William Whitaker (1548-1595) was a Calvinist Anglican apologist. He attempts to vainly defend sola Scriptura. I will reply in depth to his volume, A Disputation on Holy Scripture: Against the Papists, Especially Bellarmine and Stapleton (primarily, the sola Scriptura sections).
I can't find any anti-Catholics today worthy to debate (they literally don't even know what the word means, and spend ten times more time lobbing insults than in producing rational arguments), so I have to go back to the old days. As a matter of policy and principle, I haven't gotten into an actual, multi-round theological debate with an anti-Catholic for over four years now, save one exceptional occasion when I replied to Jason Engwer for the sake of a friend who was confused by some of the anti-Catholic arguments. As usual, he didn't fully interact with my arguments, by a long shot (ignoring most of them). What else is new with these slanderous polemicists? But I used to go round and round with many of them, and refute their nonsense (see the many scores of old debates on my Anti-Catholicism web page)
I hope you'll join me for this fun "journey." It'll be similar to my line-by-line replies to Calvin and the important early Lutheran theologian, Martin Chemnitz (one / two / three / four / five), as well as my numerous treatments of Luther. Bring on the best Protestant arguments (not the worst, as we too often see today)!
I've written more about sola Scriptura than any other topic in apologetics (as you can see on my Bible and Tradition web page), and it is always a popular area, and central to the Catholic-Protestant dispute. Authority is the bottom line. My book, Bible Conversations was partially devoted to the subject, and my 501 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura: Is the Bible the Only Infallible Authority? wholly devoted to it. Currently, I am finishing up a radical revision and shorter, much more tightly argued version of that book, in conjunction with my longtime editor, Todd Aglialoro (four of my books), called 100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura, to be published by Catholic Answers (probably this fall). The contract is already signed, so this is a certainty.
I'm ready for some good arguments to interact with from classic Protestant authors, who believed in their doctrines strongly enough to defend them (rather than merely assume them as true, sans any significant argument, like so many Protestants today, or to assume that no one can be certain enough of theological truths to vigorously defend them). Like these "old guys" or not, at least we can respect them that much. They stood for something, and zealously fought for it. There is nothing wrong with placing very high confidence in Scripture: it is only the unbiblical notion of sola Scriptura (that the Bible is the only infallible, binding authority; hence, a denial of this authority in the Church and apostolic tradition) that causes problems.
Here are some of the numerous current anti-Catholic touting of Whitaker's book as the be-all and end-all on the topic:
Bishop James White
One will scan his notes in vain for any reference to any classical works on, say, sola scriptura, such as William Whitaker’s late 16th century classic, Disputations on Holy Scripture, . . . (8-18-10)
Since the Reformation, only a few godly servants of the truth have invested the time and effort necessary to produce for God's people a full-orbed defense of Scriptural sufficiency against those who would subject Scripture to external authorities. William Whitaker was one of those servants, and his work should be carefully studied by all concerned shepherds of Christ's flock. (September 2007)
Matthew D. Schultz
William Whitaker (1547-1595) was an Oxford-trained theologian of significant influence and prestige. One of his most important treatises was Disputations on Holy Scripture (hereafter Disputations), a work that set out to explain and defend the principle of Sola Scriptura over and against the arguments of Rome's foremost apologists. Whitaker's Disputations served not only to influence the formulation of the Westminster Confession of Faith, but continues, due in part to the unchanging nature of the debate, to be an important text in the modern controversies between Catholics and Protestants. . . .
