RCC Series: 1. Authority of Scripture

Welcome back to the Reformerookie series on Roman Catholic claims and contradictions.

We've gone through the introduction to the book by William Webster and once again I highly recommend that you purchase this book. You can get it at www .christiantruth .com. It's not a long book but it's packed with tremendous information and I think you'd be very blessed by it.

The Authority of Scripture and the Protestant Reformation

So with that we're going to start now on the first chapter called The Authority of Scripture and this actually is the formal cause of the Protestant Reformation. So here we go. The Authority of Scripture.

The term commonly used to describe the Protestant position on the authority of scripture is the Latin phrase sola scriptura, which means scripture alone. Sola scriptura is the teaching that there is only one special revelation from God, the written scriptures or the Bible, and the scriptures are materially sufficient and are, by their very nature as being inspired by God, the ultimate and sufficient authority for the Church in all matters related to faith and morals.

The teaching of sola scriptura, however, is rejected by the Roman Catholic Church as being unscriptural. But such an assertion is false. It is the expressed teaching of scripture and in particular of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Believers for every good work, is the final judge of all tradition, is the word of God. We are told these things about the scriptures but we are never told these things about tradition. In addition, Jesus himself confirms the truth of sola scriptura.

He used scripture alone authoritatively for his life and ministry. He always appealed to the written word of God, never to oral tradition to settle any.

Dispute.

He never referred to the oral word of God, but rather to the written scriptures. For Jesus, scripture was the final judge of all tradition. In fact, he never has one positive thing to say about tradition.

Matthew 15, 5, 22, and 4. If the Son of God himself teaches that all tradition is to be judged by its conformity to the scripture, then tradition is subordinate to the scripture. It is the scripture that has ultimate authority.

No one denies the fact that Jesus and the apostles taught orally. But the Protestant teaching is that the oral revelation that God wanted preserved is contained in the scriptures. It is the scriptures alone which are the revelation of God to us.

This means there is no portion of that revelation which has been preserved in the form of oral tradition independent of scripture. The Council of Trent in the 16th century, on the other hand, declared that the revelation of God was not contained solely in the scriptures, but partly in the written scriptures and partly in oral tradition, and therefore the scriptures are not materially sufficient.

This was the universal view of Roman Catholic theologians for centuries after the Council of Trent and remains the predominant view today. Trent states,. This gospel, of old, promised through the prophets and the holy scriptures, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, promulgated first with his own mouth, and then commanded it to be preached by his apostles to every creature as the source at once for all saving truth and rules of conduct.

It also clearly perceives that these truths and rules are contained in the written books and in the unwritten traditions, which, received by the apostles from the mouth of Christ himself, or from thy apostles themselves, the Holy Ghost dictating, having come down to us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand.

Following then the example of the orthodox fathers, it receives and venerates, with a feeling of piety and revenants, all the books, both of the Old and New Testaments, since one God is the author of both, also the traditions, whether they relate to faith or morals, as having been dictated either orally by Christ or by the Holy Ghost and preserved in the Catholic Church in unbroken succession.

There are several footnotes here that I'd like to read. James Cardinal Gibbons, writing in the 19th century, states,. The scriptures alone do not contain all the truths which a Christian is bound to believe.

The scriptures alone cannot be a sufficient guide and rule of faith, because they do not contain all the truths necessary for salvation. That comes out of the book, The Of Our Fathers. Next, Roman Catholic theologian John Hardin says,.

We find the truths revealed by God in sacred scripture and sacred tradition. Both sacred scripture and sacred tradition are the inspired word of God, and both are forms of divine revelation. Sacred scripture is divinely inspired writing, whereas sacred tradition is the unwritten word of divinely inspired persons.

Sacred tradition is the unwritten word of God that the prophets and apostles received through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and, under his guidance, the Church has handed on to the Christian world.

Sacred tradition, which is divine revelation in oral form, has been handed on by the Church's doctrine, life and worship. The Bible and sacred tradition are of equal authority, because they are equally the word.

Of God.

Sacred tradition can never be in conflict with sacred scripture, because the same Holy Spirit working in the Church is the source of both sources of revelation. Each source either adds to the other or explains the other, but they are never in contradiction.

This comes out of the book, The Question and Answer Catholic Catechism. Questions 59, 60, 84, 87, 89, and 91. This view, however, is contradictory to, and a repudiation of, the belief and practice of the Church of the Patristic Age.

The Roman Catholic Church claims that the teaching of Sola Scriptura is unhistorical, that it contradicts the universal teaching of the early Church. But the facts do not support this claim. Sola Scriptura was the universal teaching of the Church Fathers, and for the Church as a whole up through the latter part of the Middle Ages, in that it believed that all doctrine must be proven from scripture, and if such proof could not be produced, the doctrine was to be rejected.

Cyril of Jerusalem on Scripture as the Proof of Doctrine

Listen to Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, who is the author of the Catechetical Lectures, an extensive series of lectures given to catechumens expounding the principal doctrines of the.

Faith.

It is a complete explanation of the faith of the Church of his day, and his teaching is thoroughly grounded in the scriptures. It is significant that Cyril of Jerusalem, who is communicating the entirety of the faith to the catechumens, did not make a single appeal, in the entirety of the lectures, to any oral apostolic tradition, that is independent of scripture to support his teachings.

What he writes here is reflective of the overall view of the Fathers. Concerning the divine and sacred mysteries of the faith, we ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the holy scriptures, nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument.

Do not then believe me because I tell thee of these things, unless thou receive from the holy scriptures the proof of what is set forth. For this salvation, which is our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the holy scriptures.

The Treatise on the Resurrection by Gregory of Nyssa says,. We are not entitled to such license. I mean that of affirming what we please. We make the holy scriptures the rule and measure of every tenant, or dogma.

We necessarily fix our eyes upon that, and approve that alone which may be made to harmonize with the intention of those writings. The statements of Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory of Nyssa, and Basil the Great, cited below, are representative of the Church throughout the entire patristic age.

The Fathers taught that all teaching must be validated by the written scriptures. Furthermore, they taught that the extent of the authority of any teacher, be he bishop or layman, was limited to scripture.

They do affirm the authority of the Church, but an authority grounded in fidelity to the scripture, not principally to succession. Therefore, according to the Church Fathers, the Church is subject to the final authority of scripture, and is to be disregarded if it moves outside of that authority in its teaching.

Basil the Great and the All-Sufficient Counsel of Scripture

Basil the Great, the Bishop of Caesarea from 370 -379 AD, testifies to his belief in the all-sufficient nature of the scriptures in these words, taken from a letter he wrote.

To a widow.

Enjoying, as you do, the consolation of the holy scriptures, you stand in neither of my assistance, nor of that of anyone else, to help you comprehend your duty. You have the all-sufficient counsel and guidance of the Holy Spirit to lead you to what is right.

Interestingly, the term Sola Scriptura did not originate with the Reformers, but was a term commonly employed by theologians for centuries preceding the Reformation. The Protestant teaching of Sola Scriptura is not a novel doctrine, but the reaffirmation of the faith of the early Church.

It is both biblical and historical. Thomas Aquinas, in the 13th century, makes the following comment, The canonical scriptures alone are the rule or measure of faith. Sola Canonica Scriptura est regula fide.

Well friends, thanks again for joining us for this session of Roman Catholic Claims and Contradictions. We look forward to seeing you in the next session. Please also subscribe to the channel and check out more great videos on Reformed Theology.

Thanks again for listening and remember Sempla Reformanda.