Sola Scriptura?

[Albion]

I think you agreed with the definition I gave earlier of Sola Scriptura. I believe I understand the actual definition of it. Yet, even within the Churches that have a clearcut understanding of Sola Scriptura, there are significant differences.

I've tried to move this seventh month old discussion off dead center, but this probably is the time when you should list or explain the "significant differences" that you have in mind, and in no uncertain terms.

The different ways of understanding and using Holy Tradition makes a big difference in the final dogmas and doctrines. You may not see it that way, but as someone who is part of one of the two Churches, it does make difference. Remember, your opinion is "from what you can tell".

Don't take polite language as some sort of concession.

 

[All4Christ]

I've tried to move this seventh month old discussion off dead center, but this probably is the time when you should list or explain the "significant differences" that you have in mind, and in no uncertain terms.


Don't take polite language as some sort of concession.

My point is that this is your understanding.

Significant differences, including some within the Anglican Church itself:

Asking for intercession of the saints (at least the Anglo-Catholics)
Veneration of icons
Liturgical style
The extent of using tradition

Between multiple Sola Scriptura churches:

All the items above
Church polity / ecclesiology
Understanding of the Eucharist
Homosexuality
Ordination of women and / or homosexuals
Abortion
Role of baptism / regeneration, etc (Presbyterian view vs Lutheran or Anglican is very different)
Closed communion vs open communion
The role of the Mother of God / devotion
Honoring the saints
Praying for the reposed

I could go on.

 

[Albion]

My point is that this is your understanding.

Almost everything on all sides has so far been the poster's understanding.

Significant differences, including some within the Anglican Church itself:

Praying to the saints (at least the Anglo-Catholics)
Veneration of icons
Liturgical style
The extent of using tradition
Sola Scriptura churches:

Just a minute. In your recent posts you appeared to make reference to there being different views of Sola Scriptura itself. Are we now to discuss different beliefs on the part of churches you think teach Sola Scriptura?

 

[All4Christ]

Almost everything on all sides has so far been the poster's understanding.


Just a minute. In your last post you made reference to there being different view concerning Sola Scriptura. Now you've switched to different beliefs on the part of people you wuppose to be believers in Sola Scriptura.

My last post, I said that there were significant differences in theology between Churches that have the traditional understanding of Sola Scriptura. These are some different conclusions even within those who understand Sola Scriptura in the same way.

"Yet, even within the Churches that have a clearcut understanding of Sola Scriptura, there are significant differences [in the resulting beliefs]."

I misunderstood what you were asking, since I wasn't trying to imply that there were major differences in the understanding of the doctrine Sola Scriptura between traditional churches. There are, however, major differences in the resulting beliefs, even though they all believe in Sola Scriptura as defined by the reformers.

 

[Albion]

My last post, I said that there were significant differences in theology between Churches that have the traditional understanding of Sola Scriptura. These are some different conclusions even within those who understand Sola Scriptura in the same way.

Well then, go ahead an educate me on how that is the case.

I misunderstood what you were asking, since I wasn't trying to imply that there were major differences in the understanding of the doctrine Sola Scriptura between traditional churches.

OK. It's helpful to have that cleared up.

 

[All4Christ]

Well then, go ahead an educate me on how that is the case.


OK. It's helpful to have that cleared up.

I posted some of those differences above.

 

[Albion]

I posted some of those differences above.

I'll be more precise.

You wrote:

These are some different conclusions even within those who understand Sola Scriptura in the same way.

This is the part I highlighted from your post. The part that needs your attention is the part that says "even within those who understand Sola Scriptura in the same way."

For the most part, you didn't identify what churches are supposed to go with which teachings, and the one specific reference (Anglicans) is in error.

 

[ToBeLoved]

From the NT it seems clear that communion was celebrated from the beginning of the Church or very nearly after. But the first book of the NT (one of Paul's letters) was written a couple of decades later. Much of the NT was later than that. In particular, the earliest account of the Institution is in 1 Cor, written around 54 AD. That letter make it obvious that it was already being celebrated before he wrote the letter. So it's clear that the celebration of communion really did come before Scripture.

Scripture is the only primary source of information about Jesus and his early followers available to us today. But during the 1st Century that was not the case. Initially the church was created by preaching of those who had known Jesus, and their followers. Today, however, if we need to check whether tradition has drifted off, Scripture is the only sensible way to do that.

This is one reason that some forms of sola scriptura make no sense. You sometimes get the impression that when God wanted to reveal himself, he inspired Scripture, and the Church comes from Scripture. But this is historically impossible. The Church came from preaching the Gospel, and started before Scripture existed. In fact when God wanted to reveal himself he sent Christ. Scripture is a witness to that, but not the earliest witness. Just the best we have today.

So what that person is saying is that they can trace everything done in their church and every tradition back to the apostles or before? Before Paul's death and Peter's and John's.

 

[All4Christ]

I'll be more precise.

You wrote:



This is the part I highlighted from your post. The part that needs your attention is the part that says "even within those who understand Sola Scriptura in the same way."

For the most part, you didn't identify what churches are supposed to go with which teachings, and the one specific reference (Anglicans) is in error.

Which Anglican reference is in error? The asking for intercessions of the saints part is an Anglo-Catholic practice. Is that what you meant?

