Replies

Thank you four thoughtful reply. I will address the one point I think is a stumbling block and likely to be misunderstood by most Catholics and many Protestants.

Catholics don’t disagree with this. But, it doesn’t mean that EVERYTHING is in Scripture and that outside of Scripture there can be no truth.

I believe any person that would make such a claim is a certifiable nut. I have seen no such definition of Sola Scripture. (I have asked several Catholic Posters who ridicule Sola Scripture what their definition is. I have not received a single reply.)

On the other hand, I believe that there can be, and is, great danger in stretching Scripture with man made "tradition" which has been developed well beyond the age of the Apostles.

I am certain you have seen some Protestants who argue that the Catholic Church has downgraded Scripture to no less than an "equal" status with man made doctrine.

Catechism Of The Catholic Church.

95 "It is clear therefore that, in the supremely wise arrangement of God, sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church are so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others. Working together, each in its own way, under the action of the one Holy Spirit, they all contribute effectively to the salvation of souls."

By golly it has! On the other hand

"I am certain you have seen some Protestants who argue that the Catholic Church has downgraded Scripture to no less than an "equal" status with man made doctrine."

If it is acceptable to dismiss significant portions of the Revealed Word of God, would you agree that it is therefore also possible to dismiss significant portions of Scripture? For example would you consider that the Gospels alone are sufficient or even that the Beatitudes alone are sufficient since Christ clearly presented Salvation in a number of "if / then" statements?

I am certain that it is an opinion of many Protestants that Catholics follow man made doctrine and traditions, which, I do not dispute their free will to do so.

But, and here we go again, I also am certain that this opinion is itself a man made opinion.

This is what I mean by arguing in circles. It always comes back to authority and upon whom authority rests. A Protestant believes that it rests with him under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. A Catholic believes that it rests with the Church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

A Protestant may disagree, but without declaring for himself sole interpretive authority, cannot definitively say that what he believes is the absolute truth.

Scripture supports Tradition, Tradition does not contradict Scripture and the Magisterium is the successors of the apostles who proclaim, protect and defend the faith. Christ is the Head and the Holy Spirit is the Paraclete( 1. The third person in the Trinity; Jesus promised the Apostles that he would send the Holy Spirit after his Crucifixion and Resurrection; it came on Pentecost.[Wordnet]
2. An advocate; one called to aid or support; hence, the Consoler, Comforter, or Intercessor; — a term applied to the Holy Spirit.)and we are the body.

There will never be agreement on this as long as Protestants reject the authority of the Church and her understanding of the three components of that authority.
That’s fine with me, but not that Protestants claim that authority while rejecting the Catholics right to do so as well.

Then we come back to, but it’s not found in Scripture! But, the Catholic says yes it is, but it is hidden within the explicit text and the typography of the Old Testament and the history and tradition of the church.

There is no common ground. Fine. But, just as a Protestant rejects the Church’s authority, I reject his authority.