Is Sola Scriptura Self-refuting?

[Valletta]

However, the most “trad” group in the RCC, or some would say outside of it, since its canonical status is irregular and was for a time regarded as schismatic, is the SSPX, which entirely rejects Fiducia Supplicans and Traditiones Custodes and operates outside of Papal control.

At any rate insofar as there were traditionalists in the RCC who held an Ultramontanist view, the trauma inflicted by Pope Francis now has many looking for ways of canonically removing him from office.

In the 19th century, the most traditional members of the Catholic Church were estranged by Papal Infallibility, which arguably resulted from the Savoyard conquest of all of Italy and the unification thereof, including the Papal States. These estranged members became the Old Catholics. Later, many of the Old Catholic churches of the Union of Utrecht were taken over by liberals, but as of now, thanks to Fiducia Supplicans and to a lesser extent, Traditiones Custodes,, the Polish National Catholic Church and the Norwegian Catholic Church are arguably more traditional than the mainstream Roman Catholic Church.

However, the most “trad” group in the RCC, or some would say outside of it, since its canonical status is irregular and was for a time regarded as schismatic, is the SSPX, which entirely rejects Fiducia Supplicans and Traditiones Custodes and operates outside of Papal control.

At any rate insofar as there were traditionalists in the RCC who held an Ultramontanist view, the trauma inflicted by Pope Francis now has many looking for ways of canonically removing him from office.

To clarify for everyone, there is just one Catholic Church that is in every nation in the world. There is not, for example, a "Norwegian Catholic Church," the Church has many rites as well that are all within the Catholic Church. What is "traditional has different meaning to different people, when the U.S. government goes after "traditional Catholics" they may mean pro-life Catholics. Now in Norway the Catholic Church was not tolerated for a long time after the reformation, and today some of the pre-reformation orders, such as the Trappists, have moved back. So older versions of the mass may be more popular. As to Pope Francis, the manner in which he has tried to get out his message of mercy has caused great confusion and conflict in the Church. For example, the blessings were quite proper, hate the sin, love the sinner, so that the teaching was that any individual trying to resist sin was eligible for a blessing. His unnecessary and confusing statements have caused some to improperly interpretation.

 

[Clare73]

Thank you for your refutation. I do understand your position and, although I do not agree with it, I hope you understand my position that John 6 is not considered to be fable by the vast majority of Christians, but is taken metaphorically by many, if not most, Protestants such as myself. I hope you agree that metaphor is used frequently in scripture.

Jn 6 seems too strong to be simply metaphoric.
I suggest it has something to do with sharing with the High Priest a sacrificial meal on the sacrifice itself, as we find in the OT (Lev 3:15, 7:15-18, 19:5-8).

 

[Valletta]

Thank you for your refutation. I do understand your position and, although I do not agree with it, I hope you understand my position that John 6 is not considered to be fable by the vast majority of Christians, but is taken metaphorically by many, if not most, Protestants such as myself. I hope you agree that metaphor is used frequently in scripture.

I understand, I know there are widely different opinions on the Holy Eucharist within Protestantism. I hope you agree that words are frequently to be taken literally within Holy Scripture.

 

[bbbbbbb]

To clarify for everyone, there is just one Catholic Church that is in every nation in the world. There is not, for example, a "Norwegian Catholic Church," the Church has many rites as well that are all within the Catholic Church. What is "traditional has different meaning to different people, when the U.S> government goes after "traditional Catholics" they may mean pro-life Catholics. Now in Norway the Catholic Church was not tolerated for a long time after the reformation, and today some of the pre-reformation orders, such as the Trappists, have moved back. So older versions of the mass may be more popular. As to Pope Francis, the manner in which he has tried to get out his message of mercy has caused great confusion and conflict in the Church. For example, the blessings were quite proper, hate the sin, love the sinner, so that the teaching was that any individual trying to resist sin was eligible for a blessing. His unnecessary and confusing statements have caused some to improperly interpretation.

I was quite surprised when, on another thread, I requested the official list of dogmas of the Catholic Church and discovered to my complete amazement that there is no defined list of dogmas. If I am mistaken, please direct me to the official list.

For any organization which lacks a listing of its core beliefs there is the very real probability that there will be confusion in varying degrees with some taking advantage of the situation to correct the situation, as they understand it. The current Pope, as well as all of his predecessors, has been quite circumspect in all of his actions and statements to avoid any and all possible breaches of protocol and beliefs. If one reads the various Papal statements, both current and past, one typically finds highly nuanced parsing such that various understandings can be derived. A common example would be the famous statement, "There is no salvation outside of the Church." This statement has been traditionally understood to mean that outside of the Roman Catholic Church there is no salvation, thus excluding all other branches of Christianity. However, in recent years, in efforts to appeal to the "separated brethren" this statement has been presented as referring to an invisible Church which extends to all who have undergone trinitarian baptism.

