doing well for two millenia.
One of the great reliefs for me as a Catholic was to read
the Bible without having to set aside verses that didn’t agree with my preconceived
assumptions. Catholics do not have this problem.
A Figure of a Figure? Go Figure.
Now, back to 1 Peter 3:18-21. Protestant commentaries on
Scripture admit it is one of the most difficult passages of the Bible to
interpret. Here is a quote from my book Crossing the Tiber:
In his recent anti-Catholic book The Gospel according
to Rome, James McCarthy says that "when Peter says that ‘baptism now saves
you,’ he is speaking of the typological, or symbolic, significance of baptism.
. . . It [the word figure] tells us that what follows, ‘baptism now saves
you,’ is a figurative illustration that complements the symbolism of a
preceding figure" (331-332). It seems he is saying that baptism is a
figure of a figure instead of the fulfillment of a figure. A Greek-English
Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature offers a
different and more straightforward interpretation: "Baptism, which is a
fulfillment (of the type), now saves you, i.e., the saving of Noah from the
flood is a . . . ‘foreshadowing’ and baptism corresponds to it [fulfills
it]" (75). McCarthy does go on to say: "This verse is part of one of
the most difficult passages in the New Testament to interpret. Nevertheless,
this much is clear: it does not support the Roman Catholic doctrine"
(331-332). (Crossing the Tiber, p. 130, note 56)
The Catholic interpretation explains the passage quite
comfortably without twisting the text from its clear meaning, accepting the
literal meaning of the text, and complementing the rest of New Testament
teaching. It is difficult for McCarthy to interpret because he comes to the
passage with a handicap: his Fundamentalist preconceptions.
Catholics: Seen but Not Heard
Baptism is just one example, and we have only scratched the
surface. Other examples of passages that are difficult for Evangelicals—and
where unwary Catholics attending a non-denominational Bible study can be
misled—are John 20:23, Colossians 1:24, James 2:24, Matthew 16:18-19, and John
5:28-29.
Catholics often find non-denominational Bible studies
appealing because of the warm, serious, loving, and family-like environment.
Being used to reverence and quiet devotion, Catholics find the welcoming and
chatty nature of these gatherings refreshing and new. But there is such a thing
as an ecumenical Bible study that doesn’t allow knowledgeable Catholics to
participate in leadership or where the Catholic perspective is not equally
presented and discussed with respect. In a truly ecumenical Bible study, the
Catholic interpretation and teaching is not treated as substandard or
heretical.
Also, the Catholic Church is not a "denomination"
(which means "to take a new name"); it is the Church. Those who are
in schism, who break away or subsist apart from it are denominations or sects.
The Church is not. It is the Church.
There’s still a long way to go to get Catholics to the point
of scriptural study that Protestants have achieved. But it is happening, and
you can help. For more information, see my article "Starting a Parish
Bible Study" at
www.catholicconvert.com.
SIDEBARS
Before Chapter and Verse
Chapter and verse divisions in the Bible are quite recent.
They have proven quite helpful in biblical study and finding our way around.
But they can also be a great hindrance if people begin to see the Bible as an
unrelated collection of wise maxims listed numerically. It becomes quite easy
to pluck a numbered statement (a verse) out of its context and quote it as in
independent entity. For the first 1,600 years of Christianity, biblical study
was conducted without verse numbers, forcing the reader to see whole texts and
not simply lists of unrelated sentences randomly compiled.
Bible Resources
Sites to help you find a Bible study, start a Bible study,
or get Bible study materials:
www.catholicscripturestudy.com
www.greatadventureonline.com
A Catholic Answers booklet to help you get started reading
the Bible:
Beginning Apologetics 7: How to Read the Bible by Jim
Burnham and Fr. Frank Chacon (San Juan Catholic Seminars, 2003)
A Guide to the Bible by Antonio Fuentes (Four Courts
Press, 1987)
Inside the Bible by Kenneth Baker, S.J. (Ignatius
Press, 1998)
You Can Understand the Bible by Peter Kreeft (Ignatius,
2005)
How to Read the Bible Every Day by Carmen Rojas
(Servant Books, 1988)
Books that answer common Protestant questions:
Where Is That in the Bible? by Patrick Madrid (Our
Sunday Visitor, 1999)