Replies

Even if one accepts the principle of Scripture Alone, there remains the problem that Scripture is often confusing and contradictory. And where it is, the Scripture gives authority to the apostles of the Church to settle it. Of course, the apostles did not resolve all of those confusing issues, and God didn't make them immortal.

Some argue that Scripture is never contradictory or confusing, if "properly" understood. This is a dodge. "Proper" understanding in such cases invariably means "what I think it says", and that does not lead to a consistent moral faith but towards fracture and strife.

If we take Jesus seriously in Scripture, he wants us unified. If we refuse to assign a final arbitrator in the Church to these vexed issues of Scripture, then we cannot remain unified. So, why is it that the things that vex US is allowed to be permission to divide the Church and override the SCRIPTURAL admonition of Jesus to unity? There is not a principle of disunity in Scripture.

The identical problem arises in secular law. The Constitution of the US says what it says, but it is often unclear how it is to be applied to a given situation. To resolve that matter, we have the Supreme Court. The Constitution does not anywhere contain the words "judicial review" and establish the Supreme Court as the final say on what the Constitution MEANS in vexed questions, but without such an authority every man is his own law, or we are simply ruled by force...or the country falls apart (take your pick).

The authority of the Supreme Court is implicit in the Constitution.
The authority of the Church is more explicit in the Gospels and the Epistles.

But wherever you have that authority, you will have people who don't like a given decision. Schism and secession have been the recourse of those who cannot abide the decisions of the authority. But the result hasn't created a new basis of authority.