Sola scriptora, the apostles creed and confirmation

[pablope]

The Catholic Church also has Confirmation without a bishop. Attend any Easter Vigil service and you’ll probably witness it.

The authority is delegated by the bishop to the parish priest. The parish priest would not be doing confimations unless properly authorized to do so.

 

[ffg]

It was a class on the Protestant Reformation. I’m not sure but I think the term “Sola Scriptura” originated during that times. I’m not sure if the principle was advocated by any groups pre-Reformation.

Thanks for the reply.

I assume by your last point that you think the principle existed before the reformation. But was named during / after a point in the 1,500’s.

So considering the Bible is Christian. If it is a true Christian principle, one desired by Christ for His Church, we would have seen evidence of it since his time. And should expect to see evidence of it from His mouth.

I don’t see how it’s possible for a very important principle to exist for 1,400 - 1,500 years and never be named, even under different terminology.

If the principle was very important, it would have been written in at least one of the books of instructions that you and I both learned were the guide to life.

Ahh - I just saw your last response to someone else about how it's a reformation principle.

I would agree with that, as I would think most would. It's definitely a reformation principle. 

Is it correct? Would be my evaluation before accepting it. I wouldn't be able to accept it considering my thought process above.

 

[ltwin]

Thanks for the reply.

I assume by your last point that you think the principle existed before the reformation. But was named during / after a point in the 1,500’s.

So considering the Bible is Christian. If it is a true Christian principle, one desired by Christ for His Church, we would have seen evidence of it since his time. And should expect to see evidence of it from His mouth.

I don’t see how it’s possible for a very important principle to exist for 1,400 - 1,500 years and never be named, even under different terminology.

If the principle was very important, it would have been written in at least one of the books of instructions that you and I both learned were the guide to life.

I think you misunderstand me. I said, “I’m not sure if the principle was advocated by any groups pre-Reformation.” The reason I say this is because there were a lot of groups that pre-dated Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation that anticipated a lot of the things they believed. I’m not sure if some type of high regard for scriptural authority similar to Sola Scriptura would be one of those or not.

 

[Nicea325]

ltwin;10775843]Already answered this question.

It’s a standard principle of the Protestant Reformation. **A lot of Catholics disagree with the Catholic Church’s beliefs and practices. It doesn’t mean they know what they are talking about./**QUOTE]

Sorry,but that is a bad comparison. All orthodox doctrines have been defined and ratified by the ancient church. SS has no official voice or authority defining it and ratifying it as an orthodox doctrine or principle. If so, again…whose the official voice for SS?

 

[JonNC]

After mass I went to an evangelical church with my non catholic wife

**They say the apostles creed and it says “decended into hell”

Where is that in the bible according to Protestants I don’t think it’s in the bible **
They also had thier confirmation completed at that church service
(they baptize at 8 and confirm at 13)

How do they have confirmation with no bishop and no laying on of hands since that’s the bible way?

1 Peter 3: 18-20
18For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, 19in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, 20because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.

Lutheran confirmation is done by laying on of hands by the pastor.

Jon

 

[Darryl_B]

Well, your neighbor from Calvary Chapel does not speak for all Protestants. And anyway, I doubt your neighbor from Calvary Chapel believes that Sunday School or “non sola scriptora prayer” (whatever that is???) is forbidden by Scripture to begin with. Therefore, I highly doubt you understand what he means by Sola Scriptura in all honesty.

This is what the Evangelical Covenant Church believes:

“the holy scripture, the old and the new testament, is the Word of God and the only perfect rule for faith, doctrine, and conduct.”

Calvary Chapel believes:

We believe that the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the Word of God, fully inspired without error and the infallible rule of faith and practice. The Word of God is the foundation upon which this church operates and is the basis for which this church is governed. We believe that the Word of God supersedes any earthly law that is contrary to the Holy Scriptures. It is from God’s Word that we establish our doctrine and Statement of Faith. (Isaiah 28:13; Nehemiah 8:8; John 17:17; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; Hebrews 4:12; 1 Peter 1:23-25; 2 Peter 1:3-4 and 1:21).

You see! The statement clearly says that CC believes that it “establish[es]” its doctrine and beliefs on God’s Word. It derives what it believes from Scripture. In other words, it judges and measures everything it believes against the Bible.

It’s not about finding it in the Bible. It is about being on a solid foundation. It is about not being carried away by every man made tradition that claims to be sacred. It is about not being carried away with every wind of doctrine. It is about not binding what God has not bound and not loosing what God has not loosed. It is about believing that all things necessary to salvation is told and given to us in Holy Scripture so that we might not be led astray or without guidance. It is about not letting guesswork or circumstantial doctrines be declared de fide.

I am confused. You say the Sola Scriptura rejects the traditions of men (which I think you refer to the Catholic Church by this) but then say Sola Scriptura does not incorporate the traditions of men (which I think you refer to the protestant churches by this).

