Amen! OTOH, a Protestant has only the Bible – or the Bible Only
– as his sole basis for faith, practice, and morals.the problem is Scripture is the sole authority position is that in reality it becomes" my personal interpretation of Scripture is the sole authority" in dispute arises as to what Scripture means the denomination is. and of course such an attitude leads to the convenient twisting Scripture I have to accommodate whatever morals current culture holds you. . For example, after 2000 years of consistent teaching among all Christians contraception, homosexuality suddenly become “moral” for many denominationsAmen! OTOH, a Protestant has only the Bible – or the Bible Only
The Church is nearly 400 years older than the Bible. She didn’t need the Bible to know what to teach. The Scriptures confirm the doctrines of the Church, but they are not the original source. The Catholic Faith was being taught while the NT was being written, selected, and canonized.
Jim Dandy
If you were to investigate the training that Lutheran clergy go through, and I imagine that of others, you would see how baseless this comment really is.
, So in Lutheran clergy training they are taught that god was inept that he let his people live in ignorance on such basic things on how they are saved for 1500 years after the birth of Christ. ? They are taught that god put all the answers and book that didn’t even exist for 400 years after the birth of Christ and was not readily available for 1400 years after the birth of Christ?
I’m going to have to quibble here, I’m afraid. After all, it’s a CATHOLIC saint (Jerome) who reminds us that “ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ.”
So how do you explain the 1,500 years of History prior to the “reformation” did god really allow his people to live inignorance of what is necessary for salvation for 1,500!years ?
I spend attach an hour a day praying the Scriptures. But we are not a sola scriptura church and a Catholic could grow in his faith without ever personally opening the BibleI’m going to have to quibble here, I’m afraid. After all, it’s a CATHOLIC saint (Jerome) who reminds us that “ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ.”
I like the 3 legged stool image, but I have my own definition of the 3 legs:
Generally speaking (massive numbers of exeptions coming!), protestants like to rely upon 1 and 2 above and reject the existance of #3. The stool often topples as a result in both their personal lives and that of their communities.
- Scripture
- Grace
- Magisterial interpretation / clarification
But while the Catholic Church officially recognizes all three, my experience is that individual catholics mostly rely nearly exclusively on 2 and 3 and invest little effort into #1 (and precious little in #3 these days for that matter!). They end up no better off than fundamentalists: toppled stool.
So dust off that bible and do some reading!
I think God - and the Church - did a pretty darn good job with the first seven councils. They are pretty clear about what’s necessary for salvation. Don’t the creeds explain it pretty well? The creeds are the first section of the Book of Concord.
Good points. This n-C, however, would turn his back on SS in a moment, were Rome and the east to agree on what Tradition teaches, and were reconciled.I think we all are being too hard on the non-Catholics. I once knew an AoG girl that had the basic idea right. She said “a bunch of people had a meeting and prayed over the list”
In general though you just don’t think about these things. We tend to believe what we’re raised in, and unless something traumatic happens we never really question it. Not sure why.
Questioning Sola Scriptura for someone raised with it would be like a cradle Catholic questioning the Pope. Doesn’t happen often.
Good answer:thumbsup: But not all accept the councils
The question’s a pretty big problem for them.
If that were true there would’ve been no need for the so-called Reformation.
Well, in some ways, the first 6, but the seventh, which speaks to iconoclasm pretty much reflects how Lutherans feel about it.Good answer:thumbsup: But not all accept the councils
Just curious, why only 7 councils
You mean what Tradition teaches about the Pope? Both Rome and the East have a point, but they emphasize the part to their advantage. It’s sad.
So your conditions are already met…
Well, its more than that, but that, to me, is the big one. My biggest complaint about Rome is ecclesiastical, not soteriological or eschalogical. That would be solved, it seems to me.
Ya know, part of the East is reconciled. They’re just called Byzantine Catholics
Nice try, Joseph.Perhaps the problems are in the later teachings. If you wish to go back to the first seven councils, then yes, there would be no Schism or Reformation.
Right on.
Hi Jon,
Hi Jim,