Did Augustine Affirm Sola Scriptura?

In this video I suggest that St. Augustine affirmed the essential content of the Protestant notion of sola Scriptura--that is, the view that the Bible alone is the infallible rule for Christian faith and practice. I first offer a plea not to caricature sola Scriptura, and then work through three passages in Augustine's writings. Finally, I point to similar support of sola Scriptura in John Chrysostom.

Truth Unites is a mixture of apologetics and theology, with an irenic focus.

Gavin Ortlund (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary) serves as senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Ojai.

SUPPORT:

FOLLOW:

MY BOOKS:

00:00 - Introduction
01:27 - 3 Framing Remarks
08:11 - Augustine Quote #1
11:07 - Augustine Quote #2
13:23 - Augustine Quote #3
18:01 - John Chrysotom on sola Scriptura

[jonathanhnosko]

I have watched this and various associated videos multiple times. This is hands down the clearest and most helpful single unpacking of the issue that I have come across in my open minded, at times tremblingly so, 10+ year journey as a Protestant into the fathers and church history. Your preparatory comments alone were worth the price of admission. ;) Thank you, thank you, thank you!

[eduardoan]

Those quotes from John Chrysostom actually spoke directly to me, i feel that pressure to read scripture and judge things from scripture, pls pray so that the Holy Spirit guides me.

[creefloproductions]

What an absolute stunner of a quote from Chrysistom, this father speaking from of old into the same human propensity to choose wandering over finding.
Thank you Gavin. You are a gift to the Church.

[woozyjoe]

Gavin, this came at exactly the right time for me. It was an almost instantaneous answer to my prayer tonight. God Bless you and thank you so much for this, your best video yet.

[jgrobichaud]

As a Catholic, I found your reasoning and explanation well done. Is it not interesting to follow Jesus? When I realized that Jesus chose twelve apostles/disciples, I realized they had different personalities, understanding and that we are to grown together learning from one another. Being a follower, a true Christian, representing our faith with one another, growing in faith and understanding. Lead by the Holy Spirit, the truth will always be present ...God bless

[harmonypizza]

So this church father did not appeal to Magisterium for theological clarity like some Roman Catholics do today, but to the Scripture itself.

[JD-npxq]

Fascinating. Is there any chance that quote from the Letter to Jerome informed Luther's "scripture and plain reason" statement at Worms? It almost seems like a paraphrase.

[GustAdlph]

Hello Gavin, I am a former Catholic, now reformed Episcopal. The term "infallible" is a red flag for Catholics as they believe the Pope and the Magisterium are infallible when speaking "ex cathedra."
I think Scriprure is "above all else" would be a better term.

[J.F.]

It has always been a bit strange to me that those who hold oral tradition to be on the same level as Scripture, to the point that they would anathematize someone for not believing it, as not falling into the same folly as the Pharisees and Sadducees. They clearly stepped outside of Scripture and elevated manmade traditions then and Jesus called them out for it, and thus Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy do the same and are none the wiser. That is not say that many within the Protestant church don’t do the same and they are clearly in error too (no pass for Protestants). If something is not clearly articulated in Scripture and becomes a dogma centuries later or eisegetically read back into Scripture, we can confidently say that the Holy Spirit did want us to practice such things. For example, Mary’s bodily assumption nor immaculate conception nor Transubstantiation are not clearly articulated in Scripture but became later interpretations by men many centuries later, the Christian is not bound to believe or endorse said dogmas. But even for Protestants, any practice not clearly laid out in Scripture can and should be rejected.

[RockGTA]

While John Chrysostom's homily on Acts 33 may suggest something like Sola Scriptura in a first look, I think it's important to be careful not to come to that conclusion before reading more of his work. The same John Chrysostom also taught about the tradition of the Church as worthy of credit:

"So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word, or by Epistle of ours.

Hence it is manifest, that they did not deliver all things by Epistle, but many things also unwritten, and in like manner both the one and the other are worthy of credit. Therefore let us think the tradition of the Church also worthy of credit. It is a tradition, seek no farther. Here he shows that there were many who were shaken." (On Second Thessalonians, Homily IV)

"Not by letters alone did Paul instruct his disciple in his duty, but before by words also which he shows, both in many other passages, as where he says, "whether by word or our Epistle" 2 Thessalonians 2:15, and especially here. Let us not therefore suppose that anything relating to doctrine was spoken imperfectly. For many things he delivered to him without writing. Of these therefore he reminds him, when he says, Hold fast the form of sound words, which you have heard of me."

