Quote
I understand that the apocrapha was added to their canon at the Council of Trent in 1511as being Scripture. The papal decrees are regarded as the word of God as he is the chief interpreter.

Yes, the Apocrypha was declared Sacred Scripture, and thus, the Word of God at the Council of Trent in 1546.

As for the papal decrees, they are regarded as inspired, infallible, and authoritative; but, I don't think they are ever referred to as the Word of God. I may be wrong, and this may seem like a minor or trivial detail, but I have found that it is important to be as precise as possible when speaking about these things to RCs. If your account of another person's beliefs are distorted, they will generally not listen to the rest of your critique no matter how strong and compelling. And I know personally how frustrating it is when my beliefs are oversimplified or caricatured.

At any rate, I think Beckwith, for whom I still have great respect and admiration, should resign from his post. BUT, if ETS is going to enforce compliance in this, a matter about which there are possible differences of interpretation and understanding, they MUST enforce compliance about matters about which there is no such ambiguity. I'm referring in particular to John Sanders and Clark Pinnock, both of whom openly reject the inerrancy of Scripture (and embrace a host of other unbiblical, sub-Christian heresies), but who have been allowed to retain their membershp in ETS. If they're going to clean house I think they should start there, otherwise they need to be honest and revise their statement of faith to reflect those principles they are willing to enforce and uphold.

[Linked Image]