Idk why it’s so confusing. Trust and obedience are not in opposition of each other. They’re basically saying “Yes trust Jesus! But yea, don’t worry about trusting in what he taught.”
If I’m sick, I’ll trust my doctor to help me feel better. I will listen to what they say. If I ignore the recommended exercise, vitamins or eating habits, am I really trusting in what that doctor told me? Of course not.
Well that’s correct from a Protestant perspective, Scripture as the highest/only infallible authority, with church leaders secondary & fallible. From the Catholic view, we don’t see a strict hierarchy where Scripture overrides the others. Instead, Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium form a unified threefold structure established by Christ. They’re “so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others” (CCC 95). All three are guarded by the Holy Spirit to faithfully transmit divine revelation.
Question for you though, how would the earliest Christians have practiced sola scriptura? There was no fixed canon until the late 4th century. For centuries, most believers didn’t have personal copies of Scripture due to cost, illiteracy, logistics, etc. Teaching was largely oral, as 2 Thess 2:15 urges holding to traditions “whether by word of mouth or by letter.”
Scripture itself shows the need for guided interpretation: In Acts 8, the Ethiopian eunuch reads Isaiah but says, “How can I [understand], unless someone guides me?” Philip then goes on to explain it to him.
2 Peter 1:20 notes that “no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of private interpretation”the writings came from divine inspiration, not personal opinion, and Catholics see the Church continuing that guided role.
Lastly, Christ founded a Church (Matt 16:18), not a Bible, but the Bible came from the Church He established as they all worked in unison with each other.
Sorry if that’s a lot, but hopefully that’s a helpful way to think through some of those things. I personally never looked into the Catholic church’s teaching on all of it until recently, so I highly recommend looking into someone more capable than me to explain it all lol.
Yea just for clarity, nobody teaches that the Scriptures are in submission to the Pope. Peter's *behavior* was rebuked, which is cohesive with Catholic teaching... nobody teaches that the Pope can never make a mistake, but that he has the gift of infallibility when making an ex cathedra statement- which is rare. The Holy Scriptures, Tradition and Magisterium work together in perfect harmony, all guided by the same Holy Spirit.
If you/anyone is interested in understanding Papal Infallibility better, I highly recommend this 7m video from @ElijahElishaRap
https://t.co/i5m8vBDlXt
Out of curiosity… in your opinion, what teachings have no biblical support that you’re referencing? Everything I’ve looked into can be found in scripture, maybe not as detailed and clear as we would hope (trinity is a good example of this when discussing with anti-trinitarians). Seems to come down to interpretation which is why the early church is often referenced to show that a certain teaching has been passed down.
But sincerely interested in what teachings “aren’t biblical”.
So when Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, wrote this, was he in error? You’re making the Holy Scriptures contradict themselves.
“For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.”
1 Corinthians 4:15 ESV
https://t.co/7HhMSduFli
@BeSaintly https://t.co/5DmZ3yj7B2
I’m currently watching this. The science that backs up young earth creation seems to be incredibly robust compared to anything other than this model. Very long but definitely recommend it.
I’m not saying this just to say it, but this full episode, the “Christian Avengers” was something I was super super excited to watch, then during it I became very confused about my Protestant beliefs and looked into what the Catholic Church actually taught. Lead me down a full on investigation and I am currently in OCIA.
The Christ I believe in (biblical Christ) is the one who ‘became flesh’ (Jn 1:14) by truly taking that flesh from Mary, as Scripture says (Rom 1:3; Gal 4:4). That same flesh is offered in the Eucharist (Jn 6:51). God alone is worshipped. That doesn’t mean it’s Mary in the Eucharist. It’s why I keep saying your personal flesh is YOURS you RECEIVED from your mother. Hope that helps.
My favorite way to explain this is: saying these doctrines are ‘invented’ is like saying Trump ‘invented’ the idea that there are only two genders when he said it in 2024.
Everybody already knew it from the beginning; the councils just had to put it in writing because some people started acting like it was up for debate.
@sheepyrepute@Rblv73@HwsEleutheroi I’m going to paste this again:
I feel like I’m repeating myself… I hope you can understand that the flesh you have is FROM your parents but it is YOURS. The Church does not teach anyone is worthy of worship besides God and God alone.