Random Thoughts on Sola Scriptura, Part IV

Protestants group themselves into distinct denominations. These denominations put forth official statements of faith and profess a belief in certain doctrines and creeds, all of which define their theology as opposed to other denominations. But at the individual level, among the men and women in the pew, one is likely to find a variety of conflicting beliefs held by members of the same group. This is because Protestantism rejects the Church as the final authority for settling doctrine, and this naturally causes Protestants to question the authority of even their own denominational church on matters of doctrine.

And so, adding to what we have already seen in Parts I, II, and III of this series, Sola Scriptura not only causes division and confusion between denominations, but also within the denominations themselves. Each man and woman becomes his or her own final authority on biblical interpretation. If the “Bible Alone” is to be their guide, then each man and woman is left alone to interpret the Bible as they see fit. If Martin Luther can defy his own Church and claim private interpretation as his rule of faith, then so too can very man and woman in the pew.

A Protestant friend of mine once visited a large Evangelical church for Sunday worship at the invitation of a family member. At first he felt as though he shared a common faith with the people around him. He felt as though they were all worshipping the same God, and believing essentially the same things about that God. And so they were worshipping as one. That is until they came to the Communion service. As they each took a little cube of bread and a tiny paper cup filled with grape juice, he noticed that each person received these elements with a different attitude. Some had a sense of reverence and solemnity that was visible on their face and in their mannerisms. Others were casual in their approach, chewing the bread as though it were no more than a snack they bought at a movie theater, and slamming back the juice like shots in a bar. Some prayed afterwards, some turned to chat with their neighbors. Everyone seemed to have a different sense of what was taking place.

[I might add here that the practice of shot-glass communion and trays of bread-cubes or crackers passed around on platters adds a certain symbolic individualism to Communion as well. No one is asked to come forward to receive. You can “stay where you are” and communion will be dispensed to you in neat little packages. Just as they are not required to physically leave their seats or drink from the same cup, these same Christians feel no need to move from their theological positions or to drink from the church’s wisdom when they are in disagreement with the church or with one another. They “stay where they are” and drink their own cup. This practice has become very popular among many Protestant denominations. And I think it shows an indirect link to the individualism of their faith.]

After this experience, my friend began to notice the same sort of things in his own Methodist church. Eventually he asked his minister about the official Methodist teaching on certain doctrines. But the answers that he received only revealed to him that his own beliefs were at a variance with the official Methodist teaching. And conversations he had with fellow Methodists revealed further disagreements. These issues gnawed at him until his death a few years later. He struggled with how a church can be a “church” when its members fail to see eye-to-eye on so many doctrines.

Unfortunately, for the vast majority of Bible-only Protestants this crisis of faith, as experienced by my friend, never enters their mind. They either float through their faith unaware of these doctrinal differences, or they justify it as I have been told during online debates: “If my preacher teaches something that I think is unbiblical, then obviously he is wrong and the Bible is right. I have no problem disagreeing with him or anyone else in my church, because I don’t need a church to spoon-feed me my faith.”

Or to put it more succinctly: Personal interpretation trumps the Church’s authority to teach doctrine.

In Part V we will explore this idea further.

Quote of the Week

"Just as in one man there is one soul and one body, yet many members; even so the Catholic Church is one body, having many members. The soul that quickens this body is the Holy Spirit; and therefore in the Creed after confessing our belief in the Holy Spirit, we are bid to believe in the Holy Catholic Church."

- St. Thomas Aquinas

Random Thoughts on Sola Scriptura, Part III

As discussed in Part I and Part II, the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura does not protect the ancient Christian faith – instead it opens the possibility of widespread heresy. Nor does Sola Scriptura bring about unity among Christians – rather it divides Christians into denominational sects and causes endless schism. History has shown that the introduction of the “Bible Alone” Protestantism has brought about unprecedented divisions in the Body of Christ and has resurrected ancient heresies mixed with new false doctrines and theologies.

Obviously Sola Scriptura does not “work” from a practical standpoint. Division and heresy are its end results. But furthermore, it is simply not a principle that was ever used by Christians prior to the Reformation. In other words it is a relatively recent invention. And I mean “invention” in the worst possible way. It was “invented” as an excuse to depart from traditional Christian teaching and to undermine Christ’s Church.

