Sola Scriptura - questioning evangelical

[Gorgias]

Sola Scriptura basically only says that the Church shouldn’t establish new doctrines on non-scriptural grounds.

Except, if you have a governing body who interprets Scripture, you don’t have “sola” scriptura. You just have a new magisterium. So… it boils down to “I like my opinion better than yours”, doesn’t it?

The lack of scriptural support was only a part of Luther’s critique of Purgatory and indulgences. He also cited the Church Fathers and used basic logical arguments.

Yet again, though: “my opinion over above your authority”, no?

 

[Julius_Caesar]

The lack of scriptural support was only a part of Luther’s critique of Purgatory

Augustine didn’t see it like that. Evidently Luther was following his own opinion.

And Purgatory is a small part of Catholicism so why would Catholics have a whole section about it?

 

[BohemianBrother]

Except, if you have a governing body who interprets Scripture, you don’t have “sola” scriptura. You just have a new magisterium.

The 5 Solas suffer from an unfortunate naming. Remember it is primarily a catchy slogan. The “sola” in sola scriptura means that binding doctrine should be based solely on scripture, or that scripture is the only final norm for doctrine. It doesn’t actually exclude a magisterium, that’s a more modern misunderstanding.

Again, to see this in practice, look at the churches where Sola Scriptura historically originated - they all have a ‘magisterium’ of some kind. Even your nondenom. church down the street has an authoritative ‘magisterium’ (the pastor), they’re just a little confused about it.

So… it boils down to “I like my opinion better than yours”, doesn’t it?

I know many evangelicals today act like it, and I am not a fan of it. Some authority is needed, that’s true, and I agree.

However, in the end even infallibility is just an opinion until you accept it. One should always try to put forward a convincing and logical argument, not merely an authoritative statement without explanation. That is how things work in real life.

Besides, you see it all the time when different Catholics accuse each other of heresy over silly things like OF vs EF mass. Even better example would be; imagine living in 15th century Western Europe, during the Papal Schism. What would you say? “I like my Pope better than yours.”? No, even authority has a basis and doesn’t just exist on its own. And sadly we disagree on what that basis is. That is the true division between our traditions.

 

[BohemianBrother]

Augustine didn’t see it like that. Evidently Luther was following his own opinion.

St. Augustine isn’t the only Church Father and he isn’t infallible. Some Eastern Fathers had problems with the specific concept of Purgatory before Luther (I am no expert on it, so correct me if I am wrong).

And Purgatory is a small part of Catholicism so why would Catholics have a whole section about it?

No dogma is small enough. Didn’t Augustine (or was it Thomas Aquinas?) say, that whoever denies one dogma, denies them all? Surely if it was a part of the Apostolic Tradition, important enough to bind the conscience of every believer, the early Church would have wanted to include it in the writings it passed down to the later generations, no?

I personally agree that there probably is some sort of purgation after death, but the specific Catholic teaching seems to develop on the idea way beyond Scriptural support (and to weird ends, like the ‘Treasury of merit’).

 

[Julius_Caesar]

St. Augustine isn’t the only Church Father and he isn’t infallible. Some Eastern Fathers had problems with the specific concept of Purgatory before Luther

The buck stops with the Church and the Church ruled on Purgatory long before Luther.

 

[BohemianBrother]

Yes, and the initial problem for Luther that the combination of Purgatory and Indulgences makes little sense and actually goes against the gospel. That is the content of the 95 Theses by the way…

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Surely if it was a part of the Apostolic Tradition, important enough to bind the conscience of every believer, the early Church would have wanted to include it in the writings it passed down to the later generations, no?

Is Purgatory in the Bible? | Catholic Answers Magazine

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Yes, and the initial problem for Luther that the combination of Purgatory and Indulgences makes little sense and actually goes against the gospel. That is the content of the 95 Theses by the way…

No. Luther’s problem was faith alone and putting himself as the authority over Scripture.

