Replies

"It is far superior to measure an innovative teaching or what the Rev. taught against Scripture instead." It's not "instead", it's "both". Measuring it only against Scripture as a practical matter means only against one's own personal interpretation of Scripture. To me, and meaning no offense to my Latin brothers and sisters, that makes about as much sense to me as papal infallibility does. In any event, that's no standard at all, wu. This is why it is always safe to measure against what the canon was measured against, 4th century Holy Tradition of The Church. "even the early church fathers did not elevate their own sayings/writings/teachings to the level of scripture, obviously knowing the Canon of Scripture was superior and rightly termed the Word of God where the works of the early church fathers are not."

Indeed they did not. They were very careful to support their positions by reference to Scripture. And even they erred. This is why we speak of the "consensus patrum" as the standard against which we measure the orthodoxy of the teachings of individual Fathers.

Measuring it only against Scripture as a practical matter means only against one's own personal interpretation of Scripture

An individual's reading of the scripture does not usually involve "only" one's interpretation. Background information will usually have been provided from what others have taught one which very well include not only modern teachers but what other interpreters have said in the past...sometimes distant past. Bible groups continually come together to share interpretations and learn from each other and each other's experiences of Bible study so as not to rely only on their own interpretations.

Why do you think so many people read study Bibles? So they can glean extra insight from the sideline notes and not rely only on their own interpretations.

They were very careful to support their positions by reference to Scripture

Which is another indication why we should consider the Scripture the superior source.

It's a shame the EO can't step back and see how this "consensus patrum" can lead to heresy. As a Born Again Christian I don't give any special weight to the various gatherings of theologians and their pronouncements. The answers are in Scripture. If something is not clear in Scripture it's better to just leave it alone rather than to rely on politically connected theologians that did a good job submitting to the prevailing power.

A great example of how badly things go awry when depending on your "consensus partum" is the Marian Cult and worship of Mary that is so prevalent in the RCC.