Protestantism, private interpretation and the Pope

[Neithan]

One of the pillars of Protestantism is the acceptance of private interpretation. A Christian in good faith when reading the Bible is capable, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, of interpreting the Word of God without error. Private interpretation puts the ‘protest’ in Protestantism.

Now, Protestants are rebuked by Catholics for believing this. The thrust of the argument is that faith requires submission to an authority, not personal judgment. Private judgement puts truth in self-centredness. Of course the Protestant ripostes that his authority is God the Holy Spirit who inspires the individual Christian to authentically interpret His Word. Catholics simply deny Protestants this right.

We Catholics deny everyone this right, in fact, except one man: our beloved Holy Father, the Pope. Only the pope is capable of infallibly interpreting the Word of God under inspiration of the Holy Spirit. This is absolutely necessary to maintain the unity of the Church (as the continual divisions of Protestants attest).

Problem is… isn’t this a logical contradiction? We deny the idea of private judgement but we allow this at the very highest level of our authority! In actual fact, Catholicism is also governed by private judgement of the Word of God. True that we also include Sacred Tradition alongside Sacred Scripture, the the principle is the same: the Pope is capable, through ex cathedra proclamations, to privately judge for all Catholics the Word of God, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

How can we Catholics logically deny the principle of private judgement and condemn Protestants thereby when we ultimately submit our own faith to this same principle?

 

[Orionthehunter]

Neithan:

One of the pillars of Protestantism is the acceptance of private interpretation. A Christian in good faith when reading the Bible is capable, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, of interpreting the Word of God without error. Private interpretation puts the ‘protest’ in Protestantism.

Now, Protestants are rebuked by Catholics for believing this. The thrust of the argument is that faith requires submission to an authority, not personal judgment. Private judgement puts truth in self-centredness. Of course the Protestant ripostes that his authority is God the Holy Spirit who inspires the individual Christian to authentically interpret His Word. Catholics simply deny Protestants this right.

We Catholics deny everyone this right, in fact, except one man: our beloved Holy Father, the Pope. Only the pope is capable of infallibly interpreting the Word of God under inspiration of the Holy Spirit. This is absolutely necessary to maintain the unity of the Church (as the continual divisions of Protestants attest).

Problem is… isn’t this a logical contradiction? We deny the idea of private judgement but we allow this at the very highest level of our authority! In actual fact, Catholicism is also governed by private judgement of the Word of God. True that we also include Sacred Tradition alongside Sacred Scripture, the the principle is the same: the Pope is capable, through ex cathedra proclamations, to privately judge for all Catholics the Word of God, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

How can we Catholics logically deny the principle of private judgement and condemn Protestants thereby when we ultimately submit our own faith to this same principle?

There is no contradiction. We don’t defer to the Pope because we judge this man better capable to interpret Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and Sacred Teaching but because we believe that Christ created the Church and believe His promise that He will protect and guide the Church until He comes again. In short, we defer to the Pope and the Magisterium because we believe they have a special charism from the Holy Spirit.

Protestants also defer to someone who they believe has a special charism to interpret the Truth. Unfortunately, by virtue of the 30,000 different denominations in the U.S. mulitiplied by the “adaptations” within each denomination and individual private interpretations, they essentially assert millions of different “truths” while the Catholic Church asserts one Truth that has been unchanging since the Assumption and Pentecost.

For a more complete explanation, one really needs to at minimum read Paragraphes 874-896 in the Catechism.

 

[Melchior]

Neithan:

One of the pillars of Protestantism is the acceptance of private interpretation. A Christian in good faith when reading the Bible is capable, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, of interpreting the Word of God without error. Private interpretation puts the ‘protest’ in Protestantism.

Now, Protestants are rebuked by Catholics for believing this. The thrust of the argument is that faith requires submission to an authority, not personal judgment. Private judgement puts truth in self-centredness. Of course the Protestant ripostes that his authority is God the Holy Spirit who inspires the individual Christian to authentically interpret His Word. Catholics simply deny Protestants this right.

