Roman Catholicism vs. Protestantism: Why the Bible’s Authority is Superior to the Church’s Authority

As R.C. Sproul has said, Rome believes that it has an infallible collection of infallible books, while Protestants have a fallible collection of infallible books. The reason for the difference, of course, is that Roman Catholic theology teaches the ultimate authority of the Church. Since the Church is the instrument of God’s will, the church gives infallible authority (through the Pope via ex cathedra statements) where no one and nothing else could. Certainty. Assurance. Peace and unity. That’s what being a Catholic (“universal”) is all about, right?

Not so fast.

Roman Catholic apologists (i.e. Madrid, Matatics, Keating, Hahn, Catholic Answers crew, etc.)  often object to the doctrine of sola scriptura and the Apocrypha-less canon of Protestants by saying this: Protestants have no basis for knowing what the true Scriptures are since they don’t have an infallible church to tell them what is Scripture and what isn’t. In fact, Roman Catholics charge Protestants of arguing in a circle: we believe the 66 books are Scripture because of their internal witness. And we believe the Scriptures are self-authorizing because there is no higher standard by which we can judge other than God’s Word.

Roman Catholics don’t have that burden because the authoritative Church tells us (the non-authoritative church; lay people) what books are inspired. And the Church is never wrong because it is God’s Church, and God gave the church that authority and infallibility. Arguing with the church’s decisions, then, is almost like arguing with God. This implies that Roman Catholicism is more rational and God-honoring than Protestantism – which rejected the God-given authority of the Church in exchange for the artificial doctrine of sola scriptura. Luther and Calvin were heretics, not Reformers.

The problem is that Rome argues in a circle just as much as Protestants, only the circularity is between the Bible and the Church, not the Bible and itself.  Naturally, Roman Catholics deny circularity by asserting that the Church gets its authority from the Scriptures (to know that Peter is the head of the church and that the church is the mechanism through which we can have infallible rule, etc.). In the words of section 86 of Vatican II, “Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the word of God, but its servant.”

But this doesn’t get rid of circularity because the argument is that the Church gets its authority from the Scriptures, but the Scriptures get their authority from the church. In fact, without the Church, we don’t even know what the Scriptures are! Roman Catholicism teaches that we have to have an institution to tell us which books are inspired and which ones are not inspired, otherwise we’ll end up like Protestants with a fallible collection of infallible books.

The charge that in this way one is guilty of circular reasoning and Scripture is proven by Scripture itself can be thrown back at Rome itself, for it proves the church by means of Scripture and Scripture by means of the church. If in response Rome should say that in the first case it uses Scripture not as the word of God but as a human witness, which is credible and trustworthy, the Protestant theologian can adopt this approach as well: inspiration is first derived from Scripture as reliable witness; with this witness Scripture is then proved to be God’s word. Much more important, however, is that in every scientific discipline, hence also in theology, first principles are certain of themselves. The truth of a fundamental principle (principium) cannot be proved; it can only be recognized. – Bavinck, Prolegomena, 458

Eric Svendsen re-affirms Bavinck a century later:

If it is argued that the Catholic church bases its infallibility on the Scriptures, then we are obliged to ask, how the Catholic Church can be certain it interprets the Scriptures correctly – especially in light of the fact that the church itself, until recent times, did not understand the same passages to be teaching ecclesiastical infallibility. -  Svendsen, Evangelical Answers, 26

Of course, Roman Catholics argue that we need an infallible Church not only to know what books of the Bible are inspired and what books are not, but we need the infallible Church just to interpret the Scriptures we have (Council of Trent, session 4). Indeed, both Catholics and Protestants have their ultimate, divine authority. Both authorities validate themselves and are therefore circular foundations of authority. And both movements build up their entire theology and philosophy of life upon an irrefutable standard.

The problem, of course, is that we disagree on what that standard is.  The ultimate authority is the Scriptures, the Word of God, for Reformed Christians. For the Roman Catholic Church, however, it is the Church itself. Sola Scriptura vs. Sola Ecclesia. It is this issue – the issue of authority – that determines the various outcomes in theological and ethical differences between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, and it is the issue that forged the Reformation.

The obvious question is, what authority is the true, final authority? The Scriptures alone, or the Church alone? What reason do Catholics have in believing the Church has the final say and that we shouldn’t question it? And what reason do Protestants have in rejecting the authority of the church and placing all the attention on Scripture?

