Sola scriptura
Solā scripturā (
Latin for
by scripture alone) is one of
five important slogans of the
Protestant Reformation in the 16th century CE. Although there is no agreed-upon technical definition among Protestants, it generally meant that Scripture is the only inerrant rule for deciding issues of faith and morals. The key implication of the slogan is that interpretations of how to understand and apply Scripture would not bear the same authority as Scripture itself, and that therefore the individual Christian is subject not to the interpretations of any ecclesiastical authority but only to his own interpretation. The intention of the Reformation was to correct the perceived errors of the
Roman Catholic Church by appeal to the uniqueness of the
Bible's authority and to reject Christian tradition as a source of original authority in addition to the Bible.
Solā scripturā may be contrasted with
Primā scripturā, which holds that the Bible is the primary source of
doctrine, but that understanding can be improved by reference to other sources.
The idea of the singular authority of Scripture is the motivation behind much of the Protestant effort to translate the Bible into
vernacular languages and distribute it widely. Protestants generally believe each man should read the Bible for himself and compare what he has been taught against it. In
Eastern Orthodoxy and
Catholicism, motivated more by their incarnational theology, not only the Bible but also the prayers and
liturgies of the Church have been translated. Even prior to the Protestant movement, hundreds of vernacular translations of the Bible and liturgical materials were translated throughout the preceding sixteen centuries. In the Western Church,
Latin was extensively utilized in time periods when it was a
lingua franca and understood by most literate persons.
Solā scripturā reverses the relationship between Scripture and Church authority as it had been understood in Catholic Tradition. The Catholic Church teaches that its teaching authority is as interpreter of Scripture and that Scripture is to be understood in light of Apostolic Tradition;
Solā scripturā makes individual interpretation of Scripture the interpreter of tradition. As
John Wesley stated in the 18th century, "The Church is to be judged by the Scriptures, not the Scriptures by the Church." For this reason,
Solā scripturā is called the formal cause of the Reformation.
Protestants argue that the Scriptures are guaranteed to remain true to their divine source, and thus, only insofar as the Church retains scriptural faith is it assured of all the promises of God. If true, and if the Church were to entirely apostasize (a possibility which Catholics deny but the Protestants affirmed), its authority would be negated. Therefore, the early Protestants targeted for elimination traditions they believed had no basis in Scripture but which the Catholic Church considered divinely revealed aspects of the Christian faith, such as
transubstantiation (; ; ; ) the doctrine of
purgatory (; ; 2 Maccabees 12:44-46), the veneration of images or
icons, (; ), and especially the doctrine that the
Pope is the head of the Church on earth(; ; ).
Although it was not the Reformers' original intention to radically reject the teaching authority of the Church, there was not unity of scriptural interpretation among the various Protestant movements. Because their early attempts to establish a consensus based on the Scriptures failed, the Reformation proceeded in three general directions: the
Lutheran exclusivists, the
Reformed, and the
Anabaptists. The Lutherans aimed at establishing an evangelical consensus immediately, but the Reformed brought diverse groups into international association with one another on more liberal principles, which damaged hopes of union with the Lutherans. Meanwhile, the Anabaptists espoused an alternative view of history in which the true Church became hidden or lost through a
Great Apostasy dating from Constantine. From that time forward fragmentation based on
sola scriptura has predominated within Protestantism, although rare movements toward union have achieved success.
The
Catholic Church against which the Reformers directed these arguments did not see Scripture and the Tradition of the faith as mutually exclusive sources of authority, but that Scripture was handed down as part of Tradition. Accepted traditions were also perceived as cohesive in nature. The ones receiving the scripture trusted the people from whom they received it and their accompanying teachings. The proper interpretation of the Scriptures was seen as part of the faith of the Church, and seen indeed as the manner in which Biblical authority was upheld. The meaning of Scripture was seen as proven from the faith universally held in the Catholic Christian churches, and the correctness of that universal faith was seen as proven from the Scriptures and apostolic tradition. The
Biblical canon itself was thus viewed as part of the Church's tradition, as defined by its leadership and acknowledged by its laity.