We Catholics deny everyone this right, in fact, except one man: our beloved Holy Father, the Pope. Only the pope is capable of infallibly interpreting the Word of God under inspiration of the Holy Spirit. This is absolutely necessary to maintain the unity of the Church (as the continual divisions of Protestants attest).

Problem is… isn’t this a logical contradiction? We deny the idea of private judgement but we allow this at the very highest level of our authority! In actual fact, Catholicism is also governed by private judgement of the Word of God. True that we also include Sacred Tradition alongside Sacred Scripture, the the principle is the same: the Pope is capable, through ex cathedra proclamations, to privately judge for all Catholics the Word of God, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

How can we Catholics logically deny the principle of private judgement and condemn Protestants thereby when we ultimately submit our own faith to this same principle?

Your first sentence is actually not entirely accurate. The historic principle of Sola Scriptura does not include the idea of private interpretation being sufficient to understand scripture. That came later and is better call Solo Scriptura. The classic protestant view says that scripture alone is sufficient to make us wise unto salvation - but it must be interpreted within the context of the church not simply by individuals on their own.

Mel

 

[Todd_Easton]

In 1 Corinthians 12, St. Paul likens the Church to a body composed of different members and organs: foot, hand, ear, eye, etc. The members of the body are not all the same but, with their different gifts, each member or organ of the body is supposed to work together with the others for the good of the whole body. Specifically, St. Paul says that there are some in the Church who are teachers but he also says that not all are teachers. Elsewhere, St. Paul says that it was Christ’s gift “that some should be … pastors and teachers…so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles.” (Ephesians 4:11-14)

In 1 Timothy 3:2, St. Paul associates teaching with the office of bishop in the Church. Accordingly, the Catholic Church refers to the bishops of the Church in union with the leading bishop (the pope) as the Magisterium of the Church, the Church’s authoritative teachers. St. Paul says that one member or organ of the body cannot say to a different member or organ, “I do not need you.” Just so, to deny or ignore God’s gift of the Magisterium of the Church is to set oneself up to be, as St. Pauls says, “tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind and doctrine…”

 

[BayCityRickL]

…name three things that start with “p”

 

[davethecatholic]

Neithan:

One of the pillars of Protestantism is the acceptance of private interpretation. A Christian in good faith when reading the Bible is capable, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, of interpreting the Word of God without error. Private interpretation puts the ‘protest’ in Protestantism.

Now, Protestants are rebuked by Catholics for believing this. The thrust of the argument is that faith requires submission to an authority, not personal judgment. Private judgement puts truth in self-centredness. Of course the Protestant ripostes that his authority is God the Holy Spirit who inspires the individual Christian to authentically interpret His Word. Catholics simply deny Protestants this right.

We Catholics deny everyone this right, in fact, except one man: our beloved Holy Father, the Pope. Only the pope is capable of infallibly interpreting the Word of God under inspiration of the Holy Spirit. This is absolutely necessary to maintain the unity of the Church (as the continual divisions of Protestants attest).

Problem is… isn’t this a logical contradiction? We deny the idea of private judgement but we allow this at the very highest level of our authority! In actual fact, Catholicism is also governed by private judgement of the Word of God. True that we also include Sacred Tradition alongside Sacred Scripture, the the principle is the same: the Pope is capable, through ex cathedra proclamations, to privately judge for all Catholics the Word of God, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

How can we Catholics logically deny the principle of private judgement and condemn Protestants thereby when we ultimately submit our own faith to this same principle?

When you say “the highest level of authority” you are speaking of the successor of St. Peter who is ordained by Christ and guided by The Holy Spirit. If we can deny this authority, instituted by Christ, then, indeed, we can deny any or all that Christ has ordained (which is what many protestant denominations have done). Why would interpretation of Sacred Scripture be outside the authority of The Pope? Why would the sucessor to St. Peter, as ordained by Jesus Christ, interpreting Sacred Scripture under the guidance of The Holy Spirt be considered “private interpretation”?