To deny that there are serious divisions within the Roman Catholic Church today is wishful thinking, IMO.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Jn 6 seems too strong to be simply metaphoric.
I suggest it has something to do with sharing with the High Priest a sacrificial meal on the sacrifice itself, as we find in the OT (Lev 3:15, 7:15-18, 19:5-8).

Thank you. I had not considered that possibility.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I understand, I know there are widely different opinions on the Holy Eucharist within Protestantism. I hope you agree that words are frequently to be taken literally within Holy Scripture.

I agree entirely that much of the Bible is literal. The vast majority of it is really easily understood. The Revelation is particularly problematic, as I am sure you will agree.

 

[Clare73]

I agree entirely that much of the Bible is literal. The vast majority of it is really easily understood. The Revelation is particularly problematic, as I am sure you will agree.

Revelation is figurative prophecy which is subject to more than one interpretation, the only rule being that any interpretation not in agreement with NT apostolic teaching is necessarily incorrect, for the word of Go does not contradict itself.

 

[The Liturgist]

To clarify for everyone, there is just one Catholic Church that is in every nation in the world. There is not, for example, a "Norwegian Catholic Church," the Church has many rites as well that are all within the Catholic Church. What is "traditional has different meaning to different people, when the U.S. government goes after "traditional Catholics" they may mean pro-life Catholics. Now in Norway the Catholic Church was not tolerated for a long time after the reformation, and today some of the pre-reformation orders, such as the Trappists, have moved back. So older versions of the mass may be more popular. As to Pope Francis, the manner in which he has tried to get out his message of mercy has caused great confusion and conflict in the Church. For example, the blessings were quite proper, hate the sin, love the sinner, so that the teaching was that any individual trying to resist sin was eligible for a blessing. His unnecessary and confusing statements have caused some to improperly interpretation.

The Norwegian Catholic Church is an Old Catholic Church which like the others broke communion with the Roman Catholic Church over Vatican II.

By the way the Eastern Orthodox Church regards itself as both Roman, by virtue of its connection with the Byzantine Empire, and Catholic, but we refer to your church as Roman Catholic as a courtesy title. Before ecumenical reconciliation became a thing, the Orthodox commonly referred to the RCC as “the Frankish church” or “the Latin church” and we have some hardliners who still insist on calling it that, but since I support ecumenical reconciliation, I reject that, and believe that the church in Rome should be called the Roman Catholic Church.

Also I disagree about the propriety of Fiducia Supplicans, as do traditional Catholics such as Dr. Peter Kwasniewsky and all of the traditional Latin mass communities who have not been mercifully treated by Pope Francis, even before he issued “traditiones custodes.”

Lastly, the Roman Church cannot realistically hope to claim a monopoly over the word Catholic, since the word is not only an official part of the name of the various Sui Juris Eastern Catholic Churches who are in communion with Rome, such as the Ukrainian Greek Catholics, who reject Fiducia Supplicans, but also is part of the name of tEastern Orthodox Church and the Assyrian Catholic Church of the East, and the adormentioned Old Catholics such as the Norwegian Catholic Church and the Polish National Catholic Church, and also there are the Anglo Catholics, amonf high church Anglicans, and likewise Reformed Catholics, who are liturgical Calvinists somewhat like a funhouse mirror image of the Jansenist movement in 17th century France, and finally my Lutheran friends such as @Via Crucis and @MarkRohfrietsch who identify as Evangelical Catholics.

I realize many Catholics might want to own the word Catholic, however, ecumenical dialogue makes what was previously an unrealistic objective outright impossible, since indeed some of the closest ecumenical relations of the Roman church are with other churches that call themselves Catholic, such as the Eastern Orthodox and the Assyrian Catholic Church of the East, which has had a particularly good relationship with the Chaldean Catholic sui juris church and the Roman Catholic Church as a whole.

*That being said, I might, if Pope Francis and his successor continue the left leaning direction, be inclined to reserve this title for the SSPX and other traditional Catholic groups which preserve the traditional Latin mass and other traditional liturgies, for instance, the Society of St. Josaphat, but it has not yet reached such a condition.

 

[The Liturgist]

I was quite surprised when, on another thread, I requested the official list of dogmas of the Catholic Church and discovered to my complete amazement that there is no defined list of dogmas. If I am mistaken, please direct me to the official list.