The excellent reputation of Whitaker as a debater and the quality of his Disputations is difficult to deny. . . . even Whitaker's theological enemies considered him to be a formidable, even respectable opponent. . . . Whitaker has incisive analytical skills; his application of razor-sharp logic is demonstrated both in his ability to properly represent his opponents' arguments and in his ability to refute them. He also employs sound reasoning in selecting the strongest forms of his opponents' arguments to refute, having no interest in refuting weak versions and claiming an empty rhetorical victory. Perhaps the most remarkable features of Disputations is its timelessness. (5-20-10)Pastor David T. King
Ever since I've known him, Pastor David King has been recommending this work as one of the best resources ever on Scripture. (John Bugay: 5-20-10)Ligonier Ministries (R. C. Sproul)
In this book, Puritan William Whitaker forcefully and effectively deals with objections to the doctrine of sola Scriptura. He addresses issues such as the number of books in the canon, authentic versions of the Bible, as well as Scripture’s authority, clarity, interpretation, and perfection. Many have said that Whitaker so greatly defended the Protestant position that “he cut off the head of his antagonist with his own weapons.” [link]Reformed Anglicanism Blog
This work will stand alongside Martin Chemnitz's towering work on the Council of Trent. It may tower over Princeton's "Lion," B.B. Warfield, on the subject of Scriptures. Whitaker was a Prayer Book man, Calvinist, and Anglican of the first order magnitude. We believe he's better than Hooker. In any case, this work still should be studied by any Reformed Churchman, especially Anglicans. (1-15-10)
Further Google searching will bear out the continuing very high esteem in which Whitaker is held in Protestant circles. As I said, I like to seek the best of theological opponents, not the worst, so I eagerly look forward to this project. If we can refute the very best defenders of sola Scriptura, where does that leave the false doctrine? Sola Scriptura is, in my opinion, the most biblically bankrupt, barren argument of all in the Protestant arsenal. It is fascinating to watch people so vigorously attempt to defend a hopelessly lost cause (and -- supreme irony -- to pretend that it is actually a biblical doctrine).
Listing of the 18 Replies
Antidote to William Whitaker's Sola Scriptura Arguments, Part 1: Dedication and Preface
Part 2: Views of Tertullian, St. John Chrysostom, and St. Augustine / St. Athanasius on the Old Testament Canon
Part 3: Relation of Church and Scripture, and the Practical Necessity of an Authoritatively Declared Canon
Part 4: Is Scripture Completely Self-Authenticating and Self-Evidently Inspired in All its Books, so that Each Individual Can Discover the Canon in Isolation from Church Pronouncements?
Part 5: The Perspicuity (Clearness) of Scripture: Introductory Considerations
Part 6: The Perspicuity (Clearness) of Scripture: Bellarmine's Four Scriptural Disproofs and Whitaker's Woefully Inadequate Rebuttals Examined
Part 7: Church Fathers on the Rule of Faith / Prooftext for Perspicuity (Eisegesis of Deuteronomy 30:11-14) Refuted from Scripture
Part 8: Biblical Refutation of Whitaker's Eisegetical "Prooftexts" for Perspicuity from the Scriptural Metaphor of "Light"
Part 9: "Plain" Gospel and Easily Understood Biblical Christology?
Part 10: Interpretation of Scripture: Typology and Analogies to Moses, Joshua, and the Judges
Part 11: Interpretation of Scripture: Moses' Seat, Pharisaical Authority, the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15), and Whitaker's Irrational, Radically Individualist Subjectivism
Part 12: Church Councils, St. Irenaeus' Rule of Faith, and St. John Chrysostom on St. Peter and His Successors
Part 13: More Logically Circular Subjectivism and "Co-Opting" the Holy Spirit as the Supposed "Final Judge" for All Interpretation Disputes
Part 14: The Nature of Tradition(s), the Immaculate Conception; Gregory the Great and Nicaea II on Images
Part 15: Is All of Jesus' Teaching and Apostolic Tradition in Scripture? / Authoritative "Necessary" Extra-Biblical Tradition
Part 16: The Protestant Perspective on the Church Fathers
Part 17: Oral Tradition / Desperate Anti-Traditional Exegetical Arguments / St. John Chrysostom on Tradition / Whitaker's Near-Bibliolatry
Part 18: Further Rebuttals of Whitaker's Absurd Attempted Biblical Arguments Against Apostolic Tradition or Any Tradition Whatsoever
***
.jpg)
