Theological Arsonist #44 / Liberal Protestantism & Sola Scriptura

Jonah Saller
PO Box 363
Ingleside, IL 60041-0363

———————————————————————

MAIN GEAR

———————————————————————

This page may contain affiliate links. All that means is that I get a small commission for all who buy products through the links. This helps my ministry grow! Thanks!

———————————————————————

[stephenhenderson]

Helpful and convincing. Thank you Jonah.

[jacobmaier]

Can you explain your statement that "their is nothing wrong with holding to the Marian Dogmas..."???

[contrasedevacantism]

You listed indulgences and defining Marian teachings as dogma as personal stumbling blocks to embracing Catholicism. Regarding the granting of indulgences we have to begin with first principles. It is irrefutable that if the Church has the greater authority of granting the remission of sins, it also has the lesser authority of remitting the temporal punishments associated to sin. Although there was certainly a development in practice, we see it implicitly contained in the authority of excommunication and the lifting thereof. Excommunication is merely the imposing of a spiritual temporal punishment (it's intended to be remedial in nature). Inversely, the lifting of excommunications is the loosening of that spiritual temporal punishment. We also have to remember that whether a particular practice is consistent with the faith of the Church is ultimately for the magisterium to decide (as in the case with prayers to the saints or the veneration of icons), since the Magisterium is the rule of faith, i.e., it determines the standard of orthodoxy. Which brings us to our second point. You cited making Marian doctrines as necessary for salvation as being problematic. Where do you get from Scripture which doctrines are "salvific" or "essential" and which are not? Also where do you get from Scripture that the Magisterium is limited to making as dogmas only "salvific" or "essential" issues? For example, although we don't have the acts of the Council of Ephesus, I'm assuming that anyone that denied the title Mother of God would have been considered a heretic given its implicit connection to Christological truths. Similarly all Marian dogmas have some implicit connection to a Christological truth. Catholics would argue that the only absolutely necessary truths for salvation (depending on which spectrum you fall) is a belief in God and some other divinely revealed truth; or on the more extreme side the Trinity and Incarnation (a position I adhere to). This supposes invincible ignorance, of course. On a normative basis, Catholics are bound to follow the magisterium as the rule of faith in areas of faith and morals.

Lastly, you mention that scripture is the "supreme authority in the Church". Augustine seems to attribute the Church as the "summit of authority" instead. It must be remembered that authority properly belongs to agents; and the scripture cannot properly be said to be an agent.