Here again the first, and last of what you'd cited here, originating from http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2015/05/13-things-you-didnt-know-about-papacy.html;
- In 150 AD, a contemporary writer, in “The Shepherd of Hermas”, confirms that the Roman church is still overseen by a plurality of “elders”. Moreover, these “elders” fought among themselves and brought scandal to the church.
- We’ve seen Jesus admonish this behavior when the disciples themselves “argued among themselves as to who was greatest”. Nor does Hermas attribute any gift of “infallibility” to these elders, who themselves “have no instruction”.
From Papal Infallibility: A Protestant Evaluation of an Ecumenical Issue Mark E. Powell p. 136
- In Revelation and the Quest for Unity Dulles argues the conception of tradition as something "passed down from generation to generation by word of mouth, or at least by some channel other than the canonical Scriptures" was avoided at Vatican II and is problematic for at least three reasons;
In the first place, it involves a deus ex machina. The existence of these alleged traditions cannot be verified by historical evidence, but is postulated for the sake of of the argument. Secondly, the thesis is actually contrary to all probability. It is almost incredible that if the early fathers had known all these fact they would have written so vaguely about the Sacraments, about Mary, etc....Finally, even if we did grant the existence of such traditions in apostolic times, contrary to all appearances, it is most difficult to see how they can be utilized by the modern Church as doctrinal sources. A tradition cannot be valid source unless it's existence and contents can be established with some assurance. [Avery Dulles, Revelation and the Quest for Unity Washington, DC: Corpus Books, 1968), p.75]
from
( Latin: “god from the machine”) a person or thing that appears or is introduced into a situation suddenly and unexpectedly and provides an artificial or contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty.The term was first used in ancient Greek and Roman drama, where it meant the timely appearance of a god to unravel and resolve the plot. The deus ex machina was named for the convention of the god’s appearing in the sky, an effect achieved by means of a crane (Greek: mēchanē). The dramatic device dates from the 5th century bc; a god appears in Sophocles’ Philoctetes and in most of the plays of Euripides to solve a crisis by divine intervention.
Since ancient times, the phrase has also been applied to an unexpected saviour or to an improbable event that brings order out of chaos (e.g., the arrival, in time to avert tragedy, of the U.S. cavalry in a western film).
But somehow..."sola scriptura" is the enemy, to be defeated(!)
Scripture as over-arching guide & rule to our faith, by which tradition itself need be evaluated to help stem tide of abuses, wherever those arise within the Christian Church, and what's the response of those with which we here often contend --- sola scriptura delenda est?
It's not as if within Scripture there is no room or space made for revelation, but that true revelation won't go against what the Scriptures well enough show. Proper governance of church body is discussed also, with no where really to be found there be one single bishop as head over all others. Pretty much anybody could be corrected, and if not receiving that when it when due and proper --- be removed, cast out.
Yet when the cry is as Sola Scriptura delenda est what is it that is being declared enemy, and what is it which seeks to take it's place?
- IN CONTEXT /Subject to the Roman Pontiff Article #30