Sola Scriptura

[ICTHUS]

Okay, so I've been involved with some extensive debates with our good friend mustbenothing, and I've come away with a new understanding of what Sola Scriptura actually is.

Sola Scriptura is the belief that Scripture Alone is our *infallible* rule of faith. It doesnt mean that other sources arent useful and good, but they are fallible and must submit to, and agree with, God's Word the Bible..

Isin't this exactly what the Catholic Church teaches (materially at least)

I mean, I know it doesnt teach "scripture alone" but it DOES teach that Sacred Tradition and the writings of the Church Fathers cannot CONTRADICT the meaning of Scripture, interpreted according to the mind of the Church, right? Otherwise, they wouldn't be "Sacred Tradition"

Prehaps Im just rambling...

[Freaky Chik]

Ummm well I'm a prot (so u guys call us )... and yeh I believe that the Word of God is totally the basis of umm... stuff (man I need english lessons). What you said sounded good. See I read heaps of different christian books and so forth, and they really spur me on and encourage me in my faith... but they are based on the Bible... if they contradict the bible... I wouldn't read them/listen to them.

Um so like for example if someone told me to do something and that it is what God would want me to do ... but it's not in the Word, or it contradicts the Word... I wouldn't listen to it.

Edited October 22, 2003 by Freaky Chik

[foundsheep]

But do Prots have the complete Scripture? Thay are missing true and valuable books.

[Cure of Ars]

I think the big difference is that there is not a final court of appeals over doctrinal disputes in Protestantism. Councils and Tradition are never binding to a protestant although they do use them. This can be seen with the conservative Anglican’s who met a little while back. So I guess the big difference is that the Protestant uses private judgment through means of their understanding of scripture while the Catholic it is not a personal matter but what the Bible, Tradition and Church authority has held taught and teaches for the past 2000 years.

[marielapin]

You are close.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12495a.htm

"The first objective or formal principle [of Protestants] proclaims the canonical Scriptures, especially the New Testament to be the only infallible source and rule of faith and practice, and asserts the right of private interpretation of the same, in distinction from the Roman Catholic view, which declares the Bible and tradition to be co-ordinate sources and rule of faith, and makes tradition, especially the decrees of popes and councils, the only legitimate and infallible interpreter of the Bible.

In its extreme form Chillingworth expressed this principle of the Reformation in the well-known formula, "The Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible, is the religion of Protestants." Protestantism, however, by no means despises or rejects church authority as such, but only subordinates it to, and measures its value by, the Bible, and believes in a progressive interpretation of the Bible through the expanding and deepening consciousness of Christendom. Hence, besides having its own symbols or standards of public doctrine, it retained all the articles of the ancient creeds and a large amount of disciplinary and ritual tradition, and rejected only those doctrines and ceremonies for which no clear warrant was found in the Bible and which seemed to contradict its letter or spirit. The Calvinistic branches of Protestantism went farther in their antagonism to the received traditions than the Lutheran and the Anglican; but all united in rejecting the authority of the pope."

Hopefully this will answer your question. Yes, there is a distinction between Catholics and Protestants in this issue. Catholics do not believe in Sola Scriptura. To do so would mean that we would not rely on the teachings of the Church to guide us in the interpretation of the Scriptures.

[Jake Huether]

I mean, I know it doesnt teach "scripture alone" but it DOES teach that Sacred Tradition and the writings of the Church Fathers cannot CONTRADICT the meaning of Scripture, interpreted according to the mind of the Church, right? Otherwise, they wouldn't be "Sacred Tradition"

inDouche very close.

But we, Catholics, believe the Scripture may not contradict Sacred Tradition and the Magesterium (the Teaching body of the Church).

You see the difference. Where Prots say that the "extra" stuff cannot contradict the Bible, that leaves the Bible open to be twisted such that it fits whatever they want it to say.

Catholics on the Other hand have a check and ballance system. The Bible is not left to be missinterpreted becasue it cannot contradict Tradition. Tradition likewise cannot contradict Scripture. And the two cannot conflict with the Teachings of the Church by the Magisterium.

It was a sneaky thing for Satan to do. He brings "lie" as close to "truth" as possible so that we cannot tell the difference at first glance. But if you miss the simple itty bitty thing that seperates truth from lie, then it can bite you in the butt.

[Aloysius]

:unsure: :ph34r: :blink: