When
Catholics and Protestants engage in debate, there is generally a lot of back
and forth (we discuss the Marian doctrines, faith alone, Purgatory, the
Eucharist, Confession, the priesthood, the papacy, etc., etc.) But there is a foundational topic that we
should probably address first: What is truth?
Where is the truth that carries authority? How can a Catholic or Protestant know what’s
true in these spiritual matters?
Of course, different
levels of truth can come from many sources, some more dependable than
others. We can get some spiritual truth
from the early church fathers, we can
get it from church history, or even some secular history sources; we can get
truth from eyewitnesses of biblical events, etc. But in the end, what we are really asking is,
“Where can we find the ultimate and infallible source of truth on spiritual
matters that neither side can deny?”
In these
spiritual debates, both sides use Scripture as a source of truth (and rightly
so). But Catholics also insist that we
need to add “infallible” Sacred Tradition and the “infallible” Catholic Magisterium
(which they call “the living, teaching office” of the Church).
But are
Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium really infallible sources of truth? Let me say up front that I believe that there
is only ONE infallible source of truth, or rule of faith, for the church
today. And that source is the God-breathed
Scriptures (2 Timothy 3:16-17). If
this is indeed true, then Catholic arguments fail and crumble to the ground,
because Catholics invest so much in the Magisterium and Tradition.
Misuse of Terms
One of the
first things I wish to address is the definition of the phrase “the Church,” used
so often by Catholics. The word “church”
comes from the Greek “ecclesia,” which means “called out ones.” The phrase has only two meanings within the pages of Scripture:
1 1) The faithful members of the universal church, worldwide (in other
words, all those who are saved), or
2 2) The faithful members of the local
body of believers.
But
Catholics have a third (and unbiblical) meaning of the term “the Church,” which
they use far, far more often than the biblical meaning. They use the term to mean the LEADERS (or the
Magisterium) of the Catholic Church. For
example, when they say things like, “The Church teaches ABC…” or “The Church
believes XYZ,” etc., they mean a Magisterium. One way that they misuse the term in Scripture
is when they quote Matthew 18:17: “…And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it to the
church…” Jesus is not saying to
tell it to the Magisterium, He is saying to tell it to the local church body, not
just the leaders, but the whole
assembly. And it is the duty of the whole congregation
to treat the man as an outsider until he repents.
But, as I
said, using the term to mean Magisterium is not
biblical. The term is never used this way in the Bible, so it
causes much confusion between Catholics and Protestants and it distorts the
idea of authority. But when used in its
intended sense, as stated above, much of the confusion can be avoided.
I will offer
the reader an experiment. Go through the
Catholic Catechism and find the word “church.”
See how many times it is described as the universal church or as the
local body, as opposed to a Magisterium.
It may come as a surprise to Catholics that in the great majority of
cases, it is used as the latter (i.e., in an unscriptural sense).
How the Church Started
Extravagant
claims are made by the Catholic Church about itself and its authority, claiming
to be the “one true Church,” i.e., the Church that Jesus Christ founded. Why do they say this? They usually break it down and present their
argument something like this:
1 1) Jesus Christ established a Church (Matthew
16:18).
2 2) He founded this Church upon Peter (Matthew
16:18). Peter is the foundation
and human head of this Church worldwide.
3 3) Jesus gave Peter primacy over the
other apostles by giving him the keys to the kingdom with the power to “bind”
and “loose” (Matthew 16:19) when determining doctrine, faith and morals, and
to rule over the whole Church.
4 4) This made Peter the first pope.
5 5) This authority extends to all of
Peter’s successors (future popes), as
well. This is called Apostolic
Succession, and it includes an unbroken, lawful chain of successors throughout
history, from Peter to now.
6 6) This authority also includes the gift
of infallibility (teaching without
error) when the pope makes an official statement or proclamation to the whole
church.
7 7) This necessarily established a
Magisterium of Church leaders (with the pope as head) who are the ONLY ones who
can truly interpret Scripture and Sacred Tradition (which is equal with Scripture).
8 8) This created the “three-legged stool,”
consisting of Scripture, Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium, faithfully
preserving and transmitting this deposit of faith.
9 9) The Catholic Church’s Magisterium has
truly, and infallibly, determined the correct list of books of the Bible, thus,
giving the Scriptures to the world.
1 10) The
early Church fathers unanimously agreed with this and wrote about it. Not only that, but Church history confirms
all of this.
Logic Leaping and Scripture Twisting
Ok, there
are a lot of assumptions and giant unproven leaps of logic here. Catholics may say that it’s a cumulative
argument – that each piece of the puzzle forms a part of the whole
picture. But I would say that if each
piece individually can be refuted,
then the whole thing collapses. I will
attempt to very briefly address each one now:
1 1) We all agree that Jesus Christ
established a church. No problem there.
2 2) The Church of Jesus Christ is not
founded upon any mere man (like Peter).
It is Christ’s church (“Upon
this rock I will build MY church” – Matthew 16:18). And He is
the Head of it. The focus here is on
Jesus, not the apostles or disciples.
