Clarifying sola Scriptura

For those deep thinkers out there.

Moderator: tuttle

Post Reply
User avatar
Kerdy
Smootchie
Smootchie
Posts: 16950
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: North Carolina

Post by Kerdy » Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:22 am

dasmokeryaget wrote:
Kerdy wrote:
dasmokeryaget wrote:I believe that Sola Scriptura is a postion or concept that only exist as a refutation to the extra-Biblical doctrines and practices of Catholicism. It's misunderstood and at times taken to the far extreme, but it's an effective position.

I could be wrong.
Acceptance of Sola Scriptura is a repudiation of the very thing which provided you with that scripture. I call that irony.
If you mean the Mother Church, you're wrong. The mother church did not provide us with that scripture. That is a deception of the church.
You should have no difficulty supporting this hypothesis, yes? Maybe this will be easier than defining Sola Scriptura.

Mother church? Have you read my posts?
"Let it be understood that those who are not found living as He taught are not Christian- even though they profess with the lips the teaching of Christ." - Justin Martyr  ( c.160 )

“Moral principles do not depend on a majority vote. Wrong is wrong, even if everybody is wrong. Right is right, even if nobody is right.” - Venerable Servant of God, Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

User avatar
DepartedLight
That boy's got a Thorazine deficiency.
Posts: 26694
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 6:00 pm
Location: Tobacco Fairy HQ, North Carolina

Post by DepartedLight » Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:33 am

I love the ancient Church. Give me that Orthodox incense, stain glass windows, the solemnity and respect of Holy Communion, the gothic architectures of the Roman Rite with pain staking attention to every detail to ensure that absolutely everything in the massive structure points to the Cross of Christ above the high Altar, Sacramental living, icon, statuary, the phenomenal art and music that was birthed by this environment, and so much more.

Then I hear the arguments centering on authority. They echo the same words and attitudes that the self righteous religious class had towards Christ. By what authority do you teach? By what authority do you make changes to the Law? By what authority do you work on the Sabbath? By what authority do you perform miracles? Jesus was pretty harsh to those guys.

St. John Chrysostom, a giant among giants, preached on every book of the bible at great length and with a fire and zeal rarely seen. At the Council of Chalcedon where the Tome of St. Leo the Great was presented to the Elders for consideration, and though it is brilliant, the Elders that wanted to simply rubber stamp it because it came from the pope were chided for such an attitude. And great examination was given to the work. St. Jerome after receiving a dream he deemed to be from God, dedicated his cleric life to Scripture. He offered great eloquent arguments and ideas contrary to Catholic Tradition, he wasn't castigated, he is a Doctor of the Church. The Donatists were beaten back by St. Augustine by use of Scripture. The examples would fill volume after volume.

Test everything, hold to what is good.

User avatar
jo533281
like R2D2, just not as cool
like R2D2, just not as cool
Posts: 3115
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 6:00 pm
Location: Grand Rapids, MI

Post by jo533281 » Fri Jun 08, 2012 10:13 am

DepartedLight wrote:I love the ancient Church. Give me that Orthodox incense, stain glass windows, the solemnity and respect of Holy Communion, the gothic architectures of the Roman Rite with pain staking attention to every detail to ensure that absolutely everything in the massive structure points to the Cross of Christ above the high Altar, Sacramental living, icon, statuary, the phenomenal art and music that was birthed by this environment, and so much more.

Then I hear the arguments centering on authority. They echo the same words and attitudes that the self righteous religious class had towards Christ. By what authority do you teach? By what authority do you make changes to the Law? By what authority do you work on the Sabbath? By what authority do you perform miracles? Jesus was pretty harsh to those guys.

St. John Chrysostom, a giant among giants, preached on every book of the bible at great length and with a fire and zeal rarely seen. At the Council of Chalcedon where the Tome of St. Leo the Great was presented to the Elders for consideration, and though it is brilliant, the Elders that wanted to simply rubber stamp it because it came from the pope were chided for such an attitude. And great examination was given to the work. St. Jerome after receiving a dream he deemed to be from God, dedicated his cleric life to Scripture. He offered great eloquent arguments and ideas contrary to Catholic Tradition, he wasn't castigated, he is a Doctor of the Church. The Donatists were beaten back by St. Augustine by use of Scripture. The examples would fill volume after volume.

