Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian; RnMomof7
Being advised by Timothy that Scripture Alone can thoroughly furnish a Believer unto Perfect Understanding, I intend to continue reading Scripture and speaking my understanding (albeit under the Authority of my Ordained Presbyters, which is also of course commanded in Scripture).

Which is exactly what I do. I, too, subject myself to the authority of the ordained presbyters in my church and the authority of the ecumenical councils and the Early Church Fathers and the Creeds.

I do this because I do not trust my own interpretations of Scripture standing in isolation. My own prejudices, misconceptions, and errors are read into the text; by using the framework of the Presbyters, the Councils, the Fathers, and the Creeds, that is mitigated. I'll even call this group the Magisterium - and so call myself a Magesterial Protestant.

I think my statements on this approach could have been more clear, because right now RnMomof7 is absolutely convinced I don't believe in absolute truth (I do, I just observe that even the most naked fact requires that we interpret it through the lens of our experiences.). But ultimately, my approach is rooted in a disbelief in the complete perspecuity of the Scriptures (rather, believing that all things pertaining to salvation are clearly found within; the rest is subject to interpretation - by the Magisterium.

86 posted on 01/20/2006 6:24:12 AM PST by jude24 ("Thy law is written on the hearts of men, which iniquity itself effaces not." - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]


To: jude24; OrthodoxPresbyterian; AnalogReigns; HarleyD; Dr. Eckleburg
I think my statements on this approach could have been more clear, because right now RnMomof7 is absolutely convinced I don't believe in absolute truth (I do, I just observe that even the most naked fact requires that we interpret it through the lens of our experiences.). But ultimately, my approach is rooted in a disbelief in the complete perspecuity of the Scriptures (rather, believing that all things pertaining to salvation are clearly found within; the rest is subject to interpretation - by the Magisterium.

Ask the pastor Jude.

If you can not trust your own reading of the word, how do you know that you can trust your judgment in who you have interpret it for you?

Perhaps the Watchtower would be good . You just can not be sure can you, because your own judgment is so clouded. Perhaps prayer for discernment would help.

110 posted on 01/20/2006 1:05:51 PM PST by RnMomof7 ("Sola Scriptura,Sola Christus,Sola Gratia,Sola Fide,Soli Deo Gloria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

To: jude24; RnMomof7; HarleyD; Dr. Eckleburg
But ultimately, my approach is rooted in a disbelief in the complete perspecuity of the Scriptures (rather, believing that all things pertaining to salvation are clearly found within; the rest is subject to interpretation - by the Magisterium.

In and of itself, I don't see that much to which I would strongly object in Jude's statement.

On the one hand, the Scriptures do endorse the Protestant contention of Sola Scriptura, the doctrine that the Bible Alone contains within itself all teaching necessary for a Finite Man to attain a perfectly-rightful (albeit Finite) understanding of the things of God:

On the other hand, however -- Jesus and His Apostles organized the Church as a Social and Presbyterically-supervised Organization, and the Scriptures themselves also reject the notion of a completely-individualistic approach to the reading and understanding of Scripture (For myself, Jude, I don't know if I can justify "a disbelief in the complete perspecuity of the Scriptures"; just to make the point, I suspect that the Scriptures were "completely perspicacious" to at least one Man, Jesus of Nazareth. However, I can certainly believe in any individual Fallen Man's propensity -- even once he is Redeemed -- to get things wrong from time to time) :

The notion that "two heads are better than one", is, we might say, enshrined in Scripture:

So God has ordained that we are supposed to understand God's Word as the only infallible rule of Faith; but God has also ordained that we are supposed to reason together, and with the help of an Under-Shepherd of Christ (i.e., a Presbyter).

The accumulation of this "Reasoning Together, under ordained Presbyters", over the centuries, constitutes the "Magisterium" -- and if you've ever taken Notes of a Pastor's Sermon, you're engaging in a Magisterial sort of practice. Nothing wrong with that; we're supposed to glean wisdom from those who have gone before us.


However, I think Jude probably would differ from the Romanists on at least three points:

Unless I am mistaken (and Jude, correct me if you disagree with any of those statements, but I'm fairly confident that you agree), that would place Jude soundly within the mainstream of Magisterial Protestantism -- and certainly no Romanist Trojan Horse within our gates (grin).

Best, OP

144 posted on 01/23/2006 5:00:25 AM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian (We are Unworthy Servants; We have only done Our Duty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson