Sola Scriptura, Tradition, The Early Church Fathers, the Value of the Early Creeds, Differences with the Roman and Orthodox Churches, etc.

CHURCH HISTORY CLASS

The Reformed Doctrine of Sola Scriptura, Tradition, The Early Church Fathers, the Value of the Early Creeds, Differences with the Roman and Orthodox Churches, etc.

This is not at all an exhaustive consideration. Also, for another treatment, consider this 1 hour and 45 minute video we recorded here: https://youtu.be/aJFmHPdYJOA?si=Q95-qIjNnbLHlThk

 

The Doctrine of Sola Scriptura vs. Living or Ongoing and Unwritten Apostolic Traditions:

 

1.       “Scripture Alone”/Sola Scriptura means that Scripture is the only infallible, inerrant, revelation of God, given to us today; it is the complete and sufficient revelation of God and for doctrine and life for man.

a.       It does not mean that we reject God’s creation or nature, the real, observable world around us, the knowledge or learning of even unbelievers, for these are also sources of God’s truth.

b.       Further, sola scriptura does not mean that we reject subordinate authorities even in the Church, such as pastors and elders or creeds, catechisms, and confessions.

c.       Yet none of these subordinate authorities are inspired by God the Holy Spirit such that they can be said to be infallible, whether that is a priest or minister, a council or creed, or a confession or catechism.

d.       Christ has given His Church gifts, as Eph. 4 tells us, of Apostles and Prophets, who were foundational, Eph. 2, but the Church is still given faithful yet fallible Pastors and Teachers.

e.       They are authoritative, just as a pastor and his sermon is authoritative, even though they are not the infallible standard or giving new or further revelation of God.

2.       While Scripture warns against following man-made tradition, Scripture does not deny true tradition.

a.       A key passage is 2 Thess. 2:15, “Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.”

b.       On the other hand, Paul warns in Colossians 2:6ff.: “As you therefore have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him, rooted and built up in Him and established in the faith, as you have been taught, abounding in it with thanksgiving. Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power.”

c.       Paul is saying that the Apostles have the true “tradition” and that this tradition is  as the Apostle John states in 1 Jn 1:1-4, “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life— the life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us— that which we have seen and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. And these things we write to you that your joy may be full.”

d.       Note that those who have the Scriptures have fellowship with the very Apostles, and further, that they have fellowship with the Apostles in Christ, in salvation, and in knowledge and revelation of Jesus Christ, the Word of life.

e.       The Bible, the Old and New Testament Scriptures, are a complete, full, and final revelation of Jesus Christ, by whom we know and have access to the Father.

f.         There is no further revelation or ongoing, extrabiblical, infallible and authoritative “tradition” that would somehow complete the revelation of God in Scripture.

3.       Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and others will reject this in various ways, noting that the Apostles speak of not only Scriptures or a written tradition, but also an oral tradition, which they will assert has not or is not written down in the Bible.

a.       John at the end of the Gospel of John 22:24-25 says, “This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true. And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.”

b.       They might also appeal earlier to John 16:12ff., where Jesus tells His disciples and soon to be Apostles  “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you.”

c.       Long story short, the claim is that these and other like passages constitute the ongoing tradition that the Holy Spirit gives to His Church, through His Apostles or then passed along through other leadership in the Church. Whether that is various Patriarchs forming Councils the govern the whole church and speak with infallible authority and anointing from the Spirit, or the doctrine of the infallibility of the Papacy when the Pope speaks in the capacity of what is called ex cathedra.  

d.       To be clear, there is not a claim of sinlessness in any Pope or church leaders in various councils, nor is it claimed that these leaders outside of their councils or being seated in the chair in the case of the Pope are infallible. They admit that they can all make theological error in word or writing in certain circumstances.

e.       Nonetheless, they assert that Christ is teaching that He will continue to teach His Church new things, given to the leadership of the Church, and taught by the Holy Spirit. Or at minimum, that there will be an infallible interpretation of the Holy Scriptures given to the Church within certain church councils, creeds, and so on.

