Are you saying the Catholic Chuch can say something contrary to the Bible and it is to be accepted as the word of God based on the Catholic Church’s authority?
“In addition, not contrary.”
Thanks. I appreciate the answer.
How is it determined whether the teaching is contrary?
“As a Catholic I find that there are many Protestant teachings that are truly contrary to the Bible. The truth is that Protestants are as wedded to their own traditions of interpretation as Catholics.”
May be. That’s not the topic of this thread, though.
A key question, as in reality, not only is the veracity of RC doctrines not determined by the weight of Scriptural warrant, and in fact they do not necessary need actual evidence, but while they must not contradict Scripture, this is determined according to Rome, who has interpreted, or decreed, herself as being (conditionally) infallible so that she cannot be wrong under that condition.
RCs will argue that without an infallible magisterium there will be divisions, which is correct, but the questions are, is an infallible mag. Scripturally necessary for assurance of Truth, thus what it rejects is to be rejected? And is this the means of a superior unity? And what is the basis for Rome's claim to be that infallible magisterium?