The rock refers to the truth of the revelation Peter was shown just a
couple of verses earlier – “And Simon Peter answered and said, ‘Thou
art the Christ, the Son of the living God.’”(Matthew 16:16). THAT is what the church of Jesus Christ is
built upon. See also this link:
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2016/09/matthew-16-who-or-what-is-rock.html
3 3) Peter was definitely a prominent
leader in the early church. But there is
no scriptural reason to believe he had primacy
over the other apostles. As far as the
keys to “bind” and “loose,” all the
apostles received them (Matthew 18:18-19). Jesus may have first mentioned that they will be given to Peter, but that doesn’t prove
primacy. The New Testament must be taken
as a whole. It is obvious that Peter, in his day, was
never recognized by the other apostles as he is by the modern Catholic Church (Mark
9:33-34). He had a position of
prominence, but not primacy over the others.
Again, all the apostles were
given the keys. See this link:
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2016/10/matthew-16-keys-binding-and-loosing.html
4 4) There is no mention of an office of
pope, pontiff, or “vicar of Christ” in this passage. Actually, there is no such office anywhere in the New Testament, although
several other offices are indeed mentioned there.
5 5) There is nothing in Scripture about a
“lawful” and “unbroken” chain of successors with infallibility who will obtain “Peter’s
office” in the future. A direct pedigree
or lineage was not, and still is not, necessary for the church to
function. Something was definitely
handed down to his successors, but that was the teachings he got from Jesus,
not a papal position. See this link on
Apostolic Succession:
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2009/12/apostolic-succession.html
6 6) Nowhere in the New Testament do we
find any post-apostolic teachers or leaders who acquired infallibility.
7 7) There are leaders in every church
today, but it is extremely arrogant for any
of them to say that ONLY THEY can correctly interpret for the common
people. See here:
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2013/07/quick-notes-on-sola-scriptura-part-6.html
Concerning Sacred Tradition, it cannot be equal with Scripture, nor can
it be infallible, since it often contradicts God’s Word. Furthermore, Catholics cannot even tell us
exactly what Tradition is. I have asked
many times, and no Catholic seems to be able to give a meaningful and specific
definition of “Sacred Tradition,” much less demonstrate why it is infallible. All we get is extremely vague descriptions,
like, “It is the Living Voice of the Church,” or “The fullness of divine truth
proclaimed in the Scriptures, preserved by the apostolic bishops and expressed
in the life of the Church…” In other
words, it is whatever the Catholic Church wants
it to be!
8 8) There can only be one ULTIMATE source
of revelation for today. It can also be
demonstrated that Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium often contradict Scripture.
9 9) The Catholic Church did NOT give us
the Bible. See here:
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2012/02/did-catholic-church-give-us-bible.html
1 10) Many
of the early church fathers had some valuable and useful information, but the
idea of a “unanimous consent of the fathers” is inflated and untrue. See here:
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2009/12/church-fathers.html
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2009/10/eucharist-part-1.html
Whose Authority?
Ok, what
about authority? Who really has it? This simply boils down to authority being for
the person who is faithful to the
Scriptures. Authority does not belong to
a spiritual dictator. It does not belong
to one who flirts with error or false doctrine.
A “common” Christian in the pew can use the authority of Scripture to
rebuke a “pastor” who is flippant or careless with God’s Word. Pastors, deacons and bishops have their role
as leaders in the body, but they cannot, and should not, lord it over the
people. As Christians, we are all
brothers and sisters (Matthew 23:8), and we all have
biblical roles/positions. But being a
pastor or bishop does not automatically
give one authority, but rather, responsibility
in his God-given role should be emphasized, so he can rightly divide Scripture. This produces true authority… a “Magisterium”
does not.
What Has Proven True?
So where can we find truth? I hope that we would all agree that the
following entities have proven themselves:
God the
Father – through mighty
miracles, like creation, the parting of the Red Sea, the Jews’ victories over
multiple larger armies, miraculously providing manna, the Tabernacle’s cloud
and pillar of fire.
Jesus the
Son – through His
fulfilled prophecies, His many personal miracles, including raising the dead, and
by His own resurrection.
The Bible – through the intricate tapestry of
its design (God’s fingerprints are all over it), archaeological proofs, and
through fulfilled prophecies and ample manuscript evidence. Furthermore, Jesus recognized it as the Word
of God, He pointed others toward it. He
lived it and obeyed it, and used it Himself during His temptation in the
wilderness. Furthermore, we cannot deny the
changed lives (for the better) it has caused over the centuries.
THESE ARE
TRANSCENDENT SOURCES and God has caused Scripture to prove itself as a source
of divine authority. God is using His
Son (the Word) through the written Word, as the last word for the church today (Hebrews 1:1-2).
There is no
Tradition of any kind and no Magisterium of any church that matches the Bible
in its divine essence. Scripture is the
one infallible source for the church today.
And that, my friend, is the origin of spiritual truth.