4.       But the proper understanding of Christ’s Words in John 16 is that Jesus poured out His Spirit on the Apostles at Pentecost, & revealed to them, in their lifetime, all things concerning Himself prior to glory.

a.       That revelation was undoubtedly given to the Apostles in such a way that they could reveal it orally or by preaching and oral instruction, and was not simply limited to the written Word or what we now find verbatim in the Bible.

b.       We see that plainly affirmed of the actions of Christ in His life on earth, that the whole world could not contain the books that would need to be written to explain everything that Jesus spoke or said or did while on earth.

c.       And yet, John, Paul, Peter, the various Apostles of Scripture, all affirm that what they have seen and heard of Christ they have revealed and made known to us, and have committed it to writing.

d.       Further, Paul can even say before the new testament is completed in writing and being spread to the various churches, in 2 Tim. 3:14-16:

e.       “But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

5.       With the help of the Holy Spirit in the true believer, Paul could say that Timothy even as a child, almost certainly before any of the New Testament was yet written, was wise for salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.

a.       The Old Testament Scripture is Christian Scripture and reveals Jesus Christ to us, and it did so even before or without the N.T. being written, though less clearly and fully.

b.       But Paul then goes on to note that all of the Holy Scriptures, all the writings in the Bible that the Holy Spirit inspired or breathed out, is not only helpful or beneficial for doctrine and living, but is completely sufficient.

c.       It makes a Christian complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

d.       Thus the sufficiency of Scripture apart from oral tradition or ongoing new revelations that are sometimes alleged, whether by the Roman Church on one hand or Charismatics on the other.

e.       But a more modest claim may be that what is taught in the oral tradition does not contradict Scripture, or some might be even more narrow and say that it only helps us understand Scripture. On this point, we can affirm that Christ by His Spirit has poured out faithful pastors and teachers in every generation to exposit the Scriptures, to instruct, preach, proclaim, exhort, etc.

f.         All of this is to help Christians understand, believe, and obey God as revealed in His Word.

g.       However, if the claim is that the Church has been given leaders with the capacity of infallibility, such that we can receive a sermon, or a creed or statement, or a council, or a Papal declaration, as true and perfectly true automatically, infallibly this we reject & find nowhere claimed in Scripture.

6.       All Christians, do, however, possess within them the Holy and Infallible Illuminator, or if you will, Interpreter of Scripture, the Holy Spirit.

a.       It is the Holy Spirit of John 16:13 that has come and guides the Church into all truth.

b.       And so, we are called to “test all things” 1 Thess. 5:21 and in 1 John 4:1 we are told, “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.”

c.       But EO and RCC can tend toward a blind trusting of “mother Church” as if to test or question her is to test and question Christ the Head of the Church Himself. But the Church, the bride of Christ, is not yet spotless, is not perfect, and is not infallible. Only Christ the Head is these things, and the Church will only be such when Christ returns and we are glorified with Him in Heaven.

d.       It is certainly true that the Holy Spirit’s ministry of illumination of God’s Word will continue until Christ returns, even though the full revelation of God in Christ was given and revealed to the Apostles in their lifetime, and the complete doctrine of that revelation is recorded for us now in Scripture.

7.       In other words, while we do not have every word of instruction that Christ or the Apostles taught orally, and we do not even have every word of it recorded for us in Scripture, the doctrine or the instructional value of it we do have in Scripture.

a.       God’s full revelation of Himself has been committed to us in the Bible, and whatever words or actions of Jesus that were not recorded or given to us would not add to or enhance the revelation of Christ as given to us in Scripture.

b.       We have every type of miracles, the fullness of Christ’s instruction, even if we do not have recorded for us every miracle of Christ or every lecture He ever gave.

c.       It is clear that the Apostles and writers of the N.T. times summarized some of Christ’s words, the point being that they were still transmitting the revelation of God in doing so, and not every word or even the exact words or last detail of what Christ did was necessary to communicate this fullness.

