Is the Book of Genesis to be taken literally or allegorically?
Each and every word of Genesis need not be taken literally. But the substance of all facts which are fundamental in Christianity are to be taken as literally true.
The Bible
223 articles from the existing collection.
Does not Scripture say, “Of Him, and through Him, and in Him are all things”?
Yes. But that does not mean that things are made out of God. It means that all things derive their beings from God’s activity, are preserved by His continued providence, and exist always in His immense omnipresence.
Any man who can think has the moral right to interpret anything.
He has not. The very laws of the state are not subject to the interpretation of each and every citizen. There is such a thing as thinking erroneously. In difficulties of civil law a man consults a lawyer who knows legal practice and parallel statutes. Who gives you the right to take greater liberties with divine legislation? A m…
But even granted no real inconsistency in the numbers, there seems to be a great inconsistency as regards the names. Also, how could Jacob be the father of Joseph, as St. Matt. says; yet Heli be his father, according to St. Luke’s account?
Many scholars have replied that Jacob and Heli were half-brothers. Upon Heli’s death without issue, Jacob married his widow in accordance with the Levitical law to provide children to Heli. Joseph would thus be the natural son of Jacob, and the legal son of Heli. In this case, since St. Matt. gives the natural genealogy, and St.…
Let us leave these mysterious inner activities of God, and turn to external creatures. How do you view the theories of creation and evolution?
Creation is not a theory. It is a fact revealed by God. Evolution is a fact within certain restricted spheres, but a mere theory when made of universal application. We have to admit evolution in knowledge, or in growth from babyhood to manhood. As a universal theory, however, evolution from nothing is absurd. Yet granted that Go…
You keep insisting, not only upon tradition, but also upon the teaching authority of your Church. Why follow her interpretations?
Because we cannot safely follow the interpretation given by anybody else. All guides except the Catholic Church confess to being fallible. The Catholic Church alone claims infallibility, and proves her claim. I prefer to follow so sure a guide. Those who refuse to do so are at sixes and sevens as to the true meaning of Christian…
I do not question traditions contained in Scripture. I object to the Roman traditions which are not in Scripture and which are against Scripture.
The Catholic Church rejects all traditions which are against Scripture. She accepts divine traditions which are complementary to Scripture, and which are in perfect harmony with the principles taught in Scripture. The traditions themselves cannot be in Scripture for the traditional Word of God cannot be the written Word of God. …
But the census mentioned by Josephus took place A.D. 6, not at the time of Christ’s birth!
There was a previous census at the time of Christ’s birth, of which Josephus makes no mention. St. Luke is a perfectly reliable historian. Both in his Gospel and in the Acts he proves his exact knowledge of Graeco-Roman affairs, and begins his Gospel with a reference to his diligence in verifying the facts he narrates. He would …
God gave Manna to the Jews in the desert. Those who gathered little had sufficient; those who gathered much had but enough. Was not that socialism?
No. It was the provision by God of a miraculous food for the Jews in crossing the desert, where their own efforts could not secure it. When they were able to provide for themselves, the Manna ceased. Socialism, in its wildest dreams, does not think of leading us all out into the desert, and relying upon God to rain down food mir…
To prove Davidic descent both Matthew and Luke give the genealogy of Joseph, useless were not Joseph the father of Christ.
The genealogy of Joseph was that of Mary also. They were kinspeople of the same Davidic stock. The Jews as a rule counted their generations only in the male line, and such a generation alone would appeal to the Jews for whom Matthew above all wrote. The same St. Matthew records that the angel told Joseph that the child was conce…
Then Christ’s sacrifice fails because He cannot create in men the will to be saved!
Christ can be said to have failed only if He did not succeed in accomplishing His purpose. But His purpose was to give men the means of salvation, should they will to make use of such means. All who sincerely wish to be saved can be saved. Meantime, even God cannot endow a man with freewill who has to do the right thing in spite…
Hoiv does it help to know Hebrew or Creek?