I think this sums it up well…

85 “The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.” 47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

**86 “Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith.” 48 **

87 Mindful of Christ’s words to his apostles: “He who hears you, hears me”, 49 the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms.

**88 ** The Church’s Magisterium exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas, that is, when it proposes truths contained in divine Revelation or also when it proposes, in a definitive way, truths having a necessary connection with these."

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Here is the bit from the Catholic Encyclopedia on New Advent:
newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm

Vatican I from New Advent:
newadvent.org/cathen/15303a.htm

Ex Cathedra from New Advent:
newadvent.org/cathen/05677a.htm

Immaculate Conception from New Advent:
newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm

Papal Infallibility from Catholic Answers:
catholic.com/library/Papal_Infallibility.asp

THE MEANING OF EX CATHEDRA AND THE REASON FOR THE DEFINITION OF PAPAL INFALLIBILITY
wandea.org.pl/papal-infallibility.htm

I hope these help.

In Christ, Michael

 

[asteroid]

Neithan:

One of the pillars of Protestantism is the acceptance of private interpretation. A Christian in good faith when reading the Bible is capable, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, of interpreting the Word of God without error. Private interpretation puts the ‘protest’ in Protestantism.

I have been part of quite a few churches. NONE have taught this. They have taught that when reading the Bible, and asking for guidance from God, that He will help you understand. I am taught that in the Catholic Church too.

But nowhere have I been taught in Protestant churches that any individual is capable of interpretings without error. No one is counted as infallible (unless perhaps he is Finis Dake). I was never told to read Scripture and infallibly interpret it or asked to believe any church leader was infallibly interpretting it.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

I was looking for this - Like a dog for a bone:

Session 4 : 18 July 1870
First dogmatic constitution on the Church of Christ
Chapter 1. On the institution of the apostolic primacy in blessed Peter
Chapter 2. On the permanence of the primacy of blessed Peter in the Roman pontiffs
Chapter 3. On the power and character of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff
Chapter 4. On the infallible teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff
ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/V1.HTM#6

That last part is the actual definition of Papal Infallibility as defined by Vatican I.

In Christ, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

asteroid:

I have been part of quite a few churches. NONE have taught this. They have taught that when reading the Bible, and asking for guidance from God, that He will help you understand. I am taught that in the Catholic Church too.

But nowhere have I been taught in Protestant churches that any individual is capable of interpretings without error. No one is counted as infallible (unless perhaps he is Finis Dake). I was never told to read Scripture and infallibly interpret it or asked to believe any church leader was infallibly interpretting it.

Asteroid:

The problem is that “Private Interpretation” of “Solo Scriptura”, coupled with the lack of any real teaching authority and the inability of Protestants to submit to others or to admit that they might be mistaken has produced something like 132,000 different denominations claiming to be accurately interpreting the word of God, and claiming that their interpretation is rtight while all of the others are wrong.

What makes this worse is that these doctrinal differences are used to justify not praying for or with and not working for or with people of other denominations, and has even been used to justify the worst sort of lies and calumnies about the Catholic Church.

The scandalous and tragic result is that people who might otherwise believe doubt and refuse to consider the consider the claims of our Lord.

I can only say that this is horribly wrong and must change.

In Christ, Michael

 

[asteroid]

Hey, I only pointed out that the accusation made about protestantism was false for every single one of the protestant churches I’ve been a part of - that accusation being that protestants claim any Christian can infallibly interpret scripture.

I would also note that the majority Protestants I’ve known are quite happy a lot of the time to admit they are mistaken about many things. Your blanket accusation is very unfair.

