![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2021\/02\/GregorytheGreat4.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Protestant anti-Catholic polemicists\u00a0<\/span>David T. King<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0William Webster<\/a>\u00a0are the editors of a three-volume series, entitled,\u00a0<\/span>Holy Scripture: The Ground and Pillar of Our Faith<\/i><\/a>\u00a0(self-published by Webster\u2019s outfit, Christian Resources Inc. [Battle Ground, Washington] in 2001). I\u2019m most interested i<\/span>n\u00a0Volume III<\/a>:\u00a0subtitled, \u201cThe Writings of the Church Fathers Affirming the Reformation Principle of\u00a0Sola Scriptura<\/i>\u201d (edited by both Webster and King).\u00a0In the Introduction to Vol. III (p. 9) they make the fantastically absurd, demonstrably false assertion:<\/span><\/p>\n [T]he Church fathers . . . universally taught\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/em>\u00a0in the fullest sense of the term embracing both the material and formal sufficiency of Scripture.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n The definition of\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/em>, according to three of the most able and articulate Protestant defenders of it in our time, is the following:<\/span><\/p>\n [T]he Bible\u00a0alone<\/strong>\u00a0is the\u00a0infallible<\/strong>\u00a0written authority for faith and morals (Norman Geisler)<\/span><\/p>\n Scripture . . . is the\u00a0only<\/strong>\u00a0inspired and inherently\u00a0infallible<\/strong>\u00a0norm, and therefore Scripture is the only final authoritative norm. (Keith A. Mathison)<\/span><\/p>\n The doctrine of\u00a0sola scriptura<\/em>\u00a0. . . is that the Scriptures\u00a0alone<\/strong>\u00a0are sufficient to function as the\u00a0regula fidei<\/em>, the\u00a0infallible<\/strong>\u00a0rule of faith for the Church. (James R. White) [my bolding; see\u00a0<\/span>the\u00a0<\/a>sources<\/a>\u00a0for these quotations and also<\/span>\u00a0a fuller explication<\/a>\u00a0by each man]<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Such a definition entails also understanding what\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/em>\u00a0is\u00a0not<\/em><\/strong>. It logically rules out tradition, the Church, ecumenical councils, bishops, popes, or appeal to apostolic succession as infallibly and finally authoritative. Only the\u00a0Bible<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0is that. Therefore, if any Church father believes that\u00a0any<\/em>\u00a0of these are infallible or a final authority, then he (by the same token)\u00a0does not<\/em>\u00a0and indeed\u00a0cannot<\/em>\u00a0believe in\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/em>. I didn\u2019t \u201cset the rules\u201d. Protestants have by defining\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/em>\u00a0as they do. Thus, they have to\u00a0live with<\/em>\u00a0their own definition and unbiblical rule of faith.<\/span><\/p>\n I shall be examining (in this series of papers) several Church fathers that Webster and King bring up, and documenting that they rejected\u00a0sola Scriptura<\/em>. I\u2019ve\u00a0already<\/em>\u00a0done this documentation with regard to\u00a0<\/span>Augustine<\/a>,\u00a0Athanasius<\/a>,\u00a0John Chrysostom<\/a>,\u00a0Jerome<\/a>,\u00a0Ambrose<\/a>,\u00a0Irenaeus<\/a>,\u00a0Justin Martyr<\/a>,\u00a0Clement of Alexandria<\/a>,\u00a0Hippolytus<\/a>,\u00a0Dionysius<\/a>,\u00a0Basil the Great<\/a>,\u00a0Cyril of Jerusalem<\/a>,\u00a0Theodoret<\/a>,\u00a0Gregory of Nyssa<\/a>,\u00a0Tertullian<\/a>,\u00a0Origen<\/a>,\u00a0Gregory Nazianzen<\/a>,\u00a0Epiphanius<\/a>,\u00a0Lactantius<\/a>,\u00a0Cyprian<\/a>,\u00a0Papias<\/a>, Hilary of Poitiers<\/a>, and\u00a0John Damascene<\/a>.<\/p>\n All citations are from Volume III unless otherwise indicated.<\/span><\/p>\n *****<\/span><\/p>\n God . . . fashions His word in such a manner, as to satisfy the enquiries of all men. . . .\u00a0 He includes in holy Scripture whatever can possibly befall each one of us, . . . (Morals on the Book of Job<\/em> [Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1847], Vol. 3, Part 5, Book XXIII, pp. 29-30) [p. 138]<\/span><\/p>\n God delivers therein [in Scripture] all that he wills, [so] they may not be at variance with His will, in proportion as they learn that will in revelation. (Ibid<\/em>., Vol. 2, Parts 3 & 4, Book XVI, Chapter 35, p. 252) [p. 136]<\/span><\/p>\n [H]eretics . . . broach things which assuredly are not maintained in the page of the sacred books. (Ibid<\/em>.,\u00a0Vol. 2, Parts 3 & 4, Book XVIII, pp. 343-344) [p. 136]<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n These are citations that Webster and King included under \u201cmaterial sufficiency.