Why Sola Scriptura fails

[PRmerger]

Is should be clearer - we don’t make the same claims of infallibilty, but do claim correct teaching.

How so? If you haven’t been given the charism of infallibility, it means that your magisterium is fallible…that is, going to be wrong.

Simply put, if someone points out incorrect dogma pr incorrect practice in Protestants, it doesn’t bother us in the slightest. Only if we get lumped in under that umbrella do we begin to get testy.

I don’t understand…

 

[benjohnson]

How so? If you haven’t been given the charism of infallibility, it means that your magisterium is fallible…that is, going to be wrong.

I don’t understand…

One need not rely on an dogmatic claim of having the Holy Ghost in order to be correct. One can simply be correct under the guidance of the Holy Ghost.

We get testy when we’re lumped with other groups that we specifically deny our doctrines. Just like Catholics would most likely get upset if I lumped them with Old Catholics.

Edit: I just had a beer so sorry for the horrid spelling, and incomplete thoughts. I don’t drink much so I really feel the effects.

 

[PRmerger]

Edit: I just had a beer so sorry for the horrid spelling, and incomplete thoughts. I don’t drink much so I really feel the effects.

Haha! I actually was going to make a joke about whether you’d been imbibing…but I didn’t know if you would be offended. Sometimes written posts don’t convey good-intentioned ribbing very well.

 

[PRmerger]

One need not rely on an dogmatic claim of having the Holy Ghost in order to be correct. One can simply be correct under the guidance of the Holy Ghost.

That sounds like a case of special pleading to me.

Either your magisterium claims to be fallible, which means they are going to err at some point, or they claim the charism of infallibility.

 

[benjohnson]

That sounds like a case of special pleading to me.

Either your magisterium claims to be fallible, which means they are going to err at some point, or they claim the charism of infallibility.

I can see that viewpoint - Perhaps it’s our experiences in the recent past that make us cautious. I’ve noticed a few people in the LC-MS get frustrated with the hiarchy and express it loudly. After their therapeutic outburst they then they shrug and continue to work in His name.

Feel free to mess with me! I enjoy a good joke, especially at my own expense!

 

[Porknpie]

Is should be clearer - we don’t make the same claims of infallibilty, **but do claim correct teaching. **

Ben,

I have to ask a few questions…

What is the “Correct Teaching” on contraception? …

Did your teaching change in 1930?

Is your teaching today consistent with what Luther taught?

If Tradition should be tested by Scripture and consistent with it…what scripture allows contraception? Tradition appears to be against it… rather some man made traditions have allowed it…inconsistent with scripture.

What’s your thoughts here??

Pork

 

[joe370]

So, there is no debate among Catholics on this issue? Catholics are in lock-step?
How about on abortion. What percent of Catholics voted for Obama?

Over the last 1,000 years, how successful has sacred Tradition been in solving the Great. Schism? I guess Tradition has failed, too.

Jon

Hey Jon. I voted for Obama because I truly believe, regarding republican candidates, that abortion is nothing more than a talking point i.e. they have no intended resolve, desire or zeal to back up their promises about abortion. For example, former president Bush Jr. had 8 years to suggest some sort of legislation that would change the laws on abortion and he did nothing. However, his respective campaigns were certainly all about that issue to appeal to Christian communities, no doubt. My point is: either way nothing was going to get done, and Obama was certainly the better candidate, as far as I am concerned (could be wrong) in terms of helping so many poor and disenfranchised folks in dire need of help, which is suppose to be the Christian way. Don’t get me started on Romney…LOL…

The only way the great schism will get resolved, in my humble opinion, is if either church admits to their doctrinal errors (very few differences) and re-establishes themselves with the other church e.g. the CC admitting that Jesus’ church was not built on Kepha. Gosh, I would be so sad if that ever happened, but that’s just me.

Anyway, how the heck are you doing??? I hope all is going well…

 

[pablope]

We reject denominationalism, and make a positive claim to be a valid continuation of the western church.

But if you are a valid continuation of a western church…why are you not under a patriarch, in particular, any patriarch for that matter if you do not want to be under the bishop of Rome?

You say you value the tradition of the early church, well, all the early churches always had patriarches…so who do you recognize as your patriarch?

And would a truly, universal, all encompasing church call someone the Anti-Christ?

We see it this way: that your church split from us when it decided to maintain some practices rather than stop them.

 

[benjohnson]

Ben,

I have to ask a few questions…

What is the “Correct Teaching” on contraception? …

Did your teaching change in 1930?

Is your teaching today consistent with what Luther taught?

If Tradition should be tested by Scripture and consistent with it…what scripture allows contraception? Tradition appears to be against it… rather some man made traditions have allowed it…inconsistent with scripture.

What’s your thoughts here??