I would also note that most Protestants I’ve known are quite happy to submit to others, whether that be their congregational leaders, denominational leaders, apostolic covering authority, or whatever else. Your blanket accusation is very unfair.

I would also note that the number you quote, 132,000 Protestant denominations is rather large. What is your source for this number? The normal source for the large number of Protestant denominations (The World Christian Encyclopedia) lists many denominations that actually fall under one denominational grouping. For instance, for 1985 it lists a total of 22,190 denominations. These include 223 denominations that are all in reality part of the Catholic Church. They include 580 Orthodox denominations, 240 Anglican, 504 denominations which are Catholic (non-Roman), 10,956 “non-white indigenous” denominations, a set of 1,490 “denominations” including such things as Mormons, New Age, and all cults. Actually 132,000 is rather a large number even by WCE standards.

That encyclopedia lists 8,196 protestant denominations. That still seems like a massive number until you remember that the one Roman Church includes 223 denominations according to the list.

But of course, two denominations is one too many so even though the numbers aren’t relevant we should try to be accurate with them.

I would also note that while some denominations refuse to pray with or work with others (and the Catholic church has historically done this very frequently) and that doctrinal differences are used to justify this, that isn’t the sole picture of protestant churches. In this town there is a Churches Together group (which also includes the Catholic Church) and one wonderful thing to happen in Wales has been the Prayer Weeks, churches of all types coming together with the sole purpose of praying for our nation.

Please note, I am now Catholic. I am not defending Protestantism of any type and saying “let’s leave the Catholic Church and be something else”. I am just pointing out accusations that do not present a fair picture of protestant churches.

To say Protestants are unable to submit to others (as has just been done in the above post) is approximately as unfair as saying that Catholics worship the Pope and Mary. Both unfair. Both untrue. It’s horrible when Protestants tell lies, knowingly or otherwise about Catholicism. It’s also horrible when the tables are turned.

And yes, it is very horrible that people don’t turn to Christ on account of the division in the Churches. Let’s all pray as Jesus did - may they all be one …

 

[Della]

That encyclopedia lists 8,196 protestant denominations. That still seems like a massive number until you remember that the one Roman Church includes 223 denominations according to the list.

I don’t know what encyclopedia you referenced, but the Catholic Church doesn’t have any “denominations.” It has various rites and many religious orders, but they are all one in teaching and all look to the pope as the Vicar of Christ.

 

[asteroid]

Della:

I don’t know what encyclopedia you referenced, but the Catholic Church doesn’t have any “denominations.” It has various rites and many religious orders, but they are all one in teaching and all look to the pope as the Vicar of Christ.

Precisely.

That was my point. Thank you for making it clearer.

There is ONE Catholic denomination.

This is why I wish Catholics would stop quoting absurdly large numbers of denominations. The numbers come straight from this source that says, falsely, that there are over 200 Catholic churches, over 500 Orthodox denominations, over 200 Anglican, and then includes non-Christian groups in the list.

I don’t know where the 132,000 number has come from though - it’s 100,000 higher than even that source. I’m pretty certain that there haven’t been 100,000 new denominations formed in the last 20 years.

The encyclopedia I referenced btw was the encyclopedia I named in my post. It’s the one from which people culled the large number in the first place.

 

[Polar]

Neithan:

the Pope is capable, through ex cathedra proclamations, to privately judge for all Catholics the Word of God, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Is he only capable to judge for all Catholics
through ex cathedra proclamations?

 

[estesbob]

BayCityRickL:

…name three things that start with “p”

Peter piper piecked a peck of pickeld peppers…

 

[Angainor]

Neithan:

In actual fact, Catholicism is also [sic] governed by private judgement of the Word of God.

:clapping:

 

[AndyF]

Neithan:

Now, Protestants are rebuked by Catholics for believing this…

Cause and effect.

Why talk about effect when we know the cause. So let’s focus on the cause, and incidently, the statement is wrong. Catholics are perfectly at peace within the protective arms of the descendant Apostles and the existing Church, just as Christ demanded it to be.

