The Foundational Flaw of Protestantism: Private Interpretation
The following is an exchange that occurred on Instagram in the Comment threads, based on a post that was originally put up by Joe and Brad of the ROTK Team. This particular debate really highlights the foundational flaw of the Protestant worldview, which is Private Interpretation. Joe and Brad both teamed up in the comments to take this individual to task with his assertions and questions against Catholicism.
As the dialogue continued to move forward, it became more apparent that every comment by this person was further trapping him and putting him into a corner. By the end of it, there really was no way out. This is because he had assumed, as all Protestants do, that Private Interpretation was the method given by Jesus Christ for His followers to determine doctrines of faith and morals. However, as we point out, this novel idea only became normative after the Protestant Revolt of the 16th century.
Whenever Protestants attempt to use Sacred Scripture against God’s Church, they are taking for granted that their method for interpretation is not grounded in the Christian worldview, but rather in the humanism which influenced Martin Luther to rebel against the Christian Faith established by Our Lord.
This debate does a great job expounding upon the true and proper filter God has given to us whereby we discern and know truth. His tripod of authority as found in Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the teaching authority of the Magisterium. He did not give us the Bible Alone as our sole rule of faith and then Private Interpretation as the final ultimate authority.
We will preface our interlocutor’s comments with CK. And ours will be prefaced either with JOE or BRAD depending on which one of us was responding at the time. Get prepared for some high level apologetics here. And always remember, in debates with Protestants, the first issue you really have to tackle is this idea of Private Interpretation. Once you expose it for the heresy that it is, the rest falls in line like a row of dominoes.
CK: Catholic meaning universal doesn't mean God is only with the Catholic church. That is a gross distortion of the text and meaning. God's gift being to all people is simply that, it is not saying your church has to be labeled Catholic.
BRAD: Catholic is not a label. God’s gift is to all people, we are not denying that. The way we access that gift is through the Catholic Church, which is his Kingdom on Earth.
CK: so you're saying this isn't referring to THE Catholic church but to churches that are universal towards people?
JOE: the term "catholic" is Greek for universal, which is one of the four marks of the Church. And only one Church traces back unbroken to Jesus, Peter, and the Apostles. Jesus didn't start 12 denominations, He had 12 Apostles. He didn't say He had 45,000 bodies and brides, but one Body and Bride. He didn't tell the Apostles, "Go into the world, hand out New Testaments, see what everyone comes up with." He said, "Go and teach and baptize." Jesus' template was not "Just accept Me as Savior, and for everything else, just be relativistic and see which doctrines you think are taught in the Bible." He taught one doctrine. There is one faith, and it was handed down. Either Jesus was a clear Teacher, or we think His intention was to have 45k denominations debating what He taught. He sent the Holy Spirit to lead us into truth, and the Spirit worked with the Apostles at the Council of Jerusalem. This is why the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. For His sheep, He sends the Spirit so we can be holy, not so we can all debate endlessly over Bible verses using our private interpretation.
CK: I see the problem. "The church is the pillar and foundation". It appears your faith is in the catholic church and it's traditions rather than scripture alone.
JOE: do you believe the church is the pillar and foundation? And yes, we categorically reject Sola Scriptura, a demonic doctrine and a tradition of men, a product of 16th century humanism, and the fertile ground for Freemasonry and Modernism. We reject any man made invention that was not revealed by Jesus and the Apostles. We uphold the Christian faith which teaches Sola Verbum Dei. The Word of God Alone. Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. As interpreted and guided by the teaching authority of the Church which has the promised protection of the Holy Spirit on dogmas of faith and morals. We are taught by God alone, not by men like Luther or Calvin or 21st century IG accounts. And we reject Private Interpretation as the means of determining dogma. Heed the words of St. Paul. If anyone brings you a gospel different than the one given, let him be anathema. Hopefully you can see the errors of following men, and repent and come to the Christian Religion established by Our Lord.
CK: so you live by the word of God aka the Bible and have no traditions of man? Correct?
JOE: do you believe the church is the pillar and foundation of truth? And yes, the Christian faith proclaims the Word of God aka Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. It rejects all man made scripture (i.e. Book of Mormon and Koran) and it rejects all man made tradition (i.e. Sola Scriptura and Private Interpretation). The Christian faith can not be founded on traditions of mere men, otherwise we would be saying the Holy Ghost did not inspire and reveal its teachings, which is a heresy.
CK: the church as in the body of believers or the catholic church? So you reject Sola scriptura yet the Bible gives us biblical traditions we are to hold?