 

[BohemianBrother]

I don’t disagree with the idea of purgatory in general. Just with the explanation that involves a kind of temporal punishment which can be mitigated by receiving alien merit from some ‘Treasury of merits’ which is comprised of the merits of saints who produced more merit than they actually needed for attaining Heaven.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Just with the explanation that involves a kind of temporal punishment which can be mitigated by receiving alien merit from some ‘Treasury of merits’

That’s in Scripture as well. Paul speaks of making in his body what is lacking the suffering of Christ for the sake of his fellow believers. There are multiple examples of people receiving salvation because of their friends, like the paralytic.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Here is what Dr. Scott Hahn wrote on it:

How did Moses deliver them from the punishment they deserved? By invoking the merit of their ancestors. He told the Lord: “Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, your servants, to whom you swore by yourself, and said to them, ‘I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have promised I will give to your descendants, and they shall inherit it for ever’” (Ex 32:13).
Moses did not try to plead the case of the current generation, except insofar as they were offspring of the great patriarchs. In this story, we can see the temporal remission of punishment. God is going to destroy the Israelites; but he doesn’t. We can see Moses’ intercession, based upon the treasury of merits, the merit of the Fathers.
When the ancient rabbis discussed this story, they found no other way to explain it. The treasury of merit enabled them to safeguard God’s mercy and his justice simultaneously. They applied the same principles to the stories of Noah, whose righteousness served to redeem future generations from the ravages of the flood, and David, whose goodness alone saved his son Solomon from the disaster he merited for himself. (Hahn, Scott, Signs of Life: 40 Catholic Customs and Their Biblical Roots, 192-193)*There are all kinds of Scriptural examples of person A benefitting from the faith of person B. Think of the centurian’s servant who is healed because of the faith of the centurian (Mt 8:5-13), or the paralytic who was healed and forgiven because of the faith of his friends (Mk 2:3-5). Or the Canaanite woman who interceded for her daughter, healed by Jesus through the faith of the mother (Mt 15:22-28).

 

[BohemianBrother]

Scott Hahn is a well read and bright scholar and apologete. I guess my response won’t come with such a well structured and eloquent argument.

I agree that prayers can influence other people’s faith. I don’t see how purgatory and the treasury of merit neccessarily connect to Moses asking God to remember the promises given to the righterious forefathers of the Hebrews. He wasn’t directly invoking the merits, but the promises given.

The conflicting part is mainly this: Either purgatory is a place of unpleasant but neccessary purgation of sin from the soul, or it is a last place for the temporary punishment for sins already atoned for - in both cases indulgences make little sense. If the Church can almost arbitrarily transfer merit from a ‘treasury of merit’, then it should do so freely and all the time, to ease the suffering of those being punished. If the souls in the purgatory need to be purified, then we should help them in their struggle by prayer, but it makes little sense to impart merit to them, so that they can escape purgatory earlier.

If purgation is purification from sin, I would want to stay in purgatory for how long is neccessary. If it is a punishment, then why does the Church withold giving help? And if what actually matters is the merits of the faithful (prayer, donations), then why mix in some heavenly ‘treasure of merits’?

 

[Julius_Caesar]

I added my own statements into the mix. You have yet to analyze those.

 

[Gorgias]

Either purgatory is a place of unpleasant but neccessary purgation of sin from the soul, or it is a last place for the temporary punishment for sins already atoned for

It’s not “temporary punishment for sins already atoned for”. It’s “the temporal punishment due to sin.” That’s a turn of phrase meant to contrast with the ‘eternal punishment due to sin’ (eternal condemnation). It’s not “punishment”, as such, but refers to satisfaction for sins committed. There’s a certain nuance there, that might need explication.

The sins you’re talking about may have been forgiven, but atonement hasn’t taken place. (That’s what the notion of “satisfaction” is; we’re offering that sacrifice – of our actions and/or prayers – to atone to God, who’s forgiven our sin.)

Only when that atonement isn’t complete (or unforgiven venial sin exists) is purgation necessary.

in both cases indulgences make little sense

Actually, it makes perfect sense, if you think about it. Did Christ’s death merit your salvation? If so – and if substitutionary atonement is a real ‘thing’ – then why can’t I apply my sacrifices (little though they may be) to your benefit? Moreover, if the whole point of the Church is to be a vehicle through which the grace of Christ is distributed to humanity, then what’s off-base with the notion that these graces be distributed by the Church?

If the Church can almost arbitrarily transfer merit from a ‘treasury of merit’, then it should do so freely and all the time, to ease the suffering of those being punished.

Two thoughts:

• remember Christ’s parable of the workers in the field. “Am I not free to do as I wish with my own money?” Isn’t that the heart of your objection, as well – that you disagree with the way it’s being distributed?
• to be fair, they really are being distributed “freely and all the time” – Catholics pray for the deceased all the time, and it’s also part of the prayers of every Mass!

If it is a punishment

It’s not. In modern parlance, “consequence” would be a more familiar way to put it.