Dear Michael,

Thank you for this interesting discussion. I just would like to make a comment here. You list the Roman Catholic point of view as coming from the Counter-Reformation. I do not doubt that Catholics did indeed take a stricter attitude to Church authority in light of the threat from “sola scriptura” as taught by the reformers. But that this sense was exaggerated due to a reaction does not necessarily mean it holds the same today. In fact, I would recommend you consider examining the Catholic position on this subject leading up to and after the Vatican II Council. With the renewal of biblical and patristic scholarship in the Catholic Church, the attitude shifted back toward an Augustinian understanding “In the necessary things, unity, in dubious things, liberty, in all things, charity.” That the Catholic Church understands the Magisterium as the ultimate authority on scripture and Tradition, does not mean that there is no room for individual interpretation, as your graphic seems to imply. Were this the case, then there would be no differences among the various religious congregations. However, there are many differences, but no differences in necessary matters. For example, Franciscan tradition holds that Christ first appeared to the Blessed Virgin Mary after the resurrection. The point is that the Magisterium is the ultimate authority on the interpretation of scripture (again for unity sake). The Magisterium does not squash authentic individual understanding.

Another comment on authority: In scripture Christ himself gives authority to the apostles. This authority is passed on by an outpouring of the Holy Spirit (see John 20). That outpouring of the Spirit (and hence handing on of authority) is continued in the succession of bishops after the apostles, who were ordained by a laying on of hands.