“But
those who are ready to toil in the most excellent pursuits, will not desist
from the search after the truth, till they get the demonstration from the
Scriptures themselves.”
Yet another widely used quote to demonstrate that the
Early Church believed in sola scriptura as far back as the late 2nd
century. Unfortunately this quote undoes the Protestant belief in scripture
alone when we read, just a few paragraphs down, the following (my emphasis added):
“And
if those also who follow heresies venture to avail themselves of the prophetic
Scriptures; in the first place they will
not make use of all the Scriptures, and then they will not quote them entire,
nor as the body and texture of prophecy prescribe. But, selecting ambiguous
expressions, they wrest them to their own opinions, gathering a few expressions
here and there; not looking to the sense, but making use of the mere words. For
in almost all the quotations they make, you will find that they attend to the
names alone, while they alter the meanings; neither knowing as they affirm, nor
using the quotations they adduce, according to their true nature.”
My humble reader, if St. Clement of Alexandria states
that taking quotes OUT OF CONTEXT and using them as a weapon in a theological
argument is a heresy, well then, I suggest to you that this is THE definition
of Bible-alone Protestantism! Far too often do we see Protestants quoting a
particular verse or a particular passage when attempting to substantiate a
Protestant belief, doctrine or dogma. This crucial and fundamental Protestant
tactic is to be, therefore, done away with per St. Clement for – as he stated –
IT IS a heresy. Hence, ANY Protestant that attempts to quote a Church
Father or a Bible verse by proof-reading the text is wholly committing a
heretical act and should be called out on it! BUT, more importantly is what St.
Clement says just a couple paragraphs afterwards (my emphasis added):
“…through
the propensity to sloth, they push truth away, or through the desire of fame,
endeavor to invent novelties. For those are slothful who, having it in their
power to provide themselves with proper proofs for the divine Scripture from
the Scripture themselves, select only what contributes to their own pleasures. And those have a craving for glory who
voluntarily evade, by arguments of a diverse sort, the things delivered by the
blessed Apostles and teachers, which are wedded to inspired words; opposing the
Divine Tradition by human teachings, in order to establish heresy.”
In other words, heretics do two things: they give their
own personal meaning to the Scriptures by not using Scripture properly and,
they deny the orally inspired words of the Apostles and their disciples, that
is, they reject Apostolic Tradition. That’s right, this Early Church Father who
pro-sola scriptura Protestants like to quote, decimated the entire notion of
Protestantism over 1,350 years before it was ever invented! He clearly and
unambiguously stated that taking a verse out of context and rejecting Apostolic
Tradition, which is the bread and butter of Protestantism, make any Christian
believer a heretic.
BONUS
POINT OF TRUTH:
Need more proof that Apostolic Tradition was
foundational for St. Clement of Alexandria? Look no further than the
very first chapter of Stromata. Towards
the middle of the first chapter, Clement is stating whom he learned the faith
from and then says the following:
“…they
[those
who taught St. Clement] preserving the tradition of the blessed
doctrine derived directly from the Holy Apostles, Peter, James, John and Paul,
the sons receiving it from the father, came by God’s will to us also to deposit
those ancestral and apostolic seeds. And well I know that they will exult; I do
not mean delighted with this tribute, but solely on account of the preservation
of the truth, according as they delivered it. For such a sketch as this, will,
I think, be agreeable to a soul desirous of preserving from escape the blessed
Tradition.”
Basically, right from the beginning of Clement’s
Stromata, he espouses the authority
of Sacred Tradition and its importance in both the Church and the Scriptures!
“But
there is no evidence of this, because Scripture says nothing…”
“The
Scripture says nothing of this, although it is not in other instances silent…I
do not admit what you advance of your own apart from Scripture.”
“But
to what shifts you resort, in your attempt to rob the syllable of its proper
force as a preposition, and to substitute another for it in a sense no found
throughout the Holy Scriptures!”