Pork

The LC-MS has been consistant in that any ‘method’ that could injure a child is prohibited and always has been - only barriers (that do not harm a child) are to considered alike to rhythm methods. ‘The Pill’ and other abortificants are prohibited. Barriers that can cause harm to a child are prohibited.

I don’t think the church had to address barrier methods as they didn’t generally available.

The expected norm should be chastity. What I’ve seen with the behaviour our children and young adults makes me glad for our education system.

 

[benjohnson]

But if you are a valid continuation of a western church…why are you not under a patriarch, in particular, any patriarch for that matter if you do not want to be under the bishop of Rome?

Awesome question! I’m not sure what the LCMS teaches, but I think ours would the Bishop of Rome. He just need to behave.

And would a truly, universal, all encompasing church call someone the Anti-Christ?

Only if the office has the marks. We’re still watching, but no LCMS member could use the formula against recent Popes and be considered entirely sane.

Can you then explain how Catherine of Sienna, before Luther, can reform the Church, castigate popes, and urge them to reform without needing to split the Church?

Perhaps the difference should include Leo X - remember he was the scion of the Medici and not even an ordained priest.

 

[pablope]

Is

Simply put, if someone points out incorrect dogma pr incorrect practice in Protestants, it doesn’t bother us in the slightest. Only if we get lumped in under that umbrella do we begin to get testy.

Ben…why should it not bother you? Should you not express the greatest concern?

For after all, it was Luther’s disobedience that spawned the Reformation, isn’t it? Or do you also keep a blind eye to what Luther gave birth to?

 

[joe370]

benjohnson;10714950]Awesome question! I’m not sure what the LCMS teaches, but I think ours would the Bishop of Rome. He just need to behave.

LOL…Hey Ben. Is it reasonable to conclude, possibly, that truth is transmitted via the Petrine office, and not the fallible man holding the office? In other words the man holding the office (who of course is a sinner like all humans) no matter how bad he behaves (and a few did) cannot interfere with God’s plan, in terms of the following passage. Maybe:

Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter,** and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[c] will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[d] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[e] loosed in heaven.” 20

Would, what I said, maybe apply to the following?

Perhaps the difference should include Leo X - remember he was the scion of the Medici and not even an ordained priest.

**

 

[pablope]

=benjohnson;10714950]Awesome question! I’m not sure what the LCMS teaches, but I think ours would the Bishop of Rome. He just need to behave.

Ah…so you are putting conditions on who you should obey and disobey?

Or would you put your trust in God to act, in his time and will…to act accordingly and deal with bad leadership?

I repost my question:

So much so, that David also took it to heart, that he did not slay Saul despite having opportunities to do so…and Saul wanting to kill David…do you know why David did not kill Saul?

Only if the office has the marks. We’re still watching, but no LCMS member could use the formula against recent Popes and be considered entirely sane.

Does not matter, the formula is there…and I thought your formulas and confessions are a right reflection of scripture?

Do you think having that in your formulas is a right reflection of scripture?

Perhaps the difference should include Leo X - remember he was the scion of the Medici and not even an ordained priest.

So what about Pope LeoX? He could not become pope unless he was first ordained…but nevertheless, he was still bishop of Rome.

 

[benjohnson]

Ben…why should it not bother you? Should you not express the greatest concern?

For after all, it was Luther’s disobedience that spawned the Reformation, isn’t it? Or do you also keep a blind eye to what Luther gave birth to?

I’m sure many others point to Luther as some sort of excuse, but frankly their doctrine is much stranger to us than Catholic doctrine. Frankly I can’t answer for those I do not understand.

 

[Porknpie]

The LC-MS has been consistant in that any ‘method’ that could injure a child is prohibited and always has been - only barriers (that do not harm a child) are to considered alike to rhythm methods. ‘The Pill’ and other abortificants are prohibited. Barriers that can cause harm to a child are prohibited.

I don’t think the church had to address barrier methods as they didn’t generally available

Ben,

So you are saying that some forms of contraception are OK and some are not… and that this is the “Correct Teaching”. Based on what?

• Scripture? … please show me where…
• Luther? … please show me where…
• Tradition or tradition before 1930… please show me where?

Scripture: barrier methods have the same effect as what Onan did by withdrawing…they waste the man’s seed. God put Onan to death.

Genesis 38
9 But since Onan knew that the offspring would not be his, he spilled his semen on the ground whenever he went in to his brother’s wife, so that he would not give offspring to his brother. 10 What he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.

Tradition ( ScriptureCatholic.com)
“Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted” Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2 (A.D. 191).

**“To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature.” **Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of Children 2:10:95:3 (A.D. 191).

“But I wonder why he [the heretic Jovinianus] set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. **Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children?” **Jerome, Against Jovinian 1:19 (A.D. 393).