Test everything, hold to what is good.
Something to remember DL is that while we don't subscribe to sola Scriptura, we are not therefore "demoting" Scripture or attacking it. Those great defenders of the faith, especially monks, have written volumes on the Scriptures and many of them knew entire gospels/epistles from memory and encouraged others to know them from memory as well. Yet they were Orthodox (or RC) and submitted to the authority of the Church. You mention St. Augustine. He once said "I would not have believed the gospel unless the authority of the Church moved me." They used Scripture. We still use it. It is even, for Orthodox, on the crown of Holy Tradition, the largest and most brilliant gem (some forget that the Scriptures, for the Orthodox, are apart of Holy Tradition, not something excluded or separate from it). Our arguments are not against the Scriptures but against a false understanding of them that leads to lots of schism and heresies.
"This is not facebook, we are not here to boost your self esteem or hang on your every word." -Zed-

"It's all right, Andy! It's just bolognaise!"

Most Likely to Draw Pirates with a Post

User avatar
dasmokeryaget
Has short thumbs
Has short thumbs
Posts: 12271
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: Gentry Arkinsaw
Contact:

Post by dasmokeryaget » Fri Jun 08, 2012 10:46 am

Kerdy wrote:
dasmokeryaget wrote:
Kerdy wrote: But again, who gets to dictate which is good and which is bad tradition, you? This responsibility seems to lie within each denomination, the same denominations that all claim Sola Scriptura, but never agree with one another on what scripture is really saying. If you are unable to agree on scripture, it’s no wonder you can’t agree on Tradition.

Who gets to dictate which is good and which is bad tradtion within the Protestant Churches?

Other than the Mother church, which is not the authority on the matter.
Did you provide an answer? I do not understand your point here.
The question is asked, because if you ask the question of me, I will also ask the question of you. Can you answer?

I will answer. The Word of God through the guidence of the Holy Spirit dictates what is good and bad tradition. Depending on the Word and the Spirit, I personally must choose which traditions are of God and which are not, because when I face God, no church or group of men will be there with me where I can point at them and say "well Lord it's tis way, They said it was truth and I had to believe them." That won't fly.

The same goes for you.

User avatar
dasmokeryaget
Has short thumbs
Has short thumbs
Posts: 12271
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: Gentry Arkinsaw
Contact:

Post by dasmokeryaget » Fri Jun 08, 2012 10:53 am

Kerdy wrote:
dasmokeryaget wrote:
Kerdy wrote:
dasmokeryaget wrote:I believe that Sola Scriptura is a postion or concept that only exist as a refutation to the extra-Biblical doctrines and practices of Catholicism. It's misunderstood and at times taken to the far extreme, but it's an effective position.

I could be wrong.
Acceptance of Sola Scriptura is a repudiation of the very thing which provided you with that scripture. I call that irony.
If you mean the Mother Church, you're wrong. The mother church did not provide us with that scripture. That is a deception of the church.
You should have no difficulty supporting this hypothesis, yes? Maybe this will be easier than defining Sola Scriptura.

Mother church? Have you read my posts?
Of course I can defend it, but if I do, a flurry of naysayers will descend on the thread with a bunch of fluff and scatter and it will be a free for all.

Go seek the truth for yourself. Its there... Google it.... or go to any library. Thats what I did. It took almost ten years becasue I didnt have the ease of the internet back is 1991. Now you can find the truth of the matter in an hour...if you look.