Isn’t Sola Scriptura supposed to have all protestants on the same page? Yet I guarantee you will disagree with another protestants interpretation who dont speak on behalf of all protestants in even some fundamental doctrines.

The way I understand Scriptura (without the Sola in front) is Catholics derive all their doctrines from it, this part I don’t understand about the protestant claim. But the way I understand Sola Scriptura is that if it’s not in the Bible it is wrong. eg. The Bible does not say celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ therefore it is wrong to do that.

Does your pentecostal church have communion (bread and wine) at its service? What about water baptism?

 

[ltwin]

I am confused. You say the Sola Scriptura rejects the traditions of men (which I think you refer to the Catholic Church by this) but then say Sola Scriptura does not incorporate the traditions of men (which I think you refer to the protestant churches by this).

No. All churches have traditions. All human societies will form traditions. What Sola Scriptura is designed to do is to insure that man-made traditions are not raised to the level of matters of faith that all must believe. It is about ensuring that things that Scripture does not clearly speak to are left to individual conscience and that what is circumstantial is not imposed in a dogmatic way.

Isn’t Sola Scriptura supposed to have all protestants on the same page? Yet I guarantee you will disagree with another protestants interpretation who dont speak on behalf of all protestants in even some fundamental doctrines.

I suppose it would, if everyone reading the Bible were perfect.

The way I understand Scriptura (without the Sola in front) is Catholics derive all their doctrines from it, this part I don’t understand about the protestant claim. But the way I understand Sola Scriptura is that if it’s not in the Bible it is wrong. eg. The Bible does not say celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ therefore it is wrong to do that.

You misunderstand Sola Scriptura. Sola Scriptura means that all things should be measured and judged by Scripture. Transubstantiation, for example, is a belief that the Catholic Church has made dogmatic pronouncements on. This is a belief that even liturgical Protestants find problematic. It’s not Transubstantiation itself, but the fact that the Catholic Church had declared that one must believe that this is the explanation for the Real Presence. How on earth is anyone supposed to be able to explain the mystery of Real Presence?. Yet the Catholic Church attempts to do so and in the process it defines a mystery that is left undefined in Scripture.

Does your pentecostal church have communion (bread and wine) at its service? What about water baptism?

Not at every service. We do observe communion and we baptize new believers.

 

[Darryl_B]

I suppose it would, if everyone reading the Bible were perfect.

So which perfect teacher did you use to tell you what Scripture says? 1 tim 3:15?

You misunderstand Sola Scriptura. Sola Scriptura means that all things should be measured and judged by Scripture.

That is exactly what I said. If it is not in the Bible it is wrong. eg Christmas.

Transubstantiation, for example, is a belief that the Catholic Church has made dogmatic pronouncements on. This is a belief that even liturgical Protestants find problematic. It’s not Transubstantiation itself, but the fact that the Catholic Church had declared that one must believe that this is the explanation for the Real Presence. How on earth is anyone supposed to be able to explain the mystery of Real Presence?. Yet the Catholic Church attempts to do so and in the process it defines a mystery that is left undefined in Scripture.

That sounds more like an issue of faith rather than Sola Scriptura. The Real Presence is historically instigated by Jesus Christ as Scripture says John 6, has been accepted since the start of the Church and was even believed by the early protestants with a minor variant. So which perfect teacher did you use to tell you what Scripture says?

The pentecostal churches I’ve been to don’t do communion. Maybe you need to split yourself off from them rather than having an umbrella definition of pentecostal.

 

[ltwin]

So which perfect teacher did you use to tell you what Scripture says? 1 tim 3:15?

We don’t read by ourselves. We read it and are informed by the church. We are taught by the church. What the Scriptures say is defined for us by the church.

That is exactly what I said. If it is not in the Bible it is wrong. eg Christmas.

Is it contrary to the Bible to celebrate the birth of our Savior??? Some may think it does, but they would be a minority of even Fundamentalist Protestants.

Sola Scriptura would only be violated if someone mandated that everyone must believe that Christmas was on December 25. Or if everyone must not celebrate Christmas. The Bible doesn’t have anything to say about Christmas. It is up to the individual if they want to celebrate Christmas as the birth of our savior.

Sola Scriptura does not mean, “If it is not in the Bible it is wrong.” You don’t understand what “to judge and measure means.” Scripture is what we “judge and measure” everything by. We judge and measure any beliefs about the birth of Christ by Scripture. We don’t eliminate any or all observances that are not named in Scripture.

That sounds more like an issue of faith rather than Sola Scriptura. The Real Presence is historically instigated by Jesus Christ as Scripture says John 6, has been accepted since the start of the Church and was even believed by the early protestants with a minor variant. So which perfect teacher did you use to tell you what Scripture says?

