Yes and no. God gave the Catholic Church the authority to determine the canon of scripture. As far as infallible interpreter the Catholic Church has only infallibly defined somewhere between 5-8 verses. Now that being said; anyone may have a different interpretation as long as it doesn't contradict the Church's teaching.
and that Rome, being the steward of Divine revelation, and inheritor of promises of God's presence and preservation, and having historical descent, is therefore that infallible interpreter. Is this a correct argument?
Also yes and no. See above. The Church is the divinely appointed steward (Excellent choice of words, seriously), but does not infallibly interpret ALL scripture.
this is one of the most convoluted run on sentences I can ever recall reading. And I teach ninth graders
I see not reason why this is considered hard to comprehend to a person who understands the issue, while if so and too long, you must have a real problem with papal encyclicals!
Yes and no. God gave the Catholic Church the authority to determine the canon of scripture.
That is what is unclear. Do you affirm an infallible interpreter is necessary to authoritatively determine what Scripture all consists of and its meaning (insofar as it is interpreted), ?
As far as infallible interpreter the Catholic Church has only infallibly defined somewhere between 5-8 verses. Now that being said; anyone may have a different interpretation as long as it doesn't contradict the Church's teaching.
This refers to individual verses, and even then the arguments are not necessarily infallible, but Rome's teaching constrains far more of Scripture to support her, which RCAs seek to do. As well as to interpret which level of the magisterium each teaching falls under, and thus what degree of assent is required, and if any dissent is allowed.
However, this does not answer my question as to the basis for Rome being the infallible interpreter.
The Church is the divinely appointed steward
And thus infallible, to whom all should submit?
but does not infallibly interpret ALL scripture.
That is a given, but it was what i meant by my question, but that she alone authoritatively defines the contents of Scripture and its meaning, insofar as it is interpreted, as she is the steward of Scripture, etc. and thus is to be submitted to.