Sola Scriptura is not a doctrine

[De_Maria]

So, the BoC has nothing to do with this.

The BoC teaches Semper Virgo the same as Mother of God. But Lutherans eschew the BoC and refer to Scripture alone.

Got it.

As for SS, then, the same applies. The BoC teaches it. But Lutherans recognize it is not in the Bible, therefore they deny it is doctrine from God. But hold it as a hermeneutical principle.

That still leaves the illogical stance of claiming it is not a doctrine. It remains a doctrine since people have to be taught what it is and how to apply it.

 

[De_Maria]

De_Maria:

That still leaves us with the problem

It isn’t a problem for me.

OK. Thanks for replying.

 

[JonNC]

Got it.

Actually, you’ve proven over and over that you don’t get it. That’s okay, you don’t seem to get the Catholic understanding of doctrine and discipline either.

That still leaves the illogical stance of claiming it is not a doctrine. It remains a doctrine since people have to be taught what it is and how to apply it.

The fact that you see it as illogical has more to do with either an inability or an unwillingness. I really can’t do anymore to help you.

 

[De_Maria]

The fact that you see it as illogical has more to do with either an inability or an unwillingness. I really can’t do anymore to help you.

That’s a two edged sword, isn’t it.

And, you not seeing it as illogical has more to do with either an inability or an unwillingness. I really can’t do anymore to help you, either.

Arrivederci!

 

[spina1953]

De-Maria I disagree. While its true Eastern Catholic canon is subject to the Pope along with the Bishops, The Pope generally does not interfere with their canon recognizing they have their own traditions. You might think discipline and doctrine are the same but Catholic’s do not since disciplines can be changed while doctrines can not be changed because it explains dogma’s. Not everything found in Scripture is doctrine but they do reveal truths. That being said none of the biblical authors ever once thought that what they wrote was sacred Scripture. It was to the Catholic Church to decide under the guidance of the Holy Spirit which Books were inspired and which ones were not.

Jesus taught orally, and passed what he taught and preached to the Apostles who in turn also taught and preached orally before there was ever a NT. Also Jesus never commanded the Apostles to write and those who did write did so to those places where they were not able to be, but they never thought that what they did write was the final word.

For example in the OT "An Eye for an Eye and a tooth for tooth, along with many other things in the OT can’t be doctrine since if it were so then all of us would be bound to follow everything in the OT as well as the NT. There are verses in the OT that speaks of how lands are to be used etc. if that is doctrine then why are we not following all of that is contained in Scripture? If it is disciplines why are we not following all of what is contained in Scripture? So my point is discipline and doctrine are different.

 

[De_Maria]

You might think discipline and doctrine are the same but Catholic’s do not since disciplines can be changed while doctrines can not be changed because it explains dogma’s.

Do you understand the concept of sets?

In Catholic Teaching, disciplines are members of the set called doctrines.

If you read the discipline itself, you will see that it conveys a lesson. Thus, it is a doctrine of the category labeled discipline.

Can. 277 §1. Clerics are obliged to observe perfect and perpetual continence for the sake of the kingdom of heaven and therefore are bound to celibacy which is a special gift of God by which sacred ministers can adhere more easily to Christ with an undivided heart and are able to dedicate themselves more freely to the service of God and humanity.

That is a disciplinary doctrine.

I know that people love to say, “its a discipline, not a doctrine”. But those who have come to regard those two words as mutually exclusive, are simply wrong.

 

[MichaelP3]

But those who have come to regard those two words as mutually exclusive, are simply wrong.

The entire Catholic Church it seems?

 

[spina1953]

De-Maria this is the Catholic understanding of discipline, doctrine and dogma. Disciplines are teachings and practices that can be changed. Disciplines are the liturgical and theological practices and customs of the Catholic faith and are intended to further enhance the faith of the believer. Doctrines are truths that have been defined by Biblical, historical, or logical extensions or connection to dogma’s. Dogma’s are truths revealed by God and can not change Dogma’s and doctrines only apply to issues of faith and morals. No one not even the Pope can change doctrines and dogma’s. However, the Pope can change disciplines for example, Priests marrying in the Latin Rite, change fasting times, whether or not one eats meat on fridays etc.

It does not matter what secular source you use the Catholic Church has defined its meanings of Disciple doctrine and dogma’s and as I stated this how the Catholic Church and Catholic’s understand these terms.

 

[De_Maria]

De_Maria:

But those who have come to regard those two words as mutually exclusive, are simply wrong.

The entire Catholic Church it seems?

I’ve already disproved that idea. I produced even a CA article that admits that textbooks exist which teach that disciplines are a form of doctrine.

 

[De_Maria]

It does not matter what secular source you use the Catholic Church has defined its meanings of Disciple doctrine and dogma’s and as I stated this how the Catholic Church and Catholic’s understand these terms.

Show me the teaching from the Catholic Church. Not some apologetic or other informal source.

 

[MichaelP3]

In the same article it also said what everyone is telling you. Very very explicitly.

Guess I need to say it AGAIN. Your best bet with that article is that it is contradicting and should be tossed.

So no, you didn’t disprove anything. In fact I am not really sure what you are doing?

 

[De_Maria]

In the same article it also said what everyone is telling you.

“Also” is the key word there.

Thus, you understand that the article admits that Catholic Catechism textbooks exist which teach exactly what I’m telling you.

 

[FrDavid96]

First this:

I’ve already disproved that idea. I produced even a CA article that admits that textbooks exist which teach that disciplines are a form of doctrine.

Then this:

Show me the teaching from the Catholic Church. Not some apologetic or other informal source.

The above is your usual pattern here.

Everyone else is required to provide “absolute proof” of something. One of your favorite techniques is to say “prove where the Church infallibly teaches [whatever] and if you don’t do that, you prove me right.” Then you badger that person with “you haven’t answered my question, so you admit that I’m right.”

On the other hand, you’re perfectly content to quote some article on the internet and insist that everyone else must accept it as true; even if you take a single sentence clause and remove it from any context.

In the end, the only thing you actually prove is that you do you understand, nor are you so much as willing to learn, either Catholic teaching, Catholic methods of theology, or even basic definitions of words.

Your posts speak for themselves; and they are the reason why hardly anyone here takes you seriously.

 

[MichaelP3]

Not really. I am just giving you the benefit of the doubt. You are inferring that from the article.

Hence for your purpose the article is just contradictory. I’m not really sure what you achieved with it as it “may say” what you say but it clearly said what everyone else is saying…

 

[spina1953]

De-Maria, I have given you what the Catholic Church and Catholic’s believe and follow I showed you what we believe and you want more and its not become redundant There is no sense in keeping on as from what other have posted you are not interested in what Catholic’s say you it seems just want some proof and it also seems that you are just looking to debunk anything Catholic’s say on the subject, in order to prove a point that you are correct and the rest of us are wrong. I rather doubt that you are going to win any argument with Catholic’s in trying to convince them you are correct and they are wrong.

 

[De_Maria]

even basic definitions of words.

Synonyms for discipline
noun regimen, training

...
education...
inculcation
indoctrination...

75 "Christ the Lord, in whom the entire Revelation of the most high God is summed up, commanded the apostles to preach the Gospel, which had been promised beforehand by the prophets, and which he fulfilled in his own person and promulgated with his own lips. In preaching the Gospel, they were to communicate the gifts of God to all men. This Gospel was to be the source of all saving truth and moral discipline."32

 

[HarryStotle]

De-Maria this is the Catholic understanding of discipline, doctrine and dogma. Disciplines are teachings and practices that can be changed. Disciplines are the liturgical and theological practices and customs of the Catholic faith and are intended to further enhance the faith of the believer. Doctrines are truths that have been defined by Biblical, historical, or logical extensions or connection to dogma’s. Dogma’s are truths revealed by God and can not change Dogma’s and doctrines only apply to issues of faith and morals. No one not even the Pope can change doctrines and dogma’s. However, the Pope can change disciplines for example, Priests marrying in the Latin Rite, change fasting times, whether or not one eats meat on fridays etc.

