Reformation Day – and What Led Me To Back to Catholicism

The Catholic Thing ^ | 10/28/11 | Francis J. Beckwith

[markomalley]

October 31 is only three days away. For Protestants, it is Reformation Day, the date in 1517 on which Martin Luther nailed his Ninety-Five Theses to that famous door in Wittenberg, Germany. Since I returned to the Catholic Church in April 2007, each year the commemoration has become a time of reflection about my own journey and the puzzles that led me back to the Church of my youth.

One of those puzzles was the relationship between the Church, Tradition, and the canon of Scripture. As a Protestant, I claimed to reject the normative role that Tradition plays in the development of Christian doctrine. But at times I seemed to rely on it. For example, on the content of the biblical canon – whether the Old Testament includes the deuterocanonical books (or “Apocrypha”), as the Catholic Church holds and Protestantism rejects. I would appeal to the exclusion of these books as canonical by the Jewish Council of Jamnia (A.D. 90-100) as well as doubts about those books raised by St. Jerome, translator of the Latin Vulgate, and a few other Church Fathers.

My reasoning, however, was extra-biblical. For it appealed to an authoritative leadership that has the power to recognize and certify books as canonical that were subsequently recognized as such by certain Fathers embedded in a tradition that, as a Protestant, I thought more authoritative than the tradition that certified what has come to be known as the Catholic canon. This latter tradition, rejected by Protestants, includes St. Augustine as well as the Council of Hippo (A.D. 393), the Third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397), the Fourth Council of Carthage (A.D. 419), and the Council of Florence (A.D. 1441).

But if, according to my Protestant self, a Jewish council and a few Church Fathers are the grounds on which I am justified in saying what is the proper scope of the Old Testament canon, then what of New Testament canonicity? So, ironically, given my Protestant understanding of ecclesiology, then the sort of authority and tradition that apparently provided me warrant to exclude the deuterocanonical books from Scripture – binding magisterial authority with historical continuity – is missing from the Church during the development of New Testament canonicity.

The Catholic Church, on the other hand, maintains that this magisterial authority was in fact present in the early Church and thus gave its leadership the power to recognize and fix the New Testament canon. So, ironically, the Protestant case for a deuterocanonical-absent Old Testament canon depends on Catholic intuitions about a tradition of magisterial authority.

This led to two other tensions. First, in defense of the Protestant Old Testament canon, I argued, as noted above, that although some of the Church’s leading theologians and several regional councils accepted what is known today as the Catholic canon, others disagreed and embraced what is known today as the Protestant canon. It soon became clear to me that this did not help my case, since by employing this argumentative strategy, I conceded the central point of Catholicism: the Church is logically prior to the Scriptures. That is, if the Church, until the Council of Florence’s ecumenical declaration in 1441, can live with a certain degree of ambiguity about the content of the Old Testament canon, that means that sola scriptura was never a fundamental principle of authentic Christianity.

After all, if Scripture alone applies to the Bible as a whole, then we cannot know to which particular collection of books this principle applies until the Bible’s content is settled. Thus, to concede an officially unsettled canon for Christianity’s first fifteen centuries seems to make the Catholic argument that sola scriptura was a sixteenth-century invention and, therefore, not an essential Christian doctrine.

Second, because the list of canonical books is itself not found in Scripture – as one can find the Ten Commandments or the names of Christ’s apostles – any such list, whether Protestant or Catholic, would be an item of extra-biblical theological knowledge. Take, for example, a portion of the revised and expanded Evangelical Theological Society statement of faith suggested (and eventually rejected by the membership) by two ETS members following my return to the Catholic Church. It states that, “this written word of God consists of the sixty-six books of the Old and New Testaments and is the supreme authority in all matters of belief and behavior.”

But the belief that the Bible consists only of sixty-six books is not a claim of Scripture, since one cannot find the list in it, but a claim about Scripture as a whole. That is, the whole has a property – i.e., “consisting of sixty-six books,” – that is not found in any of the parts. In other words, if the sixty-six books are the supreme authority on matters of belief, and the number of books is a belief, and one cannot find that belief in any of the books, then the belief that Scripture consists of sixty-six particular books is an extra-biblical belief, an item of theological knowledge that is prima facie non-biblical.

For the Catholic, this is not a problem, since the Bible is the book of the Church, and thus there is an organic unity between the fixing of the canon and the development of doctrine and Christian practice.

Although I am forever indebted to my Evangelical brethren for instilling and nurturing in me a deep love of Scripture, it was that love that eventually led me to the Church that had the authority to distinguish Scripture from other things.