Early Christian experience contradicts the Protestant notion of Sola Scriptura. For example, the early Church did not have an authoritative Biblical Canon. The books of the bible were not agreed to for at least the first four centuries of Christianity. Imagine if the United States existed for four hundred years without adopting a Constitution.

Thankfully the Church does not work like a nation or state. Before the Bible was compiled (in fact, before the New Testament was even written) there was already an established authority for the teaching of sound doctrine, and that authority was the CHURCH. Without an agreed to Biblical cannon there had to be some other locus of authority (i.e. not Sola Scriptura), and sure enough, the Church Fathers attest to a strong teaching authority for their bishops and under them the priest and deacons.

For early Christians, obedience to one’s Bishop was compared to obedience to Christ Himself. And these bishops received their authority through Apostolic Succession. Proving such a lineage, tracing one’s ministry back to Christ, proved the Church’s authenticity and ensured sound doctrine. That does not sound like a Protestant ecclesiology and it certainly doesn’t sound like Bible Alone Christianity.

Protestantism (for the most part) rejects Apostolic Succession, some even reject bishops altogether, and they reject the authority of a bishop to expound doctrine authoritatively (as “in the place of Christ” – the way the early Christians would have understood it). If you were to travel back in time and explain to a First or Second Century Christian the Protestant notion of a weak ecclesial governance and the doctrine of Sola Scriptura you would be called a heretic. And with good reason - Sola Scriptura is a heresy!

No doubt, when it comes to sound doctrine and teaching authentic Christian faith, Protestants would say that the Bible should be our pillar and foundation of truth. But the Bible itself proves them wrong. As the early Christians knew, and as Catholics believe today, for correct teaching we must look to “the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.” (1Tim 3:15)

Monday Musings

A few random thoughts and ponderings to begin the week...

The Sunday Gospel was a good reminder for us as we approach Lent. Jesus went off to a secluded place to pray alone. Here we see the Son of God, who is Himself GOD, taking time to pray and visit with God away from other people. He often did this after performing a series of miracles (as in this particular passage) or before a great trial (such as the Agony in the Garden before His arrest). As the miracle of Christmas fades into our past and the trial of Lent and Christ's Passion lay before us, this Sunday's reading is a perfect reminder to us of our own need to step away from the crowds and spend time alone with God.

+        +        +

After discussing some political and religious issues, my son (8 years old) recently commented: "I wish everyone in the world was Catholic. Then nobody would believe in abortion, and we wouldn't have any Democrats." ...If only it were that simple. :)

+        +        +

So where are the new missals?! I've had one on back-order for months. And it's not just the company I'm ordering from. It seems that no store has them in stock. The pew cards are looking pretty beat up and just feel gross after so many people have handled them. I just want my own missal so I can follow all the new parts of the Mass, not just the responses that fit on a sheet of paper.

One More Headline

Yesterday I posted my usual Friday round-up of headlines. But shortly after I posted, I ran across this well written piece by Pat Archbold over at the National Catholic Register. I wish I had seen it before posting my Friday headlines...but in hindsight, perhaps this deserves its own post. Here's an excerpt:

"Many Bishops have been speaking out and calling for Catholics and Christians of all stripes to contact the Obama administration and demand a revision to the conscience clause in the mandate. If that is their argument, they have already lost. They might win the battle, either through the courts or the election year largess of the emperor, but the war is lost.

"In order to win the argument they must change the argument. In order to change and win the argument, the battle, and ultimately the war, the Bishops need to understand that they were wrong, completely wrong. They were wrong when they supported the health care bill in the first place.

"Back in 2009, the Bishops made a show of demanding ‘amendments’ that would stipulate that no government funds would go to abortion. Given that stipulation, the Bishops Conference was completely on board with compulsory government run health care. They were completely on board with a government that can mandate that you buy something and mandate what it is you buy. In essence, the Bishops helped hand the bullets to the firing squad, and now they are shocked—shocked—when the guns now point at them.
 