It does not matter what secular source you use the Catholic Church has defined its meanings of Disciple doctrine and dogma’s and as I stated this how the Catholic Church and Catholic’s understand these terms.

This isn’t the Church’s understanding and can’t be because it excludes where it ought to include and includes where it ought to exclude. Not to mention the fact that it is logically inconsistent and incoherent.

If disciplines are merely for enhancing the faith and can be changed, that would mean all disciplines would be changeable even the disciplines regarding intrinsically evil moral acts or the discipline regarding reception of the Eucharist when in mortal sin. Nope. Some disciplines can be changed if they are grounded on doctrine where the Church has the power to bind and loose. However, disciplines based upon revealed truth or dogma cannot be changed because the Church has no authority to do so.

Furthermore, doctrine is simply the entire corpus of what is taught and passed on by the Church. Some of those doctrines are in the power of the Church to change (I.e., comes from the authority of the Church to bind and loose) while other doctrines called dogmas are revealed by God and cannot be changed by the Church. Disciplines are practices in toto which follow from all doctrines (including dogmas). If those practices or disciplines follow from dogma, they MUST be followed because the Church has no authority to change them – marriage and remarriage, for example. If the practice follows from a non-dogmatic doctrine the practice can be changed.

Assuming that a discipline is always changeable by the Church, as your position implies, is a BIG mistake.

Sola Scriptura is not a doctrine Apologetics

A big part of the issue in this thread is the confusion between dogma and doctrine. Dogma, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia… … is now understood to be a truth appertaining to faith or morals, revealed by God, transmitted from the Apostles in the Scriptures or by tradition, and proposed by the Church for the acceptance of the faithful. It might be described briefly as a revealed truth defined by the Church — but private revelations do not constitute dogmas, and some theologians confine …

 

[FrDavid96]

Assuming that a discipline is always changeable by the Church, as your position implies, is a BIG mistake.

That’s all true.

Which is why we typically add a qualification “mere discipline” which indicates a discipline that is not a direct enforcement of doctrine or dogma.

In casual conversation, though, the word discipline all by itself, or especially in the context of discipline compared to doctrine, we usually intend the meaning “mere discipline” without actually saying the word.

 

[FrDavid96]

FrDavid96:

even basic definitions of words.

Synonyms for discipline
noun regimen, training

...
education...
inculcation
indoctrination...

This is your typical equivocation.

As I already tried to explain to you, one of the definitions of discipline is an academic field. You are trying to equate that with doctrine just because both share the synonym “teaching.”

Equivocation and refusing to acknowledge that words actually have definitions is your problem.

 

[HarryStotle]

HarryStotle:

Assuming that a discipline is always changeable by the Church, as your position implies, is a BIG mistake.

That’s all true.

Which is why we typically add a qualification “mere discipline” which indicates a discipline that is not a direct enforcement of doctrine or dogma.

In casual conversation, though, the word discipline all by itself, or especially in the context of discipline compared to doctrine, we usually intend the meaning “mere discipline” without actually saying the word.

The fact that “we” play fast and loose with a term on a frequent basis does not, then, support an argument regarding what is or is not discipline in a proper sense. It certainly doesn’t work on behalf of the argument that Sola Scriptura is merely a discipline when the reason for the “merely” is left up to the discretion of the user and “not a direct enforcement of doctrine or dogma.” Nor does it even address the reason why it might be reliable hermeneutic practice or discipline to begin with. Surely, it must be supported by some doctrine or dogma somewhere to attain the degree of influence or practice that it does. If it is “merely a discipline” then why would anyone base their entire exegetical approach upon it without any solid reason (i.e., some dogma or, at least, a sound doctrine) for doing so?