I am under the impression that some of you Catholics are aware of a common Protestant objection to some of your doctrines that you appeal to the Parables of Christ to explain. Like John 15 for the oneness of the Church and the possibility of leaving the Church that you were actually in. Also Matthew 18 for being actually forgiven, then punished for what you were forgiven from if you don’t forgive others. So those type things I’ve got in mind when asking this question.
As a Protestant, I was presented with the principle that "you can't try to get much doctrine from the Parables of Christ" first by a Reformed Baptist pastor, then a couple years ago it came up again in John Murray's "Redemption Accomplished and Applied" in the chapter on "Union w/ Christ" and discussing John 15. Like, my pastor and everybody in my church believes that. I used to, but now I'm like "Is that Biblical that we shouldn't get much doctrine from the Parables?" I don't even know how much is "too much" in that system.
So, understanding that Christ taught in parables and explained them to His disciples (Matt. 13:11 & Mark 4:11), but not all those explanations are included in Scripture, it seems like it would limit our understanding of the truth Christ taught, if we don’t take the parables seriously. Not that Reformed folks don’t take them seriously, but it’s like maybe we don’t get everything out of them that Christ intended.
**So, do you think it’s correct that we should not try to get much doctrine from the parables, since they are just “general teaching on topics?”