In this last part of his discussion on Catholic – Protestant relations, Don
Pietro shows how the Council insinuated the heresy of Sola Scriptura into its teaching by a change of accent and other
ploys. This he considers the fundamental
Lutheran heresy because it effectively dispenses with the authority of the
Church and substitutes it with the Bible
interpreted as one pleases. F.R.
“The Council and the Eclipse of God”
by
Don Pietro Leone
Part XII
The Protestantization of Council Doctrine
II
Protestantization of Council Doctrine
We may identify the Protestantization of Council doctrine in the following fields
particularly:
·
Ecclesiology;
·
The Holy Scriptures;
·
The Priesthood; and
·
The Mass.
We shall consider the first two themes here, the third in chapter 6, and
the fourth in chapter 7.
Ecclesiology
The novel ecclesiology that we have presented in our treatment of the
attacks against the dogma of the Unity of the Church is largely of Protestant
inspiration, in that:
a) The concept that the true Church is wider in extent than the Roman
Catholic Church and includes within its confines other denominations, is a
heresy of the ‘German High Church’ 1 and of the
Anglicans 2 ;
b) The concept that there is more than one church is manifest most notably
in the proliferation of the Protestant ‘churches’;
c) The concept of the ‘hierarchy of truth’ corresponds to the Protestant error concerning Fundamental Truths’ 3 ;
d) Ecumenism, is, in its origins, a Protestant fabrication4 .
The Holy Scriptures
In the texts below we shall see how the Council opens itself up to the
Protestant heresy of Sola Scriptura, namely that the source of the
Faith is the Bible alone. Now this principle of Sola Scriptura is
commonly understood to signify not only that the Bible is the sole source of
Revelation, but also that it is ‘self-interpreting’, which means in effect that
the Christian reader is free to interpret it as he wishes. The principle, in
this more general sense, is heretical in two ways: first, because it
contradicts the -dogma that the source of Faith is double, consisting not only
in the Bible but also in Oral Tradition 5 ; and second,
because it contradicts the dogma that it is the Church Herself that is the
authentic interpreter of the Bible 6 . The principle
should be regarded as the fundamental Protestant heresy first, inasmuch as it
accords to the Christian, relying on his ‘conscience’7 , the
freedom to create a Christianity to his own liking without any reference to
objective truth; second, inasmuch as it renders the existence of the Church
entirely otiose.
The Council opens itself up to this fundamental heresy by raising in
various ways the status of the Holy Scriptures above that of Oral
Tradition.
i) Christ the Lord… commanded
the apostles to preach [the Gospel]. This… was done by the apostles
who handed on, by oral preaching…. what they themselves had received…; it was
done by those apostles and others associated with them who… committed the
message of salvation to writing.’(Dei Verbum 7)
This passage expresses the Church’s perennial doctrine that Revelation
has a double source: namely the Holy Scriptures and the Oral Tradition. We read
for instance more clearly in the First Vatican Council (Dei Filius)
quoting Trent: ‘Supernatural Revelation, according to the Faith of the
Universal Church, as declared by the Holy Synod of Trent, is contained in the
written books and in the unwritten Traditions which have been received by the
Holy Apostles and by the mouth of Christ Himself or through the inspiration of
the Holy Scriptures have been handed down by the Apostles themselves, and have
thus come to us’.
ii) ‘Tradition and
Scripture make up a single sacred deposit of the word of God which is entrusted
to the Church.’ (DV 10)
This passage, by contrast, while still teaching that Revelation has a
double source, designates that source as the ‘word of God’, rather than for
example ‘Tradition’ (oral or written), thereby expressing a predilection for
the Word of God over Oral Tradition.
iii) ‘…may it come that
by the reading and study the sacred books… the treasure of revelation entrusted
to the church may more and more fill people’s hearts… so new impulse of
spiritual life may be expected from increased veneration of the word of God
which “stands forever.’’ (DV 26).
While the first chapter of the document treats of Revelation, and the
second chapter (from which the extracts (i) and (ii) are taken) treats of its
double source, the following four of the six chapters treat of the Holy
Scriptures alone, concluding with the portentous sentence just quoted. In such
ways the Holy Scriptures are again given preference over Tradition.
iv) ‘The Church… has
always regarded and continues to regard the scriptures, taken together with
sacred tradition, as the supreme rule of its faith…they are inspired by God and
committed to writing once and for all time… It follows that all the preaching
of the Church, as indeed the whole Christian religion should be nourished and
ruled by sacred scripture…’ [There follows an encomium of the
scriptures.] (DV 21);
v) ‘Sacred
theology relies on the written word of God, taken together with sacred
tradition, as its permanent foundation. By this word it is powerfully
strengthened…’ [A further encomium of the scriptures follows.] (DV
24);
In texts (iv) & (v) we have two instances of a logical fallacy. What
is predicated of two members of a set (that is to say the Scriptures and
Tradition taken together) is then applied to one member only (that is to say to
the Scriptures alone). In other words the relation between the two members is
understood first as conjunctive and then as disjunctive. An illustration would
be: ‘Laurel and Hardy are a comedy duo, therefore Laurel is a comedy duo’. The
effect of this logical fallacy is yet again to accord preference to Holy
Scripture over Tradition.