8.       Our problem is not the insufficiency of Scripture, for it is complete and clear.

a.       The problem is also not the means of interpreting or comprehending, for each Christian has the Holy Spirit. 1 John 2:26-27, “These things I have written to you concerning those who try to deceive you. But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him.”

b.       We have the Holy Spirit (along with ordained Pastors & Teachers), yet we are commanded to not quench the Spirit, but rather to live by the Spirit and put to death the deeds of the body. This applies to holy living, but also clear and holy thinking and understanding of God’s Word, illumination.

9.       So what is the problem? It is our darkened understanding and sin that remains in us.

a.       Christ’s Word and Spirit is complete and sufficient. But in our present capacity, as redeemed yet still imperfect sinners with a sin nature, we do not comprehend God’s Word fully, and even that which we do comprehend, we do not obey fully!

b.       This is true not only of us, but of the Apostles and Prophets as well.

c.       We have salvation and illumination in earthen vessels, in our weakness. WE are not yet glorified.

d.       We do see the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ as revealed in Scripture, but we do not yet see Jesus face to face in glory, which is the point when we will perfectly and fully know the Lord.

10.   But having the full revelation of God and understanding that full revelation are two different things.

a.       New revelation has ceased, illumination of God’s Word by the Spirit continues, and it continues in each Christian, but also in the ongoing Church officers whom Christ gave as gifts to the Church, namely, Pastors and Teachers. Eph 4:7ff. –

b.       “But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift.  Therefore He says: “When He ascended on high, He led captivity captive, And gave gifts to men.” (Now this, “He ascended”—what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.) And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ— from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.”

c.       While infallible men, ministers, and churches are not needed for this growth in the Lord, the infallible Word of God, the Scriptures, are needed, and the infallible equipping of the Holy Spirit within us.

d.       This is critical. Paul is speaking here not only of the church in Ephesus, but the whole church all the world over, the universal church.

e.       Paul already in Eph. 2:20 explained that the Apostles and Prophets, and associated with them the office of Evangelist that Timothy held, were the foundation, with Christ being the chief cornerstone.

f.         The foundation was laid in the first century as the Apostolic and prophetic ministry was completed with the completion and spreading of Scripture, the written record of the Apostolic ministry.

g.       And so the “Apostolic tradition” is that which is written in Scripture, and you can find the early church fathers understanding this and claiming this as well. It is not an unwritten, oral tradition.  

11.   It is true that the process of Canonization, or of the Church recognizing and receiving and fully discerning which books were Sacred Scripture, took time.

a.       But Romanists and EO often overblow this process to support their view of church tradition. By AD 150, if not sooner, we can say that the Church/churches widely received as inspired, infallible Scripture most all the books of the N.T., with some questions about Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation. That’s basically it.

b.       Here, too, we differ from Rome and EO who claim that the Church was given an infallible capacity to collect these books, declared by various councils.

c.       We say no, we have a collection of the infallible word of God, collected by fallible but holy men.

d.       Yet the possibility of being fallible does not mean that these men did in fact err.

e.       We confess that our Bibles are Sacred Scripture, and that we are not missing any, nor have we mistakenly added any.

f.         Further, the Church recognizing the authority of Scripture does not place the Churches over the Scriptures, or “Tradition” over Scripture. The Scriptures, being God’s voice, testify to themselves.

g.       We gladly affirm that God providentially guided that process in the early church period, but not that He gave infallible inspiration in decrees to councils. A council that is capable of fallibility is not necessarily a council that errs. You can have inerrant councils that could have potentially erred.

h.       You can take a test, knowing you are fallible and could get some wrong answers, and yet you can also score a 100 on the test. You can get a perfect score, but that doesn’t mean you were infallible. 