\u201d Catholics would have no problem with them at all. They certainly don\u2019t prove sola Scriptura<\/em> in any way, shape, or form.<\/span><\/p>\n Besides, since with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation, I confess that I receive and revere, as the four books of the Gospel so also the four Councils: to wit, the Nicene, in which the perverse doctrine of Arius is overthrown; the Constantinopolitan also, in which the error of Eunomius and Macedonius is refuted; further, the first Ephesine, in which the impiety of Nestorius is condemned; and the Chalcedonian, in which the pravity of Eutyches and Dioscorus is reprobated. These with full devotion I embrace, and adhere to with most entire approval; since on them, as on a four-square stone, rises the structure of the holy faith; and whosoever, of whatever life and behaviour he may be, holds not fast to their solidity, even though he is seen to be a stone, yet he lies outside the building. The fifth council also I equally venerate, in which the epistle which is called that of Ibas, full of error, is reprobated; Theodorus, who divides the Mediator between God and men into two subsistences, is convicted of having fallen into the perfidy of impiety; and the writings of Theodoritus, in which the faith of the blessed Cyril is impugned, are refuted as having been\u00a0<\/span>published with the daring of madness. But all persons whom the aforesaid venerable Councils repudiate I repudiate; those whom they venerate I embrace; since, they having been constituted by universal consent, he overthrows not them but himself, whosoever presumes either to loose those whom they bind, or to bind those whom they loose. Whosoever, therefore, thinks otherwise, let him be anathema. But whosoever holds the faith of the aforesaid synods, peace be to him from God the Father, through Jesus Christ His Son, Who lives and reigns consubstantially God with Him in the Unity of the Holy Spirit for ever and ever. Amen.\u201d (Letter to John of Constantinople, Book I, Epistle 25<\/a>)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Such a view of the infallibility of ecumenical councils is utterly contrary to sola Scriptura<\/em>, which holds that only Scripture is infallible and our final authority.<\/span><\/p>\n St. Gregory the Great (being a pope himself) believed in Roman primacy:<\/span><\/p>\n Inasmuch as it is manifest that the Apostolic See, is, by the ordering of God, set over all Churches, there is, among our manifold cares, especial demand for our attention . . .\u00a0(Letter to Subdeacon John; Register of the Epistles, Book III, Epistle 30<\/a>; NPNF 2, Vol. XII)<\/span><\/p>\n Yet I exhort thee that, as long as some time of life remains for thee, thy soul may not be found to be divided from the church of the same blessed Peter, to whom the keys of the heavenly kingdom were entrusted and the power of binding and loosing was granted, lest if his benefit be despised down here, he may close up the entrance to life up there.\u00a0(The Great Epistles<\/em>, B IV, Ep. 41), in J. P. Migne,\u00a0Patr. Lat.<\/em>, translated by John Collorafi)<\/span><\/p>\n [Y]ou must still strictly order them to observe all things after the pattern of the\u00a0Apostolic See.<\/span> (Book 4, Letter 36<\/a>)<\/p>\n [I]t was right that the\u00a0Apostolic See\u00a0should take heed, with the view of guarding in all respects the\u00a0unity\u00a0of the\u00a0Universal\u00a0Church\u00a0in the\u00a0minds\u00a0of\u00a0priests.<\/span> \u00a0(Book 4, Letter 2<\/a>)<\/p>\n This he did as\u00a0knowing\u00a0such reverence to be paid by the\u00a0faithful\u00a0to the\u00a0Apostolic See\u00a0that what had been settled by its decree no molestation of unlawful usurpation would thereafter shake.