CAN THE POPE AND COUNCILS BE WRONG?

THE ARGUMENT MOVES FROM INDULGENCES TO AUTHORITY

In 1517, Martin Luther questioned indulgences.

That was serious.

But the controversy did not stop there.

Suppose Luther believed an indulgence preacher was wrong.

Who could decide?

A bishop?

The pope?

A church council?

And what happened if Luther became convinced that the pope or a council was wrong?

That brought the controversy to a question underneath almost everything else:

WHO HAS THE FINAL WORD?

1. LUTHER’S ARGUMENT KEPT GETTING BIGGER

At first, Luther hoped abuses surrounding indulgences could be corrected.

But the controversy soon moved beyond the conduct of individual preachers.

His opponents challenged his authority to question established church teaching.

That raised another question:

WHY SHOULD THE CHURCH’S TEACHING BE ACCEPTED?

Because a pope taught it?

Because a council approved it?

Because Christians had practiced it for centuries?

Or because it could be established from the apostolic message?

Those were not merely questions about indulgences.

They concerned the authority by which Christian teaching was to be established and defended.

2. THEN CAME THE LEIPZIG DEBATE

In 1519, Luther debated the theologian Johann Eck at Leipzig.

Eck pressed Luther on church authority.

The discussion eventually reached the case of:

JAN HUS.

Hus had challenged church teachings more than a century earlier.

The Council of Constance condemned him.

He was burned at the stake in 1415.

At Leipzig, Luther acknowledged that some positions associated with Hus and condemned by the council were Christian and evangelical.

That carried a serious implication.

A CHURCH COUNCIL COULD CONDEMN A TEACHING THAT LUTHER BELIEVED WAS TRUE.

Luther was moving toward the conclusion that councils could err.

3. THAT WAS A MUCH BIGGER QUESTION THAN INDULGENCES

Think about what had happened.

The original question was:

ARE INDULGENCES BEING ABUSED?

Now the question had become:

CAN AN OFFICIAL CHURCH COUNCIL TEACH ERROR?

Luther’s opponents understood the church’s authoritative teaching office as essential to preserving Christian doctrine.

Luther increasingly argued that decisions made by church authorities could themselves require correction.

If a council could err, another question followed:

WHAT STANDARD CAN JUDGE A COUNCIL?

Luther’s answer was increasingly:

THE WORD OF GOD.

But the dispute did not end simply by appealing to Scripture.

Both Luther and his opponents appealed to Scripture.

They disagreed about its interpretation and about the authority Christ had given His church to preserve and interpret apostolic teaching.

That distinction matters.

4. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE POPE?

The same problem applied to the pope.

Could a pope be wrong?

Luther increasingly argued that he could.

That did not mean:

EVERY POPE IS ALWAYS WRONG.

Nor did it mean:

EVERYTHING A COUNCIL TEACHES IS WRONG.

It meant that Luther did not regard a pope or council as an authority whose doctrinal judgments were necessarily beyond correction.

Roman Catholic teaching makes a more specific claim than the idea that a pope can never make a mistake.

It distinguishes a pope’s personal conduct, ordinary statements, and decisions from particular definitive teachings made under specified conditions.

We should not confuse those claims.

The dispute between Luther and Rome concerned the authority Christ had given the church and whether that authority could establish a teaching as binding when Luther believed it conflicted with Scripture.

WHAT AUTHORITY DOES CHRIST GIVE CHURCH LEADERS, AND WHAT ARE ITS LIMITS?

That is the question we must take to the New Testament.

5. NOW PUT THAT QUESTION BESIDE THE NEW TESTAMENT

Peter was certainly important.

Jesus said to him:

“And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

— Matthew 16:18, KJV

Jesus also said:

“And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven.”

— Matthew 16:19, KJV

Those words must not be ignored.

Roman Catholic teaching understands Peter’s role in this passage as foundational to the continuing office of the bishop of Rome.

Other Christians understand Peter’s role differently, including the relationship between his confession, his apostolic commission, and the authority shared by the apostles.

We examined those arguments in Section 1.

For this study, notice that Matthew 16 does not settle every question about whether a later pope or council can err.

We must also examine what the rest of the New Testament says about Peter, the apostles, and the testing of teaching.

6. PETER COULD BE CORRECTED

Paul tells us about an incident at Antioch.

Peter had been eating with Gentile Christians.

Then, when certain men came from James, Peter withdrew and separated himself because he feared those of the circumcision.

Paul wrote:

“But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.”

— Galatians 2:11, KJV

Paul explained the problem:

“But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all.”

— Galatians 2:14, KJV

That is remarkable.

Peter’s conduct was judged in relation to:

THE TRUTH OF THE GOSPEL.

Paul did not excuse Peter’s behavior because Peter was an apostle.

But we must distinguish what the passage demonstrates from what it does not.

Galatians 2 records Peter’s conduct being corrected.

It does not, by itself, resolve the later Roman Catholic claim concerning the conditions under which a pope teaches infallibly.

That claim concerns a particular kind of definitive teaching, not the idea that a pope can never act wrongly.

Still, the passage establishes an important principle:

AN IMPORTANT CHURCH LEADER IS NOT BEYOND CORRECTION IN HIS CONDUCT.

7. PETER WAS ALSO QUESTIONED

After Peter entered the house of Cornelius and ate with Gentiles, Christians in Jerusalem challenged him.

Luke writes:

“And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him.”

— Acts 11:2, KJV

Peter explained what had happened.

He described the vision.

He described the Holy Spirit falling upon Cornelius and his household.

He explained why he had gone with the men sent for him.

Then Luke tells us:

“When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God.”

— Acts 11:18, KJV

Peter was important.

But the account does not portray his fellow Christians as forbidden to question what he had done.

He explained his actions by recounting what God had revealed and done.

The others accepted that explanation.

THE QUESTION WAS ANSWERED BY AN ACCOUNT OF GOD’S ACTION, NOT MERELY BY PETER’S POSITION.

8. WHAT ABOUT ACTS 15?

A major doctrinal controversy arose concerning Gentile Christians.

Some were teaching:

“Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.”

— Acts 15:1, KJV

This was serious.

So what happened?

Did Peter simply issue a ruling without discussion?

No.

Luke writes:

“And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.”

— Acts 15:6, KJV

There was discussion.

Peter spoke.

Paul and Barnabas reported what God had done among the Gentiles.

James spoke and appealed to Scripture.

Then Luke tells us:

“Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch.”

— Acts 15:22, KJV

The decision was communicated through a letter.

Acts 15 shows the apostles and elders deliberating together over a serious doctrinal question.

It does not describe Peter acting alone throughout the process.

But Roman Catholic interpreters also point to Peter’s significant speech and his role in the early church.

We should acknowledge that evidence rather than pretend Peter had no special place.

The question is what Acts 15 establishes about the authority of the apostles and what conclusions may legitimately be drawn about later church government.

9. DOES ACTS 15 ESTABLISH THE AUTHORITY OF EVERY LATER COUNCIL?

Not by itself.

Acts 15 certainly shows church leaders meeting to resolve a doctrinal controversy.

But this meeting included:

APOSTLES.

Men personally commissioned by Jesus were still alive.

And the letter could say:

“For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us.”

— Acts 15:28, KJV

Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christians understand later councils as part of the church’s continuing responsibility to preserve apostolic teaching under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Other Christians distinguish the authority of the apostles themselves from the authority of later assemblies of bishops.

Acts 15 provides evidence for deliberation among church leaders.

But the claim that a particular later council possesses a guarantee against doctrinal error requires further argument.

WHAT AUTHORITY DID CHRIST GIVE THE APOSTLES?

WHAT AUTHORITY CONTINUED AFTER THEIR LIFETIMES?

AND HOW CAN THAT CONTINUING AUTHORITY BE IDENTIFIED?

Those are the questions behind the disagreement.

10. WHAT IF EVEN AN APOSTLE PREACHED A DIFFERENT GOSPEL?

Paul gives us an extraordinary warning in Galatians.

He wrote:

“But 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.”

— Galatians 1:8, KJV

Notice what Paul said.

Even:

“WE.”

Paul included himself in the warning.

The gospel already delivered was not something a messenger could simply replace with a different message.

The messenger was accountable to the message.

But read the passage carefully.

Paul was not suggesting that the Galatians could invent their own gospel and then use it to judge the apostles.

He was reminding them of the gospel they had already received.

THE APOSTOLIC MESSAGE WAS NOT TO BE CHANGED BY A LATER CLAIMANT TO AUTHORITY.

That principle becomes important whenever someone claims authority to define Christian teaching.

11. THE MESSAGE MUST NOT BE CHANGED

Imagine the possibilities.

A famous preacher teaches something.

Examine it.

A bishop teaches something.

Examine it.

A pope teaches something.

Examine it.

A council teaches something.

Examine it.

Martin Luther teaches something.

EXAMINE IT.

But do not confuse examining a claim with assuming that our first impression of a passage must be correct.

We need to understand what was taught, why it was taught, and how the relevant passages fit together.

Paul’s warning in Galatians does not establish Luther as the new authority.

It directs attention to the gospel already delivered.

THE MESSENGER DOES NOT HAVE PERMISSION TO REPLACE THE MESSAGE.

12. LUTHER CHALLENGED THREE “WALLS”

By 1520, Luther’s position had become much stronger than it had been in 1517.

In his Address to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation, he described what he considered three walls protecting Roman authority.

In simple terms, he challenged claims that:

THE SPIRITUAL ESTATE WAS BEYOND THE CORRECTIVE AUTHORITY OF SECULAR RULERS.

THE POPE ALONE HAD THE RIGHT TO GIVE THE AUTHORITATIVE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE.

ONLY THE POPE COULD CALL A COUNCIL.

Luther believed these claims made meaningful reform nearly impossible.

His argument was no longer mainly about indulgence preaching.

It concerned who had authority to examine the church’s teaching and practices.

We should also remember that Luther’s proposed involvement of secular rulers raised questions of its own.

Challenging papal authority did not automatically establish the proper limits of political authority over the church.

WHO MAY CORRECT THE CHURCH, AND BY WHAT AUTHORITY?

That question would continue long after Luther.

13. WHO MAY READ AND UNDERSTAND SCRIPTURE?

This became another enormous issue.

If only the official teaching authority can finally determine what Scripture means, appealing to Scripture against that authority becomes difficult.

Luther challenged the claim that interpretation belonged exclusively to the pope.

But we should state the other concern fairly.

If every person simply announces:

“THIS IS WHAT THE BIBLE MEANS TO ME,”

what prevents endless competing interpretations?

That is a serious question.

History after Luther would show how sharply Christians could disagree while all claiming biblical support.

So we should not pretend that Luther solved every problem merely by appealing to Scripture.

We must distinguish:

THE AUTHORITY OF SCRIPTURE

from:

THE ACCURACY OF A PARTICULAR PERSON’S INTERPRETATION.

Those are not the same thing.

14. THE NEW TESTAMENT EXPECTED CHRISTIANS TO EXAMINE TEACHING

Consider the Bereans.

Luke writes:

“These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”

— Acts 17:11, KJV

Notice whose preaching they were examining.

PAUL’S.

They received his message eagerly.

But they also searched the Scriptures to examine what he taught.

Luke speaks positively of that response.

This passage does not tell us that every individual interpretation is correct.

Nor does it settle every question about the church’s teaching authority.

But it does show that examining a religious message in light of Scripture was commended.

EAGER LISTENING AND CAREFUL EXAMINATION BELONG TOGETHER.