12.   The issue among Protestants today is that we are very ignorant of Doctrine in general, and perhaps even more so of Church History.

a.       Accompanied with this, naturally, is a lot of apostatizing or even false churches that purport to be Protestant, Reformed, Evangelical, and so on.

b.       All this creates easy attack points for studied and knowledgeable Roman Catholics or Eastern Orthodox priests and laypersons, who make a claim of being the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church, claim they have never fractured or divided or had the same sort of fundamental doctrinal disputes or divisions that Protestants have had, etc. Such claims themselves are dubious.  

c.       Further, they can seduce by saying that they have the full revelation of God in the unwritten traditions that have orally been passed down from Christ by the Spirit to the Apostles and the Apostles’ successors, whether that is especially traced for R.C.’s through the Pope or through more than one man, or even for the Orthodox found in the Holy Spirit through the Church as a whole in a sort of mystical fashion.

d.       Both these bodies are appealing to being the possessor of the full knowledge of God, to be the one holy catholic and apostolic church of the Nicene Creed.

e.       But even if they grant some sort of doctrine of “separated brethren” or “invincible ignorance” that gives hope of salvation to Protestants, they still urge conversion to them as the sole possessors of the fullness of Christ and the Church’s teaching. So the appeal is that you are missing out, stop fracturing and dividing as a Protestant, come home to the true, ancient, apostolic Church.

f.         And of course they try to say that the roots of Protestantism have no basis in the early church either, though that is false as we truly uphold the Apostolic teaching and embrace the early creeds.  

 

The error and danger of elevating the Apostolic or Early Church Fathers and the ecumenical creeds to be on par with the Apostles and their teaching in Scripture, or to elevate it above the teaching of other gifted pastors, teachers, and their confessional and catechetical statements crafted in later generations after the early church period.

 

1.       Eph. 2:20 states the Apostles and Prophets constitute the foundation of God’s Church, with Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone.

a.       Not those who came after over the first few centuries that were leaders in the Church and who are often called the “Early Church Fathers”, or the “Apostolic Fathers” who were the generation right after the Apostles and in some cases learned directly from the Apostles.  

b.       Yet, these same so-called fathers often pointed to Scripture as the final and only infallible authority.

c.       They did not view themselves as having a higher authority simply because they had learned things from the Apostles, sat at their feet, or had a Grandpa that had done so.

d.       They generally appealed to Scripture as the final and only infallible authority in doctrinal disputes.

e.       They did not claim infallibility or to be the infallible interpreters themselves, and of course they had many disagreements among themselves on doctrine and practice as well.

f.         Even on baptism, you can find some of the ECF saying things like “not all who are born of water are born of the Spirit”, including St. Augustine.

g.       Do not let the Roman Catholics or Eastern Orthodox deceive you here. Baptismal efficacy, which we affirm in the WCF, and an automatic or ex opere operato working of regeneration by the sacrament of baptism, which we reject, are not the same thing.

2.       At the same time, we must not lightly discard traditional church teaching down through the generations.

a.       We should give the teachings of the early church fathers some weightiness, and be thankful for them in defending the essence of Christianity in the early creeds, concerning the Trinity and the hypostatic union, that Christ is fully God and fully man, two natures in one person, etc.  

b.       Yet the ECF are fallible and subordinate authorities, and their writings must be checked against the Sacred Scriptures, as they themselves affirmed as the only inspired, infallible, inerrant word of God.

3.       The teaching of the Church down through the generations is not infallible or inerrant, but the best of it and what is true in it does come from Pastors and Teachers, ordained men who are filled and gifted with the Holy Spirit.

a.       In other words, when you look at the early church creeds that came from various councils and so on over the first four or five centuries after Christ, their greater weightiness is not flowing from the fact that they were produced by Pastors and Teachers that are called “fathers” as if they had a higher office, authority, or anointing than any other Pastor or Teacher.

b.       The greater weight is not that they came earlier after Christ and closer to the time of the Apostles. That does not guarantee they are more accurate than those who came in the Middle Ages or after in the Protestant Reformation.

c.       The ECF had to defend against error and heresy and disagreed among themselves as well.