<\/span> (Book 9, Letter 111<\/a>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n He believed that the pope was the supreme head of the Church:<\/span><\/p>\n To all who know the Gospel it is obvious that by the voice of the Lord the care of the entire church was committed to the holy apostle and prince of all the apostles, Peter . . . Behold, he received the keys of the kingdom of heaven, the power to bind and loose was given to him, and the care and principality of the entire church was committed to him . . . Am I defending my own cause in this matter? Am I vindicating some special injury of my own? Is it not rather the cause of Almighty God, the cause of the universal church? . . . And we certainly know that many priests of the church of Constantinople have fallen into the whirlpool of heresy and have become not only heretics but heresiarchs . . . Certainly, in honor of Peter, the prince of the apostles, \u2018the title \u2018universal\u2019] was offered to the Roman pontiff by the venerable Council of Chalcedon.\u00a0(His Epistle 37 to Emperor Maurice, from Book V; from\u00a0Monumenta Germaniae historica: Epistolae<\/em>; Berlin: 1891 \u2013 , Vol. I, 321-322; cited in Jaroslav Pelikan,\u00a0The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600)<\/em>, University of Chicago Press, 1971, 352)<\/span><\/p>\n [W]ithout the authority and the consent of the apostolic see, none of the matters transacted [by a council] have any binding force.\u00a0(Book IX, Epistle 156; from\u00a0Monumenta Germaniae historica: Epistolae<\/em>; Berlin: 1891 \u2013 , Vol.II, 158; cited in Pelikan,\u00a0ibid<\/em>., 354)<\/span><\/p>\n Who could be ignorant of the fact that the holy church is consolidated in the solidity of the prince of the Apostles, whose firmness of character extended to his name so that he should be called Peter after the \u2018rock\u2019, when the voice of the Truth says, \u2018I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven\u2019. To him again is said \u201cWhen after a little while thou hast come back to me, it is for thee to be the support of thy brethren.\u00a0(Epistle 40; in Michael Winter,\u00a0St. Peter and the Popes<\/em>, Baltimore: Helicon, 1960, 66)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n These positions are directly contrary to sola Scriptura<\/em>, which is why Webster and King pretended that they didn\u2019t exist<\/em>. Infallible popes and councils don\u2019t fit in with sola Scriptura<\/em>: a view of the rule of faith that allows only one<\/em> thing to be infallible and the final authority: <\/span><\/p>\n Holy Scripture<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Related Reading<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n Gregory the Great & Papal Supremacy (vs. Calvin #20)<\/a>\u00a0[6-25-09]<\/p>\n Did Pope Gregory the Great Deny Papal Primacy & Supremacy?<\/a>\u00a0[9-16-17]<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Photo credit:<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>St Gregory the Great by Jos\u00e9 de Ribera (1591-1652)<\/span>;\u00a0Livioandronico2013<\/a>\u00a0(3-5-17)<\/span> [Wikimedia Commons<\/a> \/\u00a0Creative Commons<\/a>\u00a0Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International<\/a>\u00a0license]<\/p>\n ***<\/span><\/p>\n Summary<\/em>: Anti-Catholic Protestant polemicists Webster and King try to force Pope St. Gregory the Great into the \u201cbox\u201d of sola Scriptura<\/em>, but his views on \u201cpapal supremacy\u201d and infallible ecumenical councils simply don\u2019t logically allow for this to be the case.<\/span><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Protestant anti-Catholic polemicists\u00a0David T. King\u00a0and\u00a0William Webster\u00a0are the editors of a three-volume series, entitled,\u00a0Holy Scripture: The Ground and Pillar of Our Faith\u00a0(self-published by Webster\u2019s outfit, Christian Resources Inc. [Battle Ground, Washington] in 2001). I\u2019m most interested in\u00a0Volume III:\u00a0subtitled, \u201cThe Writings of the Church Fathers Affirming the Reformation Principle of\u00a0Sola Scriptura\u201d (edited by both Webster and King).\u00a0In […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":55226,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[239],"tags":[48,33,1029,1031,13240,13237,32,35,47,1030],"class_list":["post-55223","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-fathers-of-the-church","tag-bible-alone","tag-christian-authority","tag-church-authority","tag-david-t-king","tag-gregory-the-great-sola-scriptura","tag-gregory-the-great-the-rule-of-faith","tag-rule-of-faith","tag-scripture-alone","tag-sola-scriptura","tag-william-webster"],"yoast_head":"\n