Ben, before Christ there were barrier methods…including:

Lemons
Citric acid is said to have spermicidal properties, and women used to soak sponges in lemon juice before inserting them vaginally. Mentioned in the Talmud, this was a preferred method of birth control in ancient Jewish communities. The sponge itself would act as a pessary—a physical barrier between the sperm and the cervix. The great womanizer Casanova was said to have inserted the rind of half a lemon into his lovers as a primitive cervical cap or diaphragm, the residual lemon juice serving to annihilate the sperm.

Cotton Barriers
In the ancient medical manuscript the Ebers Papyrus (1550 BCE), women were advised to grind dates, acacia tree bark, and honey together into a paste, apply this mixture to seed wool, and insert the seed wool vaginally for use as a pessary. Granted, it was what was in the cotton rather than the cotton itself that promoted its effectiveness as birth control—acacia ferments into lactic acid, a well-known spermicide—but the seed wool did serve as a physical barrier between ejaculate and cervix.

And condoms have been around likely since the middle ages (if not way earlier) with people using animal intestines.

Source

Here’s what Luther said (catholic.com/tracts/birth-control)
The apostolic tradition’s condemnation of contraception is so great that it was followed by Protestants until 1930 and was upheld by all key Protestant Reformers. Martin Luther said, “[T]he exceedingly foul deed of Onan, the basest of wretches . . . is a most disgraceful sin. It is far more atrocious than incest and adultery. We call it unchastity, yes, a sodomitic sin. For Onan goes in to her; that is, he lies with her and copulates, and when it comes to the point of insemination, spills the semen, lest the woman conceive. Surely at such a time the order of nature established by God in procreation should be followed. Accordingly, it was a most disgraceful crime. . . . Consequently, he deserved to be killed by God. He committed an evil deed. Therefore, God punished him.”

Here’s what LCMS professes on the Pill in 2004…how is the pill prohibited??
“The LCMS Sanctity of Human Life Committee, following the mandate given to it by the Synod in convention, cannot state definitively that hormonal contraception does not at least some of the time cause a chemical abortion. The medical and scientific community acknowledges this possibility, but cannot state how frequently or if, in fact, this does occur. In light of this, some Christian couples may have concerns about hormonal contraception. Rather than defaulting immediately to “the pill” or other hormonal methods, they should keep an open mind and make themselves aware of all forms of contraception, including natural family planning, barrier methods, and sterilization in certain exceptionally difficult situations.”

Ben, if you are not getting the “Correct Teaching” from the bible, Tradition or Luther…who are you getting it from and by what Authority? By what basis does the LCMS profess that is is OK to use the Pill and to use barrier contraceptives?

No “Correct Teaching” here Ben…

 

[Tomster]

Is should be clearer - we don’t make the same claims of infallibilty, but do claim correct teaching. We have a different understanding of Apostolic Sucuession, though our expulsion out of Prussia under the pain of death probably has infulance on this understanding.

Simply put, if someone points out incorrect dogma pr incorrect practice in Protestants, it doesn’t bother us in the slightest. Only if we get lumped in under that umbrella do we begin to get testy.

We’re all glad you don’t make the claim of infallibility Ben. For if you did, you would be in a lot of trouble.

Take for instance the Lutheran doctrine of the Universal Priesthood. This one should really bother you and this is why.

The Lutheran doctrine of the Universal Priesthood is one of the most radical errors of Reformation theology. It was Luther’s denial of a distinct sacerdotal office or power and the corresponding claim that all believers are equally priests before God. Ignoring the the context which refers to offering “spiritual sacrifices,” Luther rested his case on the words of St. Peter, saying, “You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood” (1 Peter 2:9). “By this text,” Luther said, “I have proven that all Christians are priests, for Peter addresses all Christians, as the words themselves clearly prove.” This notion was later incorporated into the Smalcald Articles, and thus made Confessional doctrine, after Luther had taken up the challenge and repudiated the very idea of a visible priesthood to be consistent with his theory of a purely invisible Church.

A great part of modern Lutheranism finds its basis and justification in the hypothesis of a universal priesthood. As a logical consequence, it rejects as unscriptural the doctrine that only such are true ministers of the Church as have been ordained by bishops, that the different offices and ranks of the clergy are not of human but of divine origin, that only priests can forgive sins, that the power of excommunication does not belong to the whole congregation, but to the spiritual rulers of the Church.

But along with the denial of a distinct sacerdotal office, Lutherans inherited a problem which they have not yet resolved, namely, the exact status of the ministry, whether it is a divine or merely human institution.

If there is no sacerdotal office instituted by Christ and all believers are equally priests, where does the Lutheran ministry derive its authority to teach, celebrate the Eucharist, absolve from sin, demand obedience, and punish the unworthy? In trying to answer this question, two schools of thought have arisen.