4.       The greater weight, or the more essential nature of affirming something like the essence of the Nicene or Apostle’s Creed, or the Chalcedonian Creed, is the subject matter of the creed itself.

a.       These creeds are addressing who God is in His nature, as Triune, co-equal and co-eternal.

b.       The creeds address the nature of Christ Himself, fully God and fully man, two distinct natures united in one person, without mixing or confusing the two natures.

c.       Those who were denying these things were proclaiming another God altogether, as 1 John states.

d.       They were saying that Jesus is not God, or not eternally God, or is not as glorious as God even in His divine nature, etc. And as Christ said if you have seen Me and believe in Me, you have seen and believe in the Father, John 14:9.

e.       And as 1 John 2:22ff. tells us, those who deny that Jesus is the Christ are a liar, and is anti-Christ because he denies the Father and the Son, and that whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either, but he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.

f.         So insofar as the early creeds touched upon these essential issues regarding the Father and the Son, the nature of God and His Son Jesus Christ, and what must be believed and confessed in order to truly confess the true God and His Son, these have greater weight than other documents or confessions that are dealing with things less essential to salvation itself.

g.       These early creeds were also ecumenical insofar as they were received by the church or the churches as a whole, not just one branch of portion of Christian churches. We cannot claim that for our Protestant confessions and catechisms of course.

h.       Asking why God did not give an infallible church tradition to interpret Scripture is like asking why God does not perfectly sanctify us as soon as we are converted. We must be overcomers, and struggle and labor both to know rightly and to do righteously. This struggle/labor glorifies God!

5.       But even the early creeds, and the early church fathers, were not part of the foundation of the church as the Apostles and their teaching in Scripture was and is and always will be.

a.       Rather, the early church fathers and the creeds produced by them were doing the same thing, in essence, that Luther, Calvin, and the Reformers would do in their generation a thousand years later.

b.       It is the same thing that must be done in every generation, namely, to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints”, Jude 3.

c.       Those are the Apostles’ words to the Christians, to the saints, in the book of Jude.

d.       That call to “contend for the faith” shows us that the faith has already been given and delivered.

6.       Thus, early creeds and early church fathers do not add to or complete the faith or the canon of Scripture, nor provide an infallible interpretation of the infallible Scriptures.

a.       Though they most certainly provided a faithful interpretation and faithful and sound creeds that summarize the essential teaching of the Scriptures on the Trinity and Nature of Christ as God-Man.

b.       In other words, they obeyed Paul and earnestly contended for the faith that was delivered.

c.       Yet they diverged widely at times on other very important doctrines. Some embraced a form of universal salvation, that all would be saved. Some had incipient views that would lead to the Roman Catholic false teaching of purgatory, a doctrine which Eastern Orthodoxy is not as committed to.

d.       That the ECF sometimes held to early versions of these views does not mean they are acceptable positions to hold, or should be tolerated today. The ECF were in the infancy of the new covenant church, and therefore, we can appreciate them but also recognize they in fact had less light.

e.       We have more light, insofar as more illumination by the Spirit through Pastors and Teachers has come since then, and some godly pastors and teachers truly have stood on their shoulders, after the early church period into the middle ages and then flowering further in the Reformation period.

7.       So we can admire, be very grateful and thankful for the early church leaders and the early creeds.

a.       But we cannot convey to them a higher authority and certainly not an infallibility, and therefore we cannot regard the creeds themselves, Nicene or otherwise, as infallible or divinely inspired.

b.       Yet if we rejected the core teaching of the Nicene or Apostles’ Creed, we would rightly say such a person is outside of the universal church and what the church has confessed in all ages.

c.       So how do we reconcile this distinction of fallible creeds that nonetheless must be affirmed to be considered a true Christian and a true church?

d.       Well, we are not bound to confess precisely what many of the early church fathers confessed regarding Christ descending into hell/hades of the Apostles’ Creed, for example.

e.       Those interpretations are not essential to salvation nor are they infallible.  

f.         The clause itself was added later and was disputed, was accepted gradually over time, and its exact meaning was interpreted variously even by some of the early church fathers/leaders. etc.

g.       The early creeds themselves went through a refining and revising process early on.

h.       They form a rule of faith, a measuring stick, but not an infallible one. But the RCC and EO would claim not only these creeds as authoritative, but infallible, and thus essentially on par with Scripture.

