I’m continuing to read Protestant apologist James White’s book Scripture Alone.
I am on chapter 3, where Mr. White is examining what he believes are the crucial passages of the Bible for understanding the nature of the Bible (i.e. that the Bible is inspired and the sole infallible rule of faith). In his interpretation of his favorite verses, 2 Timothy 3:16-17, he says:
Just as Paul warned Timothy of the activities of false teachers, so he sounded the same alarm to the Ephesian elders. In each scenario one would expect that, upon describing the great danger and peril facing the infant church, Paul would make reference to the source, the bulwark, that would protect her and give these leaders what they needed to press forward and accomplish the work of ministry.
If there was to be some external source of authority in the form of the papacy…or any other extra-scriptural organization or foundation, here is where the apostle would have to make mention of it…But Paul says nothing of the sort.
(italics his, bolding mine)
Mr. White seems to have forgotten St. Paul’s other words to Timothy in 1 Timothy 3:15:
If I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
(NIV translation–note that “foundation” could also be “ground” or “bulwark” depending on the translation)
So the Bible claims that the Church is the bulwark of the truth but Mr. White claims that it is the Bible only and not the Church or any extra-Scriptural organization. Should we believe the Bible here or Mr. White’s interpretation of the Bible?
For clarity’s sake, I would like to also note that pitting the Scriptures against the Church or against the papacy, as Mr. White does, is wrong-headed. The Bible is God’s Word. The Church is Christ’s Bride and Mystical Body. The papacy is the office Christ entrusted with the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven. None of these are opposed to each other, for all are God-ordained entities.
The Church is the pillar and bulwark of the truth, and the Scriptures are an indispensable part of the deposit of Faith that Christ entrusted to her. The Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth, infallibly inspired the human authors of the Scriptures and also infallibly guides the Church into all truth. The Spirit did so in guiding the Church in discerning which books he had inspired for example. The Church is built on the Apostles (contrary to Calvin’s modification of Ephesians 2:20 where he said that she was built on “the teachings of” the Apostles) with St. Peter as the Prince of them. It is erroneous to pit any one of these against another, for they form a seamless whole.
Hi Devin
I do admire your idealism that you give to your Church. It’s just too bad that history shows that it is no different in holding a multitude of various opinions and doctrines through its history. If it didn’t act so confused and unclear on its journey through time, you would prove that you are different than Protestantism in a unique way- and THEN when you say the Holy Spirit guided Her it would actually look like something. This why it continues to strike me as a sad irony as I learn more and more about Roman Catholicism, this clearly false chest pounding of the conservative Roman Catholic that just doesn’t fit Her at all.
In Christ,
Garret
Edit-
second sentence said “It’s just too bad that history shows that it is no different in holding a multitude of various opinions and doctrines through its history.”
I meant to say something like-It’s just too bad that history shows that it is no different in holding a multitude of various opinions and doctrines through its history than any non-RC Church.
Now Garret don’t get all mad; after all, I don’t think you believe that Mr. White has the gift of infallibility, do you? So if he gets some stuff wrong, we shouldn’t be too surprised.
Sadly, the scandal given by Catholics throughout the centuries does obscure the Church’s witness to the world, including to fellow Christians like you. That’s why we have to focus on the teachings of the Church versus the actions of any particular person in the Church.
I will note that you didn’t defend what Mr. White actually said about the Scriptures being the bulwark versus the Church.
Hi Devin
I didn’t get mad, and I’m sure James White is wrong about something, as are you and I (:
Sadly, the scandal given by Catholics throughout the centuries does obscure the Church’s witness to the world, including to fellow Christians like you. That’s why we have to focus on the teachings of the Church versus the actions of any particular person in the Church.
And that was exactly my point! When you focus on the actions and doctrinal confusion in the Protestant realm, you are pointing to the exact same thing that has plagued the RC Church through history, including in the last century. Your Church does not posses a ‘quality’ that is distinguishable from any other church in the world that allows one to say- “this Church is guided by the Holy Spirit- that one is not.” You can only provide a ‘bad witness’ excuse, which excuse proves the point. The Holy Spirit, it is apparent, does allow for disputes and discussions and doctrinal differences around a core truth. What is bizarre is the Church’s apologists that try to use doctrinal disunity as a proof of lack of guidance, which Church is at least equally plagued, and at worse, blasphemous and cursed.
