Church Fathers on Sola Scriptura

  • Thread starter Thread starter LutheranStudent
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

LutheranStudent

Guest
**St. Irenaeus of Lyons (130-202) **

“We have known the method of our salvation by no other means than those by whom the gospel came to us; which gospel they truly preached; but afterward, by the will of God, they delivered to us in the Scriptures, to be for the future the foundation and pillar of our faith.” (Adv. H. 3:1)

“Read more diligently that gospel which is given to us by the apostles; and read more diligently the prophets, and you will find every action and the whole doctrine of our Lord preached in them.” (Adv. H. 4:66)

**Clement of Alexandria (150?-213?) **

“They that are ready to spend their time in the best things will not give over seeking for truth until they have found the demonstration from the Scriptures themselves.” (Stromata 7:16:3)

**Origen (185?-252) **

“In which (the two Testaments) every word that appertains to God may be required and discussed; and all knowledge may be understood out of them. But if anything remain which the Holy Scripture does not determine, no other third Scripture ought to be received for authorizing any knowledge or doctrine; but that which remains we must commit to the fire, that is, we will reserve it for God. For in this present world God would not have us to know all things.” (Orig. in Lev., hom. 5, 9:6)

“We know Jesus Christ is God, and we seek to expound the words which are spoken, according to the dignity of the person. Wherefore it is necessary for us to call the Scriptures into testimony; for our meanings and enarrations, without these witnesses, have no credibility.” (Tractatus 5 in Matt.)

“No man ought, for the confirmation of doctrines, to use books which are not canonized Scriptures.” (Tract. 26 in Matt.)

“As all gold, whatsoever it be, that is without the temple, is not holy; even so every notion which is without the divine Scripture, however admirable it may appear to some, is not holy, because it is foreign to Scripture.” (Hom. 25 in Matt.)

“Consider how imminent their danger is who neglect to study the Scriptures, in which alone the discernment of this can be ascertained.” (in Rom. 10:16)

**St. Cyprian of Carthage (200?-258) **

“Whence comes this tradition? Does it descend from the Lord’s authority, or from the commands and epistles of the apostles? For those things are to be done which are there written. … If it be commanded in the gospels or the epistles and Acts of the Apostles, then let this holy tradition be observed.” (Ep. 74 ad Pompeium)

**Hippolytus ( -230???) **

“There is one God, whom we do not otherwise acknowledge, brethren, but out of the Holy Scriptures. For as he that would possess the wisdom of this word cannot otherwise obtain it than to read the doctrines of the philosophers; so whosoever of us will exercise piety toward God cannot learn this elsewhere but out of the Holy Scriptures. Whatsoever, therefore, the Holy Scriptures do preach, that let us know, and whatsoever they teach, that let us understand.” (Hip. tom. 3, Bibliotheque Patrium, ed. Colonna)

*St. Athanasius of Alexandria (300?-375) **

“The Holy Scriptures, given by inspiration of God, are of themselves sufficient toward the discovery of truth.” (Orat. adv. Gent., ad cap.)

“The Catholic Christians will neither speak nor endure to hear any thing in religion that is a stranger to Scripture; it being an evil heart of immodesty to speak those things which are not written.” (Exhort. ad Monachas)

*St. Ambrose of Milan (340?-396) **

“How can we use those things which we do not find in the Holy Scriptures?” (Ambr. Offic., 1:23)

“I read that he is the first, I read that he is not the second; they who say he is the second, let them show it by reading.” (Ambr. Offic., in Virginis Instit. 11)

**St. Hilary of Poitiers (315-367) **

“O emperor! I admire your faith, which desires only according to those things that were written. … You seek the faith, O emperor. Hear it then, not from new writings, but from the books of God. Remember that it is not a question of philosophy, but a doctrine of the gospel.” (Ad Constant. Augus. 2:8:2)
 
**St. Gregory of Nyssa (330?-395) **

“Let a man be persuaded of the truth of that alone which has the seal of the written testimony.” (De Anima et Resurrectione, 1)

**St. Cyril of Jerusalem (315?-386) **

“Not even the least of the divine and holy mysteries of the faith ought to be handed down without the divine Scriptures. Do not simply give faith to me speaking these things to you except you have the proof of what I say from the divine Scriptures. For the security and preservation of our faith are not supported by ingenuity of speech, but by the proofs of the divine Scriptures.” (Cat. 4)

St. John** Chrysostom of Antioch and Byzantium* (347-407) **

“The Scripture], like a safe door, denies an entrance to heretics, guarding us in safety in all things we desire, and not permitting us to be deceived. …Whoever uses not the Scriptures, but comes in otherwise, that is, cuts out for himself a different and unlawful way, the same is a thief.” (Homily 59, in Joh. 2:8)

“Formerly it might have been ascertained by various means which was the true church, but at present there is no other method left for those who are willing to discover the true church of Christ but by the Scriptures alone. And why? Because heresy has all outward observances in common with her. If a man, therefore, be desirous of knowing the true church, how will he be able to do it amid so great resemblance, but by the Scriptures alone? Wherefore our Lord, foreseeing that such a great confusion of things would take place in the latter days, ordered the Christians to have recourse to nothing but the Scriptures.”

