Replies

Moses declared to all Israel:

Take to heart all the words I have solemnly declared to you this day, so that you may command your children to obey carefully all the words of this law. They are not just idle words for you, they are your life, - Deu 32:46, 47

The people do not need any additional institution to interpret the Word. The priests, prophets, and scribes of Israel certainly function to help the people ministerially. The prophets, who were indeed inspired, came very much in the spirit of Micah who said, “He has shown you, O man, what is good,” Micah 6:8. The function of the prophets and priests was not to add to or even clarify the law; rather, they applied it to the people who were sinfully indifferent.

If this principle of the sufficiency and clarity of the Word is true in the Old Testament, we do not have to assume it is all the more true in the New Testament - which gloriously fulfills what the Old Testament promises - given the example found in II Tim 3 & 4. There Paul writes to his younger brother in the faith, Timothy — who was instructed in the faith by his mother and grandmother — also learned all about Paul’s teaching (3:10).

Nevertheless, Paul reminds Timothy that the Scriptures are able to make him wise unto salvation in Christ Jesus (3:15). He teaches that the Scriptures are useful for teaching, reproof (rebuking), correcting, and training in righteousness (3:16). Because the Scriptures have this character, they thoroughly equip the man of God for every good work (3:17). So Paul tells Timothy that he must preach this Word, even though the time is coming when people will not want to hear it, but rather will want teachers to suit their fancy, who will instruct them in myths rather than the truth of the Word (4:1-4).

Catholic apologists respond by repeatedly asserting II Tim 3 does not teach sufficiency. Sometimes they will refer to Jam 1:4, Mat 19:21, or Col 1:28 and 4:12 as parallel texts, claiming that the word “complete” in II Tim 3:17 does not mean sufficient. But such passages are not parallel; II Tim 3:17 uses exartizo, which has to do with being fitted for a task, while the other passages use the Greek word teleios, which has reference to maturity or having reached a desired end.

In contrast to this assertation, the force and clarity of Paul’s teaching is striking. In spite of the rich oral teaching Timothy had, he is to preach the Scriptures because they gave him all that he needed for wisdom and preparation to instruct the people of God in faith and all good works. It is Scripture that makes Timothy wise for salvation, and equips him with everything he needs for doing every good work required of the preacher of God. The sufficiency and clarity of the Word are taught in this one section of Scripture over and over again. John Chrysostom paraphrased the meaning of Paul’s words to Timothy this way: “You have Scripture for a master instead of me; from there you can learn whatever you would know.”¹

Repeated assertations by Rome's apologists do not prove a point; that is only a propaganda technique; an answer in a responsible, thorough way, is demanded of them.

The great church father, Augustine, in his treatise to prepare leaders of the church in an understanding of the Bible, wrote:

Among those things which are said openly in Scripture are to be found all those teachings which involve faith, the mores of living, and that hope and charity which we have discussed.²

At the beginning of his public ministry, Jesus faced the focused temptation of the devil in the wilderness. And how did He face that temptation? Did he not appeal to the oral tradition of Israel, the authority of the rabbis or Sanhedrin, or to even His own divinity or the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? Our Savior, in the face of temptation, turned again and again and again to the Scriptures. “It is written,” He said.

He implied that even the evil one knew what he said was true. When the devil quoted the Scripture, Jesus did not turn to some other authority. Rather Jesus said, “It is also written.” [emphasis mine] When the evil one or his representatives misuse the Bible, or imply that it is unclear, Jesus teaches us that we must look more deeply into the written Word, not away from it.

While making much of tradition, they will never really define tradition or tell you what its content is. Historically, they have not agreed among themselves about the nature and content of tradition. For example, one has said that tradition does not add anything to Scripture. But almost all Roman apologists, for over three hundred years after the Council of Trent, argued that tradition does add to the Scriptures. Some Roman apologists believe that all binding tradition was taught by the apostles, while others believe that tradition evolves and develops through the centuries of the church so that there are traditions necessary for salvation that were never known to the apostles.

This tradition which comes from the apostles develops in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed down. . . . For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fulness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.³
It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, sacred Scriptures and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God’s most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls.⁴

Carefull analysis of the foregoing statments allows one to discern that the real authority for Rome is neither Scripture nor tradition, but the church as final arbiter of all things spiritual for Man. What is the Scripture, and what does it teach? Only the church can tell you. What is tradition, and what does it teach? Only the church can tell you.

The Scriptures are not authentic, except by the authority of the church. - John Eck⁵

"I am tradition"⁶ was the declaration made by Pope Pius IX at the time of the First Vatican Council in 1870; sola ecclesia is the unimpeachable doctrine of Rome. The Reformers saw that the words of Jesus to the Pharisees applied equally to their day: “You nullify the Word of God for the sake of your tradition” (Mat 15:6).

