Roman Catholic apologists routinely object to sola scriptura on the grounds that it results in doctrinal anarchy. It has been claimed by them that an infallible teaching authority is a requirement in order to obtain unity in the church. That may sound like a good and reasonable proposal at first, but the idea itself is also a subtle, yet serious, problem for Catholics.
If one and only one of Rome's dogmas are refuted by Scripture, logic, or by any other means, then it follows that the entire system falls apart. If the Catholic Church can be shown to not be infallible in teaching, then its claims to authority are not binding on us at all. In that scenario, faithful Roman Catholics would have no choice but to give up Christianity altogether.
In Protestantism, one has to use Scripture and reason to discern truth from error. The ability to make independent decisions exists, with there being options to choose from. That comes with the advantage of a person being able to change his viewpoints in accordance with available evidence, which is not the end of the world for one because we all make mistakes. It is not an all or nothing scenario.
If, however, one wishes to defend the Roman Catholic Church's claim to infallibility, then he must be entirely consistent. The idea must be defended at all costs. That would place an excessive apologetic burden on one to believe ideas that are potentially absurd beyond all measure. This framework would make any thinking person susceptible to apostasy from Christianity.
If one and only one of Rome's dogmas are refuted by Scripture, logic, or by any other means, then it follows that the entire system falls apart. If the Catholic Church can be shown to not be infallible in teaching, then its claims to authority are not binding on us at all. In that scenario, faithful Roman Catholics would have no choice but to give up Christianity altogether.
In Protestantism, one has to use Scripture and reason to discern truth from error. The ability to make independent decisions exists, with there being options to choose from. That comes with the advantage of a person being able to change his viewpoints in accordance with available evidence, which is not the end of the world for one because we all make mistakes. It is not an all or nothing scenario.
If, however, one wishes to defend the Roman Catholic Church's claim to infallibility, then he must be entirely consistent. The idea must be defended at all costs. That would place an excessive apologetic burden on one to believe ideas that are potentially absurd beyond all measure. This framework would make any thinking person susceptible to apostasy from Christianity.
No comments:
Post a Comment