I believe, as a Roman Catholic representative on this board, your points have merit......
Where I have a greater problem is when scriptures run contrary to tradition. For me, tradition gets the boot every time.
Greetings, AC.
Perhaps this is one of the reasons Catholics and Protestants keep missing each other. We are starting from different premises. The Catholic Church does not pit the Bible against tradition as Protestants do, but rather consider the Bible a part, and a significant part, of Sacred Tradition. The either/or of Protestants are on a different paradigm than the both/and of Catholic belief and these differing paradigms explain a lot of issues on which we see differently.
And that's why Augustine referenced scriptures (not any type of church authority) in much of his arguments against Pelagius.
There are strong and weak defenses of Sola Scriptura, and this is a weak one. It helps to step outside of the argument to see why certain arguments, while seeming to buttress Sola Scriptura, are actually ineffective. The use of scripture to demonstrate a doctrinal point does not translate to scripture being the supreme authority over all doctrine, usurping the authority Christ gave to the Church.
I can't rely on men or popes as upholders of truth, I could never believe Peter was a pope
Let's hold right there. Aside from the fact that Peter was the leader
among equals, there's an important scripture that lays the groundwork for the Seat of Peter:
Matthew 23:
1 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples,
2 saying: “The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat.
3 Therefore whatever they tell you to observe,[a]that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do.
In spite of their hypocrisy, the Pharisees held a trans-generational office. If this was true for the Old Covenant, how much more is it true for the New Covenant as demonstrated in the opening of Acts where the apostles nominated a replacement for Judas, the first example of apostolic succession. This is an example of where the charge that Catholics make up unbiblical traditions proves untrue. Though you may not agree with the interpretation, you can see why
we believe the Seat of Moses was replaced by the Seat of Peter in scripture.
or that Mary holds such a prominent position in terms of worship, intercession or supernatural attributes. You, as a Roman Catholic, have to stifle any doubts you could have regarding the veracity of any of these so-called truths.
Strawman arguments deal ineffective blows in any rhetorical exchange. Mary is neither worshipped nor endowed with supernatural powers. To say Catholics ought to be criticized for holding these beliefs when we don't is to posit a strawman.
The problem with the RCC is that it took its own path along time ago, with subtle and not so subtle erroneous practices & traditions/doctrines. Just look at the indulgence controversies that was running rapid in the time of Luther. If a practice so wrong and ungodly could take root under the authority of the Catholic church why should I not believe all types of abuses of power, authority and truth could transpire over a few months let alone many centuries, even very early on.
And few Catholics will argue that Luther didn't have a valid point on the abuse of indulgences and the general corruption that infested the Vatican leadership at that time. The 95 Thesis was entirely correct and, I believe, served as a warning that dire consequences would follow continued recalcitrance in these matters. The Protestant Reformation resulted from a massive failure of the Church to heed God's correction.
I don't think having to rely on Sola Scriptura is a perfect way to go, but it became the necessary, reliable Christian standard.
On that we are agreed. As I've argued from the beginning, it's a departure from Sola Scriptura that causes Christians to fall prey to cults like that of Harold Camping.
If the transition from the simplicity & commands of scriptures that derived under the apostolic age from the pomp and circumstance and the related practices of Rome could be verified I would go back to Rome.
The problem I see with Sola Scriptura is that it imposes on a growing Church the strictures of a much smaller, simpler church. It would be tantamount to having the U.S. Army operate on the ordinances that governed the Continental Army 230 years ago. The Doctrine of the Trinity, the Creeds, the Canon of Scripture, and many other matters were solved by a church tackling issues that didn't present themselves during the apostolic age.
I don't believe God is working out of a physical institution, there is an invisible church where God's spirit dwells. His people will spot truth from error for the most part(not perfectly) and will not be deceived with the Bible as their guide, the only reliable source of truth.
You're quite incorrect about the "invisible church". Jesus compared his future church to a shining city on a hill, a visible representation to which the world can look to for answers and guidance. An authority structure immediately followed Christ's ascension, and the Counsil of Jerusalem was the first example of official leadership deciding doctrinal and administrative issues.
Buildings? It might do well to remember that the early Church was mercilessly persecuted and in hiding until Constantine ended the persecutions. Archeology points to buildings and cathedrals that went all the way back to the first centuries. But more importantly, there is a certain continuity to be expected from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant considering our God is changeless. The first tabernacle that the itinerant Israelites built would eventually be replaced by a glorious temple that God physically resided in. The constant theme through the Old Testament is that God took pleasure in the magnificent structures Israel built for His honor, but when the hearts of Israel departed from God, then the temple and rituals became an empty show. Nothing is different today. The ancient cathedrals throughout the world are absolutely breath taking, and all built for the glory of God, but it's far more important that our hearts are turned toward God that our religious labors may not be in vain.
