USCCB Will Remove St. Paul from the Canon?

[Augstine Baker]

The Excommunication of St. Paul the Apostle by the Inmates of the Asylum known as the Post-Conciliar Roman Catholic Church

By Michael Hoffman • www.revisionisthistory.org


Catholics "cannot hold" to  St. Paul's declaration in 1 Thessalonians 2: 14-16 "without falling out of communion with the Catholic Church"

— United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), May 24, 2011


http://revisionistreview.blogspot.com/20...ut-of.html

[Petertherock]

I love this comment...

I thought St. Paul was already condemned. I was told to my face by a priest and another, the head of the Catholic education in the city, that St. Paul was a misogynist! At that point, I left the Church for the Greek Orthodox Church.

Ordering women to wear scarves in church, commanded a woman to obey her husband and females have to be trained to be submissive--is the grounds on which St. Paul is a misogynist.

St. Paul is a very evil creature in the sight of the JudeoRomanCatholicChurch.

[K3vinhood]

:laughing:

[K3vinhood]

"The Jews frighten you as if you were little children, and you do not see it. Many wicked slaves show frightening and ridiculous masks to youngsters-the masks are not frightening by their nature, but they seem so to the children's simple minds-and in this way they stir up many a laugh. This is the way the Jews frighten the simpler-minded Christians with the bugbears and hobgoblins of their shrines. Yet how could their ridiculous and disgraceful synagogues frighten you? Are they not the shrines of men who have been rejected, dishonored, and condemned?"

"Many, I know, respect the Jews and think that their present way of life is a venerable one. This is why I hasten to uproot and tear out this deadly opinion. I said that the synagogue is no better than a theater and I bring forward a prophet as my witness."

"No angels, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor any other creature separated Paul from the love of Christ."

- St John Chrysostom

[GottmitunsAlex]

Here Here!

[salus]

This is completely the fault of Pope Benedict and his speculating as a PRIVATE theologian in his recent book on this . Shame on him!!!!

[Walty]

*sigh*

We will now rewrite Scripture to suit our lies?

[JayneK]

The Excommunication of St. Paul the Apostle by the Inmates of the Asylum known as the Post-Conciliar Roman Catholic Church

By Michael Hoffman • www.revisionisthistory.org


Catholics "cannot hold" to  St. Paul's declaration in 1 Thessalonians 2: 14-16 "without falling out of communion with the Catholic Church"

— United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), May 24, 2011

This is a misleading way to state things.  The USCCB did not reject a Scripture passage.  One priest who works for the USCCB rejected an idea which some think is upheld by that passage.  He is claiming that they are misinterpreting St. Paul.

Here is the passage quoted in the article:

"For you, brothers, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea. For you suffered the same things from your own countrymen as they did from the Jews, who killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out, and displease God and oppose all mankind by hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles that they might be saved — so as always to fill up the measure of their sins. But God's wrath has come upon them to the utmost.” 1 Thessalonians 2: 14-16

.

This is what Nostra Aetate says: 

True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ; still, what happened in His passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures.

It is possible to claim that the Thessalonians passage refers to specific Jews rather than all Jews throughout history which interpretation is compatible with Nostra Aetate.  Whether one agrees with this line of thought or not, one must see that it is different from the sort of statement that says "St. Paul was a misogynist and we should ignore everything he says about women."

[Augstine Baker]

Except that that interpretation is fairly recent. The AIPAC wasn't able to intimidate the Church Fathers until the late 20th Century.

Even the Liberal Card Newman interpreted the passage to mean what St Paul calls "the Synagogue of Satan"

[JayneK]

Except that that interpretation is fairly recent. The AIPAC wasn't able to intimidate the Church Fathers until the late 20th Century.

Even the Liberal Card Newman interpreted the passage to mean what St Paul calls "the Synagogue of Satan"

I'm not arguing that the interpretation is correct.  The point is that using a different interpretation is not the same as removing St, Paul from the Canon.  It is not a denial of the authority of St. Paul.  It is legitimate to complain about the interpretation. It is not legitimate to present this as a rejection of St. Paul.