vi ) ‘Catholic theologians… searching together with separated
brothers and sisters into the divine mysteries… [taking account of the
principle of the ‘hierarchy’ of truths … will bring about] a
deeper realization and a clearer expression of the unfathomable riches of
Christ’ (cf. Eph 3.5) (UR 11);
vii) ‘If… these translations [of the Holy Scriptures] are
made jointly with churches separated from us, they can then be used by all
Christians (DV 22);
viii) ‘... in the Church, according to Catholic belief, its authentic
teaching office has a special place in expounding and preaching the written
word of God.’ (UR 21).
ix) ‘Catholics must gladly acknowledge and esteem the truly
Christian endowments from our common heritage which are to be found among those
separated from us (UR 4);
x) Such a
heritage is described as: ‘the common patrimony of the Gospel and the
resultant common duty of bearing a Christian witness’ (Apostolicam
Actuositatem 27);
xi) ‘They [the
non-Catholic Christians]… share our desire to stand by the words of Christ
as the source of Christian virtue’ (UR 24).
Moral and doctrinal Truths derive from the two sources of Divine Revelation, that is to say both from Holy Scriptures and from Oral Tradition, as interpreted and declared by the Church. Protestants who reject Oral Tradition and deny the authority of the Church cannot be said to have a ‘common heritage’ with Catholics; nor a ‘common patrimony of the Gospel’ tout court; nor a resultant common duty of witness; nor a common desire to adhere to the words of Christ tout court.
We observe that the root problem of Protestantism, of the Council, and
of any heresy altogether, may be framed in terms of the rejection of Tradition.
We shall return to our consideration of the Holy Scriptures in the later
chapter on the Mass.
Summary
The Council illegitimately accords to non-Catholic Christian communities
and individuals a status approaching Her own, and recommends relations with
them (‘Ecumenism’) which obstruct Her very raison d’être. In so
doing it opens itself up to Protestant heresies concerning the nature of the
Church, the Holy Scriptures, and, as we shall explain in chapters 6 & 7
below, also concerning the priesthood and the Mass.
Conclusion
The first chapter has treated of the Church, above all of Her Unity; the
second has treated of the alleged division of this unity in Protestantism, and
the Council’s irenism towards it. We conclude these two chapters with the
following passage from St. Cyprian’s treatise de Unitate Ecclesiae 9 .
‘The One Church, the Holy Spirit in the Song of Songs designated in the
person of Our Lord, and says: ‘My dove, my spotless one, is but one. She is the
only one of her mother, elect of her that bare her.’ Does he who does not hold
this unity of the Church think that he holds the faith? Does he who strives
against and resists the Church trust that he is in the Church, when moreover
the Blessed Apostle Paul teaches the same thing, and sets for the sacrament of
unity saying: ‘There is one body and one spirit, one hope of our calling, one
Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God’ ?…
‘The Church is one, which is spread abroad far and wide into a multitude
by an increase of fruitfulness. As there are many rays of the sun, but one
light; and many branches of a tree, but one strength based in its tenacious
root; and since from one spring flow many streams, although the multiplicity
seems diffused in the liberality of an overflowing abundance, yet the unity is
still preserved in the source. Separate a ray of the sun from its body of the
light, its unity does not allow a division of light; break a branch from a
tree, when broken it will not be able to bud; cut off the stream from its
fountain, and that which is cut off dries up. Thus also the Church, shone over
with the light of the Lord, sheds forth her rays over the whole world, yet it
is one light which is everywhere diffused, nor is the unity of the body
separated. Her fruitful abundance spreads her branches over the whole world.
She broadly expands her rivers, liberally flowing, yet her head is one, her
source one; and she is one mother, plentiful in the outpouring of her
fruitfulness: from her womb we are born, by her milk we are nourished, by her
spirit we are animated.
‘The spouse of Christ cannot be adulterous; she is incorrupt and pure.
She knows one home; she guards with chaste modesty the sanctity of one couch.
She keeps us for God. She appoints the sons whom she has born for the kingdom.
Whoever is separated from the Church and is joined to an adulteress, is
separated from the promises of the Church, nor can he who forsakes the Church
of Christ attain to the rewards of Christ. He is a stranger; he is profane; he
is an enemy. He can no longer have God for his Father, who has not the Church
for his Mother.’
Notes
1. see historical
sketch above
2. known by them as
the ‘branch theory’. We take Anglicanism as a form of Protestantism
3. see the quotation
from Mortalium Animos above
4. see the historical
sketch above
5. as was expressed
in the preparatory schema on Revelation by its title ‘de Fontibus’
6. In the Council of
Trent, quoted later in the section
7. understood
subjectivistically
8. Council of Trent,
session 4, repeated in the First Vatican Council and later by Pope Leo XIII
in Providentissimus Deus (1893), and Vigilantiae
studique (1902), the latter document constituting the Pontifical
Biblical Commission as a bulwark against the modernist historical-critical
method of exegesis, cf. RdM I. 2 (b)
9. 4-6
