Does the Roman Catholic Church decide on matters not directly mentioned in the Bible?
Question:
I watched a debate about sola scriptura, and a Catholic apologist made the following argument against it. He said the Bible doesn’t specifically address some things. One thing he pointed out was prepubescent marriage and cousin marriage.
His question was: if the bible is the sole source of faith and doctrine, where does the New Testament condemn a man marrying a 10-year-old? Where in the New Testament does it say you can’t marry your 1st, 2nd, or 3rd cousin?
His point was to say that the New Testament doesn’t specifically address it, and that’s where the teaching magisterium of the church is required to address that.
How would you address this from a Scripture-alone perspective?
Thanks!
Answer:
This argument makes two major mistakes.
Let's assume that the Bible doesn't give guidance on a particular issue. Where in the New Testament does it say that the magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church is the one to decide what God wants? The faulty assumption is that the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church has the ultimate authority over Christianity. Yet Jesus says that he is the head of the church. "And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and gave Him as head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all" (Ephesians 1:22-23). Christ gave His apostles the authority to communicate His will. They did not make up the rules. Christ told them through the Spirit what to speak (John 16:12-15). "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:19; 18:18).
However, the basic argument is also false. "Seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence" (II Peter 1:3). The Roman Catholic is denying that God truly gave us everything pertaining to life and godliness. He doesn't believe that the Bible is complete. "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work" (II Timothy 3:16-17).
He is throwing out reasoning from the Scriptures (Acts 17:2; 19:9). He claims that only direct commands will do, though he does not live by that standard himself. See "The Basics of Communication: Tell, Show, Imply." Have you considered why he narrowed down his standard to just the New Testament, even though Paul said, "For whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction, so that through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope" (Romans 15:4)? I suspect that he knew that a line of argument could be made from God's teachings in the Old Law and he wanted to rule it out.
In describing God's care for Israel, he uses the illustration of an orphan who was cared for, and when she reached the age appropriate for marriage, God took Israel as His bride (Ezekiel 16:7-8). We take note of the implication: There is a time appropriate for marriage, and it is after puberty is reached.
Marriage is a covenant vow (Malachi 2:14). Both parties must be of an age to give consent to the terms of the covenant. A young woman living at home could not make an oath without her father's consent -- direct or implied (Numbers 30:3-5). This would imply that a young woman's father could keep her from marrying too soon or to an inappropriate man (Exodus 22:16-17).
In regards to marrying cousins, the Old Law did not prevent people from marrying their cousins (Leviticus 18:6-18). We discourage first cousins from marrying today because of the increased probability of birth defects. However, no moral law says such a marriage is sinful. See: "Could cousins marry in biblical times?"
By the way, in case a Roman Catholic objects to the reasoning presented, it must be noted that no Roman Catholic magisterium issues rulings on its own say-so. They argue and reason from Scripture, though they also include extra-biblical documents as evidence in their discussions. What I'm pointing out is that they have no authority to include documents written by men and treat them as equal to (or even more authoritative than) God's teachings.
"I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed! For am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I striving to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a bond-servant of Christ" (Galatians 1:6-10).
"See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ" (Colossians 2:8).