“We
have, however, challenged these opinions to the test, both of the arguments
which sustain them, and of the Scriptures which are appealed to, and this we
have done ex abundant…”
(DISCLAIMER: Tertullian was a hardcore defender of the true faith for most of his life. I
say was because, unfortunately,
Tertullian fell into heresy later on in his life. He became a member of the
heretical Monatist sect which placed some inordinate puritanical practices in
lieu of new prophecies as well as false revelations from God. As such,
Tertullian isn’t really an “Early Church Father” in the extreme sense of the
title, much like Origen he is more of an ecclesiastical writer. However, most
of his pre-Monatists works are absolute gems of Early Christianity. Therefore,
I will not refer to Tertullian as an Early Church Father per say but, a Church writer
instead.)
Protestants who stick to sola
scriptura simply love Tertullian. More than any other 3rd
century Church writer and defender, Tertullian definitely used the Holy Scriptures
when attacking all forms of heresy. In particular, the
quotes above are taken from his work entitled On the Flesh of Christ, or, De
Carne Christi. In this work, Tertullian
sets out to not only refute several heretics but, he also debunks a lot of
their misunderstandings; chief among these heretics is a “Christian” named
Marcion.
The Marcionites were heretics for several reasons: to
begin with, they believed St. Paul to have been Christ’s head Apostle instead
of Peter, they denied the Incarnation, and they believed that there were 2 gods
- a good god and a bad god. They reasoned from Scriptures that there was a bad
god during the time of the Old Testament and there was another god during the
time of the New Testament, that is, during the time of Christ. As such they
stated that Christ could not be the Son of the God of the Jews primarily due to
the fact that Christianity was the New Covenant and anything that had to do
with the Judaism had to be discarded…that included the entirety of the Old
Testament!
That’s right, Marcion rejected outright the Old
Testament due to its antiquated cruelty and rudimentary practices. Marcion
therefore theorized that this Old Testament god was not the Supreme God but a
lesser god. The real issue for Marcion then became in how to reconcile the New
Testament verses that reference the Old Testament and, much like the grand
heretic that he was, Marcion edited out all text that ran contrary to his
beliefs. In other words, Marcion created his own personal New Testament; which
consisted in having only eleven of Paul’s epistles and one Gospel which he
edited, that of St. Luke.
Therefore once we realize who, CONTEXTUALLY SPEAKING,
Tertullian is addressing in these quotes, is it any wonder as to why Tertullian
quotes from the Scriptures so much??? Think about it, Tertullian is fighting
against a heresy that not only negates the existence of one Creator but, has
discarded ALL of the Hebrew Scriptures and has settled with a mutilated
version of the New Testament. Is it really that surprising that Tertullian
would rely so heavily on the true Scriptures when combating a heretic who
mangled Scriptures to fit his personal ideology? Of course not!!!
These proof-read quotes of Tertullian don’t prove sola scriptura for two
reasons: 1) Tertullian NEVER states that
Scripture in and of itself is what is needed in order to disprove heretical and
conflicting dogma. In other words, he never states that the Scriptures are
the only thing to be used to justify a belief or practice and, that brings us
to the next reason: 2) Tertullian was a
HUGE believer in Apostolic Tradition and the Church as sources of genuine authority.
So much so, that he uses Apostolic Oral Tradition as a means of justifying the authentic
Scriptures! In chapter
2 of On the Flesh of Christ,
Tertullian states that Marcion has rejected the Scriptures which were “handed down”
and “transmitted” from the Apostles themselves (my emphasis added):
“…I suppose you have
had, O Marcion, the hardihood of blotting out the original records (of history)
of Christ, that His flesh may lose the proofs of is reality. But, prithee, on
what grounds (do you do this)? Show me
your authority. If you are a prophet, foretell us a thing; if you are an apostle,
open your message in public; if a follower of apostles, side with apostles in
thought; if you are only a (private) Christian, believe what has been handed down to us…What you believed to be of
a different character, had been handed down just as
you [once] believe it. Now that which
had been handed down was true, in asmuch as it had been transmitted by those
whose duty it was to hand it down. Therefore, when rejecting that which had
been handed down, you reject that which was true. You had no authority for what
you did.”
