Biblical Dictionary topics?


Why can’t I find Inquisition and Personal Prelature in a Biblical Dictionary?

What is their place in the Development of Doctrine?

Isn’t the Development of Doctrine supposed to be in the direction of Scripture?


Probably because they’re not Biblical topics. They are issues that arose after Sacred Scripture was written, and after the Canon was closed. You would be more likely to find these topics in a dictionary or encyclopedia that deals with ecclesiastical issues.


I’m wondering whether Inquisition and Personal Prelature are really doctrinally correct anyway - but that’s just me!


Considering that neither thing is a doctrine but a disciplinary practice, both being institutional structures, I’d say the question is moot. What would it mean for them to not be doctrinally correct?



Because a structure, being a relationship, puts the Faith into practice - or doesn’t, as the case may be.

Delinquency in authority has hurt. If delinquency is designed into a structure, or if laid down rules have been seen to not guard reasonably against it, then this is an issue.

It obviously depends what size dictionary. Perhaps I should look under “authority”?


Ponder Judas Iscariot. Jesus chose him. Does not his being chosen involve your same concern about harm being done?


One of my purposes was essentially to establish that on some basis the details should be mappable outable so that one can see how well or badly Judas Iscariot is matching up at any time.

(Another purpose is to point out it shouldn’t just be assumed church order can proceed without reference to the Gospel.)

OK, they are probably in a different book from a Bible Dictionary but I get the impression it is agreed such principles should be knowable in advance.


Several of the New Testament writers warn against false teachings. One may (and I do) deplore many of their actions and even their choice of targets, but the various inquisitions (and now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) were started as a way of investigating and dealing with those who were potentially contaminating the Faith, in a situation where Christianity was far more widespread and powerful in society than it had been in the first century.

As for personal prelatures, the New Testament Church of the original Apostles seems far less geographically bound than it would become in later centuries. Paul, as “Apostle to the Gentiles,” ranged throughout the known world and was never bishop of a specific place. His area of responsibility was over a certain group of people (Gentile Christians) rather than over a geographic area. Nowadays it might well be called a personal prelature, just as there are prelates whose bailiwicks include “members of Opus Dei,” “Catholics in the United States Armed Forces,” and “formerly Anglican congregations” now, instead of a specific city or region.


Usagi, I see what you mean about PPs and Ordinariates - but at least one knows one is going to join them and their terms are properly set out, if they are in accordance with doctrine. The ones that aren’t in accordance with doctrine are the ones that can’t be clearly vouched for. And it strikes me a “limpieza de sangre” mentality about fellow believers’ mentality (trying to profile or “discern” their level of belief through mimetics or memetics, as is done in high-demand movements) shows insufficient reliance on the genuine Holy Spirit.


Opus Dei is the only personal prelature in existence.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit