Some things must be placed beyond argument; disputation can never make progress unless there are some things that we no longer need to dispute.  In logic, for example, denying the law of non-contradiction is beyond the pale, or ought to be; in ethics, denying the Holocaust or defending the bayonetting of infants; in Christian theology, rejecting the Resurrection.

But by what authority are we to decide which things are beyond argument?  Notice that I said “authority,” not “power.”  I am not proposing that anyone should be coerced to accept such authority.  I am merely pointing out its indispensability.  The progress of reason itself requires authority.  For it is all very well to say that we should reach the decision about which things are beyond argument by argument, but by what authority are we to say that the argument has reached a conclusion? 

Secularists answer the question, “By human authority.”  Thus we have politically shaped conformity.  Or else they say “By no authority,” which effectively means either anarchy (which doesn’t last) or socially shaped conformity.

Protestants answer, “By the authority of the Holy Spirit,” understood as operating either through each individual (which effectively means by no authority -- see above) or through the sundry religious teachers, congregations, or denominations to which individuals adhere (which effectively means by human authority – see above).  So in practice the Protestant and Secularist solutions embody the same alternatives.  They are in this respect indistinguishable.

Some things must be placed beyond argument; disputation can never make progress unless there are some things that we no longer need to dispute.  In logic, for example, denying the law of non-contradiction is beyond the pale, or ought to be; in ethics, denying the Holocaust or defending the bayonetting of infants; in Christian theology, rejecting the Resurrection.

But by what authority are we to decide which things are beyond argument?  Notice that I said “authority,” not “power.”  I am not proposing that anyone should be coerced to accept such authority.  I am merely pointing out its indispensability.  The progress of reason itself requires authority.  For it is all very well to say that we should reach the decision about which things are beyond argument by argument, but by what authority are we to say that the argument has reached a conclusion? 

Secularists answer the question, “By human authority.”  Thus we have politically shaped conformity.  Or else they say “By no authority,” which effectively means either anarchy (which doesn’t last) or socially shaped conformity.

Protestants answer, “By the authority of the Holy Spirit,” understood as operating either through each individual (which effectively means by no authority -- see above) or through the sundry religious teachers, congregations, or denominations to which individuals adhere (which effectively means by human authority – see above).  So in practice the Protestant and Secularist solutions embody the same alternatives.  They are in this respect indistinguishable.

Catholics answer, “By the authority of Holy Spirit,” understood as operating through the Church founded by Christ.  This solution is distinct from the other two only if the Church is correct about what she actually is, which of course Protestants and Secularists deny.

Is she?  We are not answering the question today.  But this is the crux of the matter.