Distinguishing Truth from Error

How does a Christian in 2009 determine what is Truth? There are so many denominations and so many different interpretations of the Bible.

A method of distinguishing truth was articulated by St. Vincent of Lerins in the 5th Century. It is amazing how this work speaks to the current situation in Christianity today.

For example, St. Vincent of Lerins states:

“But here some one perhaps will ask, Since the canon of Scripture is complete, and sufficient of itself for everything, and more than sufficient, what need is there to join with it the authority of the Church's interpretation? For this reason, because, owing to the depth of Holy Scripture, all do not accept it in one and the same sense, but one understands its words in one way, another in another; so that it seems to be capable of as many interpretations as there are interpreters.”

St. Vincent of Lerins proposes a way to distinguish Truth. Here is his proposal:

“Moreover, in the Catholic Church itself, all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and in the strictest sense "Catholic," which, as the name itself and the reason of the thing declare, comprehends all universally.

This rule we shall observe if we follow universality, antiquity, consent. We shall follow universality if we confess that one faith to be true, which the whole Church throughout the world confesses; antiquity, if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is manifest were notoriously held by our holy ancestors and fathers; consent, in like manner, if in antiquity itself we adhere to the consentient definitions and determinations of all, or at the least of almost all priests and doctors.”

A Lutheran may argue that Popes, councils and church fathers have erred in the past. Therefore, we can’t trust antiquity or consent. Even if “almost all priests and doctors” held a teaching, Lutherans would argue that we must only trust the Scriptures. The difficult part is which interpretation of Scripture do we use to determine the Truth? For Lutherans, the "true" interpretation ends up being the Lutheran one. This is nice and circular.

St. Vincent of Lerins has a proposal for dealing with error in antiquity. He states:

“What then will a Catholic Christian do, if a small portion of the Church have cut itself off from the communion of the universal faith? What, surely, but prefer the soundness of the whole body to the unsoundness of a pestilent and corrupt member? What, if some novel contagion seek to infect not merely an insignificant portion of the Church, but the whole? Then it will be his care to cleave to antiquity, which at this day cannot possibly be seduced by any fraud of novelty.

But what, if in antiquity itself there be found error on the part of two or three men, or at any rate of a city or even of a province? Then it will be his care by all means, to prefer the decrees, if such there be, of an ancient General Council to the rashness and ignorance of a few. But what, if some error should spring up on which no such decree is found to bear? Then he must collate and consult and interrogate the opinions of the ancients, of those, namely, who, though living in divers times and places, yet continuing in the communion and faith of the one Catholic Church, stand forth acknowledged and approved authorities: and whatsoever he shall ascertain to have been held, written, taught, not by one or two of these only, but by all, equally, with one consent, openly, frequently, persistently, that he must understand that he himself also is to believe without any doubt or hesitation.”

So, the ancient General Councils and the consensus of the teachings of the majority of priests and doctors can be used to determine what is Truth.

How does a Christian in 2009 determine what is Truth and the correct interpretation of Scripture? St. Vincent’s answer is universality, antiquity and consent.