If Sola Scriptura is TRUE, then why didn't St. Paul ever write THIS!?
Got a question? Email askcatholics@gmail.com DONATE to support this channel: http://bit.ly/DonateToAskCatholics? Pretend you're St. Paul. Pretend it's towards the end of your life, and you're writing letters to the churches that - once you and the other apostles die, will serve as the SOLE RULE OF FAITH. Why, if that is the case, would you NOT write something like this: "Timothy, my child, please take care to make copies of this letter, and pass it around to all the churches, for this is the sole rule of faith, along with this set of 26 other texts, including the first letter I wrote to you..." No, instead he gives instruction for the living dissemination of the truth through the church: "what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also." (2 Tim 2:2) THAT is the biblical church. "So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the teachings[a] we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter." (2 Thes 2:15?) Word of mouth was the MAIN way that the teachings were spread - though to be sure people HIGHLY regarded the writings, too, reading them in their eucharistic liturgies. But the teaching was alive, guarded by the holy spirit, and passed down from the apostles to other men (bishops/episcopoi) whose job it was to guard the truth and teach the truth. And that's just what their successors did. Paul references 4 generations of men in that one sentence from 2 Tim above: Himself, Timothy, those Timothy would teach, and those that THOSE would teach. Paul was a voluminous writer, but he did more than write - and he expected people to adhere to the TEACHING he gave them no matter how it was delivered. That's why when he chides the Galatians, he tells them to compare any new gospel they receive to the one he already delivered to them - orally. "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we PREACHED to you, let him be accursed." (gal 1 :8) The expectation is that they should look back to that TRUTH that they had received - not in a written fashion - and compare ANYTHING else (written or unwritten) to that truth. If you knew that the Christians were going to NEED the NT as their sole rule of faith, you should NEVER write something like: "Though I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink. Instead I hope to come to you and talk face to face." (2 john 12) Instead, you should have written out a systematic theology that could not have been mistaken or misread. But instead the Apostles left us teachers. This is based on the model laid down by Christ, in Luke 10:16 Jesus tells His apostles, "he who HEARS you, hears Me." And, as a reminder, 99% of the world was illiterate, too. So for most people not just then but for all of human history, it could NEVER have been "me in my bible." It was always the church. And the earliest of documents bear this out: "And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first-fruits [of their labours], having first proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe. Nor was this any new thing, since indeed many ages before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus saith the Scripture a certain place, 'I will appoint their bishops s in righteousness, and their deacons in faith.'... Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, and there would be strife on account of the office of the episcopate. For this reason, therefore, inasmuch as they had obtained a perfect fore-knowledge of this, they appointed those [ministers] already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry...For our sin will not be small, if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled its duties." Bishop Clement of Rome, Epistle to Corinthians, 42, 44 (A.D. 98).