 

[Paidiske]

To be fair, while Anglo-Catholics do seek the intercession of the saints, it is in violation of our formal doctrine to do so. So it's arguable whether that's a valid Anglican practice.

 

[All4Christ]

To be fair, while Anglo-Catholics do seek the intercession of the saints, it is in violation of our formal doctrine to do so. So it's arguable whether that's a valid Anglican practice.

Out of curiosity - What is the level of acceptance for varying practices? It seems like there is a wide range of practices in Anglicanism, from Evangelical, liberal, conservative, and Anglo-Catholics. What is the formal set of beliefs that all Anglicans must adhere to?

 

[Paidiske]

The closest thing we have to that (and the way different provinces deal with it differs) is the 39 Articles of Religion: The Thirty Nine Articles

 

[All4Christ]

The closest thing we have to that (and the way different provinces deal with it differs) is the 39 Articles of Religion: The Thirty Nine Articles

Thanks!

 

[All4Christ]

I'll be more precise.

You wrote:



This is the part I highlighted from your post. The part that needs your attention is the part that says "even within those who understand Sola Scriptura in the same way."

For the most part, you didn't identify what churches are supposed to go with which teachings, and the one specific reference (Anglicans) is in error.

To clarify, before spending a lot of time doing this, you would like me to list beliefs that differ between traditional sola scriptura churches and identify which church I'm referencing for each belief? Including the beliefs of each church?

 

[gordonhooker]

To be fair, while Anglo-Catholics do seek the intercession of the saints, it is in violation of our formal doctrine to do so. So it's arguable whether that's a valid Anglican practice.

well not it is not there is a subtle difference between asking someone including a saint to pray for you and invoking something or someone in the name of saint. Although you may believe that is what it saying it doesn't mean it is. As an Anglo-Catholic and a Franciscan I know what the difference it.

 

[Paidiske]

gordon, whether you like it or not, the reformers saw the intercession of saints as a "fond thing vainly invented." If you wish to do so in your private practice, that is no one's business but yours. But it would be totally improper for me to introduce it in public worship.

 

[gordonhooker]

gordon, whether you like it or not, the reformers saw the intercession of saints as a "fond thing vainly invented." If you wish to do so in your private practice, that is no one's business but yours. But it would be totally improper for me to introduce it in public worship.

No one is asking you or would expect to include it in corporate worship... and as I said there is a difference between asking for prayer and invoking the saints to do something like get someone out of purgatory (not that I believe in purgatory). So whether you like it or not we will have to agree to disagree on that point.

 

[Albion]

Out of curiosity - What is the level of acceptance for varying practices? It seems like there is a wide range of practices in Anglicanism, from Evangelical, liberal, conservative, and Anglo-Catholics. What is the formal set of beliefs that all Anglicans must adhere to?

We subscribe to the historic creeds--Apostles,' Nicene, and Athanasian. In addition, there are a number of formularies, including the (Thirty-nine) Articles of Religion and what's called the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral. And, not to be overlooked, the service book is the Book of Common Prayer. A wide latitude is tolerated when it comes to the Articles, which is why there are Anglo-Catholics.

The terms High Church, Low Church, and Broad Church refer to practice. Anglo-Catholic and Evangelical are used to describe doctrinal parties within the church.

 

[All4Christ]

To clarify, before spending a lot of time doing this, you would like me to list beliefs that differ between traditional sola scriptura churches and identify which church I'm referencing for each belief? Including the beliefs of each church?

@Albion - Please let me know if this is what you are requesting. I can do this, but it will take a good amount of time, so I don't want to do it unnecessarily. Thanks!

 

[Albion]

From the beginning of the thread, those who are unsympathetic to the concept of Scripture Alone have attempted to denigrate it by saying that different readers of Scripture--and different churches--come up with different interpretations. Regardless of how this relates to Holy Tradition, Sola Scriptura is not right or wrong on account of how anyone interprets Scripture. The point of Sola Scriptura is that it--Scripture--contains all that is necessary for us to know in order to accomplish his purposes with us in this life.

IF, however, you want to itemize the doctrines of various church bodies that subscribe to Sola Scriptura (as I took to be the case), I was saying to go ahead and do so, and I will pay attention.

Two things about that should be acknowledged, however.

First, no matter how may doctrinal differences might be listed, that doesn't affect the correctness (or invalidity) of Sola Scriptura in any way. Sola Scriptura doesn't guarantee a correct understanding of Scripture by you or me or some particular church; it's a concept that says that it IS Scripture that holds the answers, not something else.

Secondly, you started with a list a few posts back, but unfortunately, the first part of it used Anglo-Catholics -- who do not accept Sola Scriptura -- and the second part listed doctrines but didn't identify any church bodies. That's why a pause was needed at that time.

So, if you want to start into this project, I'd be interested in what you come up with, that's for sure. But if you think doing so will debunk Sola Scriptura, it won't...and that's because Sola Scriptura is neither proven nor disproven in this way.

Interestingly, someone else earlier mentioned the opposite side of that coin, pointing out that, although the RCC and the EO both claim Tradition, the two of them have come up with different doctrines while saying that it's (the same)Tradition that produced them.