Echoes of the Fathers

As Amy and I started diving into discovering the roots for our faith in the early Church and reading scripture alongside the Church Fathers, one of the first pillars that came crumbling down for us was sola scriptura — or “scripture alone.” Simply put, that scripture is the sole and ultimate authority was, and is, simply implausible.

I think there’s almost this notion among a lot of Christians reared in evangelical churches that we’ve always had the Bible. But Jesus didn’t leave us the Bible — He left us His Church (Matthew 16:18–19). He never left any instructions to write anything down (Luke 10:16; John 20:21–23). Ultimately, it was Church authority working together with scripture and tradition that produced the Bible.

If you would’ve asked Amy or me five years ago as Christians what was the pillar and foundation of truth, we would’ve said “the Bible.” But the Bible doesn’t even give itself the ultimate authority; it gives it to the Church as Paul told Timothy:

“But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth.” (1 Timothy 3:15)

If not for the Holy Spirit working through the teaching authority of the Church, the Bible couldn’t have been produced (John 14:26; John 16:13). Scripture alone doesn’t specify which books to include or how many were to be in the New Testament canon. The twenty-seven books that we have are never spelled out in scripture. The New Testament canon came through Church Tradition and the teaching authority of the Church (2 Thessalonians 2:15; Acts 15:1–29). If the early Church had operated under sola scriptura, we wouldn’t have a Bible today. The process for preserving and compiling the scriptures into the Bible took place through a multitude of Church councils — that is, through Church authority — over a time period of about 350 years.

None of the Church Fathers argued solely from a position of sola scriptura. While the Fathers held a very high view of scripture (2 Timothy 3:16–17) and used it as the authority to dispel heresies contradicting scripture, they also appealed to Tradition to interpret it (1 Corinthians 11:2; 2 Thessalonians 3:6). Most importantly, none believed in individual interpretation of scripture, but rather in the authority of the universal (Catholic) Church and the unified consensus of the bishops. We wouldn’t have a Bible — or doctrines such as the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, or the Incarnation — without scripture working alongside tradition under the interpretive authority of the Church.

Augustine, the most recognized of the Church Fathers and the most influential on Western Christianity, said: “I would not believe in the Gospel if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so.” And it was Church authority, interpreting scripture along with Tradition, that held the unity of the Church together. For one thousand years, there was biblical unity (John 17:20–23; 1 Corinthians 1:10–13) with only one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church under the authority of the bishops in communion with the Bishop of Rome. The next five hundred years saw only two Churches — the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church.

We’ve seen the results in the last five hundred years of removing Church authority when it comes to scriptural interpretation under sola scriptura — and it’s not been pretty. There would be credibility for sola scriptura if there were only one unified Protestant or Lutheran Church. But sadly, the biblically unified Body of Christ has been shattered into thousands of man-made denominations, independent, and non-denominational churches — all claiming scriptural authority but in constant schism and unbiblical division over their varying interpretations (Romans 16:17; Ephesians 4:3–6, 11–13).

When we take the lid off Church authority and leave interpretation up to private judgment — supposedly through the guidance of the Holy Spirit — what we find is that everyone has an interpretive lens. If the Holy Spirit were truly guiding, under sola scriptura, all these fragmented churches and man-made denominations born out of division, why is the end result the exact opposite of what Jesus and Paul tell us about unity and being “one”? (John 17:21; Ephesians 4:13; 1 Corinthians 12:12–27)

The Bible doesn’t lay out a list of “essentials,” which is why there are so many disagreements across thousands of Protestant denominations. None of this disunity is biblical (Matthew 12:25; 1 Corinthians 14:33). Who among Protestants can firmly define what the gospel is? Whether you’re a five-point Calvinist, a free-will Arminian, or somewhere in between, you’ll have very different views on salvation, the gospel, and evangelization. The same goes for doctrines like the Lord’s Supper (real presence or symbolic?) and baptism (salvific or symbolic?).

