The community that I came to faith in is one that I treasure. I deeply appreciate the foundational respect for the scripture that was grafted into my heart. I was taught to search for “Book. Chapter. Verse” when coming to an understanding of the truth. Book, chapter and verse is how I got to an impasse with this question. “Is sola scriptura biblical?”
Marsilius of Padua first introduced the idea that became known as sola scriptura, by scripture alone. During the 14th century, deeply concerned with the abuse of papal authority, he began to challenge the infallibility of the Pope and the Church Magisterium, which determined what scripture and traditions were divine. He began to assert that the scripture was a higher authority than the Pope.
The Reformation Movement then gave shape to sola scriptura. The assertion: the Catholic Church nor the Pope were above the sacred scripture.
I think we have to get into the head and heart of the reformers to understand what they were getting at. They were dealing with a church in the west that they believed was fundamentally corrupt. The issues at hand included selling of indulgences, required acts of penance and the selling of church offices. The issues that arose from mixing affairs of the state with church policy allowed greed and power to influence church leaders.
The Reformers were forced to set a standard that put the immoral and unethical practices of clergy in check. Sola Scriptura was born.
Jump ahead to 2024, I think the centuries have allowed us to change the message and intent of what the reformers were getting at.
Sola scriptura was a response. It rejected the idea that infallible authority was given to the Church to interpret both scripture and tradition. It never intended to disregard Christian history, tradition or the church when seeking to understand the Bible.
In Western Churches today the results are two varying extremes with differing degrees. We have some churches holding on to the scripture by a thin thread. It is used more like an inspiration than an authoritative text.
Then we have some, like me, who came to the scripture with such single lens intensity that we have ignored the tradition, the history, the art and the songs of the faithful who have gone before us. It’s really like if the 66 books don’t say it it can’t be trusted.
There’s another influence that needs to be explored here for my benefit. The Restoration Movement of the 19th Century was a movement based in the US that sought to unify Christian churches in America under the authority of one central teaching, the Bible.
It was not a divisive movement. It was not an isolationist movement. It was a unity movement.
I’m afraid what developed is far from what these latter church fathers intended. What they hoped would bring oneness to Christ’s Church has often resulted in harsh division, sharp lines of fellowship and often a spirit of superiority by those to subscribe to proper biblical authority.
With the call to rise above denominational divisions, we who come from the Restoration Movement, seem to have cut off Christian history prior to the movement, forgetting there was a church before the movement. That church has a deep culture in the West and the East.
It has people of virtue, stories of faith and meaningful traditions. These deep roots produce surety. They weave confidence in being people of God. They are a meaningful and necessary pieces of who we are.
Now, remember when I said “book, chapter and verse” got me to the impasse? Well, the written word says:
- So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter. 2 Thes. 2:15
- I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you. 1 Cor 11:2
- Faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word about Christ. Rom. 10:17
So if the Bible says that traditions passed down by word of mouth are authoritative, where does that leave my understanding of sola scriptura? It leaves me questioning the whole framework of my view of authority, scripture and the word.
My previous understanding of sola scriptura, which was quite literally using only Bible always, is not possible if oral tradition was accepted by the early church.
How do I know it was accepted? Well, in addition to those verses up there, the bible as we know it wasn’t compiled for nearly 400 years. The early church grew by handing down oral tradition and circulating the gospels and apostolic letters. It’s possible for those 400 years some churches may have only been exposed to one gospel or only a few of Paul’s letters. Oral tradition mattered.
There is another significant piece of the puzzle we will explore soon- how we got the Bible. Church tradition played a big part in the canonization of scripture. That fact can’t go unnoticed.
My personal addendum: this isn’t meant to be scholarly or exhaustive. It is just me sharing my journey and the thoughts that have challenged my thinking. This is just one stop. I’m sure there will be many more. The beautiful thing about God is that I don’t have to get it all right to be right with him. Praise be to the Holy One.
But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace. Romans 11:6
