I was tempted, when I first began reading, to just dismiss the article, after all - "Rome has spoken, the case is closed" - to paraphrase St. Augustine. Regardless of debates which may have taken place prior to the Council of Trent, the fact remains that Trent infallibly decreed the Canon of Sacred Scripture - end of story - the canon is closed. Still, I repeat, I did find Swan's article to be interesting.
Of course, the reason folks like Swan, White, or Webster (whom Swan also mentions) will make such speculations is clear - they wish to undermine the authority of the Catholic Church to infallibly define ANYTHING. Ironically though, in doing so they undermine one of their own pivotal and foundational tenets, sola scriptura. Why? Because if we define sola scriptura as the sole infallible rule of faith for the Christian church, as White & Co. does, and Scripture itself records God Himself giving this infallible authority to the first leaders of His Church (Matthew 16:18-19 and 18:18) then Scripture has confounded the argument of sola scriptura in CLEARLY presenting us with ANOTHER infallible authority - so much for White's definition of sola scriptura (which I believe Swan and Webster both subscribe to). As I have previously pointed out, this is "the other pen" White has challenged others to present.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Keep in mind while posting:
1) Please respond ON TOPIC to the article at hand.
2) Posts more than 4 weeks old are set to automatically save new comments for moderation - so your comment may not show up immediately if you're responding to an older post.
3) The "Spam Filter" is on - and randomly messages get caught in that filter. I have no control over which messages get caught in the spam filter and those that do must wait for me to mark them as "not spam." A message caught by the spam filter may show up for a moment, making you think it posted, and then disappear. Do not assume I have deleted your comment, it's probably just the spam filter and it will show up.