"Lesson number one of appeasement, you cannot just give away a little of your liberty. When faced with the firing squad, you should not just hope that they aim low.

"Once you accept the government can tell you what health care to buy, you are only arguing over degrees of tyranny. That is the wrong argument. When you support the government being able to force people to buy something and force the sellers to sell only what the government wants, even out of some false sense of compassion, you support tyranny. When you support such things, you reject the liberty of the individual to say no. So, when that tyranny inevitably turns against you, you have forfeited the right to complain."

AMEN!! The bishops need to learn that you can't make a deal with the devil and expect to not get burned. Read the whole article here.

This Week's Headlines

As another week comes to an end, this is your chance to top off your glass with a final helping of news, current events, and just plain interesting stuff that may not have made into the mainstream media. A chance to linger for a few more moments before we close the door on the week. Below are some links to articles, blogs, and miscellaneous happenings that caught my eye over the past few days. Sample what you like - I'll serve up more next Friday...

The New Anti-Catholicism Movement - "...the new anti-Catholicism does not adopt the posture of a humble and teachable critic seeking to engage the Church on matters over which reasonable citizens from differing theological and secular moral traditions disagree. Rather, it seeks to employ the coercive power of the state to force the Church’s institutions to violate the Church’s own moral theology, and thus compromise, and make less accessible, the Church’s mission of charity and hope."

Catholics, Get Ready to Suffer - "Bishop Fabian W. Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Nebraska in response to the Obama administration’s contraception mandate said, 'We cannot and will not comply with this unjust decree. Like the martyrs of old, we must be prepared to accept suffering which could include heavy fines and imprisonment.'"

Inside the Mind of Evil: Obama Administration's HHS Decision - "The policy is so bad, and so certain to be reversed, that I have difficulty understanding why the Obama administration would pursue it. The jackbooted, 'jam it down your throat' approach that the Obama administration has taken in this is shocking."

See also: Obama’s War on Religion, American or Catholic? Why must we choose?, Catholic Bishops Reject Obama’s Surrender Terms, Non Possumus: The HHS Mandate,

Just a Reminder - "...the Obama administration’s new unconstitutional insurance mandate seems to be jolting weary and jaded voters into action.  Those who had given up on the political system and weren’t planning to vote, even with a clothespin on their noses—they’re suddenly realizing that it’s imperative to get this power-mad grand inquisitor out of office, no matter who replaces him."

This Celebrity Loves Abortion So Much She Gets Her Own Column - "Planned Parenthood makes its money selling abortions, oral contraception, emergency contraception, long-term contraception, condoms, STD treatments, and the like. When young people abstain from sex, Planned Parenthood doesn’t make any money. Like, at all."

I shouldn’t have waited for the bishops - "Think about it. If a doctor is willing to prescribe abortifacient drugs or abortifacient devices, then the doctor is willing to induce abortions. If we wouldn’t let a practicing sex offender examine our children, then why for Heaven’s sake would we let a practicing abortionist deliver them?"

Arguments Ever New - "The pro-life arguments, for many people, still come as news. Those arguments are never out of season, and we should never tire of sounding them anew. Especially in those dark places found, most likely these days, in college towns."

Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation Breaks Partnership with Planned Parenthood  - "It’s unfortunate that it took a technicality such as Planned Parenthood being under Federal investigation in order to get this partnership broken off. One would hope that if the Komen Foundation is truly focused on cancer advocacy they would understand it can only hurt their cause to ally with a group involved in such incredibly controversial behavior as Planned Parenthood."

Why My Big Family Is Not Overpopulating the Earth - "...I don’t see my children as adding to the problem; I see them as contributors to the solutions of the future." 

“Single Issue” Voting Returns–with a Vengence - "It was never actually true that culturally-conscious Catholics were 'single issue' voters. We have considered the other issues, and we concluded they are outweighed by widespread child-murder."

From Chick Flicks to Purgatory  - "In our casual culture, it’s common to act as though the deceased person has already passed through any unfortunate suffering which might be imposed, and is already in the arms of the Father.  But why would we presume that?"

Being Smart Is Not A Virtue - "This isn't to promote a bunch of mental slouching. It promotes an ideal moral standard which every child can meet."