In what timeline are we talking about? Protestants rebuked the Catholic Church from the offset. What have you to say about the first rebuttal, since that is the cause?

Andy

 

[BryPGuy89]

Neithan:

One of the pillars of Protestantism is the acceptance of private interpretation. A Christian in good faith when reading the Bible is capable, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, of interpreting the Word of God without error. Private interpretation puts the ‘protest’ in Protestantism.

Now, Protestants are rebuked by Catholics for believing this. The thrust of the argument is that faith requires submission to an authority, not personal judgment. Private judgement puts truth in self-centredness. Of course the Protestant ripostes that his authority is God the Holy Spirit who inspires the individual Christian to authentically interpret His Word. Catholics simply deny Protestants this right.

We Catholics deny everyone this right, in fact, except one man: our beloved Holy Father, the Pope. Only the pope is capable of infallibly interpreting the Word of God under inspiration of the Holy Spirit. This is absolutely necessary to maintain the unity of the Church (as the continual divisions of Protestants attest).

Problem is… isn’t this a logical contradiction? We deny the idea of private judgement but we allow this at the very highest level of our authority! In actual fact, Catholicism is also governed by private judgement of the Word of God. True that we also include Sacred Tradition alongside Sacred Scripture, the the principle is the same: the Pope is capable, through ex cathedra proclamations, to privately judge for all Catholics the Word of God, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

How can we Catholics logically deny the principle of private judgement and condemn Protestants thereby when we ultimately submit our own faith to this same principle?

As a holy man, ordained into the order, he has been put in a deeper relationship with God than your average man, protestants would all fall under as most don’t actually have a clergy to speak of, the pope has all his life been raised to read and comprehend the Bible has the church has been for centuries. As the center of the church and a holy man we would like to say that he would be the best candidate for interpretation as he sit closes to heaven’s ear. Now we have had some bad poes in the past, but all men are capable of falling to great sins. I would have to say that are understanding of the Bible and the interpretation would be very similar, because that has been the way for two millinia. The church has stood by the same principles and remains mostly universal, as the protestants splinter daily. God gave the position of pope to him and the right to be our guide, it is our duty to follow him to the life Jesus would have us live.

 

[FCEGM]

Neithan:

. . .
How can we Catholics logically deny the principle of private judgement and condemn Protestants thereby when we ultimately submit our own faith to this same principle?

But, we don’t submit our own faith to this same principle. We submit our faith to the PUBLIC judgement (not private) of the Church that alone has the authority to conserve the revelation of Christ.

This article may help you:

Conserving the Revelation:

In order to come to an understanding of the manner in which Scripture is to be interpreted, I believe it is necessary to consider by what means the Holy Spirit preserves the Revelation in Christ.

The Apostles were divinely inspired to preach (Day of Pentecost) the Revelation of God in Christ. They were also divinely inspired to act by baptizing those who accepted what they they preached. They were also divinely inspired to celebrate the Eucharist as Worship (“the breaking of the bread”) each Sunday. They were also inspired Divinely to decide doctrinal, moral, and disciplinary issues at the Council of Jerusalem. Finally, much later, some of the twelve and some who were not the Twelve, were Divinely inspired to write gospel accounts as well as the rest of the NT.

They were not inspired as isolated individuals, but as members of the Church visible united to one another in a communion of faith, worship, common life. All of those activities would qualify as Tradition; because they not only spoke, but did things as well, as including writing (some of them) - all by positive Divine inspiration, just as Our Lord not only spoke but DID things (and never wrote).

What they were inspired to say, do, write, they commissioned others to conserve by repeating what they said and did and wrote. They commissioned others in their own lifetime to so conserve by repeating. This conserving by repeating was a Divine commission, coming from the Lord Himself. In preaching the divinely inspired thoughts, they were preaching Christ’s thoughts; in doing the sacraments, they were doing Christ’s actions; in deciding the issues at the Council of Jerusalem, Christ was deciding through them; when they healed or worked miracles, Christ was the principle author. All this is attested in various places in the NT.

