Quote:
Originally posted by GeekyPenguin
My favorite part of that whole doctrine is the Lutherans who talk about sola scriptura but then cite Luther's works. Those sure aren't in the Bible. 
|
Not inconsistent, necessarily. As originally formulated and understood by the Reformers, it simply meant that Scripture was the only authoritative rule of faith. Specifically, it meant that Tradition and the magisterium of the Church were not authoritive, except to the extent that they taught what Scripture taught, since any authority of Tradition and the megisterium derived from and were dependent on the authority of Scripture.
Nevertheless, given the spin often given the term now, the irony is well noted.
Quote:
Originally posted by JonInKC
At least today we can own a bible without facing jail or worse.
|
Not in all countries.
But when was simply owning a Bible actually a crime -- as opposed to possessing unauthorized translations of the Bible (yes, there were authorized vernacular translations of the Bible prior to Luther and the Reformation) or preaching/teaching what the Church considered heresy (and thereby possibly fomenting political discord)? Unless you're factoring in that prior to the invention of the printing press, Bibles were prohibitively expensive to produce and therefore could only be commissioned by the nobility or by the Church itself -- I guess if a common man or woman had one, there was some reasonable presumption that it was stolen.
I've seen this charge against the Catholic Church and Catholic governments from time to time in evangelical publications, but I haven't found any real evidence to back up the assertion that simply owning a Bible was a crime.
Linear Mode