“The man of God could not be perfect without the Scriptures. [Paul says to Timothy:] “You have the Scriptures: if you desire to learn anything, you may learn it from them.” But if he writes these things to Timothy, who was filled with the Holy Spirit, how much more must we think these things spoken to us.” (Hom. 9 in 2 Tim. 1:9)

“It is absurd, while we will not trust other people in pecuniary affairs, but choose to reckon and calculate for ourselves, that in matters of far higher consequence we should implicitly follow the opinions of others, especially as we possess the most exact and perfect rule and standard by which to regulate our several inquiries: I mean the regulation of the divine laws. I, therefore, could wish that all of you would reject what this or that man says, and that you would investigate all these things in the Scriptures.” (Hom. 13, 4:10 ad fin. in 2 Cor)

**Theophilus of Alexandria ( -412) **

“It is the part of a devilish spirit to think any thing to be divine that is not in the authority of the Holy Scriptures.” (Ep. Pasch. 2)

St. Jerome*** (342?-420) **

“The church of Christ, possessing churches in all the world, is united by the unity of the Spirit, and has the cities of the law, the prophets, the gospels, and the apostles. She has not gone forth from her boundaries, that is, from the Holy Scriptures.” (Comm. in Micha. 1:1)

“Those things which they make and find, as it were, by apostolical tradition, without the authority and testimony of Scripture, the word of God smites.” (ad Aggai 1)

“As we deny not those things that are written, so we refuse those things that are not written. That God was born of a virgin we believe, because we read it; that Mary did marry after she was delivered we believe not, because we do not read it.” (Adv. Helvidium)
 
St. Augustine** of Hippo (354-430) **

“In those things which are clearly laid down in Scripture, all those things are found which pertain to faith and morals.” (De Doct. Chr. 2:9)

“Whatever you hear from them [the Scriptures], let that be well received by you. Whatever is without them refuse, lest you wander in a cloud.” (De Pastore, 11)

“All those things which in times past our ancestors have mentioned to be done toward mankind and have delivered unto us: all those things also which we see and deliver to our posterity, so far as they pertain to the seeking and maintaining true religion, the Holy Scripture has not passed over in silence.” (Ep. 42)

“Whatever our Saviour would have us read of his actions and sayings he commanded his apostles and disciples, as his hands, to write.” (De Consensu Evang. 1:ult)

“Let them [the Donatists] demonstrate their church if they can, not by the talk and rumor of the Africans; not by the councils of their own bishops; not by the books of their disputers; not by deceitful miracles, against which we are cautioned by the word of God, but in the prescript of the law, in the predictions of the prophets, in the verses of the Psalms, in the voice of the Shepherd himself, in the preaching and works of the evangelists; that is, in all canonical authorities of the sacred Scriptures.” (De Unit. Eccl. 16)

**St. Cyril of Alexandria (380?-444) **

“That which the Holy Scriptures have not said, by what means should we receive and account it among those things that are true?” (Cyril. Glaphyrarum in Gen. 2)

**Theodoret of Cyrrhus (393?-458?) **

“By the Holy Scriptures alone am I persuaded” (Dial. 1, Atrept.)

“I am not so bold as to affirm anything which the sacred Scripture passes in silence.” (Dial. 2, Asynchyt.)

“We ought not to seek those things that are passed in silence, but rest in the things which are written.” (in Gen. Q. 45)

St. John** of Damascus (675?-749?) **

“We receive and acknowledge and reverence all things which are delivered in the law, the prophets, the apostles and evangelists, and we seek after nothing beyond these.” (de Fid. Ortho. 1:1:1)
 
Im a little confused on this one. Are you trying to start a debate or what? If so, what is the debate to be about ?
 
I think the point is that he is quoting all the Catholic Church Fathers as being authoritive. This is a good thing.

But we need to be patient to see if he will then allow them to interpret their own words in the context in which they were written.
 
Jesus
Matthew 22. Verse 1-14.
Jesus again in reply spoke to them in parables, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son. He didpatched his servants to summon the invited guests to the feast, but they refused to come. A second time he sent other servants, saying, ‘Tell those invited: “Behold, I have prepared my banquet, my calves and fattened cattle are killed, and everything is ready; come to the feast.” ’ Some ignored the invitation and went away, one to his farm, another to his business. The rest laid hold of his servants, mistreated them, and killed them. The king was enraged and sent his troops, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city. Then hs said to his servants, ’ The feast is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy to come. Go out, therefore, into the main roads and invite to the feast whomever you find.’ The servants went out into the streets and gathered all they found, bad and good alike, and the hall was filled with guests. But when the king came in to meet the guests he saw a man there not dressed in a wedding garment. He said to him,‘My friend, how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment?’ But he was reduced to silence. Then the king said to his attendants, ‘Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.’ Many are invited, but few are chosen.”