 “Occupy” Thugs Attack Catholic Girls - [Disgusting...but not surprising considering the type of people this "Occupy" movement has attracted.]

What to do if a bug gets into the chalice? - Father Z. gives a great response to the question in the title, but I also love this little tidbit: "At a very clerical supper one night we mused about the possibility of a mouse dashing across the altar after the consecration and making off with a Host. Our solution was to bless a cat, put a white stole on it, send it after the mouse, and when the cat came back, burn the cat and put the ashes down the sacrarium."

 The Domestic Church: 7 Steps to a Proper Catholic Home

Random Thoughts on Sola Scriptura, Part II

As was said in Part I, history shows us that Sola Scriptura (the Bible Alone) has caused division and schism among Christians. Protestants who claim that Sola Scriptura was meant to protect the ancient faith are proven wrong by history itself and the endless splintering of post-Reformation Christianity. Doctrines that had been unquestioningly held dear are now up for grabs. Certainly there were divisions and disagreements before the Reformers’ time; even the ancient Church suffered schism. But the scale of division that was seen after Sola Scriptura entered the scene is unprecedented.

The previous divisions in the Church’s history were largely caused by specific heresies – the Arians, the Donatist, the Pelagians, etc. If these heresies were bad because of the division they caused, then the Protestant heresy of Sola Scriptura, with the thousands of divisions it has caused, must rank high on our list of very bad heresies.

Protestants may shout: “Wait! We do not believe in heresy. We accept the early Councils. We accept the Creeds. We are merely concerned that these early statements of faith should not be corrupted by later additions. We limit our beliefs to these early Creeds and statements of faith so that we all have common ground as Christians. And so any differences you might see between Methodists and Baptists, or Anglicans and Lutherans, etc., are few and only secondary. We all still agree to the basic statements of the ancient faith. We reject the early heresies, but by using the Bible Alone to formulate our doctrine we avoid going beyond the ancient creedal statements.”

But this is a false and dangerous approach for at least two reasons.

1) The ancient Councils and Creeds themselves were not the product of using the Bible Alone. Indeed, these are examples of an authoritative Church which met together in Council to decree which doctrines were true and which were false. The Church realized that it was not enough to have a book of Scripture to sort out Truth. It was necessary for the Church to speak with force in order to quell a heresy. So for Protestants to claim that the Bible Alone will now protect the faith of these Councils flies in the face of what these Councils actually were. They were examples of an authoritative Church defending the Bible. How can the Bible now defend itself? It simply cannot. The existence of Creeds and Councils proves that Sola Scriptura is not an effective way to formulate sound doctrine. Sola Scriptura is a departure from the ancient practice of the Church.

2) To say that Protestants actually agree to these early Councils and Creeds is itself an overstatement of reality. There are definitely Sola Scriptura churches which do adhere to these ancient sources…but there are far more that do not. Sola Scriptura sets itself up to allow for rejection of these ancient Church statements. Since the Bible ALONE is their source of authority, then anything issued by the Church (ancient or otherwise) is automatically suspect, and can be discarded if a denomination views it as unbiblical. Protestants may like to pat themselves on the back because they agree on some doctrinal basics, but those basics are shaky at best and no two denominations agree on what those basics should include or how they should be understood. So the premise itself, that Sola Scriptura protects the ancient faith of the Church, is false.

Let’s keep in mind that the Councils and Creeds were largely designed to answer heresies. They were designed to settle doctrinal controversy. And let us also remember that the ancient heretics used the Bible to make the case for their own false doctrines against what the Church taught. The Bible is a two edged sword. As we said before, the Bible cannot defend itself. But it can be used to defend heretical doctrine. Only an authoritative Church can sort out Truth from error.

Indeed, over the course of 500 years, Sola Scriptura has actually served to resurrect old heresies, so that now new life has been breathed into old lies. There are Bible Alone denominations that reject Christ’s divinity, the Trinity, the Virgin Birth and other long-held doctrines from the ancient Church. Sola Scriptura does not defend Christian doctrine, nor does it lead to authentic interpretation of the Bible. It only serves to destroy the faith and unity of the Church.