Sola Ecclesia in the New Testament Implies Sola Scriptura for Both Protestants and Catholics Alike

 One of the confusing things about the Roman Catholic/Protestant debate over sola Scriptura (i.e., Scripture is the ultimate source of authority relating what God has spoken) or sola Ecclesia (i.e., the church is the ultimate source of authority relating what God has spoken) is when both go to the Scripture and attempt to argue their cases from the time of the apostles. It seems very clear that the primary authority in the early church was that of the apostles. The apostles' word was the final word concerning the right interpretation of the Hebrew Bible and the new revelation of Jesus Christ. All would agree that they would never contradict the Hebrew Scripture, since they were speaking from the same God who gave it, but it seems very clear that they were the ultimate authority through which the Holy Spirit spoke. Hence, the Roman Catholics are right in that the ultimate source of authority in the early church would have been the apostles, and hence, sola Ecclesia.

The problem is this. If the apostolic teaching is written down into a closed canon, and that closed canon now joins with the Hebrew Bible to complete Scripture, as most Christians believe that it does, then the only logical conclusion to make is that the sola Ecclesia of the early church demands sola Scriptura for the rest of the church from that point on, as it is the only place where the apostle's teaching is confirmed.

The mistake is in thinking that if Roman Catholics can somehow prove that the early church was rooted in sola Ecclesia, the rest of the church throughout history should be as well. This is also what many liberals try to argue. The problem is that the authority is in the apostles' teaching, and apostolic succession must be in agreement with it or it is wrong; and hence, if their teaching is sufficiently represented in the New Testament, then the entire church must bow down to it as the supreme authority because it is bowing down to their teaching that is the supreme authority. In other words, in order for Christians today to submit to what the early church did within the framework of sola Ecclesia, they must submit to it via sola Scriptura. 

Hence, Roman Catholics actually have to speculate and make up an additional apostolic teaching they supposedly know through tradition. Yet, this tradition is only supposed as apostolic and it must be confirmed by what is known to be apostolic, i.e., what is written in the New Testament, and if it contradicts what is written, proves itself false. This means that even Roman Catholics must believe in sola Scriptura if their claim that there is an apostolic tradition that is equally authoritative as the New Testament is true, since the one must verify the other and thus proves itself the superior authority.