“Howbeit when He, the
Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth: for He shall not
speak of Himself; but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak: and He
will shew you things to come.” (John 16:13)
What exactly
did Jesus mean when He said the Holy Spirit would guide His audience “into
all truth”? Is He talking about
the truth found in science, logic or math?
Is He referring to the great mysteries of space and the universe?
No, He is
speaking of spiritual and eternal truths, i.e., the things of God, morality and
how He expects one to live. But someone
could say that everything that God
knows is the truth, so does this mean that the Holy Spirit is going to show us
all things that God Himself knows? Of
course not. There is no person or group
of people that could possibly contain
all the spiritual knowledge that God possesses.
So, “guide you into all truth” simply means that the Holy Spirit
will give you all the truth that you need
in a particular circumstance, for example:
“And when they bring
you unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take ye no thought
how or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye shall say: for the Holy Ghost
shall teach you in the same hour what ye ought to say.” (Luke 12:11-12)
“But the Comforter,
which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach
you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have
said unto you.” (John 14:26)
He will give
you all the wisdom and direction you need and bring that which is necessary to the
believer’s remembrance. The meaning of John
16:13 is that simple.
Catholic Apologists vs. the Catholic
Catechism
But there
are many attempts today by Catholic apologists to use this particular verse to
buttress the concept of the supposed infallibility of the Catholic Church. They will say the Holy Spirit, through the
promise of Jesus, will give Peter and the apostles (and by extension, the
Catholic Church) the authority to teach infallibly and to never be able to teach
error or false doctrine when “officially” addressing and teaching the whole church. They believe that the term “guide
you into all truth” applies to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church
and offers a “negative charism,” i.e., an infallible gift of protection from
error. In this way, the “chair of Peter”
would always fail to promote false doctrine.
But this passage
does not at all support this idea of infallibility for the Church or the popes. In fact, the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that Jesus’ words (“guide
you into all truth”) do not only
apply to the Magisterium, but also to individuals:
“All the
faithful share in understanding and handing on revealed truth. They have received the anointing of
the Holy Spirit, who instructs them and guides them into all truth.”
(CCC #91 – emphasis added)
This
paragraph from the Catechism contains a footnote specifically pointing to John
16:13, so there is no doubt that it is speaking of this passage. Therefore, the Catechism is teaching that this
applies to “all the faithful” individuals in the Church.
So, what
does this mean? It means that if
Catholic apologists want to claim that Jesus’ words (“guide you into all truth”)
offer special protection from error for the Magisterium, they must also believe that the individual believer is specially protected from error in the same way. And I know they don’t want to say that!
But you
can’t have it both ways. It either
provides infallible protection from error for both the Church leadership AND for the individual, or it is for neither.
I will assert it is for neither.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: In Scripture, there is no
guarantee of infallibility for anyone in the post-apostolic church.
So, what is
this “all
truth” that Jesus was speaking of in this passage? How exactly will the Holy Spirit guide us? He tells us clearly in the very next chapter
of John:
“Sanctify them through
Thy truth: Thy word is truth.” (John 17:17)
God tells us
in no uncertain terms, and He tells us throughout
the Bible that truth lives in His Word – Scripture (e.g., see Psalm
119).
First Example
Is it really
true that Catholic apologists claim that John 16:13 means that the (Catholic)
Church is infallible? For anyone who may
deny this, I would like to offer a few examples. For the first, see this article written by
Jason Evert on the Catholic Answers website:
In this
write-up, Evert has a short paragraph in which John 16:13 is pressed
into service in an attempt to affirm the idea of the infallibility of the
Catholic Church. He says:
“The early
Christians knew that they could turn to the apostolic teaching of the Church as
a norm for the truth.”
Ok, so far,
so good. Apostolic teaching is indeed a
norm for the truth, but we must make sure that what we are talking about is
indeed apostolic teaching. And we determine that by looking to
Scripture.
He then
says, “For whoever heard the Church heard Christ (Luke 10:16), and Christ
cannot teach error.”
Again, when
Catholic apologists use the term “the Church,” it is almost always used to mean
specifically the Magisterium of the Catholic
Church. But this is simply reading
into the context of Scripture an idea that isn’t there.
Furthermore,
the reference to Luke 10:16 is forced here.
In this verse, Jesus is addressing the seventy-two disciples whom He had
sent out ahead of Himself to preach the gospel (the good news) to the
surrounding towns and cities. They were
sent out as ambassadors of Christ, preaching truth. So, whoever “heard” these ambassadors were,
in effect, “hearing Christ” because these preachers were faithfully sharing His
message. So, if you want to apply Luke
10:16 to your church, you’d better make sure that your message is indeed His
message. But unfortunately, not every
teaching that the Catholic Church promotes is what Jesus says.
Getting back
to Jason’s quote, it is certainly true that “Christ cannot teach error.” But to equate Jesus’ infallibility with the
Catholic Church (or ANY church) is ridiculous and is usurping Jesus’
authority. Jesus shares His
infallibility with no one but the other two members of the Trinity. The only time He has shared it with man is
when He stirred them to write Scripture, which is “God-breathed” (2
Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20-21).
Evert then
says:
“So the
question should not be ‘where is infallibility in the Bible,’ but where in the
Bible is the idea that Christ’s Church would teach error?”
No, Jason,
I’m sorry, but you guys are the ones
making the positive assertion that not only is the Catholic Church infallible,
but that this information can be found, at least partially, in the Bible. So it is up to YOU to prove your assertion
and you certainly didn’t do that in your article.
Also, concerning
the church teaching error, it is true that the gates of Hell will not prevail
against the true church (Matthew 16:18). Catholics use this verse all the time to
point to infallibility. But this has
nothing at all to do with church leaders being exempt from teaching error. The sad truth is that Hell will indeed
prevail against MANY who claim to be
part of the church (Matthew 7:21-23). But
it will not prevail over those who trust in (and keep the words of) Jesus.
Furthermore,
note that the apostle Paul sternly warned the Ephesian elders/leaders to “keep watch over yourselves and the entire
flock,” and that some “from among your own selves”
would draw disciples away with false teaching (Acts 20:28-30).
That doesn’t
sound like a guarantee that the church leadership has a promise to avoid false
teaching. Why would they need to “keep
watch” if they had no possibility of error? The bottom line is there is no gift of
infallibility for the post-apostolic church – showing that no one is safe if he deviates from God’s Word. This demonstrates that Catholic apologists are
abusing John 16:13 and it does not prove their case.
Second Example
In the
“Question Corner” of the Catholic Courier
(November 7, 2013) a Catholic priest named Kenneth Doyle answers a discerning patron
who is asking about infallible teachings of the Church. Doyle points out that the doctrine of
infallibility is “founded on Christ’s promise to the apostles that He would
send the Holy Spirit, ‘who will guide you to all truth’ (John 16:13).”
See the
question here:
https://catholiccourier.com/articles/what-teachings-are-declared-infallible/
So, again,
we see a Catholic leader try to use John 16:13 as support for the
Church’s so-called infallibility. He
then says:
“That secure
sense of protection from error on fundamental teachings was part of the early
history of the church and is reflected in St. Augustine’s fifth-century
statement, ‘Rome has spoken; the case is concluded.’”
Concerning the
Church’s “secure sense of protection from error,” see this article on the “Rome
has spoken” quote by Doyle, which is so often abused by Catholics, and is thoroughly
debunked here:
Catholic Legends And How They Get
Started: An Example (Sermon 131) - Alpha and Omega Ministries
Just saying that the verse refers to
infallibility does not make it so. Again,
the Catholic Church has a false sense
of protection from error when they try to use John 16:13 to teach papal
infallibility.
Third Example
In an
article written by Kevin Noles at the Catholic
365 Website, Noles mentions John 14:16-17 together with John
16:13 to promote Catholic infallibility. He says:
“It is clear
in these two passages that there is a promise of infallibility… Since the Holy
Spirit is the third person of the Trinity this makes the Holy Spirit’s teaching
necessarily infallible.”
Yes, the
Holy Spirit’s teaching is indeed infallible – no argument there. But Catholic apologists are greatly distorting
that promise to be led into truth and are usurping that promise to refer to
only one institution/organization – to
themselves – rather than to all true believers.
There is nothing in the context of John 16:13 about either
infallibility or about a particular church.
Simply
mentioning the two verses he noted and saying “it is clear” that they include a
promise of infallibility does not magically keep the Catholic Church from
error.
Once again, skewed
interpretations of the Bible do not prove an infallible post-apostolic church. These apologists are guilty of eisegesis,
that is, they are just reading that idea back into Scripture. But a faithful look at the whole of Scripture will demonstrate their error.
More Examples
Catholic Online website:
https://www.catholic.org/news/hf/faith/story.php?id=42151
Catholic Share website:
https://www.catholicshare.com/what-is-papal-infallibility-and-when-does-it-apply/
Catholic Stand website:
https://catholicstand.com/doesnt-church-just-infallibly-interpret-every-verse-scripture/
Archdiocese of Boston website:
https://www.bostoncatholic.org/papal-infallibility
Catholic Company website:
https://www.catholiccompany.com/getfed/catholics-believe-everything-the-pope-says/
You get the
idea. This is just a small sampling of
Catholic sources on the internet who wrongly tie papal infallibility to John
16:13. It was my purpose here to
focus specifically on this one passage and to show the world that these Catholic
apologists, whether intentionally or not, are deceiving their audience.
Conclusion
I know that
Catholics have a number of other Bible verses and other arguments for Church
infallibility, but in order to avoid a multitude of links, I will not list them
here, but there are also plenty articles in this blog that deal with the
Catholic Church’s claim of infallibility.
You can type the words “infallible” or “infallibility” in the search bar
in the upper left corner of the blog to see some of the Protestant arguments.
The
consistent abuse of John 16:13 by many Catholic apologists to “prove” papal
infallibility/Church infallibility is either dishonest or attempted by poorly
informed Catholics. Either way, it does
not help the image of the Catholic Church, but rather weakens it.