Mother Church? Is there a problem with that? Im using the term as I hear it here from Catholics. Its also easier to type out :D

User avatar
UncleBob
CPS Theological Dogmatician
CPS Theological Dogmatician
Posts: 33753
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Lubbock, TX USA
Contact:

Post by UncleBob » Fri Jun 08, 2012 2:55 pm

Image
"One man's theology is another man's belly laugh." - Robert A. Heinlein

"Many of the points here, taken to their logical conclusions, don't hold up to logic; they're simply Godded-up ways of saying "I don't like that." - Skip

"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please." -Mark Twain

User avatar
Skip
Everything in Moderatoration
Everything in Moderatoration
Posts: 24182
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 6:00 pm
Location: Slightly East of Pepik
Contact:

Post by Skip » Fri Jun 08, 2012 3:19 pm

UncleBob wrote:Image
Respect the flag, ye lubbers. The Dread Pirate UncleBob has spoken.
2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 Winner of the CPS Award: "Most Likely to be Found Without Pants at Any Given Moment"

2017 Curmudgeon of the Year

"No man is peer to Skip, peasant." -A_Morley

User avatar
Kerdy
Smootchie
Smootchie
Posts: 16950
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: North Carolina

Post by Kerdy » Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:22 pm

Not due to any pirate flag posting, but as the result of tail chasing, this thread has reached its limit. Nothing has changed. Very sad.
"Let it be understood that those who are not found living as He taught are not Christian- even though they profess with the lips the teaching of Christ." - Justin Martyr  ( c.160 )

“Moral principles do not depend on a majority vote. Wrong is wrong, even if everybody is wrong. Right is right, even if nobody is right.” - Venerable Servant of God, Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

User avatar
John-Boy
I'm a lover and I'm a sinner
I'm a lover and I'm a sinner
Posts: 32277
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 6:00 pm
Contact:

Post by John-Boy » Sun Jun 10, 2012 6:44 am

Kerdy wrote:Not due to any pirate flag posting, but as the result of tail chasing, this thread has reached its limit. Nothing has changed. Very sad.
what do you mean?
Praying - coco
Sometimes memes can be helpful as well as humorous - Jocose
Yer mom is kindhearted and well respected in her community - JMG

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 36728
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Post by Del » Sun Jun 10, 2012 8:27 am

For my part, I learned a lot from some great posts by our Methodist pastors, back on page 3.


Let me try to frame my question better about the "Great Scandal."

First.... that's my own name for it. This problem is the elephant in the room, and so it is ignored and has not common name.

I understand that factions are caused by sin and pride and wanting to assert one's own opinion against the Church. Humans are tribal, and we like to form parties against each other. I get that.

The Scandal is that Sola Scriptura fails to control the factions, and even seems to exacerbate the problem. Any fool can preach an opinion -- but if he can build a biblical study to support his case, then he has a false claim to divine authority.... and this is what seduces his followers.

And so.... It seems that Sola Scriptura has failed as a rule of faith. A preacher-guy like John Nelson Darby or Fred Phelps thumps whatever from his Bible, and no one has the authority to tell him that he is wrong. The sheep have no sure way to discern the sheperds from the wolves.

Even though the Bible says that we should cling to the Church, in order to be sure.

So.... the question is not "Why are there factions." The answer to that is pride and sin.

The question is, "Why does Sola Scriptura fail to correct the false teachings and become a unifying force for believers?"

I wonder how modern believers of Sola Scriptura answer this difficult question.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

User avatar
dasmokeryaget
Has short thumbs
Has short thumbs
Posts: 12271
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: Gentry Arkinsaw
Contact:

Post by dasmokeryaget » Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:37 am

Del wrote:For my part, I learned a lot from some great posts by our Methodist pastors, back on page 3.


Let me try to frame my question better about the "Great Scandal."

First.... that's my own name for it. This problem is the elephant in the room, and so it is ignored and has not common name.

I understand that factions are caused by sin and pride and wanting to assert one's own opinion against the Church. Humans are tribal, and we like to form parties against each other. I get that.

The Scandal is that Sola Scriptura fails to control the factions, and even seems to exacerbate the problem. Any fool can preach an opinion -- but if he can build a biblical study to support his case, then he has a false claim to divine authority.... and this is what seduces his followers.

