No, that's wrong, we don't belileve they have a special insight. We believe that God has guided His Church as a whole and that the checks and balances of the Holy Spirit through multiple men instead of an individual who is NOT God is trust-worthy. Beyond that, The Church encourages us to question and we have recourse to the Fathers who have debated these and their doubts on both sides.
To me, you are agreeing with my point. If God guides "The Church" over time in a way He does not guide the individual, then that is special insight. This leads me to ask you another question, one which I am sure that I am the only one on this thread who doesn't know. :) I want to use the term correctly, so who EXACTLY are the Church Fathers? Does it refer to any prior Church authority (is JPII a Church Father?), or does it refer to the leaders and thinkers of the early Church? Is it a specific group or a general term? Are they all previous popes? On this thread I have been advised to read the Church Fathers, so I suppose this is a first step. :)
Do I as an individual trust them definitionally without thinking? I read through what they teach and the counter points and compare them to Scripture -- and their thoughts hold true.
If their thoughts always hold true, how is that not trusting them definitionally? I thought that every good Catholic was compelled to follow the interpretation of the Church whether he liked it or not. I mean, that's fine and all if the Catholic so chooses to do that. Take the issue of homosexuality for example. I agreed with the general spirit of what Pope Benedict XVI recently held. I just wonder what is going to happen when some future Pope takes a more Episcopalian view. Would you say that can't happen? Would you follow out of loyalty? Would you leave the Church?
The Church has the checks by which there is no reliance on ONE interpretation, but the Holy Spirit through Scriptures. what we see is you following ONE Man's interpretation, not Scripture. By that, we say that we follow Scripture more accurately since we do not rely on ONE Man's interpretation but on the Spirit superceding those men.
Really, what's his name? I want to know whose interpretation I am following. Is it Luther? You must know that throughout Protestantism, there are countless divergences from his teachings. I thought it was you who are bound to one man's interpretation. If the pope decrees something, are you not bound?
We see you as accepting Benny Hinn saying that he is the mouthpiece of God.
If you are really lumping in the Protestants on this thread with the Benny Hinn crowd, then you don't have any fundamental understanding of us at all.
Me: "Do you think we are arrogant simply because we dare to disagree with you?"
No, as I said: Is it arrogant to think that the questions, the doubts, the clarity you have, haven't been thought of in 2000 years by men of God made wiser by the Holy Spirit than you or me? Yes.
You contradict yourself. By "men of God made wiser" you mean Catholic leaders or Church Fathers. You follow them and their teachings. Your views are their views. You say that we are arrogant for not following them. That's the same as accusing us of arrogance for not agreeing with you as a representative of these men made wiser by God.