Bible Alone? Part 4

Over the last few days I’ve been looking at the subject of Sola Scriptura. Today I would like to discuss the alternative to Sola Scriptura which I realized made more sense of both history and the Biblical data…

The Alternative: Apostolic Authority

Ironically, the answer itself was in Scripture. After the Ascension, writing the New Testament wasn’t the priority because it wasn’t what Jesus commanded the Apostles to do. At the Great Commission Jesus told His disciples to “teach” all nations what He had taught them (as opposed to write a book). If you wanted to know the truth in c. 30AD you would go to Jesus. Who would you go to after the Ascension? You would go to the Apostles He taught and commissioned. It was this living Tradition that sustained the Church – primarily by orally passing on to others what Jesus had taught. Jesus wanted to found a Church, not a book club.

In the Book of Acts, when there was a disagreement over the question of Gentile circumcision, the Christians didn’t use Scripture to decide the answer, but called a Church Council. I could only think of one Church today which still calls [Ecumenical] councils to resolve matters of doctrine and practice…

The more I read Scripture, the clearer it became that the Early Church was one which exercised authority (1 Corinthians 16:16, Hebrews 13:17) given to her by Christ – to forgive sins, no less! Even in my most anti-Catholic moments I could still clearly see that Matthew 16 showed Christ giving Peter a special authority. I could only think of one Church today which claimed to still have that same authority passed on from Peter….

“If a man does not hold fast to this oneness of Peter, does he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he deserts the Chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, has he confidence that he is in the Church?” – St. Cyprian (A.D. 251)

Read more

Bible Canon Questions

Today over at St. Joseph’s Vanguard Devin wrote an article about How Evangelicals Know Their Canon Is Correct. It describes an exchange Devin had with an Evangelical concerning which books belong in the Bible.

Now, not all Evangelicals will hold those views expressed in the article, but I have to say that Devin’s exchange bears a strong resemblance to conversations I myself have had with non-Catholics concerning Sacred Scripture…

In my experience, when a Catholic-Protestant dialog reaches this stage it often stagnates. You then spend a lot of time going round and round in circles… 🙁

In an effort to stop this from happening, I find that it is generally best to keep asking questions. These questions will hopefully reveal to the non-Catholic his unknown dependency upon Catholic Church with regards to the formation of the Canon.

You may recall a little while ago I wrote about an exchange I had with a chap called Jay. When we were talking about the Bible, these were some of the questions I asked him:

1.  Let’s say I don’t believe James should be in the Bible.  Show me why I’m wrong. What’s to stop me from just taking this book out of the Bible?

2.  Let’s say I believe that Clement’s letter to the Corinthians should be in the Bible.  Show me why I’m wrong.  He was alive during the time of the Apostles and Clement has strong credentials for being taught by them…

3. Who wrote the Letter to the Philippians? What about the Gospel of Mark? How do you know?

4. Who were the people who painstakingly copied the New Testament manuscripts throughout the centuries?

5. Have you checked the authenticity of every book in the Bible? Are you sure that we have all the available “inspired texts”? How did you reach your opinion over what and what isn’t the Word of God? Are you 100% certain? Can I trust your judgment on this? Because if you’re wrong I could be ignoring text which is the Word of God and reading text which isn’t…

6. Who assembled the canon of the New Testament and when? Please give me names and dates.