Helping Roman Catholics Understand What Sola Scriptura Actually Means and Doesn't Mean

 

The Roman Catholic institution has its attempts to debunk the teaching of Sola Scriptura. How do Roman Catholics understand Sola Scriptura is very important. Catholic Answers is among the many Catholic pages that speak against Sola Scriptura. How do they understand it? In the article "A Quick Ten-Step Refutation of Sola Scriptura" by Dave Armstrong would you give you the following reasons:

1. Sola Scriptura is not taught in the Bible
2. The "Word of God" (referred here as Scripture) refers to oral teachings also
3. Tradition is not a dirty word
4. Jesus and Paul accepted non-biblical oral and written traditions
5. The apostles exercised authority at the Council of Jerusalem
6. Pharisees, Sadducees, and oral, extra-biblical tradition
7. Old Testament Jews didn't believe in Sola Scriptura
8. Ephesians 4 refutes the Protestant "proof text"
9. Paul casually assumes that his passed down traditions were infallible and binding
10. Sola Scriptura is a circular position

Again, I was thinking about reading through Catholic Answers and I wonder does Armstrong here know what Sola Scriptura means? I could commend him for actually stating that Catholics and Protestants do agree that the Bible is a standard of truth. However, how we view the Bible is very important. Some Catholics say it was just an "invention of Martin Luther". But was it really an invention of Luther or was it a truth he wanted to uphold? 

So first, Armstrong writes this as his first reason not to accept Sola Scriptura:

Catholics agree with Protestants that Scripture is a “standard of truth”—even the preeminent one—but not in a sense that rules out the binding authority of authentic apostolic Tradition and the Church. The Bible doesn’t teach that. Catholics agree that Scripture is materially sufficient. In other words, on this view, every true doctrine can be found in the Bible, if only implicitly and indirectly by deduction. But no biblical passage teaches that Scripture is the formal authority or rule of faith in isolation from the Church and Tradition. Sola scriptura can’t even be deduced from implicit passages.

I agree with Armstrong that Catholics and Protestants can agree that Scripture is the standard of truth. However, he starts to make a mistake when he says that Sola Scriptura supposedly rules out the binding authority of authentic apostolic tradition and the Church. He's right in saying that the Bible doesn't teach that the Scriptures rules out binding authority. 

But the challenges that anybody who wants to "refute" Sola Scriptura would be the following:

1. By which authority do apostolic traditions and authority get their authority or exercise it? Do they not use Scripture as their appeal to authority every time "it is written" is being used?
2. If the writer of the article believes that every true doctrine can be found in the Bible then why reject Sola Scriptura as the rule of the matters of faith and tradition? Can he also point out where in the Bible are we commanded to pray the Rosary, pray to Mary, pray to saints, or even ask dead people to pray on behalf of the living? Can he point out where Peter declared himself the Vicar of Christ? 
3. Does he know the limits of the traditions that Paul and Peter taught? Paul actually emphasized that all traditions of the church must come from the apostolic writings. I don't read anything in the apostolic writings that we should regard Mary as our spiritual mother for all or that Mary mediates between us and Jesus. True, Christians can mediate for each other but the only Mediator (note the uppercase) is that Jesus is the only one who can mediate between God the Father and man. When Christians are called to intercede for others - they go to Christ and not to Mary. 
   

On the other hand, the article "The Real Meaning of Sola Scriptura" by Marty Foord of The Gospel Coalition explains why he believes in Sola Scriptura and what Roman Catholics need to hear about it:

1. Scripture itself is the supreme authority and the final authority of the Church. It should be interesting that he also explains that it doesn't mean that Scripture is the only authority. Rather, it's all about authorities, reason, and tradition are to submit to the Scriptures.
2. The Scripture has its sufficiency in the matters of tradition. The Scripture is tradition which is different from Scripture plus tradition. Every last spiritual truth is found in the Scripture by which authority and tradition must be based upon.
3. Sola Scriptura doesn't mean that Ephesians 4 is invalid. Rather, it validates it that by whom you can help understand Scripture better. The different offices of apostles, prophets, pastors, evangelists, and teachers were given because the Scriptures are not easy to understand. Sola Scriptura means that the Scripture is the guiding principle by which church authority must teach it. It doesn't mean rejection of extra-biblical information such as the martyrdom of the apostles. Rather, it's all about rejecting what doesn't agree with the Scriptures.

For closing, here's what Ligonier.org's article "What Does Sola Scriptura Mean" says about the subject of what Sola Scriptura is or isn't:

The Reformation principle of sola Scriptura has to do with the sufficiency of Scripture as our supreme authority in all spiritual matters. Sola Scriptura simply means that all truth necessary for our salvation and spiritual life is taught either explicitly or implicitly in Scripture. It is not a claim that all truth of every kind is found in Scripture. The most ardent defender of sola Scriptura will concede, for example, that Scripture has little or nothing to say about DNA structures, microbiology, the rules of Chinese grammar, or rocket science. This or that “scientific truth,” for example, may or may not be actually true, whether or not it can be supported by Scripture—but Scripture is a “more sure Word,” standing above all other truth in its authority and certainty. It is “more sure,” according to the apostle Peter, than the data we gather firsthand through our senses (2 Peter 1:19). Therefore, Scripture is the highest and supreme authority on any matter on which it speaks. 

But there are many important questions on which Scripture is silent. Sola Scriptura makes no claim to the contrary. Nor does sola Scriptura claim that everything Jesus or the apostles ever taught is preserved in Scripture. It only means that everything necessary, everything binding on our consciences, and everything God requires of us is given to us in Scripture (2 Peter 1:3). 

Furthermore, we are forbidden to add to or take away from Scripture (cf. Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Rev. 22:18-19). To add to it is to lay on people a burden that God Himself does not intend for them to bear (cf. Matt. 23:4). 

Scripture is therefore the perfect and only standard of spiritual truth, revealing infallibly all that we must believe in order to be saved and all that we must do in order to glorify God. That—no more, no less—is what sola Scriptura means.

Hopefully, this will at least help Catholics understand what Sola Scriptura is or isn't.