The Infinite Regress Argument Against Catholicism

About this sermon

“An inerrant record is one that doesn’t have errors. An infallible authority is one who is incapable of making errors.” Support the channel by visiting: https://brianholdsworth.ca/help Protestant apologist Gavin Ortlund has argued that if Catholics need an infallible Magisterium to interpret an infallible Bible, then they also need another infallible interpreter to interpret the Magisterium — creating an infinite regress. At first glance, it’s a clever objection. But it depends on a confusion between two different roles: Scripture as an inerrant record of revelation, and the Church as an infallible interpreter of that revelation. In this video, I explain why Catholics do not believe the Bible and the Magisterium are redundant authorities doing the same thing. Instead, they work together like law and judge, curriculum and teacher, revelation and interpreter. Without a living teaching authority, the problem of fallible interpretation does not disappear — it multiplies. Timestamps: 00:00 – Gavin Ortlund’s infinite regress argument 01:00 – Why the argument seems persuasive 02:05 – The key distinction: inerrancy vs. infallibility 04:00 – What Dei Verbum actually teaches 04:53 – The law-and-judge analogy 06:37 – The curriculum-and-teacher analogy 08:00 – Can God protect interpreters from error 09:45 – Biblical examples of Scripture needing interpretation 10:56 – Why Protestant interpretation multiplies fallibility 12:26 – Final clarification: records don’t act, interpreters do Music written and generously provided by Paul Jernberg. Find out more about his work as a composer here: http://pauljernberg.com Podcast Version: https://brianholdsworth.libsyn.com/