While they were alive, what was the nature of what they did sacramentally? Was not what they celebrated sacramentally the very reality they were preaching? On Pentecost Day, e.g., after Peter’s preaching was accepted, they baptized the 5,000, thereby bestowing a connection to Christ by the supernatural birth of the sacrament, infusing the Indwelling Trinity. The preaching was for the sake of participating in the realities preached; this by Christ’s intent in inspiring them to so act after preaching, in fact, Christ pouring into the souls of the converts the Holy Spirit when the Apostles poured the water of Baptism.

continued. . .

 

[FCEGM]

Did God intend these realities which were preached and shared in for every generation, or only for the generations of the time of the Twelve? Did He want that beyond that time and place for all times and places until the Second Coming? If so, then conservation of this Revelation for all generations is the Divine plan (this intent can be shown in Scriptures). A supernatural grace of conservation within the visible Church which survives the deaths of the Twelve as to what they preached, did sacramentally, decided in council, and partially wrote down, is given in virtue of the commission to extend to all nations the meaning and reality of Revelation, must follow of necessity, and if God’s intention is to have all nations and generations receive the preaching and reality of Revelation, it must be conserved not by isolated individuals, but be conserved as it was when the Twelve were alive, communally within the visible Church.

Thus the only difference between TRADITION and Tradition is new Revelations for TRADITION (which ended with the lives of the Twelve), and conservation of the Revelation. Thus the oral preaching is conserved in the memory of the Church by the Holy Spirit Who is permanently indwelling the Church; the realities preached are sacramentally conserved in the Liturgy of the Church; the authority to decide doctrinal, more, and disciplinary questions is conserved within the Church hierarchy; and the Scriptures are conserved and understood within the Church.

The grace of conservation is different from the grace of positive Inspiration and Revelation in that no new realities are revealed; but the grace of conservation is equally inerrant in the Church as a whole, since it is a grace, a supernatural gift preserving what was once revealed by positive Inspiration and now repeated substantially in non-inspired words, sacramental actions, authoritative decisions by the Apostles’ successors and in Scripture communally understood. There is thus a continuity in the Church between the time of the Apostles and the time after their deaths, a continuity that is maintained by the grace of conserving what has been positively revealed.

This conservation in relation to the Revelation is analogous to the conserving of creation in relation to creation. Just as God first creates the universe ex nihilo and then conserves what He creates, so does He reveal Himself and conserve what He reveals in the Church. The reason is simple: God wants each generation and every nation to encounter the same Revelation in both its reality and in its meaning, so that no time or place subsequently would be at a substantial disadvantage. It is above all in the sacramental life of the Church that the realities preached are present.

Now this means that there is a grace of infallibility in the Church as a whole keeping it from error when it repeats the Revelation, keeping it from defect when it celebrates the Realities in the Sacraments, and having an authority to decide re new questions raised. This grace of infallibility that the Church as a Body has is a conserving grace. The individual who agrees with the Church’s teaching has a share in this infallibility. But the individual does not have a guarantee of this infallibility - the Church does. The individual likewise shares in the indefectibility of the sacramental life of the Church, but has no guarantee of it as an individual.

The memory of the congregation of the Church of the thinking of the Oral Preaching, and the ritual Praying of the Liturgy is conserved by the Holy Spirit permanently joining Head and Body. An individual father is acclaimed by the Church as capturing its own Divinely conserved memory and meaning; that is why the individual is acknowledged as a Doctor, i.e., Teacher of the faith. IOW, it is not in isolated individuals that the memory and meaning is primarily conserved, i.e, the Thoughts of the Oral Preaching preserved by repeating in other non-inspired words, but in the community.; a communal memory of what was preached and done.

continued. . .