JOE: the Body of Christ can not have two different definitions nor can it be divided by denominations. The Church of Our Lord proclaims one faith. The Christian Religion rejects heresy, hence the rejection of Sola Scriptura. We uphold everything revealed by Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. You first have to reject the pride of Private Interpretation, in order to know the truth of God's Word. If you attempt to quote Scripture utilizing your private interpretation, you will be proving you accept a heresy from the 16th century which was influenced by humanism. It was an invention of mere men. You would have to see if your private interpretation stands up to scrutiny against the rest of Sacred Scripture, as well as Sacred Tradition, and the infallible teachings of the successors of Peter and the Apostles. If it can not pass through all three, then it is not of God. It is of human origin.
CK: When YOU say church are YOU referring the the body of christ or specifically the Catholic church? Are the "sacred traditions" you talk about mentioned in the biblical Canon?
JOE: you are trying to separate the two terms and they can not be separated. Jesus has one Body. There are not two different definitions. They are one and the same. His sheep belong to His Church. His Church is comprised of His sheep. Regarding Sacred Tradition, it depends. Some may be implicitly mentioned in Sacred Scripture. St. Paul preached and he wrote. Both were the Word of God. Neither can contradict the other. Some of what he preached, he wrote down. Same with the other Apostles. A good example of this is the Lord’s Day being the new day of worship. It is implicitly mentioned in passing, but there is no explicit command in Scripture. Yet we know that it was a doctrine taught by the Apostles to the Christians of the 1st century, and handed down to succeeding generations. So some of the oral preaching might be implicitly found in Sacred Scripture.
BRAD: the Catholic Church is the body of Christ. No other church is. 2 Thessalonians 2:15 “…hold fast to the teachings we passed to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.” Jesus commissioned the Apostles to spread the gospels to all nations. He didn’t say to only write them down. The Gospels themselves even tell us there are things Jesus did that are not mentioned within them. God’s revelation to us comes in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. Paul’s preferred method of teaching was by mouth. He primarily wrote letters when he could not be present to those to whom he was teaching.
CK: what traditions do you hold to that are not found in scripture?
JOE: that are not explicit? The Lord’s Day as the new day of worship to fulfill the Commandment. Infant baptism. Mary is the New Eve. Abortion explicitly referenced as a mortal sin. Contraception as a mortal sin. The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are consubstantial with one another, preserving the unity yet distinguished by person. The preferred name of the Church is called the Catholic Church. The proper definition of the "Communion of the Saints." These are some. Where Scripture might touch on things implicitly or in passing, Tradition often contains explicit commands. And vice versa. And then you bring in the teaching authority of the Church to decide on matters such as the Nicene Creed, Mary as Theotokos, circumcision not required for salvation from non Jewish converts, the official canon of the New Testament, etc. Now, follow up question. Which books do you believe should have been included in the NT canon? Do you think the Bishops got it right, and if so, is it certain, or could there be the potential for error? Why are Jude or Philemon or 3rd John or 2nd Peter inspired revelation? Why not the Didache, Shepherd of Hermas, 1st Clement, or the Epistle of Barnabas?
CK: So if you're unsure of the tradition where do you go? Mary is the new Eve, Interesting one.
BRAD: Mary as the new Eve is a fundamental element of Christianity. If this is a new idea for you I can tell you your understanding of Christian theology is limited and you are missing out on the beauty of the story of salvation. The very reason Jesus gave authority to Peter and the Apostles is to guide the faithful in matter of dogma and doctrine. So if there is any confusion we have the teaching authority of Christ’s Church which is guided by the Holy Spirit. It’s the same authority that gave you your Bible.
JOE: you go to Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the teaching authority of the Church. It must pass all three, for just like the Trinity, the three are one. Just as if you are unsure what books belong in Scripture, you go to the Church, who told us definitively which books belonged there. If you are unsure if Gentiles need to be circumcised, you go to the infallible Council of Jerusalem. If you are unsure if Jesus set up differing denominations, you go to Scripture. If you want to know whether the gates of Hell can prevail against the Church, you go to Scripture. If you want to know whether the Commandment to worship is still Saturday or now Sunday, you go to Tradition. If you want to know if baptismal regeneration belongs to infants, you go to Tradition. If you want to know the proper interpretation of John 3:5 that the Apostles taught, go to Tradition. For any of these, you turn to all three. Their author and source is the same. The Holy Spirit. He inspired the oral preaching and the written revelation. And He protects the Church from binding a falsehood. If you assumed at some point in your life that all you needed was the Bible Alone and your best efforts at studying it, if you assumed the Holy Spirit would lead you to one truth but another believer from a different denomination to an alternate truth, then you were standing on a teaching which was invented in the 16th century, a man made tradition. The Church is visible in every generation. If you and I lived in the 1st millennium, which Church would that be? I truly hope and pray that Our Lord can guide you on these issues to see the truth.