However, this view of scripture and tradition was not universally accepted within the Church. Throughout the history of the Church movements have arisen within the Catholic Church or alongside of it which have disputed the official interpretation of the Scriptures. The leaders of these movements were often labeled heretics and their doctrines were rejected. According to
Irenaeus, the Judaistic
Ebionites charged less than one hundred years after the
Apostles that the Christians over-ruled the authority of Scripture by failing to keep the
Mosaic Law. Later,
Arius (
250-
336), once he had been made a presbyter in
Alexandria, began arguing that the Catholic Tradition concerning the deity of Christ was an invention of men not found in Scripture and not believed by the early Christians. The Catholic Church held that when disagreements over Scripture arise, the correct interpretation of the Bible will be consistent with how the Church authorities have believed in the past, as revealed by the
Ecumenical councils, the writings of the
Apostles of Jesus and
Fathers of the Church, the decisions of the
Bishop of Rome, and similar sources of Tradition.
However, the Reformers believed some Catholic tradition to be very seriously in conflict with the Scriptures: especially, with regard to teaching about the Church itself, but also touching on basic principles of the
Gospel. They believed that no matter how venerable the traditional source, traditional authority is always open to question by comparison to what the Scriptures say. The individual is to rely on his understanding of Scripture alone even if the whole tradition were to speak against him. This, they said, had always been implicitly recognized in the Church, and remains a fail-safe against the corruption of the Church by human error and deceit. Corruptions had crept in, the Reformers said, which seriously undermined the legitimate authority of the Church, and Tradition had been perverted by wicked men. Catholics in turn would argue that
Sola scriptura is a tradition invented by men during the Reformation, and, ironically, not defined anywhere in Sacred Scripture.
Solā scripturā is still a doctrinal commitment of conservative branches of the
Lutheran churches,
Reformed churches,
Baptist churches, and their offshoots, and other Protestants, especially where they describe themselves by the slogan, "Bible-believing" (See
Fundamentalism). As with most slogans, the meaning of
solā scripturā has been simplified over time. Instead of a theological revision of the idea of authority as understood in Catholicism and Eastern Christianity,
Solā scripturā now commonly represents a presumed antithesis between the teachings of the churches that accept
Solā scripturā and the teachings of the ancient churches. For many Protestants, it is the belief that the Bible is the only source of Christian tradition; in some cases, these have abandoned many traditional Christian beliefs and practices because they don't find them unambiguously supported in the Bible, but not because they find them incompatible with or forbidden by the Bible.
Some Christians, who doubt or reject both tradition and scripture as supreme over reason, may see liberty of conscience as the abiding legacy of the
solā scripturā-rhetoric of the Reformers. There is no question that the rhetoric of the
Reformation and especially
Solā scripturā, has provoked profound doubts concerning the authority of the Church, which has resulted in disunity and innovation far beyond the intentions of the original reformers.
Pro Solā Scripturā
; ; ;
; ; ; ; ;
; ; ; ; ;
; ;; ; ;
Con Solā Scripturā
;; ;; ; ;
; ;; ; ;
; *
Ex cath"drā*
Primā scripturā*
Wesleyan Quadrilateral*
Ijtihad, the Islamic concept of interpretation of religion and law not limited by tradition.
*
Lost books of the Old Testament*
Lost books of the New Testament*
Many articles on Solā Scripturā from a Protestant perspective
*
Many articles on Solā Scripturā from a Catholic perspective
*
A written debate on Solā Scripturā between Douglas Jones and Gerald Matatics from
Antithesis Magazine*
A formal written debate on Solā Scripturā between Julie Staples and Apolonio Latar
*
A Catholic rebuttal of Solā Scripturā*
Sacred Oral Tradition*
An Eastern Orthodox rebuttal of Solā Scripturā*
Paradosis : The Handing On of Divine Revelation [
1] cf.
Katecheo Rhema Laleo Logos Oral Torah