We should first begin on what both Catholics and Protestants can agree on: the Scriptures are not corrupt. The Bible has not been altered this way and that by the sinful desires of men. The Scriptures are the preserved Word of God, and the Scriptures are infallible. This, we both agree on.

However, we cannot say the same about the Church. The Roman Catholic Church has been corrupted, and has been altered by the sinful desires of men. One only need to look at church history to see the clear evidence. The same Catholic Church that burned Joan of Arc in 1431 declared her a saint in 1920. The same unified Church that condemned the heresy of Sabellianism elected Sabellian popes in 189 (Victor), 198 (Zephyrinus), and 217 (Callistus). Popes waged war against each other (Urban VI and Clement VII) while the Cardinals kicked them both out in 1409. The Council of Chalcedon (451) rejected decisions made in a council just two years earlier (Ephesus, 449). Indeed, it is fascinating how an infallible institution can correct itself.

Books could be written on the fallibility of the Roman Catholic Church, and on the official doctrinal statements/advocations of Popes. But if the Church is nothing more than the assembly of believers, as Protestants believe, we wouldn’t expect anything more. No Christian is perfect. We would expect several “holy” popes and church officials killing each other (900-950 AD), unjust wars (Crusades), and all kinds of other ungodliness to appear in “the Church.” Of course, that’s what we see.

But we also see architectural beauty, continuity, ancient history, enormous televised gatherings, inaugurations, and ceremonies. But, this doesn’t change the heart of sinners, and it doesn’t make the institution infallible or even worthy of attention. Just because a large group of fallible believers gather in massive buildings with candles and fancy clothing at ancient locations in the world doesn’t mean there is something truly unique and genuine about the institution. Nor does it matter that such ceremonies and structures have existed for over a millennium.

But Roman Catholics see things differently. They believe that the Church is more than the gathering of believers – it is an ordained institution that manifests the divine power and authority of God. It is, besides Scripture, another infallible rule of faith and practice.

This brings us to the second difference between the two authorities of Scripture and the Church: inspiration. Only the Scriptures have been declared God-breathed, theopnuestos (II Tim, 3:16, θεόπνευστος) . The written Word of God is the very out-breathing of God. That’s why the Scriptures are infallible. God cannot make mistakes, and so what Scripture asserts cannot be mistakes, because it is the Word of God. God works in His church, yes. But God has not spoken through the Church like God has spoken in the Scriptures.

Indeed, nothing in Scripture, church tradition, or early church history makes this claim about the church. The Roman Catholic church never has and never will be God-breathed, and for that reason, it will never have the same level of authority as the Scriptures.

Scripture, accordingly, needs the church, but the reverse is not true. Without the church there is no Scripture, but without Scripture the church still exists. The church joined to an infallible tradition is the original and sufficient means of preserving and communicating revelation. Holy Scripture was added later, is insufficient of itself, but is useful and good as support and confirmation of the tradition. In fact, in thinking of Rome, Scripture is totally dependent on the church. The authenticity, integrity, inspiration, canonicity, and authority of Scripture are all established as certain by the church…Scripture itself clearly teaches, accordingly, that not the church but the word of God, written and unwritten, is trustworthy in and of itself. The church has at all times been bound to the word of God insofar as it existed and in the form it existed…The church can indeed witness to the word, but the word is above the church. It cannot confer to anyone a heart-based belief in the word of God. That is something only the word of God can do by itself and the power of the Holy Spirit (Jer. 23:29; Mark 4:28; Luke 8:11; Rom. 1:16; Heb. 4:12; I Pet. 1:23). And for that reason alone the church appears to stand on a level below Scripture…The Reformation preferred a measure of uncertainty to a certainty that can be obtained only by an arbitrary decision of the church. – Prolegomena, 455, 458, 459

The first question every Roman Catholic must ask his/herself is why am I putting my faith in an institution that has historically been proven to be fallible and in many cases, self-serving and corrupt? This is a tough one, since Catholics can’t retaliate by asking Protestants the same question about the Scriptures, because no Roman Catholic believes the Scriptures are fallible and corrupt. The second question Roman Catholics must ask themselves, is why I am putting my faith in something that isn’t God-breathed?

Comfort? Tradition? “That’s the way I was raised?”

None of these answers are sufficient, biblical, or wise. The fact is this: the Evil One loves nothing more than to deprive and distract God’s people from God’s Word. And if that means using a massive, ancient institution to insert layers of superficial structures between the sheep and the Shepherd, he will by all means do it.