It has been standard Roman Catholic apologetics since the Reformation to criticize the doctrine of the clarity of Scripture on the grounds that the Protestants can’t seem to agree on what the Bible actually says. Recently, Christian Smith, noted sociologist and converted Catholic, has argued that this “pervasive interpretive pluralism” is the elephant in the room that squashes the naive biblicism of traditional evangelicalism. There are many things that can, have, and should be said in response to this contention. One could mention the church fathers who saw the same phenomenon in their day without drawing the same conclusions. Or we could turn to almost any Reformed theologian since the Reformation and examine their responses to this common objection. We might open the Scriptures and see how the Bible understands itself. Or we could note that the unity of belief or interpretation that comes from an authoritative magisterium is, under the surface, much less than it seems.
Another approach is to admit that the Protestant doctrines of perspicuity, sola scriptura, and the freedom of the conscience come with dangers, but that these dangers outweigh the alternatives.
Herman Bavinck deftly observes:
The teaching of the perspicuity of Scripture is one of the strongest bulwarks of the Reformation. It also most certainly brings with it its own serious perils. Protestantism has been hopelessly divided by it, and individualism has developed at the expense of the people’s sense of community. The freedom to read and to examine Scripture has been and is being grossly abused by all sorts of groups and schools of thought.
On balance, however, the disadvantages do not outweigh the advantages. For the denial of the clarity of Scripture carries with it the subjection of the layperson to the priest, or a person’s conscience to the church. The freedom of religion and the human conscience, of the church and theology, stands and falls with the perspicuity of Scripture. It alone is able to maintain the freedom of the Christian; it is the origin and guarantee of religious liberty as well as of our political freedoms.
Even if a freedom that cannot be obtained and enjoyed aside from the dangers of licentiousness and caprice is still always so to be preferred over a tyranny that suppresses liberty. (Reformed Dogmatics 1. 479)
The biblical doctrine of perspicuity can be abused. But a raft of bad interpretations and the sometimes free-for-all of Protestantism is still worth the price of reading the Bible for ourselves according to our God-given (and imperfect) consciences.
