But that is really where your "Rome gave me the Bible so they must best know what it means" leads to. Unlike how the church began, you rely upon an authority who authoritatively claims they are the authority based upon their authoritative claim of what Scripture and history means.
So I still maintain it’s the reasonable thing to do, to at least start with the stewards and instruments of Scripture in a search for an encounter with Christ here and now.
It is reasonable to expect they should know, but it is unreasonable to believe they must know best, and to place trust in them for assurance of truth, which you are to do as a RC, rather than the Scriptures themselves.
For nor being an instrument or steward of God warrants that, and such can lead you astray, as the OT corporate stewards of Divine revelation.
Moreover, the Roman magisterium was not and is not the instrument of Divine revelation, as it was neither a group project or responsible for its recognition, and is manifestly contrary to the NT church.
Otherwise, it’s not reasonable, it’s not really human to be a Christian. If He is not present and helping us NOW in a tangible way, the only way we can really respond to him as a human,
But your logic does not lead to the conclusion that Rome is to be submitted to, nor does it require her. Basing acceptance of Truth claims upon Scriptural substantiation in word and in power, with Scripture being supreme as the assured word of God, not Rome and her assured veracity, is how the church began, as explained. While the stewardship=assured veracity logic invalids the church.
But submission based upon the premise of the assured veracity of Rome is what is Catholic teachings prescribe, even to saying God being obliged to submit to her.
If you do not subscribe to this submission then you are not much of a RC, and your faulty logic has led you to a faulty church.
It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of per sons, the Pastors and the flock...So distinct are these categories that..the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors. - VEHEMENTER NOS, Encyclical of Pope Pius X promulgated on February 11, 1906:
“All that we do [as must be patent enough now] is to submit our judgment and conform our beliefs to the authority Almighty God has set up on earth to teach us; this, and nothing else.”
“Absolute, immediate, and unfaltering submission to the teaching of God's Church on matters of faith and morals-----this is what all must give..”
The Vicar of Christ is the Vicar of God; to us the voice of the Pope is the voice of God. This, too, is why Catholics would never dream of calling in question the utterance of a priest in expounding Christian doctrine according to the teaching of the Church;” —“Henry G. Graham, "What Faith Really Means", (Nihil Obstat:C. SCHUT, S. T.D., Censor Deputatus, Imprimatur: EDM. CANONICUS SURMONT, D.D.,Vicarius Generalis. WESTMONASTERII, Die 30 Septembris, 1914 )]
As Alphonsus Ligouri, whose writings were declared free from anything meriting censure by Pope Gregory XVL (1839) in the bull of his canonization, states,
“With regard to the mystic body of Christ, that is, all the faithful, the priest has the power of the keys, or the power of delivering sinners from hell, of making them worthy of paradise, and of changing them from the slaves of Satan into the children of God. And God himself is obliged to abide by the judgment of his priests, and either not to pardon or to pardon, according as they refuse or give absolution, provided the penitent is capable of it.
Such is," says St. Maximus of Turin, " this judiciary power ascribed to Peter that its decision carries with it the decision of God." 2 The sentence of the priest precedes, and God subscribes to it. .” – Dignity and Duties of the Priest, St. Alphonsus Ligouri, Vol. 12, p. 2; http://www.archive.org/stream/alphonsusworks12liguuoft/alphonsusworks12liguuoft_djvu.txt
As saith another sanctioned authority, The supreme power of the priestly office is the power of consecrating...Indeed, it is equal to that of Jesus Christ....The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows his head in humble obedience to the priest's command. - (John A. O'Brien, Ph.D., LL.D., The Faith of Millions, 255-256 , O'Brien. Nihtt obstat: Rev. Lawrence Gollner, Censor Librorum Imprimatur: Leo A. Pursley, Bishop of Fort Wayne,-South Bend, March 16, 1974
Read some Matthew Henry commentary or others, and some good evangelical preaching if you want solid food.
I think I'll have to disagree there, and pretty much leave it at that after adding a few thoughts here. I've pinged you metmom because I think my response to Daniel here will address what you said to me.
First of all, let me make things as clear as possible and here, I may not only surprise you but other Catholics. Again, I don't trust the Church just because the Church is historical, and or because She claims authority for herself. As I tried (and obviously failed) to explain before I place my trust in the Church because I have encountered Christ through her (members) and thus, based on this experience, I know I can trust Her in other areas. It matters not to me whether you think I "must" base my trust on Her claims of authority, that's simply not the truth. I don't know how else to say that.
Now, as for the portion in bold: I must have missed that point when you made it before so sorry. But I do not agree that's how the Church started, if what you are saying there is people went around with copies of (OT) Scripture and showed the truth of Jesus in them.
Certainly we read about the Bereans, and how St Paul showed them Christ in the Scriptures. But two points there: 1. St Paul showed them. He didn't give them a copy of the Torah and say, "Read it yourselves and you'll see Jesus there". He sat down with them, and through fellowship showed them Jesus in the OT. So there we have an example of the key component I described in my previous post: the human element. The human need for help (and to give help). It is in this context that the Church was founded and continues to operate. See point 2 for more.
2. Even if you are claiming that St Paul and others went around with copies of Scripture and used only that to "prove" Jesus and the Gospel, that line of reasoning only works for the Jewish converts. Only they would have responded to "...Truth claims upon Scriptural substantiation in word and in power, with Scripture being supreme as the assured word of God,". The Gentile converts would not.
I submit that the way the Church even began, much less continues today, was by the effective power of the witness. Sharing his testimony with others, a testimony based on personal experience, not on a Scriptural study. This testimony shared with those who are seeking for answers for whatever reason, not forced on others. And certainly doesn't begin with Scripture; again; it begins with a personal encounter with those who are not only willing to listen, but know they need something more in their life. Of course later, study of Scripture would be an important thing to do, but it's not how Christianity is spread not then not now. Because really, there's nothing more stupid than an answer to a question not asked. So to go to someone, Bible in hand and expect them to convert just by reading it to them, well that's just not anything really. And any "conversion" based on that alone is hardly a conversion that will last for long. Why? Because a man must be CONVINCED he needs Christ in his life, to be truly converted, and just reading the Bible, as an unbeliever with no help at all is not convincing.
This is the method that Christianity must have spread back then, so there's no reason to believe it has to change now. This is the method God the Holy Spirit uses. He uses us to spread His Word. He doesn't come to people (usually) in dreams or visions and suddenly "bam" another soul is saved. No, He uses US, chooses US to be His instrument on earth. So this really leads into my point from the beginning. That in our own human need, we can see the need for another, a helper, and not some ethereal, non-corporal spirit that we point to whenever challenged to prove God, to give a reason for our faith. We have a corporal God (Jesus) who meets us in our need by giving us a corporal, visible Church, a Church guided by the Comforter. Because that's what we need as human beings. We need something tangible (as I said before) to point to in our lives so we can say with confidence "I have MET Christ, come and see" to those who are not yet part of His Body.
We need that because that's all we are: human.