Author Topic: About that Prima Scriptura issue... (Read 15121 times)

Kephapaulos · « **on:** August 24, 2006, 06:58:05 PM »

Well, could there ever be such thing as prima scriptura or if not, what Catholic sources could we look to in that case then?

Matthew · « **Reply #1 on:** August 24, 2006, 10:11:33 PM »

I'm no expert on this issue, but from what I know, the Catholic faith uses the "twin pillars" of Scripture and Tradition.

How can any one of them be "primary"?

Both of them are absolutely necessary to Catholicism. So much is not in scripture that Tradition isn't just "handy" -- it's downright necessary.

If you doubt it, just look at the mess the Protestants are in! How many protestant sects would even still qualify as religions? Any religion without dogmas, a claim of being true, or moral obligations is a joke, it seems to me.

Matthew

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #2 on:** August 24, 2006, 10:23:23 PM »

Quote from: ChantCd

How can any one of them be "primary"?

Particularly when the one in question had to have an authoritative decision as to what even constituted the contents thereof. Further, the NT books that were eventually (late 4th century) considered as divinely inspired were not even written until several decades after our Lord's ascension (in some cases - but at least several years in all cases).

How can the Church function for decades when she is without her "primary" source (the canon of which was not finally determined until over 340 years after our Lord ascended)?

Kephapaulos · « **Reply #3 on:** August 24, 2006, 10:58:11 PM »

Quote from: gladius_veritatis

Quote from: ChantCd
How can any one of them be "primary"?

Particularly when the one in question had to have an authoritative decision as to what even constituted the contents thereof. Further, the NT books that were eventually (late 4th century) considered as divinely inspired were not even written until several decades after our Lord's ascension (in some cases - but at least several years in all cases).

How can the Church function for decades when she is without her "primary" source (the canon of which was not finally determined until over 340 years after our Lord ascended)?

The earliest date I have seen for the Gospel of St. Matthew is 38, and so for at least five years after our Lord's Ascension, there was no New Testament writing or the Bible as we know it today. All the Church had was Tradition that was being revealed until the death of St. John and the Septuagint which was a Greek translation of the Old Testament. I guess instead of saying prima scriptura (or much less sola scriptura) we could say Scriptura et Traditio (SET). What do you all think? :wink:

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #4 on:** August 24, 2006, 11:04:58 PM »

Quote from: Trinity

Is it being bandied about among Catholics?

I am not certain, as I did not see the thread while at fisheaters, but it seems that Jacob (lumen) was advocating this idea (or one similar to it). If I am wrong about this, apologies to Jacob.