[MarkBsnr]

Got that? Catholic kneeling is just not good enough. Who knows if Catholic kneeling equals kneeling in the heart? Who knows if Carholics submit in the heart? We probably don’t understand this. /extreme dripping sarcasm

When misinterpreted Paul takes precedence over Jesus, all kinds of novelties arise.

[D-fendr]

The canon of scripture is the work product of the Church determining which books are inspired and why and how. Your theology has an authority determining a canon which says it has no authority to determine the canon. Sure.

It the God breathed inspired Word of God.

As you interpret it to make it 'your' book.

But at least you're not a fallible man.

[boatbums]

But this is not how the Christian faith is and has been transmitted and maintained through the centuries. Your teachers’ theology is less than two centuries old, some of the others I mentioned are from less than a century old. What new system will be “Christian” next year or the next decade? What new fit can be made from the same verses? Infinite. You cannot have a Christian faith that is One, Holy and Universal and Eternal this way. Your teachers and what they have taught you are prima facia evidence of this.

I suppose you want us to believe the Roman Catholic Church has "it" all together, that everyone agrees about everything, nobody thinks any differently than anyone else, all the church "Fathers" were in full agreement about everything and all Catholics today all believe everything the same? If THAT'S what you're trying to imply, I hate to burst your bubble, but that simply isn't true and it isn't how it works. You have been told a lie, a myth, a fantasy world. Very few doctrines were unanimous and many were barely passed without strong arming and power plays. There IS no official Catholic commentary on the Bible and many areas remain unaddressed in the catechism.

What "true" Christians have in common - and SHOULD have in common - is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. God became man, Jesus Christ, was born of a virgin according to Scripture, lived a sinless life, was crucified, died and was buried and after three days he rose again from the grave and sits at the right hand of the Father and will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead and of his kingdom there will be no end, his sacrifice on the cross was in payment for our sins, and all those who receive him, believing in him as Savior will be saved by the Grace of God through faith. We have eternal life as a gift of God through grace. We are indwelt with the Holy Spirit, sealed until the day of redemption, who works within us to live new lives that glorify God and lead the lost to Christ. There's more, but I would say those are the MAIN THINGS that define a Christian found within the Bible as our authority.

So what that not everyone worships the same way? So what that we have different gifts, different purposes, different leaders, different structure, different prayers, styles, hymns? What God wants is unity in the faith - the faith in Christ that is spelled out in Holy Scripture - THE gospel. What God wants is unity in the Spirit, love among brothers and sisters in the Spiritual Body of Christ. When we meet in heaven, it will make sense, we will know even as we are known. God's purposes will come to pass, his will will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Amen.

[MarkBsnr]

I shouldn't make errors like that, I have a book of facsimiles of early manuscripts and often compare them to the interlinears.

Ehh, don't be too hard on yourself. You and I both know that mistakes are juvenile, yet we will occasionally make them. No big deal from my point of view.

[MarkBsnr]

Got a scripture for that?

Many. II Corinthians 11:13-15 speaks of such:

Our interpretation of this is no, you don't. However, Paul will do as a standalone replacement for Jesus, right?

[MarkBsnr]

Nah, you still have your televangelists, megachurches, TBN, Prosperity Gospel, Rapture Books, Healer Caravans, “Send me a thousand dollars and God will send you three...” etc. etc.

Don't forget the Peter Popov prayer hankies.

[caww]

Frustrating to beat all that people continue to fail to see that the Lord desires to reveal Himself to them thru the scriptures.....that’s why we have them.

What is interesting is when the tribes and natives of the deep jungles etc. accept the Risen Christ their greatest desire is to have a Bible....and when they receive these the response is overwhelming. They celebrate that the Word of God can now be read and taught among them....their gathering together for worship off Him is just that...a ‘gathering of themselves together’..(church)..but the Lord Jesus Christ is central and His Word.

[metmom]

AMEN!!!

[smvoice]

I’m thinking it is the same passage. Strange how that powerful verse comes to a sudden crickets end when “SHALL” begins...

[smvoice]

And AMEN.

[MarkBsnr]

It is only an individual subjective standard of true meaning. This would be fine if we were discussing Moby Dick or watching Apocalypse Now and discussing what it means.

But this is not how the Christian faith is and has been transmitted and maintained through the centuries. Your teachers’ theology is less than two centuries old, some of the others I mentioned are from less than a century old. What new system will be “Christian” next year or the next decade? What new fit can be made from the same verses? Infinite.

