“No doubt that with Baptism comes the indwelling of the Spirit, but when two persons of equal merit, or so it appears, come to different conclusions about a point of doctrine, then how is the matter to be settled except by the Church?”
It isn’t, especially since the Catholic Church is wrong about most everything. It is no authority on doctrine, and its repeated failures and crimes over the centuries certainly robs it of any authority it claims for itself. These days, it is proud of its ability to be meaninglessly important.
The history of corruption and heresy within Christianity is long and varied. Christ Himself warned us of it, and so did the Apostles. Shall we believe every heresy that comes from some supposed Holy man?
Which should I believe? The Christ who calls me to submission to Him, or the Catholic Church that says I must submit to the Pope or face hell fire? Obviously, one is Biblical, the other is not.
“All of us, profit by opening and reading Scriptures, but what seems to you as a perversion of Scripture I do not, and it is not because I follow Tradition and you do not, but because you follow a different tradition. “
That isn’t even slightly true. I was raised Catholic, and I converted to Christianity without any knowledge of Baptist “tradition” or anything else. I merely read, and studied on my own, and discovered I agreed with the Baptists, and to a certain degree with the Pentecostals, when later I decided to see what they believed.
I’m pretty sure that most thinking people don’t just agree with whatever they’ve heard from others, but also read the scriptures to see if some claim is true or not.
It’s this level of discernment that many denominations, not just the Catholics, fail to use.
1 John 4:1
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
1 Timothy 4
1Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;2Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;3Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
Galatians 1
6I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:7Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.9As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other Gospel”. All of these scriptures I have used can certainly be used against the Catholic Church and its centuries of mixing Christianity with paganism. Or, rather, mixing its Paganism with Christianity. There is no justification here for obeying some “authority” mindlessly, and a focus on traditions and weird doctrines not given to us by the Apostles is also specifically condemned in the Bible.
The Gospel of the Bible does not involve brown scapulars, queens of heaven, requirements against priestly marriage, infant baptism as a requirement for salvation, required attendance at mass, required submission to the Papal authority as a requirement of salvation, and so on and so forth.
As for Constantine. The heresy of baptism as a requirement for salvation for the forgiveness of sins is not a Arian one, but a Catholic one. It is one of many Catholic hoops that must be jumped in order to achieve salvation, and his interest in Arianism was but a failure of the Roman church to absolutely persuade him to join one version of heresy over another. The end result is the same. Constantine is dead, and he is likely not in a good place if he had faith in baptism to cleanse him of his sins.
It’s repeated failings and crimes? What about its repeated successes? Its persistence for centuries, its unity while the hoped for unity of the Reformers dissolved with the first decade. When I speak of the Church I even concede to Protestant the name of Church. The question remains: if two brothers read the Bible differently, someone must be there is decide between them, to say one is right and the other is wrong, or somehow to reconcile their views? The great scandal of the Church as always been disunion.Unbelievers mocks us for it.