Worldwide Communion of Catholic Apostolic Churches (WCCAC) :: View topic - Understanding Scripture In The Mind Of The Church

BpAndre

“In order to ‘read the Bible in the Church’, one must recognize that the Spirit of God had indeed inspired Christians in the past to unfold the Scripture’s meanings. By ‘the past’ I do not mean only those who lived in Reformation times, but those who studied the Scriptures for the previous fifteen centuries as well. These men are popularly called ‘Fathers.’ They are called Fathers because many of their interpretations have valiantly preserved and defended the messages of the Scriptures, often in the face of great persecution, and for this we respect them. If we want to be in touch with the Spirit’s lessons to the whole Church, we cannot confine ourselves to the teachers of our own time.

Some of these Church Fathers were immediate disciples and successors of the Apostles. Clement (30-100), an early bishop of Rome, was an acquaintance of both Peter and Paul, and Ignatius of Antioch (30-107) and Polycarp of Smyrna (69-155) were disciples of the Apostle John. Noted Church historians recognize these men, and others such as Papias (70-155), Barnabas (a letter of his dating 117/132), Hermas (140/155), and the unknown authors of the Epistle to Diogneus (150) and the Didache (100 AD – 150), as ‘The first church teachers after the apostles, who enjoyed in part personal [relationships]…with them…’ Imagine the insight these men had! They learned from those who literally heard the very words of Christ with their own ears. Try to fathom the perspective they brought to the Scriptures! Is it really possible to consider ourselves serious students of the Scriptures if we choose to ignore what those earliest believers and martyrs had to say?” 2

In addition, Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholics and Catholic Apostolic National Churches understand the Word of God to exist as more than merely words in print. The Word of God is also the living, breathing faith expressed by the believer, and it is revealed in communal membership with the Body of Christ, that is, His Church.

“God’s Word is not bound by ink or held captive by bookbinding. His Word existed before the invention of books and would continue to exist even if every Bible were destroyed. God’s Word is the ‘Living Voice’ which those who have united themselves to Christ can bear witness to as being of God. Thus, God’s Word is understood in relationship, not in reading. The early Church was in deep communion with God’s Word not because they had a Bible, but because they had a New Covenant relationship with the living Word, Jesus Christ.

The Truth of God’s Word has been revealed not only to God’s People but in God’s people (1 Cor. 2:9-13). This gives the members of the Church alone the ability to understand the Scripture as Scripture. This divinely orchestrated marriage of Spirit and humanity makes the Bible truly sufficient in the Church. Unlike the heretics, the Church’s members recognize its true message, for the ‘anointing of truth’ which rests upon them lets them know the teaching (1 John 3:27). The Bible is their book and they are of ‘like Spirit’ with it. Their Christian life and experience, which includes the experiences of their brethren before them, attests to the Bible’s true teaching.” 3

This expression naturally leads to this unanimous conclusion, agreed upon by all:

“Without question, the Scriptures are an invaluable and essential expression of Divine Tradition. But when they are set apart from the Holy Spirit’s ministry in the Church, they are no longer ‘a sure foundation.’ Outside the Church, the Bible’s stabilizing legs are cut off by contradictory interpretations of ‘individuals.’ Our call to understand the Scriptures in concert with the Church prevents such an abuse. But this attentiveness to the Church is no an exhortation to sleepily submit to an ecclesiastical court. It is a call to take responsibility; to evaluate the reasons behind our present beliefs instead of accepting them without question, to take the initiative to seek the mind of those who have gone before us, and to pursue personal interaction with their perspectives. Only then will we, in union with the brethren of all ages, be able to demonstrate the Bible Truth entrusted to us.” 4 It is the Divine Revelation, properly understood and operating within the Church, that gives meaning and life to what is written. No written book can cry out that it has been poorly understood or interpreted by the reader, and many deliberately twist Scripture in their interpretation, to lead others astray, yet without the Church, the individual with Bible in hand is buffeted about in a sea of misunderstandings and misinterpretation.

