In Acts 8:26-40 it looks like the Holy Spirit is doing the interpretation - not men. In Luke 24:13-35 Jesus is doing the interpreting. 2Tim 2:2 seems to be a warning against people pretending to be Apostles and I find 2Tim 2:3-4 intriguing. I concede the point to you on Heb 13:17, but in light of 2Tim 2:3-4, those leaders obviously must be held to a standard, no?
And this verse right here shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that the clergy can mess up and be corrected by laymen:
1Ti 5:19 Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses.
GREAT POINTS. Thanks.
1Ti 5:19 Do not receive an accusation against an elder except on the basis of two or three witnesses.
Catholics agree. But Catholics do not see this truth as incompatible with Heb 13:17. We recognize that our leaders are fallible, but we also recognize that God has appointed them, and that He wants us to obey them. The command to obey our leaders is not a blank check. Perhaps that is your worry (and it is an understandable and justified worry). But we have to fit both truths together, and neither reject Church authority nor turn into Catholic Borg [from Star Trek]. Protestantism has tended to reject Church authority altogether, as you can see clearly stated throughout this thread. On the other side, some Catholics have hushed up crimes and abuses because they failed to understand that our leaders are fallible.
The charism of truth provided in ordination is not an unqualified gift of infallibility; it is a *communal* gift, one that applies to the bishops as a whole (united throughout all time), and especially to the bishop of Rome speaking ex cathedra. Priests and bishops and even popes are, outside of those qualifications, fallible and flawed human persons.
We don't have to choose between deifying clergy and rejecting Church authority. That's a false dichotomy.
-A8