But you make assumptions that I can't accept. You believe in the infallibility of non-Biblical writers, assuming they are accepted by the Church. I don't. You assume and declare that the truth was handled down extra-Biblically and infallibly by men you trust. I can't accept that based on an extra-Biblical say-so. Your side seems to say that any individual man can be completely in error, but that a pack of men, ever changing throughout the ages, are flawless and infallible. I'm not sure why I should accept that.
In addition, I don't see this as either we're right and you're wrong or vice versa. There is much upon which we do agree.
You keep saying that yuou want to make sure that man's pride doesn't take over, yet that is precisely what the Protestants do -- they exalt individual interpretations over those held by Apostles and their disciples. ... relying on one's own interpretation (supposedly under the Holy Spirit) is the worst example of human pride and arrogance as I see it.
I say that the Holy Spirit dares to help ALL believers in matters of faith, and you declare that to be false. You say the Spirit only helps your leaders on matters of faith. So, if you dismiss the Spirit away from us, there is nothing left but our own interpretation. Attack away, I guess. We believe the Spirit loves all those He indwells.
Who are these "infallible" people I believe in? I trust that those who were ordained by the Apostles taught the same Faith the Apostles taught them, and that the trust of the Apostles was an infallible proof that the Faith of their successors is the true Faith and is interpreted correctly. And, that they could do so before the NT was put together.
So, if we compare what the people such as +Ignatius and +Polycarp taught and wrote, both of whom were disciples of Apostles (+Paul and +John), and what their successors taught and what we still preach, I have a high degree of confidence that it was as close to the true Faith as it gets.
In your case, I just have to trust your claim that yours is an equally valid, correct and providential teaching, even if it is diametrically opposed to that known to the Church from the beginning.
That is a lot of to accept, FK. That is the ultimate in the "me-me-me" way of thinking. Protestantism is a man-made "church," based on individual interpretations of the Bible, which was put together by the the Church, after much human intervention. You trust that the Church must have known what it was doing when it collected the books it deemed inspired into the Bible you believe in, but you don't believe the Church knows how to interpret the same inspired books!
There is no attack here, FK. Just bewilderment at how man can convince himself to be infallible. You expect me to believe that you are guided by the Holy Spirit, because you believe so, but that the Church is guided by fallible men who are not? Based on what? What do you have to offer other than your own conviction? The opinions of other fallible men who agree with you?