8.       Further, we are not even necessarily confined to picking from one of the various interpretations of this or that clause in the Apostle’s Creed that can be traced back to the early church leaders.

a.       For example, if we confess that Christ descended into hell, but by that mean something not identical to what the various ECF held early on, we have not “denied the Apostles Creed” by doing so. [Ignatius and Tertullian]

b.       So some understood this to mean Christ went into an underworld in His soul, Hades or Sheol. Some viewed it as Christ laying waste to Hades, breaking the gates of death, binding Satan, triumphing over the powers of death. This is called the harrowing of hell (Melito of Sardis, Hippolytus, etc.).

c.       Some like Irenaeus, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Origen claimed from 1 Pet. 3:19-20 that this clause includes that Christ descended to proclaim the Gospel and His finished work to OT saints such as Abraham or Moses and led them out of captivity and into paradise.

d.       Some, a minority in the early church, regarded it as a synonym for being “buried” in the grave.

e.       While many but not all ECF believed in some sort of local descent of Christ to some location, there were exceptions, and while the Reformed largely rejected a local or spatial descent in favor of Christ’s death and burial [being held under the power of death in burial] and also the figurative use that Christ suffered hell on the cross through the Father’s outpoured wrath, this is not a denial of the Apostle’s Creed, nor of that clause in the Creed, as EO and RCC try to argue.

f.         This is because all are confessing, despite differences in interpretation, that Christ in some meaningful way and real sense descended into hell. Not even all the ECF meant the exact same thing by confessing this clause.

g.       The Westminster Assembly debated the descent into hell/hades heavily and affirmed that the church has always confessed Christ descended into hell/hades in some sense.

h.       W.L.C. 50 does not adopt Calvin’s view, but relates the descent into hell to his being buried and continuing in the state of the dead and under the power of death until the 3^rd day.

i.         Because the creeds are not infallible and were consensus documents that were confessed even in the early church with some breadth and diversity of what was meant by certain clauses, we see that later confessions and catechisms do not displace the earlier creeds, though they might be a development, refinement, revision, etc., of them, yet certainly not a rejection.

9.       We can also take the Reformed understanding of baptism and the covenant, & also the Lord’s Supper.

a.       We believe first and foremost that this is what Scripture teaches, but also that it has continuity with the early church and the early church creeds, indeed with the Nicene Creed’s “one baptism for the remission [or forgiveness] of sins”. Covenant theology develops and refines how this is so, and differs in some details from many early church fathers, but it does not overthrow the teaching.

b.       We also  confess the “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church” of the Nicene Creed as well.

c.       Yet, we reject the claim that the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church is found in, or only in, the Romanist Church, or what is called the Roman Catholic Church, or Eastern Orthodoxy, etc.

d.       We also confess that we eat Christ’s flesh and drink His blood in the Lord’s Supper, yet Spiritually or mystically, not carnally or orally, but by faith, and are nourished with the efficacy flowing from Christ’s sacrifice in the Lord’s Supper, as Christ draws near to us, is present with us, and we to Him by the union through Christ’s Holy Spirit whom Christ has poured out.

e.       Many ECF also denied or did not teach the RCC doctrine of transubstantiation really, but recognized a real presence of Christ, though Spiritually or symbolically.  

f.         But the only reason one would have a problem with detailed alterations, revisions, developments, etc., of some of the details of the early creeds or understanding of the sacraments, is if one thinks that the ECF and these early creeds have an infallible and unchangeable authority. They do not.

