Nostr Web Client

Not quite...it was the Council of Trent that forever separated Rome from an Augustinian understanding of faith, justification, etc. It was and remains, effectively, 'another gospel' (see Paul's Epistle to the Galatians).

Also, Luther was excommunicated. He didn't want to start something new, he didn't want schism, he wanted to reform the church from within. He called out their aberrations and they threw him out. Hus did similarly before Luther. He appealed to Scripture, they appealed to their power. There were many in that day who knew that "Rome was an open sewer" of corruption, debauchery, and spiritual oppression. In Trent, Rome effectively anathematized the true gospel, so the Christians that disagreed with them--preferring Scripture--well, they just continued meeting as the church.

Let's perhaps put this in terms we prefer: Rome was closed-source (only the clergy had access to the Scriptures, and it was in Latin) and it was centralized (agree with our interpretations or you're damned for eternity). They made up new rules by fiat--and if you disagree, you're burned at the stake. By getting the Word of God into the language of the common people, it was 'open-sourced' and decentralized. It was not a revolution: it was a _reformation_ -- a return to first principles.

I happen to think that 'Satoshi Nakamoto' chose Reformation Day to publish his white paper as a throwback to the 95 theses. What 'SN' started was a _monetary_ reformation -- a return to first principles. But that's just me.

Not sure how interested you are in this topic, but the Joseph Fiennes' version of the movie Luther relies pretty heavily on actual words written or spoken by Luther and those with whom he disagreed. It's not a super high-quality production (apart from the great Sir Peter Ustinov), but the film does an actually decent job of addressing what some of the issues were. I watch it almost yearly on Reformation Day. Check it out. If you're the reading type, you might pick up the little book by Darryl Hart called _Still Protesting_ which surveys what's happened since the Reformation, and why we're still divided on the same key points:

- Sola Scriptura (the authority of Scripture _alone_ - not Popes)

- Sola Gratia (salvation is by grace _alone_ )

- Sola Fide (justification by faith _alone_ - not mixed with our works)

- Solus Christus (by the work of Christ _alone_ - we contribute nothing as to the ground of our justification)

- Soli Deo Gloria (therefore God _alone_ gets the glory for salvation)

Ryan Salayer 5mo ago 💬 1

I used to be big on sola scriptura but the church that Jesus established would have had to rely on tradition and John says in his gospel that there aren’t enough pages to write down all the things Jesus said and did.

Even as a Protestant I believed that the Holy Spirit can and does guide people to do and believe what is right in Gods eyes, so why would the Holy Spirit not be doing that for “the bishop of Rome” or any other bishop or priest for that matter. This is not to say that becoming a priest magically makes you righteous but devoting your life to our Lord in actions and in prayer would likely increase your righteousness. We also can see throughout history signs and wonders that have been performed through priests and bishops in accordance with holy scripture.

In Acts 2:42 it says “They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.”

‭‭Acts‬ ‭2‬:‭42‬ ‭NASB2020‬‬

This passage sets a scriptural precedent for holy tradition. In fact the canonical scripture wouldn’t have even existed at this point in church history and it was the Roman Catholic Church that came together to canonize the scripture.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

freeborn | ἐλεύθερος | 8r0gwg 5mo ago

The question of _sola scriptura_ isn't one of private interpretation, but focuses on the question of _authority_. What happens when so-called 'tradition' adds to, or even contradicts, Scripture? "God alone is Lord of the conscience." The Reformers were zealous to say that Scripture carries the authority of its Author: the authority of Scripture is passively _recognized_ by the church, it is not actively _bestowed_ by The Church. All that is necessary for life and godliness has been set down in Scripture and it is made effective by the work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts. Rome would say something like 'prima Scriptura' - Scripture is the primary, but not the 'alone' authority. It is 'primarly Scripture' but mediated and properly interpreted only by the Magisterium--"oh, and you can't see the Files for yourselves. Trust us, bro." Luther was Snowden, Luther was Assange, releasing the files for all to see, read, study, and understand. The doctrine of sola scriptura is: don't trust [human leaders], verify [by going straight to the source] -- like the Bereans in Acts 17:11.