And so.... It seems that Sola Scriptura has failed as a rule of faith. A preacher-guy like John Nelson Darby or Fred Phelps thumps whatever from his Bible, and no one has the authority to tell him that he is wrong. The sheep have no sure way to discern the sheperds from the wolves.

Even though the Bible says that we should cling to the Church, in order to be sure.

So.... the question is not "Why are there factions." The answer to that is pride and sin.

The question is, "Why does Sola Scriptura fail to correct the false teachings and become a unifying force for believers?"

I wonder how modern believers of Sola Scriptura answer this difficult question.

Because SS is a concept, a mindset, or a belief system if you will.
IOW's there's no Sola Scriptura Creed with a list of tenets set forth by some council, by which people can adapt as an unmovable reference point. If there was, we'd probably end up with a whole nuther religion. We need that like we need a hole in the head.

SS is a concept which is embraced by extreme ends of the spectrum.
Free thinking lone rangers can embrace the concept and start home bible studies that morph into mini false cults. Been there done that.

At the same time people such as my self, who seek the safety and balance of the multitude of counsellors (the church) and the guidence of the Holy Spirit can embrace the concept and strive for unity of understanding.

But we cant police the whole of Christianity and bar the miscreants any more than you can police and force the St Mary's Catholic church in KS which up till recently renounced Vat II into compliance and uniformity.


Jesus said the tares would grow up with the wheat. Paul said there would be differences among us. Jesus himself will separate it all out and burn all the wood hay and stubble.

If we believe that, why would we expect anything better than what JEsus said it would be. Why would we expect uniformity in belief and take to task whole groups of believers who dont have uniformity of belief when Jesus and Paul promised us wheat/tares, sheep/goats and differences and heresies?

Thats my answer. Accept it or face impending waterboarding on the front lawn of my church. :D

User avatar
Jocose
a large Chinese man named Wu
a large Chinese man named Wu
Posts: 20396
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Moonbase Alpha
Contact:

Post by Jocose » Sun Jun 10, 2012 3:03 pm

Well.. I, for one, sure am glad that Sola scriptura got clarified! Thanks to all who helped!
"And for Freds sake, DO NOT point anyone towards CPS or you'll put them off of both Christianity and pipe smoking forever." ~ FredS



Image

User avatar
dasmokeryaget
Has short thumbs
Has short thumbs
Posts: 12271
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: Gentry Arkinsaw
Contact:

Post by dasmokeryaget » Sun Jun 10, 2012 3:18 pm

Jocose wrote:Well.. I, for one, sure am glad that Sola scriptura got clarified! Thanks to all who helped!
You're welcome Jocose. I'll take full credit for that accomplishment.
Dam Im good!!

:D

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 36728
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Post by Del » Sun Jun 10, 2012 7:10 pm

dasmokeryaget wrote:Because SS is a concept, a mindset, or a belief system if you will.
IOW's there's no Sola Scriptura Creed with a list of tenets set forth by some council, by which people can adapt as an unmovable reference point. If there was, we'd probably end up with a whole nuther religion. We need that like we need a hole in the head.
You get my point, right? Instead of a whole nuther religion, we got whole bunches of religions. We got holes in our heads.
dasmokeryaget wrote:Jesus said the tares would grow up with the wheat. Paul said there would be differences among us. Jesus himself will separate it all out and burn all the wood hay and stubble.

If we believe that, why would we expect anything better than what JEsus said it would be. Why would we expect uniformity in belief and take to task whole groups of believers who dont have uniformity of belief when Jesus and Paul promised us wheat/tares, sheep/goats and differences and heresies?

Thats my answer. Accept it or face impending waterboarding on the front lawn of my church. :D
Okay.... this is a win! Seriously. This is cogent explanation of why sane Christians are not disappointed by the failure of Sola Scripture to provide a unified rule of faith.
dasmokeryaget wrote:But we cant police the whole of Christianity and bar the miscreants any more than you can police and force the St Mary's Catholic church in KS which up till recently renounced Vat II into compliance and uniformity.
Let's be clear: Authority is never about force.