“To say that the Bible alone is sufficient as the guide of Christian doctrine is at best inadequate. For although both the heretic and the Christian can be sincere and agree on the Bible’s ‘infallibility’ and authority, these shared perspectives do not erase their differences. They must ask themselves: How and why do I interpret the Scriptures the way I do? These questions free one to trace the rationale and development of his system of Bible interpretation and to judge its value.” 5

Particularly in the United States today, we see an almost fanatical adherence to ensuring that the individual’s personal and private judgment reigns supreme – in fact, in many ways society today reviles the individual who submits himself or herself to the understanding or authoritative insight of another, be it in the secular sense or in the sacred. So much has this refusal to admit ignorance, or to at least acknowledge a deposit of knowledge deeper than our own individual selves, even the obviously and blatantly incorrect determinations are more highly valued than proven knowledge and understanding that has stood the test of time. With respect to the Bible, this has resulted in disunity, discord and confusion – something the Protestant Reformers were absolutely sure that the concept of “sola Scriptura” would permanently eliminate. “The right of ‘private judgment’ – wedded together with the Bible as ‘ultimate and absolute authority’ – results in Scripture losing authority. The individual’s right to defend his or her interpretation over a legion of other understandings is of greatest importance. The contradictory opinions which result from such a premise are each given the right to be called “Scriptural.” The consequence: The Bible’s message is weakened by a democracy of conflicting ideas.

Paradoxically, those who support “sola Scriptura”, the right of each person to their own private interpretation of Scripture, have no defensive argument against the Catholic Apostolic National Church who claims the Church’s nearly two thousand year old interpretation of as his own private interpretation. If every man’s private interpretation is no more or less valid than anyone else’s, then only through a disingenuous rebuttal, could the Catholic Apostolic National Church position, supported by two thousand years of Christianity, be rejected.

Oddly enough, such a plurality gives permission to the religious tyrant. Now, in the name of fidelity to ‘the Word,’ he is able to impose his inaccurate interpretations and be respected as ‘a Bible teacher.’ In many cases, this means that the one who speaks the strongest, loudest and with the most influence, can get a “Christian” following – that is, as long as his ideas are footnoted with Biblical references. Mark A. Knolls, in Evangelicalism and Modern America, explains the problem of private interpretation in this respect:

The naïve…American intellectual heritage leads not to depth but to superficiality. Ironically, it leads to a perverse kind of authoritarianism, in which a leader claiming to have no guide but the Bible rigidly imposes his form of Scriptural interpretation on followers who likewise profess to be heeding no guide but the Bible. 12

A philosophy which advocates the Bible’s ‘independent authority’ ironically ends up giving ultimate authority to ‘the independent.’ For instance, when someone says, ‘I believe ONLY in what the Bible says’, isn’t he really saying, ‘I only believe in the way I interpret the Bible?’ Isn’t he in effect stating that his understanding of the Scriptures is as divinely inspired as the Scriptures themselves? In the final analysis, then, it is not Scripture that possesses final authority, but private interpretations. Though an exaggeration, there is some truth to the saying, ‘Before the Reformation there was only one Pope, but after the Reformation every man with Bible in hand is his own Pope.” 6 In effect, the Protestant Reformers rejected “papal infallibility” in favor of “individual infallibility”, which raises each person’s personal interpretation of the Bible to a level equal to the Bible itself. In this way, no one’s interpretation of the Bible is wrong, and the same “sola Scriptura” concept used to support the early Protestant Reformers and their Churches, is continuously being used to justify divisions and splits among them. Without a divinely authorized Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, to determine proper interpretation, it is perpetual confusion without end.

Biblical interpretation, indeed, salvation itself, is found, not in individual isolation, but within the Church, the Body of Christ. “Among the oldest and most consistent teachings of the Fathers of the Church is the notion that we are saved not alone, but as members of a community. By faith and through baptism God calls us into the community of the Church, and it is here, within the fellowship of the saved, that we find our salvation. It is true that God calls us each by name, that God reaches into our personal histories and, through faith, summons us to salvation in the Church. However, God does not save us independently and separately from others. God does not so individualize salvation that the only thing that should concern me is to know for certain that I am saved, disregarding what happens to anyone else. Moreover, God does not save me on the basis of my confidence in the providence of the Father and Jesus as my own personal savior, but on the basis of the faith of Jesus, which remains present in the community of his followers and extends to me as a member of that community. Jesus is not my savior, he is our savior, and we are not saved alone, we are saved in community.” 7 [emphasis added]