Also, the same John Chrysostom considered the Deuterocanonical books, at least some of them, as Scripture:

"Let us then repeat to ourselves soothing charms drawn from the holy Scripture, and say, "You are earth and ashes. Why is earth and ashes proud?" Sirach 10:9, and, "The sway of his fury shall be his destruction" Sirach 1:22: and, The wrathful man is not comely Proverbs 11:25, Septuagint;" (Homily 48 on the Gospel of John)

As a final quote, in his 3rd homily on the letter to the Phillipians, he goes as far as saying that the practice of praying for the dead comes from the apostles themselves:

"Not in vain did the Apostles order that remembrance should be made of the dead in the dreadful Mysteries. They know that great gain results to them, great benefit; for when the whole people stands with uplifted hands, a priestly assembly, and that awful Sacrifice lies displayed, how shall we not prevail with God by our entreaties for them? And this we do for those who have departed in faith, while the catechumens are not thought worthy even of this consolation, but are deprived of all means of help save one. And what is this? We may give to the poor on their behalf. This deed in a certain way refreshes them. For God wills that we should be mutually assisted; else why has He ordered us to pray for peace and the good estate of the world? Why on behalf of all men? Since in this number are included robbers, violaters of tombs, thieves, men laden with untold crimes; and yet we pray on behalf of all; perchance they may turn. As then we pray for those living, who differ not from the dead, so too we may pray for them." (Homily 3 on Philippians)

So, in my humble opinion, I think it's quite a long stretch to get a Sola Scriptura-believing John Chrysostom out of what he says in his 33rd homily on Acts, given all his other writings which show other things he believed and practiced that go against this principle and that resemble practices and beliefs of Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy much more than those of Protestantism.

[johnathanrhoades]

Highly recommend reading the whole homily on Acts (homily 33).

A quote from there in response to the question of why people don't necessarily see the truth of scripture straight away:
"'Then how is it they do not see it at a glance?' Many things are the cause of this: both preconceived opinion, and human causes (αἰτίαι). The others, say you, say the same thing about us. How? For are we separated from the Church? Have we our heresiarchs [leaders of heresy]? Are we called after men — as one of them has Marcion, another Manichæus, a third Arius, for the author and leader (of his sect)? Whereas if we likewise do receive an appellation from any man, we do not take them that have been the authors of some heresy, but men that presided over us, and governed the Church."

[TheRoark]

If Augustine believed that councils were infallible by their nature, you would think that in the third quote from his letter to Jerome he would have said "...convincing my judgment of its truth either by these canonical writings themselves //or by church councils//, or by arguments addressed to my reason." It's seems so cut and dry!

[jayrey]

There is no disagreement between the Protestants and Catholics/Orthodox on the idea that scripture is entirely correct on all matters of faith and practice. The idea that it is the "only" source is where we disagree since Catholics/Orthodox both would say that Holy Tradition is the "only" source and that scripture is an enormous part of that Holy Tradition. So the quotes from Augustine here are not going against the Catholic/Orthodox perspective, they're just affirming one particular portion of Holy Tradition.

And that extra layer of tradition is where Sola Scriptura is lacking because when you limit the only source of reliable truth to the content of a book, you must solve the problem of how that truth gets off the pages into the hearts of the readers. Interpretation is taking place any time you read a text, letters are symbols, words are symbols, and meanings are fluid across time and cultures and even between people in the same place speaking the same language. There must be an authority in place, a righteous human authority, that can be called upon to play that role, to authoritatively move the words from the page to the person and maintain the unity of the Church.

[natecesky]

Thankful for the content you put up here, always nuanced and irenic. This video is certainly an example of that!

[TruthHasSpoken]

St Augustine was no protestant. Don't MISS USE Him ! He never taught anything about reading the bible on your own, believing that one can come up with their own truth led by the Holy Spirit, in contradiction to the faith handed down by the apostles !! He was a Catholic Bishop who believed through his words of consecration, the bread and wine transformed into the Resurrected Christ. And, like St Jerome at his time, he deferred to the authority of the Church. An example of the "rule of faith" is that baptism is salvific as we receive the indwelling of God within us and sanctifying grace lost in the sin of Adam. The PLAIN passage of scripture below is 1 Pet 3: 21, _baptism now saves you._ That too is exactly what St Augustine believed .. scripture taught it and the Church believed it as well. So when ANYONE says otherwise, their fallible belief is rejected.