g.       Likewise, our Reformation catechisms and confessions are not infallible and unchangeable. The WCF has been changed by the American Presbyterians, and different Reformed and Presbyterian denominations have several different versions of the WCF and the WLC and WSC.

h.       Some of these differences have to do with our understanding of the civil magistrate, or whether the Pope is the anti-Christ, or other similar detailed doctrines that have nothing to do with the essence of Christianity or being a Christian, nor even with the essence of the Reformed system of doctrine as derived from the Scriptures.

i.         As the Church grows into Christ her head more and more in the centuries ahead, we should expect even better confessions of faith and catechisms to eventually be written that would surpass our WCF, Heidelberg Catechism, etc., though undoubtedly what surpasses it will not overthrow it but likewise refine, develop, expand, revise rough edges or the errors in it that are peripheral, etc.

j.         This is all from the ongoing, illuminating work of the Holy Spirit within the Church, working through fallible men, pastors and elders and such Church leaders.

k.       So, the claim of an infallible interpretation of Scripture via infallible creeds and confessions doesn’t actually help us. We still have to personally and individually interpret and strive to comprehend everything, whether Scripture or the creeds and confessions, and our own understanding and interpretation is not all identical or one. Perfect oneness awaits heaven/glory.

How Protestants should view the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches

1.       Insofar as the RCC and Eastern Orthodoxy maintain faith in the Triune God and the Lord Jesus Christ as fully God and fully man, we recognize them as actual church bodies.

a.       But the Roman Church was not considered “apostate” by the Reformers in the early church period.

b.       Indeed, it was a gradual process that started after the first 500 years after the Apostles, and full-blown apostasy could be said to have occurred even after the Reformation with Rome’s Council of Trent and Counter-Reformation, which only then dogmatized things against sola scriptura and sola fide, etc.

c.       But the Reformed position is that the Roman Church is apostate and thus false, or dead branches that only retain sparse sparks of life in the few regenerate priests and members that she maintains.

d.       Sadly, Evangelicalism as a whole today is also full of disease, though on paper we would say our doctrine is much purer, but our practice and application of it is quite corrupted.

2.       The RCC and EO are not cults like Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses which formally proclaim and believe in a false God and false Christ. What is the difference?

a.       Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses reject God as He is revealed in Scripture, and as He is defended in the early creeds which were based upon Scripture.

b.       Mormons reject the Trinity, they view Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three separate beings or gods.

c.       They claim God the Father has flesh and bones, was once a man who became god, that Jesus is the firstborn spirit child of Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother, and a spirit brother of Lucifer, etc. They reject that Jesus is fully God and fully man.

3.       Jehovah’s witnesses deny the Trinity and say God alone is the Father and Almighty God.

a.       They also say that Jesus is a created being, Jehovah’s first and highest creation, and they identify Him with Michael the Archangel rather than eternal God.

b.       Jesus is an inferior God of a different essence than the Father, the Holy Spirit is only an impersonal force, not a divine Person of the Triune God, etc.

4.       In short, these cults do not proclaim the true God and His Son Jesus Christ at all. Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodoxy do.

a.       While we as Protestants would say that Roman Catholics have apostatized, they have not formally rejected Christ and the Triune God at all.

b.       JW’s and Mormons never proclaimed God and Christ truly, but a false god, another god altogether.

5.       This is also why the Reformed and Protestants historically have generally received Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox baptism as valid and true, yet certainly faulty and defective.

a.       But the general position is that there would not be a new or second baptism for someone who converted from Romanism or Eastern Orthodoxy.

b.       Insofar as these bodies baptize in the Triune name of God and formally believe in God and Jesus Christ, their baptisms are valid, though their idolatrous forms of worship, ongoing revelations and traditions that they claim they received from God, mixing in works with faith for justification, etc., renders them a dead branch, with only sparks or embers of vital Christianity remaining.

c.       We would say that one could be part of these bodies and be true Christians, but that is in spite of much false doctrine taught in RCC and EO.

d.       Similar to liberal Protestant denominations like the PCUSA or the liberal Lutherans or wonky non-denominational churches that at least have Baptism and an orthodox confession of faith regarding the Triune God and the Nature of Christ.

e.       But to believe what the Mormon church says about God and Jesus Christ is to believe in a false god altogether, as we see from Scripture, and so their baptisms are not in any sense a baptism into Christ as it is not a baptism into the Triune name of God the Father, Son, Holy Spirit.

f.         Yet Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox baptisms are, and so they are valid. 