The man came to the feast with faith that it would occur, but he did not take the time to do the work required to put on the wedding garment.

If you are so intent on the Bible alone then you must be for the Catholic Church alone too huh. Since it was the Catholic Church which gave us the Bible. It was the Catholic Church who decided what the Bible would contain. Therefore Bible alone = Church Alone.
 
I believe this is a good example of the different lenses people use. I do not see “sola” in these quotes.I do see the incredible importance of Scripture in Catholicism.
I tried to use the references but could not always find them. Like Adv H 4:66 There is no 66th chapter that I could find in any book of his.
st julie
 
To the original poster: So What? If you believe in sola scriptura, you can’t fall on church teaching to back it up. It must be in scriptures only, remember?

Peace

Tim
 
Why would Jesus and the Apostles rely on scripture alone to spread the Gospel? A very small fraction could read, and an even smaller fraction could afford a scribe to copy the Bible.

So how would early Christians be able to rely ‘Sola Scriptura’ when they needed a Church to teach them for lack of Bibles and the inability to read. It only makes sense Jesus would give authority to his Church to interpret scripture for everyone. And teach the word of God.

I’m not even certain this is where this debate is going. As I don’t see the teachings of Early Church Fathers relying solely on scriptures and not the Church at all.

I am no scholar though and I don’t pretend to be, so I will leave this topic to the real apologists.
 
Chapter XXXIV.-Proof Against the Marcionites, that the Prophets Referred in All Their Predictions to Our Christ.
Click to expand...
  1. Now I shall simply say, in opposition to all the heretics, and principally against the followers of Marcion, and against those who are like to these, in maintaining that time prophets were from another God [than He who is announced in the Gospel], read with earnest care that Gospel which has been conveyed to us by the apostles, and read with earnest care the prophets, and you will find that the whole conduct, and all the doctrine, and all the sufferings of our Lord, were predicted through them. But if a thought of this kind should then suggest itself to you, to say, What then did the Lord bring to us by His advent?-know ye that He brought all [possible] novelty, by bringing Himself who had been announced. For this very thing was proclaimed beforehand, that a novelty should come to renew and quicken mankind. For the advent of the King is previously announced by those servants who are sent [before Him], in order to the preparation and equipment of those men who are to entertain their Lord. But when the King has actually come, and those who are His subjects have been filled with that joy which was proclaimed beforehand, and have attained to that liberty which He bestows, and share in the sight of Him, and have listened to His words, and have enjoyed the gifts which He confers, the question will not then be asked by any that are possessed of sense what new thing the King has brought beyond [that proclaimed by] those who announced His coming. For He has brought Himself, and has bestowed on men those good things which were announced beforehand, which things the angels desired to look into
Click to expand...
ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-62.htm#P7979_2198226

I think this is where that 4:66 quote really comes from. I could be wrong.
 
To say these Fathers promoted sola scriptura is a lie and if that is the point trying to be made you had to carefully select a part of their writings while totally ignoring the other part of their wirtings which speak about the authority of the Church.

If this is not the point trying to made…im sorry
 
Thanks Daniel. James Keifer admits on the site that the list was the work of others. I do see the same mistake there as in the original post.
st julie
 
Did the early Church Fathers taught Scripture alone? home.inreach.com/bstanley/sorigin.htm would be a good place to show it’s not so. Just a cursory look at what the early Church Fathers wrote about tradition would be more than enough to dispel this. As listed on that page then:

Tradition…

****Polycrates, Letter to Victor of Rome 5:24:1. J190a
*Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1:10:2, 2:9:1. J192,198,209
Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3:3:2, J210-213,226,242,257
Irenaeus, Letter to Florinus 5:20:4. J264
*Tertullian, Demurrer Against Heretics 19:3. J291-296,*298
Tertullian, The Veiling of Virgins 2:1. J328a,329
Tertullian, Against Marcion 4:5:1+. J341,371
Hippolytus, Against Heresy of Noetus 17. J394
Origen, Fundamental Doctrines 1:preface:2,4. J443,445,785
Athanasius, Letters to Serapion 1:28. J782
Foebad of Agen, Against Arians 22. J898
Basil The Great, Transcript of Faith 125:3. J917
Basil The Great, The Holy Spirit 27:66. J954
Basil The Great, Faith 1. J972
Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius J1043 Epiphanius,
Against All Heresies 61:6,73:34. J1098,1107
Chrysostom, On Romans 1:3. J1181
*Chrysostom, On Second Thessalonians 4:2. J1213
*Jerome, Dialogue between Luciferian & Christian 8. J1358
Augustine, Letter to Januarius 54:1:1,3. J1419,1419a
Augustine, Against Letter of Mani 5:6. J1581
Augustine, Baptism 2:7:12, 4:24:31. J1623,1631
Augustin, Literal Interpretation Genesis 10:23:39. J1705
Augustin, City of GOD 16:2:1. J1765
Augustin, Against Julian 1:7:30, 2:10:33. J1898-1900
Innocent I, Letter to Council of Carthage 29:1. J2015f
Theodoret of Cyr, Letter to Florentius 89. J2142
Vincent of Lerins, The Notebooks 2:1, 9:14. J2168,2169
Vincent of Lerins, The Notebooks 20:25, 22:27. J2172-2175
Gregory I, Homilies on Ezechiel 2:4:12. J2329
Damascene, Homilies 10:18. J2390
 
Maybe we could try a little bit different approach to this. I remember reading in Acts about the Jerusalem Council, and particularly how the decision was made that Christians did not have to conform to Mosaic law. If sola scriptura were practiced in the earliest Church, why is there no reference to scripture when the Apostles were defining doctrine and discipline ? It seems to me that if the Apostolic faith were to be based on the belief of sola scriptura, then the account of the Jerusalem Council would emphatically and without a doubt reflect this principle. The problem with sola scriptura is that it could not have possibly been a reality. The scriptures that comprise the New Testament did not exist during the first council, and nowhere in the book of Acts does it give any testimony to any of the attendees referencing scripture at all, much less emphatically justifying their decision based on the scriptures. It would have been impossible to declare that we were not subject to Mosaic Law if the Apostles believed in sola scriptura. However, it seems remarkably in accord with Catholic Tradition to me (and YES I used the capital “T” Tradition…as in Apostolic). As far as I’m concerned, Scripture itself refutes sola scriptura.
 
In my fervor for a persuasive argument, I overlooked the fact that Scripture was quoted in the account of the Council of Jerusalem. It was done only once however, in regard to the prophetic texts, and how it may apply to their dillemma. It doesn’t negate the fact that if the Apostles had been taught to pass on the concept of sola scriptura, they never would have been able to declare that we as Christians were not subject to the Kosher food laws, or any of the other laws of Judaism as Gentiles. If the Apostles taught sola scriptura, there would have been no Council of Jerusalem, because they as men would not be allowed to form that particular set of doctrines and disciplines under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I love the Council of Jerusalem accounting in the book of Acts, because it shows clearly just how Catholic the Church has ALWAYS been, and is probably the most clear indication that NOTHING is more Catholic than Sacred Scripture.
 
Does anyone take into account the Sacred Tradition that was used for thousands of years to pass on the stories we have in the Bible today?

The Bible Canon was put together thousands of years after all these events occured. I’m just saying Sacred Tradition has a long line of teachings Gods word throughout historical Judaism and Christianity. Only recently did the idea of no Sacred Tradition (Sola Scriptura) develop.
 
40.png
MrS:
I think the point is that he is quoting all the Catholic Church Fathers as being authoritive. This is a good thing.

But we need to be patient to see if he will then allow them to interpret their own words in the context in which they were written.
Click to expand...
I agree, there is nothing better than a protestant admitting that the ECFs are authoritative.

One question I cant wait to ask this Lutheran is what happened to the office of Bishop. The ECF’s have a lot of important things to say about that.
 
Hi Joshua, are you trying to say that the apostles did not have their scriptural background in mind while making these decisions or am I misreading you?

Acts 15:20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.
 
You are indeed misreading me. I apologize for not being as articulate as I would like. I’ll try to clarify my position.

Of course the Apostles were mindful of Scripture. That is why I added to my post that Scripture was indeed quoted in the account of the Council of Jerusalem. However, the emphasis of Acts 15 is not on Scripture, but rather on the guidance of the Holy Spirit on the Church to interpret the meaning of Scripture and apply it. Now I have to expand on that a little bit. Catholic thinking asserts that Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and Magisterial Teaching all coexist. One cannot exist without the other two. The Jerusalem Council clearly shows this. If the Apostolic faith were based on Sola Scriptura, then there is absolutely NO way that the Apostles could have said that Kosher food laws no longer applied. The Holy Spirit guided the Apostles to the understanding of the words of Jesus “what I have made clean, man shall not declare unclean”. That would not have been considered “scripture” by the Apostles, as it had not been recorded in writing as of yet. It wasn’t until AFTER the declarations of the Council of Jerusalem, that christian writings that were to ultimately become the New Testament reflected on paper (or parchment i would assume) the formal declared teachings defined at the Council of Jerusalem. Does that clarify my point a bit ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top