Protestant Canon

[JonNC]

Thanks Jon…for all the info you provided here.

Maybe this is where Luther’s fatal flaw is…he let each one decide for himself…instead of saying…defer to the Church, get guidance from the Church…in contrast to St. Jerome’s who submitted to the Church.

Hi Pablope,
I actually have the same feeling about it. From my personal perspective, if both the EO and CC agree on something, anything, we should at the very least consider it.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Jon, you can also include one of our Popes - Clement of Rome in his 1st Epistle to the Corinthians:

CHAPTER 32 – WE ARE JUSTIFIED NOT BY OUR OWN WORKS, BUT BY FAITH.

CHAPTER 33 – BUT LET US NOT OWE UP THE PRACTICE OF GOOD WORKS AND LOVE. GOD HIMSELF IS AN EXAMPLE TO US OF GOOD WORKS.

CHAPTER 34 – GREAT IS THE REWARD OF GOOD WORKS WITH GOD. JOINED TOGETHER IN HARMONY, LET US IMPLORE THAT REWARD FROM HIM.

{The caps are from the letter translation and not meant to shout )

It depends on the type of lens you use to read them, but there is inevitably a word absent from all of them: alone.

Like St. Paul, none of them use the term Faith alone.

And yet, they offer no alternative or addition to faith, and neither does Paul. So, a lot has to do with how we view the word alone. For Lutherans, it means simply that this is how we access justification - by faith, and nothing else. Does that mean we have no need to respond to grace? Of course not.
Jon

 

[pablope]

I am constantly told that I have been lied to and the I need to unlearn those lies. Yet, in my church, we are taught to test what our teachers preach using scripture as we all are instructed by the apostles. Don’t blindly accept those teachings. Pray and read the scriptures!!! .

Okay…how are you going to go about doing the testing? What standard will use to determine what is correct teaching and what is not? So in essence…it is you who declares what is to believe and what is not to believe?

It is a question of authority…

In your church, you are commanded to believe whatever

is declared as the Truth, or be accursed. Hmmmmmmmm…

The difference is…for us, it is the Church…it teaches and we conform ourselves to that teaching.

From what you posted, it seems you are the decision maker on what to believe, what to teach…what is truth and what is not truth…in essence, you declare for yourselves what to command yourself to believe as truth…

or purgatory (I personally feel bad that Catholics have to go to purgatory before Heaven - tounge in cheek)?

In the afterlife…you may find the truth of purgatory…

No, because these ideas are contradictions to the harmony of the Word of God.

It is the interpretations that are contradictory.

The original idea of this thread is why the Protestant Bible doesn’t include the apocrypha.

Okay…so where did protestants get the authority not to include the DC books?

Through out Church history, church councils, in whatever form, decide on issues…so can you point to a protestant council that decided the DC books should not be in the Bible?

Or was or is it an individual decision?

 

[spina1953]

Thanks Jon…for all the info you provided here.

Maybe this is where Luther’s fatal flaw is…he let each one decide for himself…instead of saying…defer to the Church, get guidance from the Church…in contrast to St. Jerome’s who submitted to the Church.

I have to agree with you on your point concerning Luther’s fatal flaw in that from that it seems that so many of the Protestant demoninations using the decide for oneself to interpret as they will causes confusion, misunderstandings and flawed sense of understanding of what Scripture really is saying.

 

[JonNC]

Okay…so where did protestants get the authority not to include the DC books?

 

[JonNC]

I have to agree with you on your point concerning Luther’s fatal flaw in that from that it seems that so many of the Protestant demoninations using the decide for oneself to interpret as they will causes confusion, misunderstandings and flawed sense of understanding of what Scripture really is saying.

But the two issues are unrelated. First, from a Lutheran POV, my privilege to opinion does not include doctrine. I am as closely bound to it as a Lutheran as you are as a Catholic, or I am not a Lutheran. I have no privilege to dispute the real presence, the virgin birth, the Theotokos, regenerative infant Baptism, etc. Doctrine is doctrine. If I don’t like Lutheran doctrine, I’m not Lutheran and I should go somewhere else.
2nd, as for protestant denominations, you have to speak to them as to whether or not they are confused, or have flawed misunderstandings about what scripture says. But whatever they tell you, it has nothing to do with Martin Luther. They are not lemmings. As a Lutheran, I am not confused at all. I think I am pretty well catechized in Lutheran belief.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Jon, you can also include one of our Popes - Clement of Rome in his 1st Epistle to the Corinthians:

CHAPTER 32 – WE ARE JUSTIFIED NOT BY OUR OWN WORKS, BUT BY FAITH.

CHAPTER 33 – BUT LET US NOT OWE UP THE PRACTICE OF GOOD WORKS AND LOVE. GOD HIMSELF IS AN EXAMPLE TO US OF GOOD WORKS.

CHAPTER 34 – GREAT IS THE REWARD OF GOOD WORKS WITH GOD. JOINED TOGETHER IN HARMONY, LET US IMPLORE THAT REWARD FROM HIM.

