I've written some Danish pieces on the presence of Sola Scriptura in Saint Augustine, and though many works and quotes come to mind, I especially want to share these with you, 1) "In order to leave room for such profitable discussions of difficult questions, there is a distinct
boundary line separating all productions subsequent to apostolic times from the authoritative canonical books of the Old and New Testaments. The authority of these books has come down to us from the apostles through the successions of bishops and the extension of the Church, and
from a position of lofty supremacy, claims the submission of every faithful and pious mind. If we are perplexed by an apparent contradiction in Scripture, it is not allowable to say, The author of this book is mistaken
but either the manuscript is faulty, or the translation is wrong, or you have not understood. In the innumerable books that have been written latterly we may sometimes find the same truth as in Scripture, but there is not the same authority Scripture has a sacredness peculiar
itself. In other books the reader may form his own opinion, and perhaps, from not understanding the writer, may differ from him, and may pronounce in favor of what pleases him, or against what he dislikes.
Reply to Faustus 11.5, NPNF 1.4
2) For I confess to your Charity that I have learned to yield this respect and honour only to the canonical books of Scripture: of these alone do I most firmly believe that the authors were completely free from error. And if in these writings I am perplexed by anything which
appears to me opposed to truth, I do not hesitate to suppose that either the MS. is faulty, or the translator has not caught the meaning of what was said, or I myself have failed to understand it. As to all other writings, in reading them, however great the superiority of the
to myself in sanctity and learning, I do not accept their teaching as true on the mere ground of the opinion being held by them; but only because they have succeeded in convincing my judgment of in truth either by means of these canonical writings themselves, or by arguments
to my reason." end quote. Letter 82 NPNF1.1.
As another pious teacher once said, unless moved by sacred Scripture or reason itself, I will not retract anything I've written
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A thread on the monstrous division of justification into a so called initial and continuous justification
Is Justification to Be Attributed to Faith Only at the Beginning of Conversion in Such a Way, that After the First Conversion We are Justified No Longer by Faith Alone
The manner of justification is one and the same in the beginning, middle, and end, namely that we are justified by faith alone, by the pure grace of God, solely for the sake of Christ. For Paul, Ro 4, citing a universal example of justification, does not cite Abraham when he was
first converted, Gn 12, but Gn 15, when he had already rendered to God obedience in faith in various exercises for a number of years after his first call, Heb 11:8 ff. Midstream in good works, as it were, Paul puts the question: What is Abraham’s justification or in what does