Scripture and the Magisterium

Discussion in 'Theology and Doctrine' started by Traditionalist, Dec 20, 2018.

  1. Traditionalist

    Traditionalist New Member

    Posts:
    16
    Likes Received:
    4
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Catholics often argue that with Sola Scriptura it brings subjectivity and no absolute biblical truth. Also, private interpretation makes scripture subjective. Since there is no infallible authority to interpret how do we really know what it means?

    How do you respond?
     
  2. AnglicanAgnostic

    AnglicanAgnostic Active Member

    Posts:
    154
    Likes Received:
    52
    Country:
    New Zealand
    Religion:
    none
    For the (Roman) Catholic position to be correct in your above scenario two things need to be true. The RC interpretation of scripture has to be the correct one and their authority to interpret it, is infallible. Both of these things are questionable in my opinion.
     
  3. Traditionalist

    Traditionalist New Member

    Posts:
    16
    Likes Received:
    4
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Anglican
    Of course. I’m not saying that they are infallible. That’s just the argument that they use to argue against Sola Scriptura or arguing for the Magisterium.
     
  4. Peteprint

    Peteprint Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    662
    Likes Received:
    579
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    High-Church Laudian
    Botolph likes this.
  5. Stalwart

    Stalwart Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    1,005
    Likes Received:
    821
    Country:
    America
    Religion:
    Anglican
    I want to argue that people don't use Latin precisely enough today to use those words accurately. Prima, sola, solo. It's hard to know who coined those terms, or how people use them any longer.

    Instead I want to propose that there are three simple approaches to Scripture:

    1. It is all you need for doctrine, and it interprets itself.
    2. It is all you need for doctrine, and the outside context (Church Fathers) interprets it.
    3. It isn't all you need for doctrine.

    The first camp is unsustainable and incoherent, and Anglicans definitely don't hold to it. And they're definitely not in the third camp either.

    The 2nd camp historically has been traditionally how the Anglican Divines have approached doctrine, and judged the orthodoxy of belief. Is scripture 'all you need'? Yes! There is no other revelation from God known to man. Do we need the Church Fathers and the local context to understand everything in Scripture? Yes.
     
  6. Peteprint

    Peteprint Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    662
    Likes Received:
    579
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    High-Church Laudian
    Couldn't have said it better myself.
     
  7. Tiffy

    Tiffy Active Member

    Posts:
    393
    Likes Received:
    109
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    CofE
    I think that accords pretty well with common sense too. Apart from failing to mention the guidance of the Holy Spirit in every generation of Christ's Church. We are not an organization led by dead Church Fathers. We are a Body of believers led by Christ and his Spirit filled Disciples. Matt.28:19. The Church Fathers have left a legacy for our guidance, but our direction will depend upon Christ's demands upon His Church, through The Holy Spirit, in whatever circumstances the church finds itself.
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2018
    Peteprint likes this.
  8. BibleHoarder

    BibleHoarder Active Member

    Posts:
    438
    Likes Received:
    173
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian (Protestant)
    Everyone depends on something or another outside of any written text they are reading to fully understand it, and the bible is no exception, so prima scriptura is definitely the most modest and reasonable doctrine, as held by Anglicans but without becoming as perverse as the Roman Catholic traditions in terms of the so-called 'development of doctrine'.
     
    Peteprint likes this.
  9. Botolph

    Botolph Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    841
    Likes Received:
    1,019
    Country:
    Australia
    Religion:
    Anglican
    AnglicanViewOfScripture.jpg

    I did this infographic some time back to try and encapsulate what I believe is the Anglican position, perhaps it helps, however I think we are generally on the same page. I encounter folk who subscribe to the notion of me and my bible is all I need, which I feel is a position difficult to support and clearly rejects any notion of the ecclesia of which scripture speaks and of which scripture itself is a product. I further take issue with those who use (or perhaps more precisely seek to use) scripture to support a doctrine of sola scriptura, firstly because it is normally English, and secondly all it suggests is self authentication. We read scripture not to find out about scripture, but to find out about God and how God acted in time past, that we might more clearly recognise his action in the world today.
     
    Tiffy and Peteprint like this.

Share This Page