The teachings of the modern RCC would hit the Fathers as blasphemous. Who of them would utter a prayer to Mary that would praise her that she provides grace and eternal life, that she is our hope? Yet another proof that the Church that overrides Scripture with tradition is doomed to blasphemous teaching. It does not matter that you look past Mary to Christ in this prayer- when you are actually saying these things TO her. Repent of that evil practice before it is too late.
I will note that you didn’t defend what Mr. White actually said about the Scriptures being the bulwark versus the Church.
I would absolutely defend that- for one thing it is perfectly consistent with the passage in question 2 Timothy 3. How can the Scriptures be able to make one competent and thoroughly equipped if they in fact cannot do that, as you say they can’t, and that the Church is able to then countermand the Scriptures thus putting Church over Scripture? How can the Church, a body of fallible men with limited minds be ‘over’ the Word of God with its revelations about invisible realities? Here Paul is describing exactly what the Scriptures can do, the Scriptures abilities.
By the way the Church that Paul is talking about in 1 Timothy 3 does not meet the modern Roman Catholic definition. Married men who manage their household and children well? You don’t have that church. 2,000 years is a long time Devin. We need to be true and faithful to the written word of God, the touchstone by which we can know God’s revealed will.
The only reliable touchstone seems to be the writings of the Apostles themselves, by them we can discern, with work, what they actually believed. When you read of the early church and their handling of disputes, you see Scripture was turned to as the default source of truth to shut the mouths of opponents. Why? Because as Paul pointed out, they were thoroughly equipped through them, as we are.
God bless,
Garret
@Garret
I don’t know why you think there is confusion in Catholic teaching. In my observation, the unity of Catholic teaching is the exact same unity of the Scriptures.
1. In the Scriptures we find theological development. For example, the oldest OT books have no concept whatsoever of afterlife punishment/reward. The authors thought of punishment and reward almost exclusively in terms of what happened to a person in *this* life. Heaven? Hell? These concepts didn’t fully arrive until Maccabees. The Church develops her theological understanding in a similar way.
2. In the Scriptures we find heavy borrowing/utilization of pagan concepts and symbols to mediate the truth of God. The seven-day creation sequence is a theological correction of the Enuma Elish. The Scriptures have dozens of references to a Babylonian mythological creatures known as Leviathan/Lothan. The whole New Testament is written in ‘pagan’ language. The Church operates in the same way.
3. In the Scriptures we find find many different voices that seem to contradict each other until what they are really trying to say is examined more deeply. Same with the doctrine of the Church.
Hi David
Thanks for your comments! You misunderstood what I was saying. To make it short for you- the Roman Catholic ‘epologist’ points to sola Scriptura as a recipe for doctrinal chaos- the Protestant returns by pointing out doctrinal chaos and ‘looseness’ in the RC camp, both historical and contemporary. Logically, if doctrinal development and a plurality of views exist INSIDE of Rome, then it is bizarre to point outside of Rome and fault others for having the same or similar conditions. You know- the classic case of the ‘pot calling the kettle black’.
I would submit that the members of ARBCA are much more doctrinally consistant and unified than the Roman Catholic Church as a whole. The differences between ARBCA and PCUSA are broad, but no broader than the ‘progressive” Catholics versus the traditional Catholics. ‘Progressive’ Catholics are disobedient to the clear teachings of the RCC. The PCUSA is similarly disobedient to Scripture, opting for the notion of progress OVER obedience to the uncomfortable and stiff notions of the Bible about sexuality and men/women leadership.
Regarding #1. Progressive revelation. Either this is revealed by God, or we are just making it up as we go along.
#2 Who corrected the Enuma Elish? God, or man? If man, then we are all wasting our time being much to pious, at least I am, and should go continue my old ways. If this is only a collection of evolved notions of God that they made up, we should stop playing games with these fairy tales. Read the Enuma, it is interesting- I like the war of the Gods, it would make an interesting CG story.
#3 I agree that the Scriptures need to be mined- apparent contradictions need to be reconciled, amen.
God bless,
Garret