The Sola Scriptura Challenge: An article recently submitted by Reynaldo Yana (March 10 Voice of the People) would lead one to conclude that within the Christian faith, the sole factor for determining if a church or denomination qualifies as genuine (orthodox) is how long it's been around. The problem is that this standard isn't even used by the Bible. Christianity asserts that the Bible is the word of God because of the truth claims it makes about itself, what it says about God and the state of man in relation to God. Since truth is the standard used in the Bible, truth must be the standard used for determining if a church that claims to be Christian really is. When Jesus was being tempted by Satan in the wilderness, not once did Jesus resist him by appealing to the age of the sacred texts; rather Jesus used the truth of God's word to successfully overcome the adversary. Christian believers must do the same thing. Once a church deviates from any single teaching of the core beliefs of the faith, then it's simply not a legitimate Christian organization anymore, despite outward appearance. The core truths being: The Trinity; deity of Christ; salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone (Christ as the sole mediator and redeemer -- there's no such thing as a "co-redeemer" or "co-mediatrix"); God's word (only the Bible) is inerrant, infallible, inspired and totally relevant for today; man's inherent depravity and inability to choose God apart from the gracious intervention of the Holy Spirit; a literal eternal Heaven for those who die having repented and trusted Christ alone for their salvation, and literal eternal lake of fire for those who failed to repent and trust in Christ alone for their salvation; and God is above all holy and righteous and will judge all people according to His perfect standard of righteousness. Now, does the (Catholic) Church teach all of the core truths without deviating from, adding to, or taking from them? Well, given the fact that it believes that human tradition and "infallible" papal and magisterium declarations (both teachings of men) are equal in authority to Holy Scripture (God's word) -- even when they don't agree with Holy Scripture in many cases -- the conclusion ought to be obvious to any discerning Bible-believing Christian. In conclusion, if a church's fundamental teachings don't agree with the Bible, then it's not Christian. JOHN LUJAN Dededo Originally published March 28, 2006 “Voice of the People” Pacific Daily News

Fr. Walsh’s Response: I write in response to the letter of Mr. John Lujan that appeared in the PDN on March 28^th.  I think that only in Guam do theological issues get such attention in the secular press.  Of itself, this is not a bad thing.  However, care must be taken that theological odium does not develop as a consequence. Mr. Lujan argues for Luther’s separation of the Church and the Bible.  In his day, this was a novel idea.  Previously, the Bible had always been thought of as a constitutive element in the Church who alone was entrusted with the task of interpreting it.  To accept one was to accept the other.  An infallible Bible was safeguarded by an infallible interpreter.  But with Luther, all that changed.  By separating the Bible from the (Catholic) Church, he thought he was liberating himself so as to have the freedom to interpret the Bible for himself.  This solution may seem to have been the immediate answer to his problem, but it has had several negative consequences.  Consider the following. What Luther actually did (without intending it) was to open the door to a brave new world.  His right to interpret the Bible for himself became everybody’s right.  If the Catholic Church could not tell him what to believe, how could he tell anybody else what to believe?  Theologically, the whole reform movement gradually fell apart.  This is the reason there are thousands of denominations, each claiming to have the “right” view of Scripture, yet each contradicting one another.  Or have I missed something? Mr. Lujan lists the “core truths” of Christianity.  Where does he get them?  He thinks that they come directly from the Bible, but this is a mistake.  His first “core truth” is the Trinity, but you will search high and low to find the word “Trinity” in the Bible.  Just ask your neighborhood Jehovah’s Witness.  What separates Mr. Lujan from the Jehovah’s Witnesses is that he is reading his Bible through the glasses of the First Council of Nicea (325 A.D.) and the Jehovah’s Witnesses are not.  The concepts of “person” and “nature” to describe the mystery of the inner life of God had not yet been invented when the Bible was written.  The truth is that Mr. Lujan is leaning on his church traditions in composing his lists of core truths, not the Bible alone.  Even Luther was forced to accept the early councils to defend certain traditional Christian beliefs.  He quickly found out that the Bible was not enough. By separating the Bible from the Church, Mr. Lujan is reducing the Church to a voluntary society, one that I can leave if I do not agree with it or if it does not agree with me.  My opinion becomes the measure of biblical truth, and the Bible then becomes a mine where to quarry rocks to throw at other people to show that they are wrong and I am right.  We all need a referee that is not as fallible as we are.  That is why, I humbly submit, we cannot afford to separate the Bible from the Church. Francis Michael Walsh The Catholic Theological Institute for Oceania Yona, Guam