Obviously, Jesus knew this, which is why He left us His Church — not a Bible — and entrusted His Church with great power and authority (Matthew 16:18–19; Matthew 18:18). He gave the keys to Peter with the authority to bind and loose on earth and in heaven (Matthew 18:18; John 20:21–23). Paul knew this, which is why he gave the ultimate authority to the Church as the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Timothy 3:15). And the early Christians and Church Fathers knew this, always ceding final authority to the Church (Acts 15:1–29). When there was disagreement, they didn’t just start another church down the street or leave to join one that agreed with their interpretation.

Finally, all Christians — whether they claim scriptural authority or not — hold to traditions that are outside of scripture (2 Thessalonians 2:15; John 21:25). Based on your church tradition, you may be part of a denomination — but denominations are man-made, not scriptural (1 Corinthians 1:10–13).

You may also believe that baptism is symbolic, and that the Lord’s Supper is symbolic. But those beliefs are not scriptural; they’re based on modern interpretations of church tradition, doctrines nowhere found for the first fifteen hundred years of Church history or in scripture (John 6:53–56; Acts 2:38).

You may believe that baptism is simply “a public profession of faith,” or that “a personal relationship with Jesus Christ” is essential for salvation. But both are modern evangelical traditions based upon selective scriptural interpretations.

Jesus, nor Paul, nor any New Testament writer tells us to read our Bibles every day — that developed later as a modern tradition for foundational spiritual growth.

Nowhere in the Bible is Christian marriage formation spelled out; yet every Christian church follows a similar tradition when it comes to the ceremony and what it takes to authenticate the union of marriage.

The gospel itself is not concisely spelled out, which is why there’s so much disagreement among Protestant believers about what it means to be saved.

There’s no “prayer of salvation” in the Bible, yet almost every evangelical church follows a tradition of leading someone to recite a traditional prayer to deem someone as saved or born again.

Many evangelical Christians believe in a rapture, but that’s nowhere found in scripture — it’s an interpretation that didn’t even exist until about two centuries ago.

Yes, as Christ-followers we should all hold to a very high view of sacred scripture (2 Timothy 3:16–17). But there’s much that the Bible doesn’t tell us, or isn’t clear on, which is why tradition and the teaching authority of the Church have been needed to interpret the scriptures. We need to recognize our finite minds when reading a Bible handed down through multiple centuries, cultures, and translations — an ancient text of many books, written by many authors over hundreds of years. Yes, we should prayerfully ask the Holy Spirit to help us discern scripture (John 14:26). But we must also realize the distortions of our own lens in reading it. The evidence on sola scriptura is in — and it’s not been pretty.

Author’s Note – None of the above is meant to disparage the awesome work for the Kingdom being done in so many evangelical Protestant churches. There’s no shortage of evangelicals and Protestants, as well as evangelical and Protestant churches having a TREMENDOUS IMPACT for the Kingdom of God in reaching the world around them. Churches led by, and filled with, mighty servants who’ve given their lives to the Lord. Amy and I have benefited, as well as served alongside so many of these humble servants. Many of whom are lifetime friends. The Lord in His infinite love, grace and mercy works through the unbiblical division in his body. But how much more effective can we be if, even through our disagreements, we were working together?

I’ve just seen too many instances of churches, even some from the same denomination, that won’t work with other churches down the street or across town, for one reason or another, to serve, to minister and reach people for the Gospel. Part of the reason, I’m writing two books and why I launched this site is to help educate myself, and hopefully others that are interested in learning about church history, the early Church and the Church Fathers.

The hope and prayer being for those that join us on the journey is to at least develop a healthy understanding of the foundational roots of the Christian faith, and the ONLY two Christian churches and traditions — Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox – that actually trace all their roots back to the apostles and Jesus. This would go a long way in fostering unity as divided Christians, even among those of us who disagree, in dispelling so much of the misinformation and erroneous teachings about those two foundational Christian traditions that’s led to so much ignorance, ugliness and divisiveness among brothers and sisters in Christ. Only then in unity can we truly hope to have the deep impact upon the culture that we’re called to have in The Great Commission of Matthew 28:18-20. An impact we’re too fragmented and divided to have now.

I truly believe this is possible, if and only if, we’re able to recognize our own biases and look objectively upon the historical evidence that we have access to in reading scripture through the eyes of the Church Fathers.