Authority means that the leadership has the capacity to declare that a teaching is false, or that a person or community is disobedient, so that the everyone will know how to act.

St. Paul asserted his authority over the Corinthians. St. Paul told Timothy to cling to the Church's authority, in case Paul himself was delayed. Jesus vested divine authority to Peter (binding and loosing, on earth and in heaven), which was astoundingly stupid of Jesus -- according to human wisdom, of course.

Jesus vested authority in His Church so that I can know where to go for the right answer, when people have different and conflicting interpretations of Scripture. It is good to have someone with authority to tell me when I am wrong. It is good to have an authority who can tell me which books are inspired and belong in our Scripture.

We see that Jesus gave us a great gift, by instituting His own divine authority in His Church for our sake.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

User avatar
dasmokeryaget
Has short thumbs
Has short thumbs
Posts: 12271
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: Gentry Arkinsaw
Contact:

Post by dasmokeryaget » Sun Jun 10, 2012 8:00 pm

Del wrote:
dasmokeryaget wrote:Because SS is a concept, a mindset, or a belief system if you will.
IOW's there's no Sola Scriptura Creed with a list of tenets set forth by some council, by which people can adapt as an unmovable reference point. If there was, we'd probably end up with a whole nuther religion. We need that like we need a hole in the head.
You get my point, right? Instead of a whole nuther religion, we got whole bunches of religions. We got holes in our heads.
dasmokeryaget wrote:Jesus said the tares would grow up with the wheat. Paul said there would be differences among us. Jesus himself will separate it all out and burn all the wood hay and stubble.

If we believe that, why would we expect anything better than what JEsus said it would be. Why would we expect uniformity in belief and take to task whole groups of believers who dont have uniformity of belief when Jesus and Paul promised us wheat/tares, sheep/goats and differences and heresies?

Thats my answer. Accept it or face impending waterboarding on the front lawn of my church. :D
Okay.... this is a win! Seriously. This is cogent explanation of why sane Christians are not disappointed by the failure of Sola Scripture to provide a unified rule of faith.
dasmokeryaget wrote:But we cant police the whole of Christianity and bar the miscreants any more than you can police and force the St Mary's Catholic church in KS which up till recently renounced Vat II into compliance and uniformity.
Let's be clear: Authority is never about force.

Authority means that the leadership has the capacity to declare that a teaching is false, or that a person or community is disobedient, so that the everyone will know how to act.

St. Paul asserted his authority over the Corinthians. St. Paul told Timothy to cling to the Church's authority, in case Paul himself was delayed. Jesus vested divine authority to Peter (binding and loosing, on earth and in heaven), which was astoundingly stupid of Jesus -- according to human wisdom, of course.

Jesus vested authority in His Church so that I can know where to go for the right answer, when people have different and conflicting interpretations of Scripture. It is good to have someone with authority to tell me when I am wrong.

We see that Jesus gave us a great gift, by instituting His own divine authority in His Church for our sake.

1) No I dont get your point. Not really. I guess I should have said " a whole nuther sect" (instead of religion)

There have always been bunches of religions. Christianity (not a religion) is divided up into sects Cath. Orth, Ang. Prot. and protestants admittedly divided into denominations an/or movements.

2) Isnt saying SS failed to provide a unified rule of faith like saying a 65 mph speed limit sign failed to keep everybody going 65 mph?

Again SS is not a creed to adhere to. ITs not tangible like the WCF or the Nicene Creed. Its inaccurate to say SS failed.

It might could be said that it failed, if some council had come up with a written creed called "the Sola Scriptura Confession" or something. .....
and all protestant churches adopted that creed and its tenets as a unified rule of faith. But even that would be a stretch.

Has the Nicene Creed failed because there are schisms in the RCC? Because there are Orthodox, Anglicans etc?

