Who Said That?

OK, who said that?

"Sacred doctrine makes use of these authorities [philosophers and human arguments] as extrinsic and probable arguments; but properly uses the authority of the canonical Scripture as an incontrovertible proof, and the authority of the doctors of the Church [the theologians] as one that may be properly used, yet merely as probable.  For our faith rests upon the revelation made to the apostles and prophets, who wrote the canonical books, and not on any revelations (if there were any) made to other doctors."

This is old hat . . . Leave your guess in the comments section below.  Please no google searches!  Who said that?

Update on Monday, December 11, 2006 at 12:01PM by Kim Riddlebarger

Don't you just love it when the doctors of the church teach sola Scriptura?  As many of you correctly guessed, these words come from St. Thomas, from the opening chapters of the Summa (1. Q1. 8)

Comments

[pilgrim]

RC Sproul?

[Rev. Bob]

Luther?

[Rev. Bob]

Never mind, I doubt Luther would use phrases like "extrinsic and probable arguments."

[R.K. Brumbelow]

Oh come on! This is classic _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I wont spoil it by giving the answer so quickly but the spaces are right.

[Wayne Rohde]

I'd planned to guess Charles Hodge.

But Jonathan Edwards? Or Louis Berkhof?

[Nathan]

Edwards. It has to be.

[al farabi]

aquinas?

["lee n. field"]

Calvin?

[Gomarus]

Sounds like it could be Thomas Aquinas

[Mike Ratliff]

This is so obviously Catholic "thought." I believe that would rule out any of the reformers and any of our present day reformed theologians. I looks, to me, like Latin translated into English. That would place it sometime at or before the Reformation wouldn't it? I am not familiar with Thomas Aquinas, but since there are so many others who are convinced that this is his then I vote for him. :-)

[R.K. Brumbelow]

Mike, One wonders why you think it is Catholic thought? What is precisely is your reasoning?

Logic Spoiler below:



It is of course Catholic, but it is an argument for scriptural priority and states scripture over tradition (uses the authority of the canonical Scripture as an incontrovertible proof).
You are of course correct that it has been translated from the latin, but remember that all of the middle reformers frequently wrote in latin and most of the early ones did to.

Big Clues for those who want to figure it out logically are phraseology (Doctors of the Church), semantics and translation and the mix of philosophy and humanism (albeit "extrinsic [as opposed to intrinsic]and probable [as opposed to incontrovertible]")

So look for latin writers in the era of "doctors of the church" which a humanistic flavour who value tradition but see the only inviolate arguments as coming from cannon and not some later revelation.

Remember the original "Doctors of the church were Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, and Gregory I" but a clue is when did the catholic curch name them as such.

[Mike Ratliff]

My assumption that it was Catholic thought was the reliance on "doctors of the church" for interpretation. The Reformers I have read never said any such thing. They may quote Augustine, but they always point to scripture.

I know that Tyndale and Luther wrote in Latin, but their is a difference in "thought" between what they wrote about this author. Luther would never use all of that jargon and neither would Tyndale. This piece is pointing people to Humanistic thought as an equal with scripture for interpretation. I thought of Erasmus when I read it.

In Christ

Mike Ratliff

[Scott]

Augustine?

[turmeric]

I would have guessed Calvin, he also wrote in Latin. But would he have said "probable?"

[Ron]

It is "the Doctor", a.k.a. Thomas of Aquinas.

[Nathan]

I think I'm changing my guess. It sounds a lot more like Calvin.

[timinator]

Joathan Edwards?

[Guillermo Castro]

Thomas Aquinas was in many issues more consistent than Augustin. Unfortunately, poeple have demonize Aquinas, considering here like the great Satan of the Western Church. Especially, the popular work of Francis Schaeffer, missportray and missrepresent Aquinas. We need to re-read him and rescue many important contributions for the theology. (sorry for my English) William Castro (Greenville SC)