6.       Judaism, the religion of many Jews, have openly rejected Jesus as the Christ, and in that sense have blasphemed Christ and would not be considered even an apostate church but a false religion, even though they claim to be following the Old Testament Scriptures.

a.       Judaism generally also rejects the Trinity or Triune nature of God, since OT Scripture stresses the oneness of God so strongly.

b.       Already in Paul’s time he is warning against the men who have crept in unnoticed who are ungodly, condemned, and “turn the grace of God into lewdness and are denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ” (Jude 1:4).     

 

 

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:

From Ephesians 4, we know that Christ ascended on high and gave gifts to men, and that these were Apostles and Prophets who formed the foundation of the new covenant church. The ongoing office of Pastor and Teacher is built upon that Apostolic foundation and tradition, and that tradition is the written Scriptures, not that plus an unwritten oral tradition that the Church possesses or the Holy Spirit slowly unveils to the whole Church in subsequent generations. The Holy Spirit continues to illuminate and help the Church comprehend the Scriptures, but this is not a new or additional revelation, but better and fuller comprehension. To put it bluntly then, the early church fathers have no higher ordination than Pastors and Teachers today, for they themselves were also ordinary Pastors and Teachers. Historically and providentially, they are among the first who defended the faith delivered to the saints and recorded that defense for us in the early creeds. The Apostles and Prophets did have a unique and we would say higher office of sorts, but even the Apostles and Prophets were not infallible or sinless outside of what was recorded in Scripture or uttered while under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the full teaching of which is recorded for us in Scripture even if not all the words or events of Christ and the Apostles are recorded.    

1.       The scope and breadth of revelation concerning God as seen and revealed in Jesus Christ is fully given to us in the Scriptures, and the Apostles themselves taught this.

2.       Oral exhortation and instruction was either written down and became inspired Scripture, or was an exhortation from what was or would be written down in Scripture.

3.       The early church fathers could speak as any true pastor can speak today, telling the congregation “listen to my words” or heed this sermon, yet that sermon never becomes inspired, inerrant, infallible Scripture, nor does a sermon reveal anything other than what is already within Scripture.

4.       So we must not discard the development of doctrine, or the illumination of the Spirit in the Church down through the ages, whether in the early church period, the Middle Ages, the reformation period, the present time, or into the future. But none of this carries with it infallibility, and so we must test everything against that alone which is infallible, the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments.

5.       But we do this trusting and recognizing that God has providentially given us ecumenical councils producing reliable, trustworthy, yet fallible creeds (like the Nicene Creed) that clarifies and confines the range of our biblical interpretation of Scripture.

6.       For example, we can say with confidence that anyone who rejects that God is Triune or that Christ is fully God and fully man, begotten not created, is a heretic, and any church body that rejects this is not even a false church, but no church at all.

7.       Protestants would do well to admit the problems in our Evangelical and Reformed churches today, and return to their actual doctrinal convictions, not only of the confessions and catechisms of the Reformation period, but also of the early church creeds and councils.

8.       Protestants today would also do well to study some of the best of the early church fathers, especially the ones most aligned with our Reformation confessions and catechisms, recognizing that there is connective tissue from the early church to the Reformation period into today, yet the only infallible and authoritative standard is the Bible, which with the help of the Holy Spirit is what helps us refine and develop our understanding of doctrine in our fallible yet biblically faithful written documents.