Once we come to understand the awe-inspiring purpose and nature of the Church, our entire attitude towards the community of believers must change. We must look to see Christ in the members of the Church, because He is there, among us, guiding, teaching and most of all, loving us. So then, to fail to be involved in the life of the Church is to keep the Church, and Christ, at arm’s length, rejecting the grace that is bestowed through membership and participation in the communion (koinonia) of the Church. “Unfortunately, most Christians see the Church only as a place where they can get their private spiritual needs met. The Church, however, is foremost to be an environment of love where brethren care about each other. It is a family in communion, not a forum. Individualism and self centered independence are not characteristics of God’s Church, they are characteristics of the world outside of Christ.16 It is love, for God and the people of God, which make the Church community.17“ 8

“The cup of thanksgiving which we bless, is it not a participation [koinonia] in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation [koinonia] in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16)

“Koinonia is the Greek word translated by our English New Testaments as communion, association, fellowship, sharing, common, contribution, and partnership. Not one of these spoken words, however, adequately captures what the early Christians meant when they spoke of the koinonia they had with one another and Christ. Koinonia expressed a relationship of great intimacy and depth, one so rich in fact that it even became the ‘favorites expression for the marital relationship…the most intimate between human beings.’1 The implications of this word when used to express the nature of our bond with Christ and the brethren are especially profound.

…koinonia implies a closeness of union approaching identity. Hence the significance of its use to express the believer’s union with the ‘Son of God, Jesus Christ our Lord’ (1 Cor. 1:9), and with the Holy Ghost (2 Cor. 13:14 and Phil. 2:1)…With St. John indeed it is the predominant and determining note of Christianity. For the Fellowship as defined by him is only another word for that brotherhood or brotherly love which make the difference between darkness and light (1 John 2:9f), and is therefore the essential characteristic of one who calls himself a Christian…’2

For one to have fellowship with another Christian in the early Church meant much more to him than what it means today to many contemporary Christians. (i.e. Christians having donuts and coffee together in the ‘fellowship’ [social] hall after the Sunday service). Genuine fellowship demonstrates ‘that bond which binds Christians to each other, to Christ and to God.’3 Fellowship is all inclusive, deep, personal and intimate. The ‘meaning of ‘fellowship’ or ‘communion’ in the New Testament relates to sharing one common life within the body of Christ at all levels of existence and experience – spiritual, social, intellectual, economic. No area of life can be excluded.’4

The Church is not simply a society; it is fellowship in God and with God. Every description of the Church is simply another way of expressing the depth of this fellowship: the Body of Christ, Ekklesia, Temple of the Spirit, covenant, Eucharist, catholicity, brotherhood, the life of God, etc.5 This is why one can say salvation is of the Church.

Christianity from the very beginning existed as a corporate reality, as a community. To be Christian meant just to belong to the community. Nobody could be Christian by himself, as an isolated individual, but only together with ‘the brethren’ in a ‘togetherness’ with them … Christianity means a ‘common life,’ in common.6 “ 9

This understanding of Christianity is common and foundational to the essential understanding of Church, in both East and the West. It is the consistent teaching of the Church from the very beginning down to our present day. It is in the Church that God imparts the graces of the Sacraments, in the Church that we are first taught to see Christ in others, and it is in the Church that our faith is formed and we are taught the true meaning of what is written in Scripture, and what is lived in Apostolic Tradition, the two complementary sides of the same one Divine Revelation. One does not come to experience God’s saving grace through scholastic endeavor, but through the Church, which is guided by the Holy Spirit, and is enlivened by the very essence of God’s love for us. It is imperative to understand this, because, as a result of the fall of Adam, we cannot do anything out of supernatural love unless God gives us the special grace to do so.

[cited from the official catechism of the Catholic Apostolic National Church"[/b]
_________________
Bishop Andre' Jhohn-William Queen, SCR
Vicar General
Catholic Apostolic National Church
Phone: 773.942.4660