15. JOHN ALSO TOLD CHRISTIANS TO TEST TEACHERS

John wrote:

“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 John 4:1, KJV

Paul similarly wrote:

“Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.”

— 1 Thessalonians 5:21, KJV

Christians were not instructed to accept every religious claim merely because someone made it.

They were expected to examine teaching.

But John also supplied a particular test in the verses following 1 John 4:1.

He did not merely tell Christians to trust their private feelings.

And Paul’s instruction in 1 Thessalonians belongs within his teaching about the life of the congregation.

TESTING REQUIRES A STANDARD.

The question is how Christians identify and faithfully apply that standard.

16. BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN “MY OPINION IS THE AUTHORITY”

This distinction is essential.

There is a dangerous jump from:

SCRIPTURE IS THE STANDARD

to:

MY INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE IS THE STANDARD.

Those are not the same statement.

A person can misread Scripture.

Luther could misread Scripture.

A Protestant could misread Scripture.

A Catholic could misread Scripture.

An Orthodox Christian could misread Scripture.

And:

WE CAN MISREAD SCRIPTURE.

That is why context matters.

Language matters.

History matters.

Parallel passages matter.

The author’s purpose matters.

And humility matters.

A claim does not become apostolic teaching simply because someone attaches a Bible verse to it.

17. THIS IS WHERE EXEGESIS BECOMES ESSENTIAL

If Scripture is going to test our traditions, we must allow Scripture actually to speak.

We cannot begin with:

“I ALREADY KNOW WHAT THIS VERSE MEANS.”

Then search for words that support us.

Instead, we ask:

Who wrote this?

To whom?

Why?

What problem was being addressed?

What comes before it?

What comes after it?

How does the author use these words elsewhere?

What would the first readers have understood?

That is:

EXEGESIS.

Drawing the meaning out of the text.

Not putting our conclusion into it.

And we must apply that method to passages used by every side of a disagreement.

18. BY 1520, LUTHER WAS SAYING SOMETHING VERY DIFFERENT FROM 1517

Remember RF-02.

In 1517, Luther still spoke respectfully about papal indulgences.

He seemed to hope the pope would correct the abuses.

Three years later, the argument had changed dramatically.

Luther was now openly challenging claims that the pope alone possessed authority to interpret Scripture or control church reform.

His position had developed through debates, study, and confrontation with church authorities.

One question had led to another.

The Luther of 1520 was not simply repeating the Ninety-Five Theses.

He was making much broader claims about the church and its authority.

19. BUT WE SHOULD NOT TURN LUTHER INTO OUR HERO

This is important for our study.

Luther’s willingness to challenge authority does not prove that all his conclusions were correct.

Later, we will discover areas where Luther retained older traditions.

We will also find places where other Reformers disagreed strongly with him.

And Luther himself made statements and took positions that deserve careful examination.

So our story is not:

ROME WAS WRONG AND LUTHER FIXED EVERYTHING.

It is the story of a man who challenged existing church authority and argued that its teaching must be examined in light of Scripture.

Now we must examine Luther’s claims too.

20. WHAT ABOUT THE CHURCH?

There is another danger.

If we emphasize Scripture, do we make the church unnecessary?

The New Testament certainly does not.

Paul calls the church:

“The house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.”

— 1 Timothy 3:15, KJV

Christ also gave teachers to His people.

Read Ephesians 4:11–16.

Christians learn together.

They correct one another.

They encourage one another.

They preserve and proclaim the apostolic message together.

So the question is not simply:

SCRIPTURE OR CHURCH?

It is:

WHAT AUTHORITY DOES THE CHURCH HAVE UNDER CHRIST, AND HOW DOES IT EXERCISE THAT AUTHORITY FAITHFULLY?

Different Christian traditions answer that question differently.

Our task is to examine the passages and arguments they offer.

21. THE CHURCH CAN PRESERVE A MESSAGE WITHOUT BECOMING ITS AUTHOR

Think about a messenger carrying a letter.