For any organization which lacks a listing of its core beliefs there is the very real probability that there will be confusion in varying degrees with some taking advantage of the situation to correct the situation, as they understand it. The current Pope, as well as all of his predecessors, has been quite circumspect in all of his actions and statements to avoid any and all possible breaches of protocol and beliefs. If one reads the various Papal statements, both current and past, one typically finds highly nuanced parsing such that various understandings can be derived. A common example would be the famous statement, "There is no salvation outside of the Church." This statement has been traditionally understood to mean that outside of the Roman Catholic Church there is no salvation, thus excluding all other branches of Christianity. However, in recent years, in efforts to appeal to the "separated brethren" this statement has been presented as referring to an invisible Church which extends to all who have undergone trinitarian baptism.

To deny that there are serious divisions within the Roman Catholic Church today is wishful thinking, IMO.

The Norwegian Catholic Church I referred to, along with the Polish National Catholic Church, are the remaining conservative Old Catholic churches that broke communion with Rome over Papal Infallibility. The other Old Catholic churches of the Union of Utrecht were taken over by extreme liberals.

That said if I recall the PNCC, along with the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and Assyrian Church of the East, is one of those churches under the Code of Canon Law of the Eastern Catholic Church where Roman Catholics, particularly Eastern Catholics, who cannot reach a Catholic parish, are authorized to receive the sacraments, and likewise members of those churches are permitted to receive the sacraments in Roman Catholic parishes. In practice, the Eastern Orthodox usually won’t serve the sacraments to Roman Catholics, the Assyrian Church of the East normally will, and some Syriac Orthodox parishes are also known for doing it.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

This says that true faith is always followed by obedience and that, if you are not in obedience, your faith is not true and you are not saved.

Your words. Are you saying that you agree ?

 

[Clare73]

Your words. Are you saying that you agree ?

I agree with what I stated in post #699..

 

[Valletta]

All Catholic rites, including the Latin or "Roman" rite, are part of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox have validly ordained priests descended from the Apostles. However, like Catholics, they have various regulations and protocols which differ from Catholics, so it would be a rare occasion for one to receive Holy Communion from another--perhaps an ecumenical mass. Their sacraments are just as valid as ours.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The Norwegian Catholic Church I referred to, along with the Polish National Catholic Church, are the remaining conservative Old Catholic churches that broke communion with Rome over Papal Infallibility. The other Old Catholic churches of the Union of Utrecht were taken over by extreme liberals.

That said if I recall the PNCC, along with the Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and Assyrian Church of the East, is one of those churches under the Code of Canon Law of the Eastern Catholic Church where Roman Catholics, particularly Eastern Catholics, who cannot reach a Catholic parish, are authorized to receive the sacraments, and likewise members of those churches are permitted to receive the sacraments in Roman Catholic parishes. In practice, the Eastern Orthodox usually won’t serve the sacraments to Roman Catholics, the Assyrian Church of the East normally will, and some Syriac Orthodox parishes are also known for doing it.

Thank you.

 

[Valletta]

I was quite surprised when, on another thread, I requested the official list of dogmas of the Catholic Church and discovered to my complete amazement that there is no defined list of dogmas. If I am mistaken, please direct me to the official list.

For any organization which lacks a listing of its core beliefs there is the very real probability that there will be confusion in varying degrees with some taking advantage of the situation to correct the situation, as they understand it. The current Pope, as well as all of his predecessors, has been quite circumspect in all of his actions and statements to avoid any and all possible breaches of protocol and beliefs. If one reads the various Papal statements, both current and past, one typically finds highly nuanced parsing such that various understandings can be derived. A common example would be the famous statement, "There is no salvation outside of the Church." This statement has been traditionally understood to mean that outside of the Roman Catholic Church there is no salvation, thus excluding all other branches of Christianity. However, in recent years, in efforts to appeal to the "separated brethren" this statement has been presented as referring to an invisible Church which extends to all who have undergone trinitarian baptism.

To deny that there are serious divisions within the Roman Catholic Church today is wishful thinking, IMO.

 

[The Liturgist]

All Catholic rites, including the Latin or "Roman" rite, are part of the Catholic Church. The Eastern Orthodox have validly ordained priests descended from the Apostles. However, like Catholics, they have various regulations and protocols which differ from Catholics, so it would be a rare occasion for one to receive Holy Communion from another--perhaps an ecumenical mass. Their sacraments are just as valid as ours.

Roman Catholics are theoretically allowed by the code of canon law of the Eastern Catholic Churches to receive from the Orthodox, and vice versa, but in practice Eastern Orthodox bishops frown on their priests giving communion to Roman Catholics and on their parishioners receiving communion from Roman Catholics. The Syriac Orthodox Church on the other hand has somewhat warmer relations (the Copts and Ethiopians, not so much; in the case of the Armenians, I have no idea, I suspect if one were ethnically Armenian it wouldn’t matter much), and in the case of the Assyrians, quite a lot of intercommunion happens with Chaldean Rite Catholics, and the Assyrians will give the Eucharist to anyone who believes in the Real Presence of Christ.