No, this is the issue of a church, namely the Catholic Church, defining a mystery and wanting other people to believe their definitions. This is what Sola Scriptura avoids.

The pentecostal churches I’ve been to don’t do communion. Maybe you need to split yourself off from them rather than having an umbrella definition of pentecostal.

That statement right there tells me you know nothing about Pentecostalism. It would be wise and better reflect Christian humility for people who do not know anything about a particular religion to withhold giving advice on how one should better live faithfully within that tradition.

I’d suggest you’d read the “Ask a Pentecostal” thread.

 

[Darryl_B]

That statement right there tells me you know nothing about Pentecostalism. It would be wise and better reflect Christian humility for people who do not know anything about a particular religion to withhold giving advice on how one should better live faithfully within that tradition.

When I asked you if your church has communion you seemed to suggest that it was the rule yes rather than the exception. The rule is >50% because it is more than less, the exception is <50% because it is less than more.

My experience with pentecostal churches, and no I havent been to all versions because that would take a minimum of 14 years, just the denominationals, excluding the individual churches, under that umbrella, is that communion is an exception rather than a rule.

If that offends you then I apologize but that is the sad case. I am still trying to figure out how I was handing out advice on how one should better live faithfully (although you did).

 

[ltwin]

When I asked you if your church has communion you seemed to suggest that it was the rule yes rather than the exception. The rule is >50% because it is more than less, the exception is <50% because it is less than more.

Maybe according to you.

My experience with pentecostal churches, and no I havent been to all versions because that would take a minimum of 14 years, just the denominationals, excluding the individual churches, under that umbrella, is that communion is an exception rather than a rule.

The frequency varies. It is rarely every Sunday, but there are churches that do believe in having it every Sunday. It is often observed quarterly. All Pentecostals believe in observing Holy Communion. That is the rule, not the exception. It sounded like you were suggesting that Pentecostals did not believe in even having communion.

If that offends you then I apologize but that is the sad case.

What’s sad? That we don’t have communion at each and every service? Why should that be sad to you since you’re not even Pentecostal and in the eyes of the Catholic Church what Pentecostals do isn’t even Holy Communion to begin with?

I am still trying to figure out how I was handing out advice on how one should better live faithfully (although you did).

Well you apparently suggested that I wasn’t Pentecostal enough or something and then proceeded to advise me, “Maybe you need to split yourself off from them rather than having an umbrella definition of pentecostal.”

 

[EvangelCatholic]

The authority is delegated by the bishop to the parish priest. The parish priest would not be doing confirmations unless properly authorized to do so.

Sounds very Lutheran. We believe confirmation is the affirmation of baptism since most are baptized as infants. First Communion precedes Confirmation at a much younger age [generally 7 yrs old]. After catechism instruction an individual is confirmed into the holy faith. Even in Lutheran Churches that follow Apostolic Succession, the priest can confirm in the absence of a bishop.

 

[Darryl_B]

Wisdom has built her house, she has set up her seven pillars. She has slaughtered her beasts, she has mixed her wine, she has also set her table. She has sent out her maids to call from the highest places in the town, Whoever is simple, let him turn in here! To him who is without sense she says Come, eat of my bread and drink of the wine I have mixed. Leave simpleness, and live, and walk in the way of insight.

 

[JonNC]

Sounds very Lutheran. We believe confirmation is the affirmation of baptism since most are baptized as infants. First Communion precedes Confirmation at a much younger age [generally 7 yrs old]. After catechism instruction an individual is confirmed into the holy faith. Even in Lutheran Churches that follow Apostolic Succession, the priest can confirm in the absence of a bishop.

While not universal, in the LCMS confirmands typically receive 1st common ion at their confirmation. In fact, that was the case when I was confirmed in the LCA - at age 15.

Jon

 

[ffg]

I think you misunderstand me. I said, “I’m not sure if the principle was advocated by any groups pre-Reformation.” The reason I say this is because there were a lot of groups that pre-dated Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation that anticipated a lot of the things they believed. I’m not sure if some type of high regard for scriptural authority similar to Sola Scriptura would be one of those or not.

I agree that people in a group are many times unhappy with the leadership or an aspect of the group and thus leave or anticipate change.

I think it is pretty easy to research if the term was advocated prior to the reformation - find a church / group that promoted it. - If it was an important principle, it will be written somewhere. If not the term itself, the principle.

But then we said it was a reformation principle, that being the case, looking pre-reformation is fruitless.

Does our taste (belief) have authority over Truth, or does Truth exist regardless of what we think it is or is not?

What is our goal? to be the best at what we know, or to be on the side of Truth?

I would much rather not understand Truth and be on it’s side, than to understand what I think is truth and be wrong.

 

[Miriam1947]

The Catholic Church also has Confirmation without a bishop. Attend any Easter Vigil service and you’ll probably witness it.

That means that the bishop has given authority to the local priest to confirm.