Do you relegate the Gospels or any of the other books of the NT to the same category as that of Augustine and the other church fathers? Or just Paul?
For my own spiritual purposes, I set the words of Jesus
above and beyond the instructional teachings of those who
came after him. For example, I read the Q-sayings with a
higher degree of edification than I read Revelation.
Among the non-Jesus materials, the epistle of James
especially "speaks to me." I'm glad that some ancient
Catholic Council decided to retain it in the canon.
But I take my cue from my Jewish extended family, whose
members place the Torah on a higher level of holiness
and importance than "the prophets" and "the writings."
Martin Luther was among those reformers who contemplated
a deutero-canonical status for some NT texts. Luckily for
me his poor opinion of the "strawy epistle" of James was
not well received by his fellow Protestants.
is that you don't accept.
I do not accept creeds in general, unless they are composed exclusively
of scriptural quotations, minus any theological interpretation. But the
point my Lutheran friends found so disturbing, was when I said that there
was no need for a Jesus-follower to accept that he was born of a virgin --
and especially not the related doctrinal expansions of St. Anne's
immaculate conception, nor the perpetual virginity of Mary. Some of my
views were received as "possible;" but the fact that Mary's hymen was
in tact both before and after Jesus' birth seemed un-negotiable.
Perhaps different Lutherans would have been less adamant in upholding
the creedal statements -- at least I hope so.