Many people — Catholics included — tend to think of the Bible existing in its own realm, as if it did not arise from specific people at specific times and specific places. As silly as the image appears, the implicit understanding of the Bible’s origin seems to be a one-time, direct descent from the sky — all meticulously edited with silk ribbons, concordance and maps. (Needless to say, free shipping would be included.)
Joel S. Peters refutes this notion in his recent release from Catholic Answers Press. Sola Scriptura Doesn’t Work: 25 Practical Reasons to Reject the Doctrine of ‘Bible Alone’ explores some of the major reasons why this idiosyncratic invention of Martin Luther simply cannot function in the real world.
The new book, which arose from Peters’ popular TAN Books / Saint Benedict Press booklet called Scripture Alone?, is not only a refutation of a thoroughly unworkable idea, but an affirmation of how the Bible in fact was written, copied, canonized, and interpreted in the Church through the centuries.
Peters reminds us that the early Church did not have a Bible; that the canon was not made official until the late fourth century; that even then, copies of a Bible were extremely expensive; etc. In other words, the two major sources for the Christian faith were (and are) Tradition and Scripture, as interpreted and proclaimed by the Magisterium (teaching authority) of the Church.
The Christian life was never intended to be the mere study of writings that supposedly negated the need for good works, but the living out of the Good News. This means a prayerful, repentant, sacramental, grace-filled life, made possible by ordained ministers. Spoken words and works were far more common than written words for passing on the faith, probably giving sacred art considerably more significance than it holds today.
Pretty Ugly
Although sacred art is not a thoroughly examined theme in Sola Scriptura Doesn’t Work, the two share relevance. Pope Benedict said long before his papacy: “The only really effective apologia for Christianity comes down to two arguments, namely, the saints the Church has produced and the art which has grown in her womb.” Both saints and art are continuations of the Incarnation, visible and audible manifestations of invisible and inaudible realities. [Editor’s note: Hence the true evil of iconoclasm.]
They both proclaim the Good News in a clear manner and usually require far less study than the Bible, which can be quite obscure. This obscurity, Peters notes, is demonstrated by countless Protestant commentaries on the Bible — despite the claim that the Scriptures are “perspicuous.”
Which is more perspicuous — St. Maximilian Kolbe and Padre Pio or the first two chapters of Book of Numbers? These 20th century saints taught the Christian faith so strikingly, not because they were Bible scholars or publishers, but because they lived out what they professed. They were, and are, icons of profound theological significance.
Martin Luther, on the other hand, is an icon of profound neurotic significance. Probably the most painful reasons for rejecting sola scriptura come at the end of Peters’ book, which addresses Luther’s mental maladies. The former Augustinian friar is often given implicit respect, yet after reading about him in Sola Scriptura Doesn’t Work, readers will realize that Luther himself does indeed injure sola scriptura’s credibility.
Luther’s scrupulosity, which caused him to see sin where it did not exist, was the genesis of his new religion and one of its primary doctrines: sola scriptura. Luther felt so incapable of doing good works (without which, Saint James tells us, our faith is useless) that he denied their obligatory nature. In his mind, the notion arose that he could get to Heaven without actually doing good things—and despite doing many evil things.
Not only does this blatantly run counter to James 2:24, but also Romans 2:6 (God will render to each according to their works), Matthew 7:21 (Not everyone who says to Jesus, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of Heaven, but those who do the will of His Father shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven), and several other passages of the Old and New Testament.
As so many saints (such as Philip Neri, Francis de Sales, and Alphonsus Liguori) have pointed out, the grand remedy for scrupulosity is to obey a spiritual director. Luther, however, decided to take his own route — isolated from the authority of the Church — and invent a new religion that would assuage his troubled conscience. In the process, he apparently moved from mere scrupulosity to full-blown borderline personality disorder (BPD).
Scrupulosity quietly internalizes guilt, while BPD loudly externalizes it. A merely scrupulous person would not be so publicly and caustically critical of his opponents (who would not have been such, had Luther not made them so); he would not break his religious vows and encourage others to do the same; he would not audaciously condemn what had been (and continue to be) the official teachings of the Church and invent a new religion, he would not remove parts of the Bible that did not fit his new religion, etc.
The earlier attributes of Luther (such as incessantly worrying about the state of his soul and spending vastly more time in the confessional than needed) fall under scrupulosity, while the latter ones fall under BPD. Luther became vulgar, angry, demanding and accusatory; he took needless risks, falsely boasted and made other audacious statements that caused all kinds of additional problems.
There is an extreme ugliness grounded in self-will, contrasted by a radiant beauty in surrendering one’s will to God.
Last Call
Years ago, a caller inquired with a Catholic radio host about the difference between Catholicism and Lutheranism. The reply? Jesus Christ started the Catholic Church, and 1500 years later, Martin Luther started the Lutheran Church.
What more needs to be said?
Well, those in search of a little more will find it in Sola Scriptura Doesn’t Work — and in books such as The Facts About Luther by Monsignor Patrick O’Hare; available from TAN Books / Saint Benedict Press, and The Devil’s Bagpipe: The True Life of Martin Luther by James Laing and translated by Father Robert Nixon, OSB; available from Sensus Fidelium Press.
Even though the title of Peters’ new release is “negative” in the sense that it shows why something is not true, its corollary and more important contribution is helping readers to see the authentic sources of Christian living: both Scripture and Tradition, guided by the magisterium of the Church.
Sola Scriptura Doesn’t Work is a thought-provoking and practical book capable of providing much-needed light to many souls. The inclusion of study questions at the end of each chapter makes it ideal for Knights of Columbus councils, Bible and Catechism studies, apologetics courses, convert instruction, and other group settings.
To be sure, the Bible needs an interpretative authority, and it only makes sense that this would be the same authority that assembled it in the first place. The Catholic Church, which has spared no effort or expense in preserving the written word of God through the ages, is indeed its home — and the home of all souls in need of the grace of conversion and perseverance.
Trent Beattie is the author of Scruples and Sainthood (Loreto Publications) and Fit for Heaven (Dynamic Catholic). He is also the editor of Saint Alphonsus Liguori for Every Day (Mediatrix Press), Finding True Happiness (Dynamic Catholic) and Apostolic Athletes (Marian Press).