The evangelical party grants that the ministry is divinely ordained, but only in the sense as everything wise, appropriate, morally necessary can be said to have divine sanction, not in the sense that an express divine command for the establishment of the public ministry can be shown.

Against this position is the strongly Roman doctrine of the ministry, namely, that the office of the public ministry is not conferred by the call of the congregation as the original possessor of all spiritual power, but is a divine institution in the sense that it was transmitted immediately from the Apostles to their pupils, considered as a separate “ministerial order” or caste, and that this order perpetuates itself by means of the ordination.

To date no real solution has been found for the dilemma, and no compromise seems possible, as evidenced by the number of schisms in American Lutheranism that have centered around one or another of these conceptions of the ministry, which if not divinely ordained has no title to authority, and if divinely ordained is the negation of a cardinal principle of Lutheran theology.

Luther did not really see this contradiction coming when he canonized Sola Scriptura as doctrine for his new church.

 

[benjohnson]

Hey Jon. I voted for Obama because I truly believe, regarding republican candidates, that abortion is nothing more than a talking point i.e. they have no intended resolve, desire or zeal to back up their promises about abortion.

I have not doubt that Republicans use abortion as a talking point, but if you look at the states that are curtailing abortion, they are controlled with Republican governors with Republican houses and senates.

To ignore this correlation is a disservice to those still in the womb, in my opinion.

Frankly, of all the sins I’ve committed, in my opinion the gravest one has been my past indifference to children being slaughtered. I’m thankful that God will judge me, as my own judgment condemns me without possibility of pardon.

 

[benjohnson]

Here’s what LCMS professes on the Pill in 2004…how is the pill prohibited??

The language is attempting to be persuasive not authoritarian - it seems pretty clear to me that we’re not to use abortificants as birth control.

We teach chastity before life-long marriage - that is our teaching.

I have a high respect for Catholic marriage and contraceptive morality but where we all fall short is in the practice of our churches. Where we proscribe chastity, we use NFP and barrier methods. Where we proscribe life-long marriage, we divorce or annul.

Frankly, we’d all do well to spend time correcting each other to follow our churches teaching in this regard and not squabble over who’s teaching is the most perfect.

…

While we do a great job of educating our children in morals, I’d appreciate any teaching advice you could give.

 

[benjohnson]

but is a divine institution in the sense that it was transmitted immediately from the Apostles to their pupils, considered as a separate “ministerial order” or caste, and that this order perpetuates itself by means of the ordination.

If it is as you describe it, I’m happy this works for you. Our method does have it’s merits as well - we’re a bit open to ministering to each other, and we tend to not suffer for long leaders that engage in persistent sin. Perhaps we’re still reacting to the example of Leo X.

In our school for example, after the children sing Gospel songs, all the children put their hands in the orans position and give their parents a blessing from the dais.

May the Lord bless you and keep you.
May the Lord make His face shine on you and be gracious to you.
May the Lord look upon you with favor and give you peace.

I don’t think this is appropriate under Catholic understanding, but frankly, I have never felt as blessed at that time when these children of immigrants (our school is 95% minority) gave a blessing to us parents.

 

[Porknpie]

The language is attempting to be persuasive not authoritarian - it seems pretty clear to me that we’re not to use abortificants as birth control.

We teach chastity before life-long marriage - that is our teaching.

I have a high respect for Catholic marriage and contraceptive morality but where we all fall short is in the practice of our churches. Where we proscribe chastity, we use NFP and barrier methods. Where we proscribe life-long marriage, we divorce or annul.

Frankly, we’d all do well to spend time correcting each other to follow our churches teaching in this regard and not squabble over who’s teaching is the most perfect. …

While we do a great job of educating our children in morals, I’d appreciate any teaching advice you could give.

Ben,

My point was to simply say that the words “Correct Teaching” are not correct …neither through scripture, Tradition or tradition unless you start with the year 1930. Birth control in all forms is immoral, barrier included. I’m sensitive here on two accounts:

1. I lost my sister in law…LCMS…who I dearly loved and I believe it was because she took the pill…the cancer was hormone induced.
2. I have a couple of other LCMS friends who do not understand that using the pill is an abortifacient and they believe the barrier methods are OK.

While we have much in common, LCMS church leadership is not taking the stand that they ought to on both regards. Barrier methods are OK …and the Pill is OK. This breaks from Scripture, Tradition and Luther.

What can you do? I’d start with your Pastor and tell him your concerns…show him scripture, Tradition and Luther’s words and tell him that you believe the Church is in error on this teaching.

I always hear from Lutheran’s that Tradition is tested by the scripture. I don’t see that theology applied here…

I’m done…made my point. Please take my words with charity and love. If there is something I don’t understand, I’m open to teaching and correction. Oh Jon…