The one thing we must remember is that the Apostles DID
NOT have a Bible, therefore when they spoke, they spoke God-inspired revelation
and, it is precisely this oral transmission that Tertullian says was “handed
down” and “transmitted” in a truthful manner via the Apostles. How do we know
that this is what Tertullian is saying? Well in Prescription Against Heresies, another anti-Marcionian work of
Tertullian, chapter
20
states that unless a church was founded by an Apostle, it is a heretical church
and therefore cannot have the truth:
“…they
[the Apostles] obtained the promised power of the Holy Ghost for the gift of
miracles and of utterance; and after first bearing witness to the faith in
Jesus Christ throughout Judaea, and founding churches (there), they next went
forth into the world and preached the same faith to the nations. They then in
like manner founded churches in every city, from which all the other churches,
one after another, derived the traditions of the faith, and the seeds of
doctrine, and are every day deriving them, that they may become churches.
Indeed, it is on this account only that they will be able to deem themselves
apostolic, as being the offspring of apostolic churches. Every sort of thing
must necessarily revert to its original for its classification.”
What Tertullian just said should send shivers up the
spines of any Protestant who dares to make the claim that Tertullian was a
pro-sola scriptura believer! For unless the Protestant can make a historically
accurate claim that their church, doctrines and tradition all stem from the
Apostles, as Tertullian claims, they shouldn’t even be calling themselves Christians!
Indeed, according to Tertullian, they
shouldn’t even be using nor reading the Christian Scriptures!
So how, therefore, can we tell what is and isn’t an
Apostolic Church? Well, in chapter
32 of Prescription Against Heretics,
Tertullian states the #1 thing that makes a church a true church is succession.
That’s right, the pivotal Catholic practice of succession is what this Early Church writer
stated is the hallmark of Christ’s true church and not a heretical church. In
chapter 32 he says:
“But if there be any
(heresies) which are bold enough to plant themselves in the midst of the
apostolic age, that they may thereby seem to have been handed down by the
apostles, because they existed in the time of the apostles, we can say: Let
them produce the original records of their churches; let them unfold the roll
of their bishops, running down in due succession from the beginning in such a
manner that [that first bishop of theirs] shall be able to show for his
ordainer and predecessor some one of the apostles or of apostolic men..For this
is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers: as the
church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein by John; as
also the church of Rome, which makes Clement to have been ordained in like
manner by Peter. In exactly the same way the other churches likewise exhibit,
whom, as having been appointed to
their Episcopal places by apostles, they regard as transmitters of the
apostolic seed. Let the heretics contrive something of the same kind…For their
very doctrine, after comparison with that of the apostles, will declare by its
own diversity and contrariety, that it had for it author neither an apostle nor
an apostolic man…”
There is only one modern day Church that can trace its
heritage back to not only the apostolic era but, to Christ himself and, if you
do believe in sola scriptura, then
you are not part of that Church. Because obviously, Tertullian didn’t believe that
the Bible alone was or is the sole source of authority, he held Tradition and
the Church as valid sources of authority – just like the Catholic Church does
so today. Tertullian himself believed wholly Catholic ideas; for instance, he believed that the true Christian must be baptized with
water, he believed in Holy Orders, the true Christian has to do the sign of the cross, and receives the Sacrament of Confirmation
as well as the fact that the true Christian is sanctified through the
Eucharist. Proof of each of these things are noted by Tertullian in On the Resurrection of the Flesh chapter 8:
“The
flesh is washed in order that the soul may be cleansed; the flesh is anointed,
that the soul may be consecrated; the flesh is signed with the cross, that the
soul too may be fortified; the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of hands,
that the soul maybe illuminated by the Spirit; the flesh feeds on the body and
blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may fatten on its God.”
Sorry Protestants, but that’s what the Catholic Church has
always believed in and still, to this day, practices. Hence, Tertullian IS NOT
an authoritative claim in favor of sola
scriptura.
BONUS
POINT OF TRUTH:
He is sometimes referred to as the “Father of Latin
Christianity” and is also the oldest Latin writer to use the term Trinity
(Trinitas) as well as giving the oldest known explanation of the Trinitarian
doctrine.
End of Part 2
No comments:
Post a Comment