If I recall, the Polish National Catholic Church is also an approved option for Catholics unable to get to a parish in communion with the Pope of Rome.

As far as an ecumenical mass with the Eastern Orthodox, such is highly unlikely. We have generally rebuffed all suggestions for such liturgies, even for a joint service of Forgiveness Vespers on the eve of Lent in 2015. Perhaps had Pope Benedict XVI remained around, or if Pope Francis had continued the positive dialogue that was initiated with Patriarch Kirill, through Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev, the former head of the Department of External Church Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate, who resigned in 2022, then the situation would have been different. Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, who is often accused by Old Calendarists of being an arch-ecumenist, once infamously described Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox as “ontologically different.” I can’t agree with that assesment.

 

[Valletta]

I was quite surprised when, on another thread, I requested the official list of dogmas of the Catholic Church and discovered to my complete amazement that there is no defined list of dogmas. If I am mistaken, please direct me to the official list.

It's strange you were surprised, because you have brought up the subject of Catholic dogmas a number of times in the past.

To deny that there are serious divisions within the Roman Catholic Church today is wishful thinking, IMO.

Who denies there are strong differences within the Catholic Church?

 

[bbbbbbb]

staff edited the quote

Having been chided repeatedly by various Catholic posters here for not representing Catholic dogma correctly and having repeatedly attempted to find the correct dogma in the CCC, I realized that the CCC does not contain anything resembling a list of Catholic dogmas. Thus, I attempted to locate the list and was actually amazed that none exists. It is like being in among a foreign people and wanting to speak their language passably and looking for a dictionary and discovering that nobody has yet bothered to compile a dictionary.

The net result is that I no longer give much credence to folks who represent themselves as presenting authentic Catholic dogma. A typical example is the doctrine of Purgatory. As you well know, there is an enormous diversity of ideas among Catholics, including the clergy, regarding this doctrine.

I have encountered many Catholics who sincerely tell me that the Catholic Church is completely united and is and has been unchanged since "the beginning".

 

[Markie Boy]

Having been chided repeatedly by various Catholic posters here for not representing Catholic dogma correctly and having repeatedly attempted to find the correct dogma in the CCC, I realized that the CCC does not contain anything resembling a list of Catholic dogmas. Thus, I attempted to locate the list and was actually amazed that none exists. It is like being in among a foreign people and wanting to speak their language passably and looking for a dictionary and discovering that nobody has yet bothered to compile a dictionary.

The net result is that I no longer give much credence to folks who represent themselves as presenting authentic Catholic dogma. A typical example is the doctrine of Purgatory. As you well know, there is an enormous diversity of ideas among Catholics, including the clergy, regarding this doctrine.

I have encountered many Catholics who sincerely tell me that the Catholic Church is completely united and is and has been unchanged since "the beginning".

A similar situation with Papal Infallibility. There is no list of Infallible statements through the years, because nobody can agree on which statements meet all the requirements. I have seen it listed by Catholic sources anywhere from 2 to 4, to 7, even up to 11.

So how Infallible can something be if nobody knows when it's actually happened?

This issue is not about interpreting the Bible in different ways. This is a black and white fact that makes the Dogma self refuting. But if one Catholic teaching is wrong, then the concept of infallible teaching goes away, and everything is up for grabs.

 

[jas3]

A similar situation with Papal Infallibility. There is no list of Infallible statements through the years, because nobody can agree on which statements meet all the requirements...

So how Infallible can something be if nobody knows when it's actually happened?

That argument cuts against sola scriptura too, though. Protestants say they hold to scripture as the sole infallible rule of faith but can't agree on fundamental things like the existence of sacraments or whether iconography is idolatry or not. If disagreement about papal declarations invalidates papal infallibility, then disagreement about scriptural teaching on fundamental issues would have to invalidate scriptural infallibility.

 

[bbbbbbb]

That argument cuts against sola scriptura too, though. Protestants say they hold to scripture as the sole infallible rule of faith but can't agree on fundamental things like the existence of sacraments or whether iconography is idolatry or not. If disagreement about papal declarations invalidates papal infallibility, then disagreement about scriptural teaching on fundamental issues would have to invalidate scriptural infallibility.

Not quite. In the case of the RCC there is no defined body of dogmas whereas in Protestantism there is a clearly defined canon of scripture. This means that the sincere Catholic is left in the dark regarding his faith. What might be dogma for one Catholic is hardly dogma for another Catholic. Protestants, on the other hand, may, and frequently do, disagree on the interpretation of the Bible, but the Bible itself is not the cause and is the foundation of understanding the Christian faith.