Circular Logic in Roman Catholic Theology

[eahaddix]

In studying Roman Catholicism, one observes that the Roman Catholic Church is grounded on circular logic, which involves unfalsifiable self-validation. To further elucidate this point, consider the following:

To establish its theological legitimacy, the Catholic Church appeals to:
(1) written Scripture [Paragraph 76 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/76.htm) and 81 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/81.htm) of CCC],
(2) the unwritten teachings of the Apostles, or [Catholic] Tradition [Paragraph 76 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/76.htm) and 83 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/83.htm) of CCC], and
(3) Revelation from the Holy Spirit [Paragraph 82 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/82.htm), 108 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/108.htm), and 113 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/113.htm) of CCC].

However, at the same time:
(1) the Roman Catholic Church declares itself the sole authoritative interpreter of Scripture [Paragraph 85 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/85.htm) and 119 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/119.htm) of the CCC], which includes the authority to establish the canon of Scripture by using [Catholic] Tradition [Paragraph 120 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/112.htm) of the CCC]
(2) the Roman Catholic Church declares itself the (a) sole preservative vehicle and (b) sole authoritative interpreter of the unwritten teachings of the Apostles, or [Catholic] Tradition [Paragraph 85 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/85.htm), 890 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/890.htm), 2051 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2051.htm) of the CCC]
(3) the Roman Catholic Church is the sole authoritative evaluator of revelation from the Holy Spirit [Paragraph 67 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/67.htm) and 82 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/82.htm) of CCC].

In addition, the Roman Catholic Church declares itself infallible in matters of teaching doctrine [Paragraph 890 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/890.htm) and 2051 (http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2051.htm) of CCC].

Hence, the Roman Catholic Church is the supreme authority over what it appeals to for theological legitimacy. Therefore, the Roman Catholic Church serves as its own basis of justification.

[CoreIssue]

I agree.

[Sid]

. . . the Roman Catholic Church serves as its own basis of justification.



The RCC believes that it is the One True Church and sees it as her duty to suppress and destroy all other churches which, not being true churches, are, of course, false churches.

Once the Evangelicals truly understand the RCCs attitude towards them, any ecumenical cooperation with the Vatican will wither.

This link is really worthwhile in understanding that any ecumenical dialogue with Rome is really a one-way lecture:



In the Roman Catholic document Dominus Iesus, Rome has declared her position as the sole depository of salvation and has adamantly declared that churches since the Reformation are not churches in the proper sense.

It seems as if the Roman Church is made of elastic, that is, she may bend but she never breaks and never really changes. She may adapt herself to changing circumstances but the message is always the same, that where the Roman Church is there is the Spirit, and outside of the Church the Spirit is not.

This document goes so far as to say that if Protestants have any light at all, it is entirely due to the mediatorial work of the Church of Rome.


Canadian Pastors Response to Dominus Iesus (http://www.the-highway.com/dominus.html)

[Sid]

In studying Roman Catholicism, one observes that the Roman Catholic Church is grounded on circular logic, which involves unfalsifiable self-validation.


. . . so much of RCism is based on myths, legends, fables and confused mysticism that has no basis in the Scriptures or common sense.



We can't understand the Scriptures apart from the interpretations of the Roman Catholic Church, but we must interpret the Scriptures ourselves to discover that the Roman Catholic Church has been given this authority.

Roman Catholic doctrine is valid regardless of whether the apostles or anybody living near the time of the apostles taught it. If a doctrine such as the Immaculate Conception or papal infallibility is not taught by anybody in the earliest centuries of Christianity, and there's no evidence that the apostles taught it, and many early sources actually deny it, the doctrine should be believed anyway on the basis of a vague and unverifiable "development of doctrine."

The Roman Catholic Church can err and contradict itself as much as it wants to (anti-Semitism, selling indulgences, Popes and councils contradicting one another, etc.), yet still be "Infallible Mother Church." If anybody brings up these errors, we need to either "put the past behind us" or realize that every error of the Roman Catholic Church is "unofficial." There's no definite, consistent criteria by which to determine which actions of the RCC are "official" and which are "unofficial," but it's generally a matter of anything obviously erroneous being "unofficial."

So we must wait to see whether the Roman Catholic Church is correct on an issue before deciding whether the Roman Catholic Church is acting "officially." The Roman Catholic Church is acting officially only when it's correct. And since the Roman Catholic Church has always been correct every time it's acted officially, we should be impressed with this amazing record of infallibility.


A Layman's Handbook for Catholic Apologetics (http://www.catholicconcerns.com/Apologetic.html)

[Sid]

The RCC's claims of the authority of their sacred deposit of oral traditions have problems with these verses:



Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively applied to myself and Apollos for your sakes, so that in us you may learn not to exceed what is written, so that no one of you will become arrogant in behalf of one against the other.

1 Corinthians 4:6 (New American Standard Bible) (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=4&verse=6&version=49&context=verse)


and. . .


So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.


2 Thessalonians 2:15 (New American Standard Bible) (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=60&chapter=2&verse=15&version=49&context=verse)


and. . .


Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.

Acts 17:11 (New American Standard Bible) (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts%2017:11&version=49)


I'm wondering if many Catholics actually sit down and read the Bible without the RC prejudices and see if it really says all this stuff that the Catholic church teaches.

. . . the promotions of Mary would be an interesting place to start.

[Sid]

In studying Roman Catholicism, one observes that the Roman Catholic Church is grounded on circular logic, which involves unfalsifiable self-validation.


So much of RCism is based on myths, legends, fables and confused mysticism that has no basis in the Scriptures or common sense. . . .



How much easier our job as Evangelical apologists would be if we were simply to adopt the methodology of our Roman Catholic friends! Honesty, of course, compels us to move in other directions. This Roman Catholic apologetic methodology is perhaps at its worst in online Internet discussion forums.

I have included below the comments of Jason Engwer, a colleague of mine and arguably one of the best online Evangelical apologists today. In his dealings with online Roman Catholic lay-apologists, he has made several humorous, yet insightful observations regarding the dubious methodology used to establish Rome's claim to authority over all of Christendom.

Many of us who deal with Roman Catholic apologists on a regular basis regarding these issues can attest to the fact that what you are about to read is very real indeed!
We can't understand the Scriptures apart from the interpretations of the Roman Catholic Church, but we must interpret the Scriptures ourselves to discover that the Roman Catholic Church has been given this authority.
The teachings of the Roman Catholic Church have been held all along by the Christian church, but it's unreasonable to expect Catholics to document this, because, after all, the beliefs didn't exist early on. They developed over time.
The Roman Catholic Church can err and contradict itself as much as it wants to (anti-Semitism, selling indulgences, Popes and councils contradicting one another, etc.), yet still be Infallible Mother Church. If anybody brings up these errors, we need to either "put the past behind us" or realize that every error of the Roman Catholic Church is unofficial. There's no definite, consistent criteria by which to determine which actions of the RCC are "official" and which are unofficial, but it's generally a matter of anything obviously erroneous being unofficial. So we must wait to see whether the Roman Catholic Church is correct on an issue before deciding whether the Roman Catholic Church is acting officially. The Roman Catholic Church is acting officially only when it's correct. And since the Roman Catholic Church has always been correct every time it's acted officially, we should be impressed with this amazing record of infallibility. A Layman's Handbook for Catholic Apologetics (http://www.catholicconcerns.com/Apologetic.html)