_“But when proper words make Scripture ambiguous, we must see in the first place that there is nothing wrong in our punctuation or pronunciation. Accordingly, if, when attention is given to the passage, it shall appear to be uncertain in what way it ought to be punctuated or pronounced, let the reader consult the rule of faith which he has gathered from the plainer passages of Scripture, and from the authority of the Church, and of which I treated at sufficient length when I was speaking in the first book about things.”_ Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 3, 2:2 (A.D. 397).

What is this Church to which he speaks of:

_“Petilianus said: ‘If you declare that yon hold the Catholic Church, the word ‘catholic’ is merely the Greek equivalent for entire or whole. But it is clear that you are not in the whole, because you have gone aside into the part.’ Augustine answered: I too indeed have attained to a very slight knowledge of the Greek language, scarcely to be called knowledge at all, yet I am not shameless in saying that I know that means not ‘one, ’ but ‘the whole;’ and that means “according to the whole:” whence the Catholic Church received its name, according to the saying of the Lord, ‘It is not for you to know the times, which the Father hath put in His own power. But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in Judea, and in Samaria, and even in the whole earth.’ Here you have the origin of the name ‘Catholic.’_ Augustine, Answer to Letters of Petilian, 2:38 [90] (A.D. 400).

_“Inasmuch, I repeat, as this is the case, we believe also in the Holy Church, [intending thereby] assuredly the Catholic. For both heretics and schismatics style their congregations churches. But heretics, in holding false opinions regarding God, do injury to the faith itself; while schismatics, on the other hand, in wicked separations break off from brotherly charity, although they may believe just what we believe. Wherefore neither do the heretics belong to the Church catholic, which loves God; nor do the schismatics form a part of the same.”_ Augustine, On Faith and Creed, 10:21 (A.D. 393).

_“You think that you make a very acute remark when you affirm the name Catholic to mean universal, not in respect to the communion as embracing the whole world, but in respect to the observance of all Divine precepts and of all the sacraments, as if we (even accepting the position that the Church is called Catholic because it honestly holds the whole truth, of which fragments here and there are found in some heresies) rested upon the testimony of this word’s signification, and not upon the promises of God, and so many indisputable testimonies of the truth itself, our demonstration of the existence of the Church of God in all nations.”_ Augustine, To Vincent the Rogatist, 93:7, 23 (A.D. 403).

Note the bold below. St Augustine believed the gospel due to the authority of the Catholic Church. Scripture alone? No way. He didn't teach it or believe it.

_“For in the Catholic Church, not to speak of the purest wisdom, to the knowledge of which a few spiritual, men attain in this life…–not to speak of this wisdom, which you do not believe to be in the Catholic Church, there are many other things which most justly keep me in her bosom. The consent of peoples and nations…so does her authority…the succession of priests…[a]nd so, lastly, does the name itself of Catholic, which, not without reason, amid so many heresies, the Church has thus retained; so that, though all heretics wish to be called Catholics, yet when a stranger asks where the Catholic Church meets, no heretic will venture to point to his own chapel or house. Such then in number and importance are the precious ties belonging to the Christian name which keep a believer in the Catholic Church…Now if the truth is so clearly proved as to leave no possibility of doubt, it must be set before all the things that keep me in the Catholic Church… _*_For my part, I should not believe the gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church_*_ …for it was through the Catholics that I got my faith in it; and so, whatever you bring from the gospel will no longer have any weight with me. Wherefore, if no clear proof of the apostleship of Manichaeus is found in the gospel, I will believe the Catholics rather than you.”_ Augustine, Against the Epistle of Manichaeus, 4:5, 5:6 (A.D 397).

[davidszaraz]

Nope! Check out William Albrecht's response to this video.

[matiasgamalieltolmosuarez]

I love that video and it's exactly because of sola scripture that trinity won against arrianism. The Fathers always defended their position saying "what I teach is what scriptures teach". Scriptures are our infalible rule of doctrine.

[matthewbroderick]

Do you agree with Augustine when he states if it were not for the authority of the Catholic Church, he would not know the Holy Scriptures.
Augustine also called Mary without sin, a pure dwelling place, and Augustine prayed for the dead, those undergoing final sanctification, and Augustine teaches of the Lord's Supper, " He held His own body in His hands, and gave it to them to eat ". Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is true food and Blood true drink

[dennistoufexis]

"Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. As a result, many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men." Acts 17

[rimnn]

2:44 I think it's important to note why it's the "rule" or "standard." We believe that Jesus is the authority, so the testimony of Jesus is the standard to build and refer upon. Putting it another way, The Word of God became flesh, so we reference his living example and teachings through the scriptures given to us by his direct witnesses.