The messenger may carefully preserve it.

Protect it.

Copy it.

Read it aloud.

Explain it.

Teach it.

Defend it against people who distort it.

All those functions are important.

But the messenger does not become:

THE AUTHOR OF THE LETTER.

The apostles received their commission from Christ.

The church received and preserved their teaching.

The question Luther was forcing Western Christianity to face was whether the church’s authority was being exercised in a way that faithfully preserved that message.

Catholic Christians understood the church’s teaching office as a means of preserving the apostolic faith.

Luther increasingly argued that some authoritative church teachings and practices had departed from it.

HOW CAN WE DETERMINE WHETHER A CHURCH IS FAITHFULLY PRESERVING THE APOSTOLIC MESSAGE?

That is the issue we need to examine.

22. THEN THE CRISIS BECAME PERSONAL

By this point, Luther was no longer simply debating theological ideas.

Church authorities demanded that he withdraw teachings they considered erroneous.

The dispute intensified.

In 1520, Pope Leo X issued a papal bull threatening Luther with excommunication unless he recanted.

Luther publicly burned a copy.

The possibility of reconciliation was rapidly disappearing.

Then, in 1521, Luther was summoned before the imperial assembly at Worms.

There he faced a much more direct question:

WILL YOU TAKE IT BACK?

23. WORMS WOULD FORCE THE QUESTION INTO THE OPEN

At Worms, Luther was confronted with his writings and asked whether he would retract them.

The issue was no longer merely:

WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT INDULGENCES?

The deeper issue was whether Luther would withdraw teachings that church authorities had condemned.

Luther’s response would become one of the most famous moments of the Reformation.

But before we quote the famous words, we need to separate:

WHAT LUTHER ACTUALLY SAID

from:

WHAT LATER TRADITION SAYS HE SAID.

Because even the Reformation developed its own traditions.

And Text B4 Tradition should examine Protestant traditions too.

24. SO CAN POPES AND COUNCILS BE WRONG?

History tells us what Luther eventually answered.

He said:

YES.

But our purpose is not simply to repeat Luther’s answer.

Our question is whether the New Testament gives later church leaders or assemblies a guarantee against doctrinal error, and, if so, under what conditions.

The passages we have examined establish several things.

Peter’s conduct could be corrected.

Christians were instructed to test religious teaching.

The Bereans examined Paul’s preaching in light of Scripture.

Paul warned against changing the gospel already delivered.

But we should not claim that these passages, individually or together, automatically settle every later debate about papal infallibility or the authority of councils.

Those doctrines involve additional claims about Christ’s promises, the Holy Spirit, apostolic succession, and the church’s responsibility to preserve the faith.

They must be examined on their own terms.

What the passages do establish is that testing a claim about Christian teaching is a serious biblical responsibility.

And no one’s interpretation should be accepted merely because it is familiar to us.

Pope.

Patriarch.

Council.

Bishop.

Priest.

Preacher.

Professor.

Martin Luther.

And us.

EVERY CLAIM MUST BE EXAMINED CAREFULLY.

25. NOW LUTHER MUST STAND THERE TOO

Luther challenged the authority of popes and councils.

Soon he would stand before powerful church and political authorities and refuse to withdraw his writings unless convinced that he was wrong.

But courage does not prove truth.

Sincerity does not prove truth.

Standing alone does not prove truth.

There is still a question to answer:

WAS HIS INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE CORRECT?

So on our next page, we go to Worms.

Not to make Luther a hero.

Not to make Rome the villain.

But to listen carefully to what was actually said.

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED AT THE DIET OF WORMS?

TEXT B4 TRADITION

Read First. Conclude Later.

RETURN TO MAIN SERIES: ONE CHURCH, SO MANY DIVISIONS—WHAT HAPPENED?

NEXT STUDY: WHAT REALLY HAPPENED AT THE DIET OF WORMS?