Actually, yes, the topic is the trinity, however there is a close relationship between the trinity and the current discussion re the RCC. Not many Protestants are aware of the extremely subtle teachings of the RCC regards the Bible and how it is to be understood. Most Protestants just accept that Rome sees a few things differently, and that they can win Catholics over by simply telling them what the Bible actually says. This however is not very often fruitful, for the following reasons.
In 2009, Benedict XVI affirmed the importance of the Word of God as the soul of theology and the inspiration of Christian life, emphasizing a correct study of Scripture enlightened by faith.
The Pope said this in an audience with representatives from the Pontifical Biblical Commission during their annual plenary assembly.
The Pope explained: "In the first place, great attention must be given to the content and unity of the whole of Scripture. Indeed, however different the books it contains may be, sacred Scripture is one by virtue of the unity of God's plan, of which Jesus Christ is the center and the heart." Okay, so far so good. But here is where it gets a touch dicey. He went on to remind his listeners how the Second Vatican Council identified "three perennially valid criteria for interpreting sacred Scripture in accordance with the Spirit that inspired it." I worry when Rome starts talking about things 'perennial'...doesn't leave much wiggle room, as you will see...he went on...
"In the second place," he continued, "Scripture must be read in the context of the living tradition of the entire Church."
Benedict XVI noted that the Church, in its tradition, "carries the living memory of the Word of God, and it is the Holy Spirit who provides her with the interpretation thereof in accordance with its spiritual meaning."
The Pontiff affirmed that the task of scholars is to "contribute, following the above-mentioned principles, to a more profound interpretation and exposition of the meaning of sacred Scripture."
He added: "The academic study of the sacred texts is not by itself sufficient. In order to respect the coherence of the Church's faith, Catholic exegetes must be careful to perceive the Word of God in these texts, within the faith of the Church."
"The interpretation of sacred Scriptures cannot be merely an individual academic undertaking," the Holy Father said, "but must always be compared with, inserted into, and authenticated by the living tradition of the Church." Now most Protestants understood at least that much. That tradition and scripture are seen as inspirational and they together guide the church. However...
It may be worth while to explain, one for all, that if Catholics do not read the Bible in the same way as Protestants do, it is not, as Protestants assert, because the teaching of their Church is such as to fear being confronted face to face with Scripture, nor because they less fully believe than any Protestant can do in the inspiration of Scripture; but simply because they do not believe in their own individual inspiration as interpreters of Scripture. Scripture they well know can make no mistake; but they are in no way sure that they themselves can make no mistake as to what Scripture means. They believe that there is one authorized interpreter of Scripture, and one alone,― the Holy Catholic Church, which is divinely guarded from all possibility of error, being informed by the same Holy Spirit by whom Scripture was inspired, and therefore alone able to penetrate its real meaning. Her interpretation of it he trusts with unhesitating certainty; while to trust any crude theories he might himself be tempted to form respecting it, would seem to him simply ridiculous
Thus he [the Catholic] never dreams of reading Holy Scripture with the view of gathering from it the articles of his belief; indeed, to do so would be to cease at once from being a Catholic in heart; and any one reading Scripture in this spirit, or in danger of doing so, would certainly be forbidden to read it at all, if he desired to continue in the communion of the faithful; for he would be virtually denying that the Church is the sole infallible interpreter of Scripture, whereas the acknowledgment of her as such is the very fundamental principle of Catholicism. Catholics, then, do not study the Scripture to learn their faith, but to grow in holiness….
While Catholics acknowledge but one authoritative interpreter, Protestants hold that every man is his own interpreter; that from "the Bible and the Bible only" every man is bound to learn all that he must believe in order to be saved; that if he prays for the help of God's Holy Spirit, this alone, without human aid, will guard him from all material error; that no church, no body of men, no teacher whatever has any Divine authority to interpret Scripture for him; he must do it for himself, and he can.
Quote:…Traditions, it will be seen, are placed before the Bible in this [Roman Catholic] epitome of faith. Indeed, the Word of God, as a rule of belief and conduct is, in effect, done away; and the interpretations of the church are put in its place. So that in every case, the inquiry of the faithful Catholic must be — not what saith the scripture — but, what saith "Mother Church?" Not to follow the church, however opposed she may be to the Bible, would be a violation of his oath.
The celebrated Council of Trent, which was called by a Bull of Pope Paul III, in the year 1542, decreed that the Roman Catholic church received and venerated with equal affection of piety and reverence, the Bible and traditions.
When, however, tradition was not in accordance with the Word of God, it would be manifestly impossible to conform to this decree, unless a man could conscientiously receive and reverence a truth and its opposite error at the same time. And therefore, to relieve the conscience of the Catholic, it was necessary that the right of interpreting the Bible should be given exclusively to Mother Church, who is also the keeper of Tradition. Hence the Catholic has, in fact and strictly speaking, only one standard of faith, and that is neither the Bible nor Tradition, but the Church. He professes, indeed, to acknowledge both the scripture and tradition; but he is really bound to receive and obey whatever Mother Church declares to be the truth as contained in the Bible and Tradition. She must decide for him in every case, and from her judgment there can be no appeal.
Tradition is one of the most essential subjects of dispute between Protestants and Catholics. The Catholics declare that the Scriptures alone are not sufficient for Salvation; but that there is the word of God, by hearsay, which is superior to the word of God in writing. By this hearsay, for tradition is nothing else, they assure the world that the Scripture must be explained; so that if the Scripture says white, and tradition says black, a Roman Catholic is bound to say, that white means black in God's written word.
Now to the trinity. The trinity was decided by a Roman Catholic council in Nice. The RCC claims the trinity as the foundational doctrine to every other doctrine she has. For all the reasons mentioned above, should we not take the scriptures in our hands and cleave to what the scriptures say regarding the trinity rather than the Roman Church's man-made declarations? The same surely could be said for many doctrines that Protestantism has not yet shed since the reformation...doctrines which have found their way into church books and creeds, but which have no more foundation than the imaginations of men seeking to exert power and authority over their members. Sunday sacredness would be one, eternal torment another. And many others referred to above. In fact, I would seriously question if anything the Catholic church teaches can be taken as truth?