Exceptions to the passage John 20:31.
Exceptions to the passage John 20:31.
§ 372. Regarding the passage John 20:31, they make the exceptions: (1) “John is talking only about miracles and is saying that he wrote only some miracles and not all, for those would be sufficient to convince the world that Christ is the Son of God. But what he says about miracles alone has been transferred foolishly to all the dogmas of faith and precepts of behavior.” We respond. This conclusion is general, explaining faith, explaining why the words and deeds of Christ have been recorded in the Gospel account. Bellarmine calls this a “lie” because in the “immediately preceding words, John mentions only the miracles.” Against Bellarmine, however, we urge the following argument. The apostle is teaching that those things were written sufficiently through which we conceive saving faith in Christ. But now, we conceive saving faith in Christ not from His miracles alone but also and especially from His sermons. Therefore not only were miracles written sufficiently, but also Christ’s sermons were written sufficiently. If as much of the miracles was written as is sufficient for the edification of faith, so much the more was as much of the sermons of Christ also written. Moreover, the word 
[“He did”], which John uses here (John 21:25), is explained generally, referring to the entire ministry of Christ. From this, Augustine makes the following beautiful comment on this passage (tractate 49 on John): “The holy evangelist is bearing witness that the Lord Christ said and did many things that were not written. But those things were selected to be written that appeared to be sufficient for the salvation of those who believe.” Also, Cyril (bk. 12 on John 21): “Not everything the Lord did was written. Rather, the writers wrote what they believed was sufficient both for behavior and for dogmas so that shining with a right faith and with works we may deserve to reach the kingdom of heaven.”
(2) “John does not mean that the signs alone are sufficient for salvation but that they are arranged and referred to this. They are one of the required means for our salvation, even if they are not sufficient by themselves.” We respond by inverting the argument. From those things that have been written we can be instructed for salvation, as John witnesses in this passage and as his ally the apostle Paul writes in 2 Tim. 3:15. But now, we cannot be taught sufficiently for salvation solely from miracles, as Bellarmine confesses here. Therefore, with the word 
[“these things”], John does not mean miracles alone. The thing itself shows clearly that John is speaking about such a means of salvation that is not merely useful but is also sufficient. For he explains the reason why no more miracles or sermons of Christ were written, namely, because those that were written can be sufficient for the salvation of those who believe.
(3) “John is speaking only about the things that he wrote. But if those things are sufficient, then the rest of Scripture is superfluous.” We respond, first, by inverting the argument. If John’s Gospel alone is sufficient for our faith and salvation, all of Scripture will be much more sufficient. There is a strong logical consequence from the perfection of a part to the perfection of the whole. Second, John is not speaking exclusively, as if he wanted to exclude the prophetic books and the rest of the books of the New Testament. In fact, he does appeal to the prophecies of the prophets in his Gospel. Rather, he is speaking inclusively to include all the books of the Old and New Testaments because the Old Testament confirms the New and the New confirms the Old. Third, there is more in their consequence than the antecedent allows. Although someone could be instructed sufficiently for salvation solely from the Gospel of John, yet the rest of Scripture is not superfluous because God wanted to teach and explain in greater detail the same points of heavenly instruction that are taught in the Gospel of John, as well as in other books of the Old and New Testaments, which pertain no less to the canon of Scripture than John’s Gospel does. A witness for this is Eusebius: “John wrote after the rest of the evangelists and approved of what they had said” (Histor. eccles., bk. 3, c. 24). Nevertheless he explained more fully what he noticed the rest had treated rather sparingly, especially those things that occurred before John [the Baptist]’s imprisonment. Therefore lest anyone retort that “John did not even write all the deeds and words of Christ,” John hurries to meet this tacit objection and reveals that he wrote only as much as is sufficient for the salvation of those who read it.
(4) “The meaning of the statements of Augustine and Cyril is not that all the necessary things were written sufficiently but that those things were written sufficiently which the apostles thought they should write. Because some things had to be written and some things handed down without being written—especially the interpretation and understanding of the Scriptures—the sacred books contain sufficiently all things that had to be committed to writing. Christ did not want other things to be written but to be sought from the Church. Yet these things, too, are included in their own way in the Gospel, not in particular but generally, because the Gospel teaches us to consult the Church in doubtful matters.” We respond. They are begging the question in saying that God wanted to teach some articles of faith outside of Scripture, articles that one must seek from the Church. The words of Cyril are explicit: “The apostles wrote those things that they judged were sufficient both for behavior as well as for dogmas.” To the Church we willingly concede a ministry in the interpretation of Scripture, but we deny its magistracy. We know that the Church is to be addressed when censuring behavior; we deny that new articles of faith are to be expected from her. If Scripture perfectly explains the doctrines one must know for his salvation only in the sense that it sends us to the Church, then surely there would have been no need for more to be written than these few words: “Tell it to the Church” [Matt. 18:17]. The prophets and apostles, who explain in such detail the chief points of heavenly instruction and repeat them so often, would have taken up a vain work.