That notwithstanding it can be shown that tradition contradicted tradition. For example, the tradition of the Roman church teaches that the pope is the head of the church, a bishop over all bishops. But Gregory the Great, pope and saint at the end of the ancient church period, said that such a teaching came from the spirit of Antichrist:

I confidently affirm that whosoever calls himself sacerdos universalis, or desires to be so called by others is in his pride a forerunner of Antichrist.⁷

The evident tension in tradition about the value of reading the Bible can be seen in The Index of Forbidden Books of Pope Pius IV in 1559:

Since experience teaches that, if the reading of the Holy Bible in the vernacular is permitted generally without discrimination, more damage than advantage will result because of the boldness of men, the judgment of the bishops and inquisitors is to serve as guide in this regard. Bishops and inquisitors may, in accord with the counsel of the local priest and confessor, allow Catholic translations of the Bible to be read by those of whom they realize that such reading will not lead to the detriment but to the increase of faith and piety. The permission is to be given in writing. Whoever reads or has such a translation in his possession without this permission cannot be absolved from his sins until he has turned in these Bibles.⁸

In marked contrast

Easy access to sacred Scripture should be provided for all the Christian faithful. . . Since the word of God should be available at all times, the Church with maternal concern sees to it that suitable and correct translations are made into different languages, especially from the original texts of the sacred books. - II Vatican Council⁹

Does tradition believe that the Bible is dangerous or helpful? Scripture teaches that it is the revelation of God, and is therefore true in all that it teaches. Moreover, "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints." (I Cor 14:33). We know where that comes from. That notwithstanding, and nevertheless, nowhere does Scripture say that the church is true in all it says. Rather, although the church as a whole will be preserved in the faith, wolves will arise in the church (Act 20:29, 30), and even the man of lawlessness will sit at the heart of the church teaching lies (II Ths 2:4).

At one point in his debate with the Pelagians, a bishop of Rome sided with Augustine, and Augustine declared, “Rome has spoken, the matter is settled.” Later, however, another pope opposed Augustine on this subject, and Augustine responded by saying, “Christ has spoken, the matter is settled.” Augustine did not bow to the authority of the bishop of Rome, but turned to the word of Christ to evaluate the teaching of Rome.

The Bible tells us that the Word of God is the light that enables us to walk in the ways of God.

I have more insight than all my teachers, for I meditate on Thy statutes. I have more understanding than the elders, for I obey Thy precepts. Thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light for my path. The unfolding of Thy words gives light; it gives understanding to the simple. - Psa 119:99, 100, 105, 130

Roman apologists object to an appeal to Psalm 119 on the grounds that it speaks of the Word of God, not of the Bible, and therefore could include in its praise tradition as well as Scripture. But their argument is irrelevant because it proof-text to the clarity, not the sufficiency of Scripture! The Psalmist clearly states that the light of the Word shines so brightly and clearly that if one meditates upon it, and obey it, they are wiser than any teacher or elder. The simple can understand it. The Word is like a strong flashlight in a dark forest. It enables me to walk on the path without tripping.

At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. - Mat 11:25

Adam Clarke's Commentary: The scribes and Pharisees, vainly puffed up by their fleshly minds, and having their foolish hearts darkened, refusing to submit to the righteousness of God (God's method of saving man by Christ) and going about to establish their own righteousness, (their own method of saving themselves,) they rejected God's counsel, and God sent the peace and salvation of the Gospel to others, called here babes, (his disciples,) simple-hearted persons, who submitted to be instructed and saved in God's own way. Let it be observed, that our Lord does not thank the Father that he had hidden these things from the wise and prudent, but that, seeing they were hidden from them, he had revealed them to the others.

Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God...And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law. - Rom 2:17,19-20

Adam Clarke's Commentary: Ye believe the Gentiles to be babes and fools when compared with yourselves; that ye alone possess the only true knowledge; that ye are the only favourites of Heaven; and that all nations must look up to you as possessing the only form of knowledge, the grand scheme and draught of all true science, of every thing that is worthy to be learned: the system of eternal truth, derived from the law. If, therefore, ye act not as becomes those who have such eminent advantages, it must be to your endless disgrace and infamy.

How is the the dogma proclaimed by contemporary Rome any different than the attitude held by the Jews of Paul's day? Contrast Rome's dogma with Paul's exhortation to Timothy, "from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

Consider the account of Paul preached in Berea in the synagogue and many Jews responded to his preaching with eagerness (Act 17:10-12). We are told that after they listened to Paul each day they examined the Scriptures to see if what Paul said was true. Did Paul respond by declaring the Scriptures to be unclear, and that only he as an apostle or the rabbis or the Sanhedrin were of sufficient caliber to interpret Scriptures for them? Did Paul say that they should not expect to find the truth in the Scriptures because they were incomplete and needed to be supplemented by tradition? Or did he say that they were insulting his apostolic authority, and that they should simply submit to him as the infallible interpreter of the Bible? Or did Paul say that they should defer to Peter - as the purported first pope - as the only one capable of interpretion of Scripture with authentic veracity? None of that was proclaimed. Instead the practice of the Bereans was praised; they Bereans were called noble because they evaluated everything on the basis of the written Word of God.

...that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another. - I Cor 4:6b

===============
Notes:

1) Cited in William Whitaker, A Disputation on Holy Scripture (Cambridge,: University Press, 1849) P. 637
2) Augustine, On Christian Doctrine trans. by D.W. Roberston, Jr. (New York: Liberal Arts Press, 1958) 11:9.
3) The Documents of Vatican II, ed. waiter M. Abbott (New York: Herden and Herden, 1966) p. 116. Dei Verbum, 8.
4) Ibid., p. 118.
5) John Eck, Enchiridion of Commonplaces, trans. by Ford Lewis Battles, (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979) P. 13.
6) Jesef Rupert Geiselmann, The Meaning of Tradition (Montreal: Palm Publishers, 1966)p. 16, note on pp. 113,114.
7) Cited in Cambridge Medieval History, section written by W. H. Hutton, edited by H. M. Gwatkin and J. P. Whitney,(New York: The MacMillan Co., 1967) 11:247.
8) James Townley, Illustrations of Biblical Literature, Vol. 2 (London: printed for Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown, 1821) p. 481
9) Documents of Vatican II, PP. 125,126.