An Unlikely Apologetic

The Rev. Candace Chellew-Hodge is not among my favorite theologians. No, the author of Bulletproof Faith: A Spiritual Survival Guide for Gay and Lesbian Christians, doesn’t inspire me with her contributions to sacred letters. But her column, Why Gays and Lesbians Should Never Argue Scripture, does have some — doubtless unintended — apologetical value. 

She brings up an interesting back-handed refutation of Sola Scriptura. “I have my scholars, you have yours” is the inevitable terminus, so Rev. Candace Chellew-Hodge says, of pro- vs. anti-homosexual arguments based on the sacred text. Every passage that condemns homosexuality (according to my scholars) can be interpreted (by your scholars) to mean something else. And for this reason, homosexuals should avoid Biblical arguments. (This will be a stunning upset to all those Bible-thumping old-timers from the Mattachine Society.)  Now, pro-homosexual scripture scholars have to be among the more tendentious denizens of academia, and their arguments falter on any number of grounds. But prescinding from all that, the Rev. Chellew-Hodge presents us with a problem that has no non-Catholic solution: When a Biblical passage concerning any topic of faith or morals is interpreted in two contradictory ways, who determines what’s Christian doctrine?

We Catholics have the Magisterium; others have ………………………. what?