You cannot have a Christian faith that is One, Holy and Universal and Eternal this way. Your teachers and what they have taught you are prima facia evidence of this.

[metmom]

Nobody is forcing anyone to accept the grace of God and the free gift of salvation through faith.

I’m sure that if you want to be judged based on your works, God will be more than willing to accommodate you, as indeed that is the only choice you’ve left Him.

It’s rather sobering to watch someone willfully choose damnation.

[MarkBsnr]

"And He said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved..."And these signs SHALL follow THEM THAT BELIEVE; In my name SHALL they cast out devils; they SHALL speak with new tongues; they SHALL take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it SHALL not hurt them; they SHALL lay hands on the sick, and they SHALL recover." Mark 16:15-18.

Who was He saying this to? The Eleven. And by implication their successors. He was telling them to perform or be associated with miracles. Hint: what does the requirement for a Catholic Saint include?

[MarkBsnr]

"And He said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved..."And these signs SHALL follow THEM THAT BELIEVE; In my name SHALL they cast out devils; they SHALL speak with new tongues; they SHALL take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it SHALL not hurt them; they SHALL lay hands on the sick, and they SHALL recover." Mark 16:15-18.

Say, isn't that passage in Mark the one that Catholics like to appeal to to demand that water baptism is required for salvation, but then ignore when it comes to the rest of it?

Got it wrong again. Say, you are batting just about par tonight.

[count-your-change]

Since you seem to be in generous state of mind, I'll risk another faux pas and ask why you participate in some of these threads since so often they deteriorate into a verbal bar room brawls?

I find the eye gouging a real put off. I had to ask.

[MarkBsnr]

Nobody is forcing anyone to accept the grace of God and the free gift of salvation through faith.

I’m sure that if you want to be judged based on your works, God will be more than willing to accommodate you, as indeed that is the only choice you’ve left Him.

It’s rather sobering to watch someone willfully choose damnation.

It's rather amusing to have somebody accuse me of choosing damnation by following the words of Christ over the words of a bishop.

[smvoice]

Wrong. He said “And these signs SHALL follow THEM THAT BELIEVE.” It plainly states that ALL signs are for ALL who believe. Not a select few. THEM THAT BELIEVE. C’mon, read the words as they are. Not as you want them to be.

[D-fendr]

The finite world is a messy place, there are arguments and councils and debate. But the basics of the Christian faith that we have today are here only because the Church prevailed on them and maintained them through the centuries against all manner of heresy.

The same heresies that we see today outside the Church and on these threads.

“So what that everyone worships the same way?”

Who cares? The Church does. It most definitely cares that “worship” means the same thing to everyone throughout the ages as it did to Christ and His Apostles. The word “Catholic” was first used to mean everyone does share the same faith, the same worship of the same God. If you care about this, you wish to become Catholic.

Because without this, eventually you become Dispensationalists, Calvinists, Arminians, Pentecostals, Unitarians, etc. etc.

History is the proof of this.

[MarkBsnr]

Since you seem to be in generous state of mind, I'll risk another faux pas and ask why you participate in some of these threads since so often they deteriorate into a verbal bar room brawls?

Nonsense. I am as contentious as a woman with PMS, no chocolate and a husband.

The short answer is that I have learned tremendously here on these threads, and am grateful to JR for providing this forum. The Orthodox have schooled me extremely well, and I have found out so much about the Faith simply by engaging antiCatholics of all stripes. The strong and orthodox Catholics here have also provided much fine and in depth isntruction.

I also find out about the children of the Reformation and their development. For instance, I learned about William Seymour and the Azusa street crazies tonight.

I find the eye gouging a real put off. I had to ask.

Sometimes the spitting and hateful catfights are a tad unappetizing, I agree.

[MarkBsnr]

Wrong. He said “And these signs SHALL follow THEM THAT BELIEVE.” It plainly states that ALL signs are for ALL who believe. Not a select few. THEM THAT BELIEVE. C’mon, read the words as they are. Not as you want them to be.

The signs shall follow them, not that all believers will perform them.

Mark 16: 19So then the Lord Jesus, after he spoke to them, was taken up into heaven and took his seat at the right hand of God.k 20But they went forth and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the word through accompanying signs.]l [And they reported all the instructions briefly to Peter’s companions. Afterwards Jesus himself, through them, sent forth from east to west the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation. Amen.]

Who did Jesus work through? The Eleven. Not all believers.