I recently came across an
article from Catholic Answers written
by an author named Parker Manning. The
title of the article was, “Do Protestants Care About Church Councils?” [With
the subtitle, “Church councils aren’t worth much if you accept in them only
what you agree with”]
You can find the article
here:
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/do-protestants-care-about-church-councils
In the article, Manning
correctly points out that Protestants, who believe in Sola Scriptura (“Bible
alone”), also believe that other valid authorities exist, such as traditions
and councils, but that they are less authoritative. Protestants believe that Scripture is the
ultimate and final authority for the church today, because it is the only infallible source in the post-apostolic
church (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
But Manning doesn’t like the
way that Protestants view the Church councils.
He says:
“Protestants like [James]
White, [Jeff] Durbin, and [Matt] Slick will often try to persuade their
audience into believing that they care about the early church councils when
they really do not. Or at the very
least, they care about them only when they agree with their interpretation of
Scripture. Once we recognize this, it
only makes sense to conclude that these Protestants really do not care about
what these councils teach.”
But as Christians, we’re not
obligated to embrace every word just because it comes from a council, nor are
we obligated to support unbiblical concepts when presented by said council. Having some truth mixed in with error does
not make it ok. How can a council be
acceptable, much less infallible, if it
contradicts Scripture? If a council
contains false teaching, those parts should be publicly rejected.
It looks like Manning is
suggesting that if we Protestants are going to accept anything from church councils, we should accept everything in these councils!
Inconsistent?
He also stated:
“… [I]t makes little sense to
argue for something because a council said so when they agree with only that
part of the council that agrees with their interpretation of Scripture? Why not just argue with Scripture?”
And I would say, “Amen to
that!” That’s where the real issue lies.
Catholics will claim that
Protestants are inconsistent when they point to Church councils because
Protestants will only pick and choose the things within the councils that they like. But I think that sometimes the reason certain
Protestants even bother to point to something said in a church council at all
is not to pretend to agree with
everything in it, but I believe that sometimes Protestants are simply saying, “Even your Catholic council XYZ agrees with us on this particular
point!”
But that certainly does not
mean that we agree with everything within that council.
Interpretation Dilemma?
Notice that in Manning’s
article, he keeps talking about when councils don’t agree with the Protestant’s interpretation of Scripture.
As if to continually expect him
to interpret it wrong. For example, in
the article, Manning says things like, “They care about only what they believe Scripture says…” (emphasis
added). In using the word “believe”
here, he seems to be implying that the Protestant interpretation will likely be
incorrect. Since Protestants don’t have
an infallible Magisterium to interpret for them (like Catholics allegedly do),
they are apparently very unlikely to get it right.
But the truth is Catholics
are in the same situation. They too are
obligated to use their fallible understanding and reasoning to interpret what their
“infallible” Magisterium is saying. There’s
no way out of it. If it is a dilemma for
Protestants, then it is also a dilemma for Catholics.
See these links on Bible
interpretation:
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2014/07/private-interpretation.html
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2009/12/dialogue-on-bible-interpretation.html
Arbitrary Dismissal?
Manning also says:
“This arbitrary dismissal of
certain things councils teach is known as special pleading – a logical fallacy
in which someone applies a principle or rule to others but exempts himself (or
his position) without providing a valid reason for the exception. By being inconsistent and appealing to
councils and also rejecting certain parts of them, Protestants are committing
this fallacy.”
Notice that he says,
“…without providing a valid reason for the exception.” Protestants will accept particular parts of a
council, yet indeed reject other parts, but he does this on the basis of
agreement with a greater authority –
Scripture! So, it is not an “arbitrary”
dismissal at all, but a biblical one.
Perhaps we Protestants would
care for councils more if they would fully align with the Bible. Then there should be no issue from either
side.
Conclusion
To answer the question, yes,
councils are authoritative – they carry weight in the church. Councils are often useful to articulate or
codify the core beliefs of the church and these beliefs are fine, as long as
they align with the truth of God’s Word (John 17:17), which, by the way,
will judge us on the last day (John 12:48).
But if any council contradicts
the principles of Scripture in any way, its words are no more than man-made
traditions as Jesus said (Mark 7:1-13), “laying aside the commandment of
God” (v. 8) by “teaching for doctrines the commandments of
men” (v.7).
You see, “authoritative” does
not necessarily mean infallible. There are real authorities in our churches,
just as there are in our everyday lives (parents, teachers, doctors, law
enforcement, judges, etc.), and most people have no problem obeying these
authorities, even if they are not infallible.
Councils may be authoritative, but we only have one source that is infallible
(2
Timothy 3:16-17).
The apostles enjoyed, at
least in a limited sense, the gift of infallibility in their day, but today it
is the apostolic MESSAGE that has the built-in authority/infallibility:
“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of
Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation…” (Romans 1:16).
We don’t have apostles today,
but to the extent that one is faithful
with the apostolic message (Scripture), he is authoritative. Jesus said:
“The one who listens to you listens to
Me, and the one who rejects you rejects Me; but the one who rejects Me rejects
the One who sent Me.” (Luke 10:16 - NASB)
If you are faithful in
bringing the true gospel message to others, they are indeed not just hearing
you, but hearing Jesus. In the context
of Luke
10, Jesus was not just speaking to the apostles, but to the seventy
disciples, as well – and by extension, the universal church. Jesus gave us the “Great Commission,” i.e.,
the responsibility of the whole church to spread the gospel (Matthew
28:18-20; Mark 16:15-18; Luke 24:46-49; John 20:19-23). If the gospel message being delivered is
perverted/wrong, the presenter of the message is not authoritative. But whoever hears the person commissioned and
faithfully bringing the true gospel is also hearing Jesus – and the faithful
messenger is therefore authoritative. He
is authoritative because he is correctly using the highest authority.
