For an interesting insight into the shape of historic Anglicanism today, may I suggest you read the Commentary on the Jerusalem Declaration supplemented Prepared by the Theological Resource Group of the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON)--General Editors of the Commentary – Nicholas Okoh, Vinay Samuel and Chris Sugden
The Declaration refer to the classic authorities – and they are:
1. The Bible as the word of God written,
2. The Creeds and Councils of the early church,
3. The Articles of Religion, the Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal.
Though each of these appeared at particular moments of history, each one is recognized as having an ongoing normative role. Concerning my position on sola scriptura, I can find no better treatment of the subject than that given under the topic of “The Bible as the words of God written”. Which reads, as —
The Bible stands above all the others, as the supreme authority for Christian faith and life, and the authority of each of the others stems from the fact that each one faithfully represents the teaching of Scripture. (p. 33)
I am therefore linking the commentary for your perusal. There is a lot here that I think we can all agree on, and for that with which we do not, there will be plenty of time left for that discussion. Below are a couple of significant positions that I think also reflect my thinking along the lines of what constitutes Orthodoxy—
The apostolic foundation has been laid and, with the death of the apostles, no group or individual has authority to add to it or remove from it. (p. 30)
Furthermore, we, like them, live in the last days. In this light, we insist that contextualisation does not mean modifying the Scripture to suit our culture; we should, instead, be bringing every aspect of our culture under the authority of Scripture. (p. 39)Take care, Jim
Jim, I am not trying to persuade you of anything. I am only trying to make a plea for clarity and understanding on what sola scriptura is and what it isn't and cannot be. We should always follow our conscience as sovereign, but we should never cease to form and inform our conscience.
ReplyDeleteThe Anglican paradigm you outline above is insufficient and profoundly flawed in ways that violate the rules of logic and common sense. One cannot appeal to the Authority of the ancient Church's Creeds and Councils and simultaneously reject the Authority which those Creeds and Councils presume. The Church of the Councils and Creeds NEVER operated from sola scriptura properly understood. To accept the Creeds and the Councils and reject the infallible Church which produced those Creeds is a completely ad hoc appeal to the Ancient Church and as such is unfounded and ungrounded.
My approach to this whole controversy was to lay aside my interest and seek to understand the Protestant and Catholic position clearly and maturely. I have always sought the most informed, learned, intelligent authors. I have sought men of the highest caliber and reputation for intellectual honesty and integrity. I have always wanted honest engagement with the position of both sides. I started out by giving a fair and disinterested reading to the most substantive and insightful critiques of Protestantism that I could find. And I did not initially set out to encounter these critiques from a fundamentally defensive position, I wanted to listen carefully, closely, and with openness to the reality that my own understanding might be flawed. And only after I listened carefully, and understood exactly what was being said, did I step back and analyze how compelling the critique was or was not. I have never ceased to do this in a back and forth manner giving a fair hearing to the best case that can be put forward by each side.
You tell me that you think sola scriptura is correct but without engaging the best arguments to be made against it. Of course it is within your power to approach the whole thing however you see fit, but it just doesn’t meet my standard of rigor to neglect to address the best. I exposed my own beliefs to the most demanding and fundamental examination I could possibly muster. I spent a great deal of effort to listen to substantive critiques of my beliefs and then I spent a great deal of effort attempting to understand the Catholic claim and exactly how and where their Formal Principle differed from sola scriptura. Until one is very clear on this an opinion in the matter has no claim to being a judgment.
Best,
Bill
Hi Jim,
ReplyDelete"The Bible stands above all the others, as the supreme authority for Christian faith and life, and the authority of each of the others stems from the fact that each one faithfully represents the teaching of Scripture."
Of course I could easily say that this is circular and question begging as this implies that the authors are the ones who determine whether these sources "faithfully represents the teaching of Scripture". But this is the whole question, who has the authority to say whether your interpretation "faithfully represents the teaching of Scripture". Jim, every single Protestant sect lays claim to the title of being the one that "faithfully represents the teaching of Scripture". This is not hard too see is it?
A continuous train of brilliant Anglicans, that have left Anglicanism for the Catholic Church, have written eloquently and learnedly as to why they think the Anglican claim is false.
You will understand if I think that Newman, Chesterton, Edmund Campion, Gerard Manley Hopkins, Ronald Knox, R. H. Benson, et al, all the way down to Alasdair MacIntyre, were not only more informed and possessed of deeper insight and sharper intellect than the authors of GAFCON document, but they display a far greater witness to disinterest in the matter.
Again, I am curious as to why you would reject the opportunity to participate in a substantive and disinterested engagement with the issue of Authority from the essay I have linked several times. If the authors are incorrect in some way I would like to know how.
If you don't believe me at least you should give Chesterton a full hearing in the matter. He has written extensively on his deliberations. And there has never been a more mature deliberation than those of Chesterton and Newman, whose Apologia Pro Vita Sua is the definitive work dealing with the whole Anglican matter.
continued...
Bill, what essay have you linked that I have not commented on? Am I overlooking something? Link it again and I will look at it, and, hopefully respond constructively.
ReplyDelete