St. Athanasius Was Catholic — He Knew Sola Scriptura Was False

Michie

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
167,805
56,989
Woods
✟4,778,259.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The Church Fathers, almost to a person, reject Sola Scriptura, and hold that Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture make up a single deposit of the Word of God

St. Athanasius (c. 297-373) was a great Church Father and heroic opposer of the heresy of Arianism. He is probably the most-cited Church Father after St. Augustine in the writings of Protestant apologists who wish to show that the fathers were closer in substance to various teachings to Protestantism than to Catholicism.

He is cited as a supposed proponent of Sola Scriptura — the Protestant rule of faith and notion that the Bible is the only infallible source and standard for theology. It follows logically from this definition that the Church (including ecumenical councils) or sacred tradition (including apostolic succession) cannot be infallible sources or standards for theology.

Therefore, if someone asserts that one or both are infallible sources, then by definition and logic that person cannot possibly adhere to Sola Scriptura. It's rather easy to demonstrate that St. Athanasius did indeed believe in infallible sources of authority alongside, and in harmony with Sacred Scripture.

I cite his words from the 38-volume edition of the Church fathers edited by Philip Schaff (available online in its entirety at the New Advent website):

  • “But the word of the Lord which came through the ecumenical Synod at Nicaea, abides forever.” (Ad Afros Epistola Synodica2)
  • “But let the Faith confessed by the Fathers at Nicæa alone hold good among you, at which all the fathers, including those of the men who now are fighting against it, were present, as we said above, and signed: in order that of us too the Apostle may say, ‘Now I praise you that you remember me in all things, and as I handed the traditions to you, so hold them fast (1 Corinthians 11:2).’” (Ad Afros Epistola Synodica 10)
  • “For had they believed aright, they would have been satisfied with the confession put forth at Nicæa by the whole Ecumenical Council; ... Observe how entirely they disregard the truth, and how everything they say and do is for the sake of the Arian heresy. For in that they dare to question those sound definitions of the faith, and take upon themselves to produce others contrary to them, what else do they but accuse the Fathers, and stand up in defense of that heresy which they opposed and protested against?” (Ad Episcopus Aegypti et Libyae, 5)
  • “Who, then, that has any real regard for truth, will be willing to suffer these men any longer? Who will not justly reject their writing? Who will not denounce their audacity, that being but few in number, they would have their decisions to prevail over everything, and as desiring the supremacy of their own meetings, held in corners and suspicious in their circumstances, would forcibly cancel the decrees of an uncorrupt, pure and Ecumenical Council?” (Ad Episcopus Aegypti et Libyae, 7)
  • “It is enough merely to answer such things as follows: we are content with the fact that this is not the teaching of the Catholic Church, nor did the fathers hold this.” (Letter No. 59 to Epictetus, 3)
  • “What defect of teaching was there for religious truth in the Catholic Church …?” (De Synodis, I, 3)
  • “… the sectaries, who have fallen away from the teaching of the Church, and made shipwreck concerning the Faith.” (Against the Heathen 1, 6, 3)
  • “... the soul is made immortal is a further point in the Church’s teaching which you must know ...” (Against the Heathen 2, 33, 1)
Continued below.