{The caps are from the letter translation and not meant to shout )

It depends on the type of lens you use to read them, but there is inevitably a word absent from all of them: alone.

Like St. Paul, none of them use the term Faith alone.

Just a quote I pulled out of Chapter 32:

And we, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

Look at all the things he excludes from how we are justified! He starts with “ourselves”. He could have stopped right their, because everything else he mentions come under the heading of “ourselves”. What else is there? Not ourselves, not our wisdom, not our understanding, not our godliness, not our works. Is there something other than these that we can rely on, in addition to faith?

In chapter 33, he writes:

What shall we do, then, brethren? Shall we become slothful in well-doing, and cease from the practice of love? God forbid that any such course should be followed by us! But rather let us hasten with all energy and readiness of mind to perform every good work. For the Creator and Lord of all Himself rejoices in His works.

Luther echoes this, in the passage I provided some posts back regarding Galatians 5:6.
And the confessions themselves say no less.

Again, does Clement here confirm the Lutheran idea of sola fide? It certainly appears that way, but Clement wasn’t aware of the Reformation era dispute over justification, so its hard to say. And of course, he can’t be said to be denying it, either.

Jon

PS My apology to the OP. I know this is off the topic.

 

[spina1953]

But the two issues are unrelated. First, from a Lutheran POV, my privilege to opinion does not include doctrine. I am as closely bound to it as a Lutheran as you are as a Catholic, or I am not a Lutheran. I have no privilege to dispute the real presence, the virgin birth, the Theotokos, regenerative infant Baptism, etc. Doctrine is doctrine. If I don’t like Lutheran doctrine, I’m not Lutheran and I should go somewhere else.
2nd, as for protestant denominations, you have to speak to them as to whether or not they are confused, or have flawed misunderstandings about what scripture says. But whatever they tell you, it has nothing to do with Martin Luther. They are not lemmings. As a Lutheran, I am not confused at all. I think I am pretty well catechized in Lutheran belief.

Jon

I understand where you are coming from Jon but it was just a general personal opinion of not so much of Lutherans but protestants in general. It was more that because of what Luther thought of self interpretations, at least at first gave rise to what so many in the protestant world do think.

 

[JonNC]

I understand where you are coming from Jon but it was just a general personal opinion of not so much of Lutherans but protestants in general. It was more that because of what Luther thought of self interpretations, at least at first gave rise to what so many in the protestant world do think.

Understood. One would think, however, that those who really allied themselves with Luther and his colleagues would be the ones who interpret “personal interpretation” as it is alleged that Luther did.
As it is, they seem to have there own view of things, unrelated to Luther.
But you are certainly welcome to your view, and I appreciate you sharing it the way you do.

Jon

 

[benjohnson]

It was more that because of what Luther thought of self interpretations, at least at first gave rise to what so many in the protestant world do think.

But we don’t allow for private interpretations for doctrine - we have this rather large book called the Book of Concorde that lays out our doctrine. To be Lutheran is to assent to what it says - and it’s no light tome: I could use it bludgeon any rabid animal that would attack me.

The idea that “you pop open a bible as a chose your own adventure” isn’t Catholic, but it also isn’t Lutheran.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

And yet, they offer no alternative or addition to faith, and neither does Paul. So, a lot has to do with how we view the word alone. For Lutherans, it means simply that this is how we access justification - by faith, and nothing else. Does that mean we have no need to respond to grace? Of course not.
Jon

But St. James closes the teaching on this:

and not by faith alone.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

But we don’t allow for private interpretations for doctrine - we have this rather large book called the Book of Concorde that lays out our doctrine. To be Lutheran is to assent to what it says - and it’s no light tome: I could use it bludgeon any rabid animal that would attack me.

The idea that “you pop open a bible as a chose your own adventure” isn’t Catholic, but it also isn’t Lutheran.

I believe the very reason that Lutherans are so close to Catholics is strong
Confessionalism.

 

[JonNC]

But St. James closes the teaching on this:

and not by faith alone.

Hi Jose,
James? By himself? Without regard to everything Paul says? Are we saying then that James has the final word, that all of what Paul says means nothing because of James?
I think James needs to be seen in light of what Paul says (and the other way around). Neither by his own.

What is James telling Christians? Ironically, the same thing Luther says: To think, “If faith justifies without works, let us work nothing,” is to despise the grace of God. Idle faith is not justifying faith. James is talking to those already regenerate, already justified, but necessarily having to grow in grace, just like Christians today do.

And curiously, why would those Fathers I quotes say “faith alone” if they thought they were contradicting James? I don’t think they thought they were, and I don’t think they were. Understanding that justification is a work of God’s grace in us, has its only source in said grace, that we access it by the gift of faith, and are incapable of bringing something additional to the table is quite scriptural. It is also quite scriptural that we are called to do the good works He prepares us to do by His grace and regeneration, and that failure to do so makes faith of no value. So, James is right; faith without works is dead. Faith in God without love for our fellow man is dead.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

I believe the very reason that Lutherans are so close to Catholics is strong
Confessionalism.

