As Minges carefully noted,
Scotus’ dictum “Sacra scriptura sufficienter continet doctrinam necessariam
viatori” should not be taken as an indication that Scotus viewed Scripture
as sufficiently clear to be interpreted apart from the church’s tradition or
that he believed that the entire sum of doctrine could be elicited from
Scripture alone. Nor did Scotus intend to set up Scripture as the sole norm of
doctrine: he could argue that the ancient symbols of the church summarize the
truth of revelation and even that, beside the authority of Scripture and
creeds, stands that of the “authentic Fathers” and the “Church of Rome.” Even
so, he held that the “substance of the faith” derives equally from Scripture
and the declarations and determinations of the Church—a view resembling what Oberman
called “Tradition II,” namely, a view of Scripture and tradition as coequal
norms. (Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and
Development of Reformed Orthodoxy, ca. 1520 to ca. 1725, 4 vols. [Grand
Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2003], 2:50-51)
Further Reading:
Yves Congar on Medieval Writers and the Material Sufficiency of Scripture
