Hi, I ask this question as a non-Catholic, regarding issues between Catholic interpretation of Jewish Scriptures. Pope Benedict and the Church itself display an integrated familiarity with academic scholarship on the Christian and Hebrew Scriptures and Catholic traditions of exegesis. I think of Pope Benedict’s “Jesus of Nazareth”, which I began recently but misplaced in a recent move - and works by the Pontifical Bible Commission I have been exposed to, encyclicals by several recent popes as well as the scholarship in the essays from the Catholic Study Bible I have. I am a little confused, though, by some lay Catholic discussion of Scripture I have found on the internet, for example listings of prophecies from Jewish Scriptures that are accounted as fulfilled by the coming of Jesus, that seem to derive more from Protestant, english-language-based interpretation (“300 prophecies fulfilled”, etc, etc), than anything the Church itself has sanctioned. It matters from the “Jewish” side as well, because I have read ‘anti-missionary’ material that accounts many of these texts as not even messianic in nature. I would like to find a sanctioned, articulated, well-regarded listing, hopefully with discussion, of what the Church actually believes regarding Old Testament expectations that Jesus is held to have fulfilled as the Messiah. Does something like this exist? thanks! PF
The Catholic Church does not interpret scripture, she possesses the revelation given by Jesus of “all” the scriptures. This sacred Tradition that Jesus revealed to the Apostles is what is living in the sacred Traditions of the Catholic Church these past 2000 years since the resurrection; Here is Jesus revealing the Hebrew scriptures to the Apostles who also handed down the authority placed on them to bind and loose interpretations either from a pro or anti apostolic Tradition supported by scripture.
Then beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them what referred to him in all the scriptures.
He said to them, "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that **everything written about me ****in the law of Moses and in the prophets and psalms must be fulfilled." **
Then he opened their minds to understand the scriptures.
pierrefranz;7599728]Hi, I ask this question as a non-Catholic, regarding issues between Catholic interpretation of Jewish Scriptures.
Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture revealed from the Apostolic teachings and successors to the apostles in the Popes and bishops (Magisterium) is what gives us the “full deposit of faith”. For the pillar of Truth is the Church of the apostles and their successors in the Catholic Church today unchanged.
Peace be with you
I would like to reiterate here “the Catholic Church does not interpret scripture”.
CCC 113… read scripture within the "the living Tradition of the whole Church…sacred scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart **rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial God’s Word, **and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the scripture, according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants the Church.
The Church is the custodian of revelation.
Scripture is a witness to revelation.
The Church has the power (keys, binding and loosing) to determine infallibly the meaning of scripture in matters of faith and morals.
The Church has not made any dogmatic pronouncements in the areas of biblical authorship, geography, chronology and other issues of historicity.
This task is left up to the knowledge, intelligence and hard work of individual exegetes who claim no more than reasonable conviction for their conclusions.
If and when the Church does speak about a particular scripture she does so in the “negative”, by rejecting certain interpretations as false when they place a threat to faith and morals.
In short, it is Church “doctrine which interprets scripture” (Pope Benedict XVI)
Peace be with you
Gabriel of 12, thank you for responding, but that was not an answer to my question. Nor was it to me, a clarification of an error I had made - it was an articulation of faith on your part and a belief held by the Catholic Church which I have no problem that Catholics abide it. But if I am to ask questions, MY questions, I cannot reasonably be asked to phrase them PRESUMING the internal language of the texts you quote if I’m comfortable using it as so many catholic authors, bloggers, et al, have. I need not send you a Google link indicating the number of hits I can get using SIPs like “interpretation of scripture” and “magisterium” and “catholic” - made by believing, abiding Catholics, lay and Religious, who use “interpretation” precisely as I did ONCE in my question.
Yes I understand what your asking, but I was laying down a foundation for the sake of discussion.
The list of prophecies becomes problematic. Because in the first century, you have the Sadducee’s who held only to the letter of law and the Pharisees who held to both the letter and the prophets oral Traditions such as the resurrection. Already in the first century you have a divided community from interpretations in regards to the coming Messiah.
Today, the Jews no longer have the temple, their worship has changed from the physical to the Word of God written. Today you have Orthodox Jews holding to the letter of the law, who rejects other Jews interpretations from the spirit in the Word of God.
In other words one can attain a list of prophecies deriving from the Letter of Law, which deals with a physical “world view” of the fulfillment consisting of 300 prophecies, whereby when one includes the prophets and oral Hebrew Traditional prophecies, the number increases between 400 - 700 prophecies that Jesus has fulfilled.
The impossibility of just one of these being fulfilled from their inception, exceeds 1 in a limitless number. Yet Jesus fulfilled them all.
So which list are you looking for? The letter of the law coming to fulfillment consisting of 300 prophecies, or the Whole Hebrew written and Oral Traditions prophecies from both the law and the prophets? which exceed your 300 prophecies.
I recall Bishop Fulten Sheen, giving the name of the Hebrew Jew who listed all 400 + prophecies from the Old covenant, who converted to Catholicism when he learned how Jesus fulfilled all of them.
I will check my archives and see if I can retrieve that name for you and get back to you. But I do remember this Hebrew listed over 400 prophecies, because he includes the prophets as well as the letter of the law.
I have a list of fulfillment in the sacramental economy of Jesus Christ, but I stopped way short of the 300, but it sounds like a fun journey to explore.
Peace be with you
pierrefranz;7602708]Gabriel of 12, thank you for responding, but that was not an answer to my question. Nor was it to me, a clarification of an error I had made - it was an articulation of faith on your part and a belief held by the Catholic Church which I have no problem that Catholics abide it. But if I am to ask questions, MY questions, I cannot reasonably be asked to phrase them PRESUMING the internal language of the texts you quote if I’m comfortable using it as so many catholic authors, bloggers, et al, have. I need not send you a Google link indicating the number of hits I can get using SIPs like “interpretation of scripture” and “magisterium” and “catholic” - made by believing, abiding Catholics, lay and Religious, who use “interpretation” precisely as I did ONCE in my question.