Undoubtedly. It is also what distinguishes us and separates us from most of Protestantism.

Jon

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Undoubtedly. It is also what distinguishes us and separates us from most of Protestantism.

Jon

The remarkable statements issued by the Lutheran-Catholic Dialogue and Lutheran-Orthodox Dialogue are due to precise expression of the Catholic Faith.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Hi Jose,
James? By himself? Without regard to everything Paul says? Are we saying then that James has the final word, that all of what Paul says means nothing because of James?
I think James needs to be seen in light of what Paul says (and the other way around). Neither by his own.

What is James telling Christians? Ironically, the same thing Luther says: To think, “If faith justifies without works, let us work nothing,” is to despise the grace of God. Idle faith is not justifying faith. James is talking to those already regenerate, already justified, but necessarily having to grow in grace, just like Christians today do.

And curiously, why would those Fathers I quotes say “faith alone” if they thought they were contradicting James? I don’t think they thought they were, and I don’t think they were. Understanding that justification is a work of God’s grace in us, has its only source in said grace, that we access it by the gift of faith, and are incapable of bringing something additional to the table is quite scriptural. It is also quite scriptural that we are called to do the good works He prepares us to do by His grace and regeneration, and that failure to do so makes faith of no value. So, James is right; faith without works is dead. Faith in God without love for our fellow man is dead.

Jon

The Fathers belong to something much bigger than themselves: The Church. They can express their ideas and are without a doubt great teachers. But if the Church speaks on a matter, then the case is closed.

If we look at quotes and teachings, they must be looked at in light of the Church. Or we will go insane or confused or both.

St. Paul never says Faith alone. So when we read St. James in light of St. Paul, it is pretty clear why St. Paul never said it.

Because it is not by faith alone.

 

[JonNC]

The Fathers belong to something much bigger than themselves: The Church. They can express their ideas and are without a doubt great teachers. But if the Church speaks on a matter, then the case is closed.

If we look at quotes and teachings, they must be looked at in light of the Church. Or we will go insane or confused or both.

St. Paul never says Faith alone. So when we read St. James in light of St. Paul, it is pretty clear why St. Paul never said it.

Because it is not by faith alone.

St Paul also says nothing other than faith. He doesn’t use the word alone but he provides for nothing else.
I agree that the fathers are not the final word, but they do provide great wisdom. A recent pope once said that Luther’s faith alone is not wrong if it does not oppose love. I would say that faith means nothing without love, but it is still faith that gives us access to justification. And we rely on the Spirit to guide us in our growth in grace.

Jon

 

[Porknpie]

Hi Pablope,
I actually have the same feeling about it. From my personal perspective, if both the EO and CC agree on something, anything, we should at the very least consider it.

Jon

I’m having fun with you Jon but for everything that the the EO and CC agree … how can one not be in full agreement? 2,000 years of history back to the apostolic faith and consistent with the early Church councils and Synods.

I’ll have fun with other denominations with this comment but imagine a world where everything was reversed: that the Church founded by Christ was Baptist and they believed in a symbolic Eucharist for 2,000 years. Then came along the new Catholic Church 1,600 years later and said “NO”, reading the bible alone we believe it’s not symbolic but it is truly the Real Presence, the Body Blood Soul and Divinity of Christ.

Can you imagine how the Baptists (and similar believing protestant denominations) would criticize the Catholics for departing from the faith handed down from the apostles?

PnP

 

[Isaiah45_9]

St Paul also says nothing other than faith. He doesn’t use the word alone but he provides for nothing else.
I agree that the fathers are not the final word, but they do provide great wisdom. A recent pope once said that Luther’s faith alone is not wrong if it does not oppose love. I would say that faith means nothing without love, but it is still faith that gives us access to justification. And we rely on the Spirit to guide us in our growth in grace.

Jon

Then it’s Faith and Love, and Love is really the greatest Work of all.

Paul is pretty clear, that if he has all the Faith to move mountains but has no love, he is nothing… This alone debunks faith alone.

I’m not minimizing the importance of Faith (It has carried me through many a trials), just not alone .

 

[JonNC]

I’m having fun with you Jon but for everything that the the EO and CC agree … how can one not be in full agreement? 2,000 years of history back to the apostolic faith and consistent with the early Church councils and Synods.

I’ll have fun with other denominations with this comment but imagine a world where everything was reversed: that the Church founded by Christ was Baptist and they believed in a symbolic Eucharist for 2,000 years. Then came along the new Catholic Church 1,600 years later and said “NO”, reading the bible alone we believe it’s not symbolic but it is truly the Real Presence, the Body Blood Soul and Divinity of Christ.

Can you imagine how the Baptists (and similar believing protestant denominations) would criticize the Catholics for departing from the faith handed down from the apostles?

PnP

Hey Pork
I thought some baptists did believe that.

I’m just kidding.

Jon