Because one must know what the original words meant in the language in which Scripture was written. A knowledge of Hebrew and Greek soon shows that the translators do not always find an English word to express the exact sense of the original. God inspired the thoughts of the original writers, not the work oi the translators. And…
The Gospel of Christ is simplicity itself.
In one way it is. It tells us clearly that Christ established a definite Church which He commissioned to teach all nations. It is very simple from this point of view, for men have but to accept the Catholic Church, and be taught by that Church. But the Gospel is not simplicity itself in the way you intend. Men have devoted their…
St. Peter condemns tradition, saying, “You were not redeemed by your vain conversation of the tradition of your fathers.” I. Pet. 1., 18.
This is not a condemnation of Christian traditions, but of doctrines held by those to whom St. Peter wrote, and handed on to them by human tradition from their fathers. These were the traditions Our Lord condemned in Matt. XV., 3.
What proof have you that original sin is inherited?
The very best—the word of the God who created us. In Ps. L., 7, we read David’s testimony, “In sins did my mother conceive me.” The original Hebrew has “in sin,” not “in sins.” He is speaking, not of his own personal sins, nor of any actual sin of his father or mother. He is speaking of original sin derived from Adam and the fir…
You believe that you can accept science without sacrificing the Mosaicaccount of creation?
It will take science all its time to clarify its own conclusions. But apart from that, no proven scientific conclusion will ever necessitate the rejection of a single jot or tittle of Scripture. Truth can never contradict truth, and the Biblical account is absolutely true in its own order. It does not profess to give a technical…
I do not mind admitting that the Gospels are historical. But you claim much more than that. You wish us to accept those books as the inspired Word of God. And if we accept the Gospels, we must accept the whole Bible as being the Word of God, for the New Testament quotes the Old Testament again and again as having the authority of God.
All that you say is true. The Bible is the inspired Word of God. There may be difficulties in the interpretation of the Bible, but the fact of its inspiration is certain.
If Christianity is the true development of the Jewish religion, why is it not the religion of the Jews today? Why did not the Jews accept Christ?
Many individuals did. As a race the Jews did not. This was not because Christ did not sufficiently prove His mission, but because the leaders of religious thought, and the teachers of the people had lost the true religious spirit, had selfishly transferred their affections to a love of their own high places, and had substituted …
You, as a Priest, argue to a clock-maker. I, as a rationalist, ask, “Who created your uncreated clock-maker?”
That is not a rational question. I say that the universe is obviously created, and that what is created supposes a Creator who is uncreated, or the problem goes on forever, the whole endless chain of dependent beings as unable to explain itself as each of its links. It is rational to argue to an uncreated clock-maker. It is not …
Why forbid meat on Fridays? Christ said that nothing from without defiles a man, but that it is disposition of soul that counts. Mk.VII, 15.
It follows that meat is not evil in itself, and that the Church does not forbid meat on Fridays because she thinks that meat will defile men. That should be evident from the fact that the Church permits meat on other days, as she could not do if she believed meat to be evil. Therefore it must be a question of the day, and not of…
Our First Parents — Original Sin – Primer Catechism
CHAPTER 6. — OUR FIRST PARENTS. — ORIGINAL SIN.
Being tied to dogmas, are you not the least fitted of all men to speak about religion?
No. Other men give their own personal opinions, which are not necessarily any better than the opinions of their fellow men. I am able to give the exact doctrine of Christ, and Christ said, “My doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me.” The Catholic Church also says, “My doctrine is not mine, but that of the Christ who sent me.…
You suppose, of course, the validity of your dogmas concerning the person and work of Christ.
Those dogmas are valid. I do not suppose their validity.
I am referring to the doctrine of the Trinity. You have no sufficient reason for believing in that contradictory doctrine.
No contradiction is involved in the doctrine of the Trinity. The reason why we believe it is because God says that it is true, using terms which express it as nearly as possible in human language. As God ought to know His own intimate nature, His describing it is the best of possible reasons for believing in it.