New blog on the kid: Refutation of Dr. Steven Nemes · I Heard the Cardinal Zen had Taken on Michael Lofton · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Michael Lofton on Marcel Lefebvre, Me on Both and on Pope Michael · Sola Scriptura is NOT My Position · Michael Lofton Responded to Cardinal Zen · Great Bishop of Geneva! Blunder, Gendron!
When I on a previous occasion tried to notify Mike Gendron on a reply to him, I somehow got myself subscribed to his newsletter. Today a paragraph just jumped out at me, there being so much wrong with it.
There is No Higher Authority than God and His Word
"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness" (2 Tim. 3:16). In other words, Scripture is our supreme authority for knowing truth and correcting all that opposes it. Every word was breathed out by God, who cannot lie (Hebrews 6:18). Because of this, His inerrant Word must be the standard by which we discern truth from error (1 John 4:6). We also know that Scripture is sufficient to function as the sole infallible rule of faith, because it does not refer us to any other source for truth. Everything we must know, understand, and believe to be saved is found in Scripture (2 Tim. 3:14-16; 1 Cor. 15:1-4). Therefore, after considering any other source for truth, we must ask, "But what does the Scripture say?" (Gal. 4:30).
Let's pick it apart.
There is No Higher Authority than God and His Word
Correct so far. At least in what he says, if not in what he leaves a typical Protestant to imagine.
"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness" (2 Tim. 3:16).
No quarrel with St. Paul.
In other words, Scripture is our supreme authority for knowing truth and correcting all that opposes it.
Or at least a very important part of the supreme authority.
Every word was breathed out by God, who cannot lie (Hebrews 6:18). Because of this, His inerrant Word must be the standard by which we discern truth from error (1 John 4:6).
Or at least a very important part of this standard.
We also know that Scripture is sufficient to function as the sole infallible rule of faith, because it does not refer us to any other source for truth.
No, this is a huge blunder.
It refers to both Magisterium and Tradition. Multiple times.
Everything we must know, understand, and believe to be saved is found in Scripture (2 Tim. 3:14-16; 1 Cor. 15:1-4). Therefore, after considering any other source for truth, we must ask, "But what does the Scripture say?" (Gal. 4:30).
II Tim. 3, I think 14—16 means what we consider 15—17, but I'll quote 14—17 for good measure.
14 But continue thou in those things which thou hast learned, and which have been committed to thee: knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15 And because from thy infancy thou hast known the holy scriptures, which can instruct thee to salvation, by the faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, 17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.
The Old Testament Scriptures indeed instruct to salvation, but by the faith which is in Christ Jesus, i e by the Tradition of the New Testament. Notice in the verse we call 14, St. Paul does not remind St. Timothy about "in what book" but "from whom" he had learned.
I Cor 15, "according to scripture" is not a direct describer of the Gospel, but of the events in it, namely describes that they were prophecied in OT Scripture.
1 Now I make known unto you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you have received, and wherein you stand; 2 By which also you are saved, if you hold fast after what manner I preached unto you, unless you have believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all, which I also received: how that Christ died for our sins, according to the scriptures: 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day, according to the scriptures:
If we want to include NT Scripture, it's not the Calvary and Resurrection accounts, it's Christ foretelling these events. The point being that the event matched the foretelling.
For Galatians 4, it can seem as if this quotemine were a straight appeal to Scripture on the exact same topic, taken in the literal sense. In fact, if we look at verse 30 in context, it is an appeal to typology, and "But what does the Scripture say?" simply means "you recall the story, right?" — a story for which St. Paul provides, in oral tradition to Galatians and in Epistle to them, the typological key:
21 Tell me, you that desire to be under the law, have you not read the law? 22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, and the other by a free woman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman, was born according to the flesh: but he of the free woman, was by promise. 24 Which things are said by an allegory. For these are the two testaments. The one from mount Sina, engendering unto bondage; which is Agar: 25 For Sina is a mountain in Arabia, which hath affinity to that Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26 But that Jerusalem, which is above, is free: which is our mother. 27 For it is written: Rejoice, thou barren, that bearest not: break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for many are the children of the desolate, more than of her that hath a husband. 28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. 29 But as then he, that was born according to the flesh, persecuted him that was after the spirit; so also it is now. 30 But what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son; for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the free woman.
31 So then, brethren, we are not the children of the bondwoman, but of the free: by the freedom wherewith Christ has made us free.
Jews have exactly the same story about Isaac and Ishmael in Genesis, but they would deny the interpretative tradition of OT which comes with Christianity.
And while we are at it, it's not just the parts explicitly given such allegoric or typological interpretations in NT texts, it's all of the OT. Jesus gave the disciples of Emmaus a lesson in OT exegesis, Luke 24:
25 Then he said to them: O foolish, and slow of heart to believe in all things which the prophets have spoken.
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and so to enter into his glory? 27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded to them in all the scriptures, the things that were concerning him. 28 And they drew nigh to the town, whither they were going: and he made as though he would go farther. 29 But they constrained him; saying: Stay with us, because it is towards evening, and the day is now far spent. And he went in with them.
So, Jesus spends hours walking with them and goes through all of the OT books in all parts. It says "in all the scriptures" and "Moses and all the prophets" ... here is one big source of truth mentioned in Scripture and more than just once, namely Jesus' oral teaching to His disciples — including a complete Christological typology, or in St. Paul's word "allegory" ... while in the NT texts we only see parts of it.
So, Jesus and Paul gave oral teaching. This, as to the content side is Tradition. But as to the authority side, it's Magisterium. Jesus is in the Vulgate several times over called Magister, and St. Paul in the quote given indirectly designates himself as the Magister of St. Timothy.
A charge he held from Jesus, through the twelve, through the disciples in Antioch (Acts 13). A charge Timothy held from him. A charge faithful bishops in communion with the true pope hold from such people.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Bpi, Georges Pompidou
St. Elisabeth of Portugal
8.VII.2024