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 18743
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Post by wosbald » Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:16 pm

+JMJ+

Image




"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

User avatar
Del
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Hacked by Kellyanne Conway
Posts: 36728
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Post by Del » Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:40 pm

I got nuthin.
"Utter frogshit from start to finish." - Onyx

"I shall not wear a crown of gold where my Master wore a crown of thorns." - Godfrey de Bouillon

User avatar
dasmokeryaget
Has short thumbs
Has short thumbs
Posts: 12271
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: Gentry Arkinsaw
Contact:

Post by dasmokeryaget » Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:52 pm

Del wrote:I got nuthin.

GASP!!! 8O

User avatar
wosbald
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Crux' Cleveland Correspondent
Posts: 18743
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Post by wosbald » Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:39 am

+JMJ+
dasmokeryaget wrote:
Del wrote:I got nuthin.

GASP!!! 8O
Well, if Del's out for now, maybe I should tag-in, after all.
:lol:


dasmokeryaget wrote:No I dont get your point. Not really. I guess I should have said " a whole nuther sect" (instead of religion)

There have always been bunches of religions. Christianity (not a religion)...
Are you saying that "Christianity is not a religion"?

If so, then I think that you've mentioned that before. Though I would say that most forms of Protestantism do take on an a posteriori religious form, I would also say that this form is not integral to the essence of Protestantism which is, itself, an abstraction. Only the corporeal fact of the Bible prevents Protestantism from evaporating.

And though I do understand why many would say that Christianity is not a religion, I don't understand why that's looked upon as a "net plus". In an ideological drive to become ever-more evanescent and abstract, Protestantism is slowly succumbing to the entropy that (oh, sweet irony!) they claim afflicts all visible institutions.


dasmokeryaget wrote:Isnt saying SS failed to provide a unified rule of faith like saying a 65 mph speed limit sign failed to keep everybody going 65 mph?
Well, I would say that it's like everybody agreeing on the fact of the sign but not on the meaning of the sign. So, the Bible becomes a sort of Rorschach Test. But like you said, it's really not a failure of SS, unless one expects that SS should result in a canonical, objectively-conceived meaning. This idea goes very well with the idea that Christianity is not a religion.




"In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." - Our Lady of Fatima

User avatar
tuttle
Theology Room Mod
Theology Room Mod
Posts: 12536
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 6:00 pm
Location: Middle-west
Contact:

Post by tuttle » Tue Jun 12, 2012 4:01 pm

Ack!

So I just ran across this article today and I believe it does an excellent job in clarifying the correct view of sola scriptura. It runs along the lines of something I mentioned earlier...
tuttle wrote:sola Scriptura does not reject tradition. It rejects bad tradition. It seeks to guard tradition, to assure that tradition remains pure.
...but it goes even deeper than that.

So even though this thread failed (to a degree) and the pirates hoisted their flags, this is still the best spot to put this. And since the thread failed I will personally break my own rule in the OP by posting a link. But first a quote from the article to whet your appetite:
Leithart wrote:Sola scriptura is not a piece of epistemology. It is not a modernist quest for certainty and unquestionable foundations. It doesn’t pretend to bypass interpretation or the church or people with all their foibles and fallibility. It’s not a claim that Scripture is easy. It’s not a claim that the Bible is a transparent window to absolute truth. It’s not a rejection of tradition.

Sola scriptura is a theological claim. It is Christological: It says that Jesus is Husband of His Bride, and still speaks to her. As Barth understood, sola scriptura is about the Lordship of the Lord of the church. All Christology is also ecclesiology, and so is sola scriptura: It says that because Christ is Head of the Body, He directs the Body, as and by Word. It is also, as my colleague Toby Sumpter pointed out recently to me, pneumatology: It means that the Spirit speaks to the church not merely through her.

It means that tradition is not the church talking to herself, but God talking to the church and the church talking back. To affirm sola scriptura is to acknowledge that tradition is prayer. To affirm sola scriptura is to say that tradition is liturgy. To affirm sola scriptura is to affirm the primacy of dialog over monologue.
Conversation or Monologue?
"Better to die cheerfully with the aid of a little tobacco, than to live disagreeably and remorseful without." -CS Lewis

Post Reply