An honest question about tradition

Tradition in the RCC is whatever they say it is. Why? Because of "Development of Doctrine" and the alleged "Infallible Magisterium".

 

Doudting Thomas hasn't a clue. No there cannot be new traditions. They were all left as the "deposit of the faith" by Christ and his Apostles, though when you say: "Or is it broader, is it the tradition of the Catholic Church since its inception? "

This does not make it broader, for the Catholic Churches inception was one in the same as when the Aposltes left the traditions. DT's problem is that he does not understand Development of Doctrine. By it we can grow in deeper understanding of what has been revealed in the scriptures. Or put another way we can explain what the Apostles left us in greater clarity, based on new understandings. For instance, a rubber ball is said to be red and rubber at one point in history. At another we describe it's place on the color spectrum, elastic properties, and molecular structure of the rubber. There is no contradiction in the two. Only deeper understanding of revealed truth. The Trinity is an excellent example of this. Athanasius explained it in ways not contrary to scripture you will agee (if you are a trinitarian) that clarified it for the people of his time.

Hope that helps.

Blessings

 

Yep, the RCC can claim unique dogmas as part of that "deposit of faith" for which there is no biblical or patristic evidence. Sounds reasonable to me, because when you have an "infallible magisterium" who needs universal consensus and historical evidence? Let's proclaim an infallible dogma, then read it BACK into the Bible and the Fathers. Yeah, that's it. Never mind that the Eastern Church looks at the same biblical and patristic Tradition and can find no basis at all for such novel concepts as papal infalliblity or the universal jurisdictional supremecy of the Roman Bishop. (Primacy of honor AMONG equals, yes; universal supremecy OVER other patriarchates, no!)

By it we can grow in understanding even in ways unheard of by those ignorant wretches in the early church! Liberals believe in "development of doctrine" as well--they, with their advanced knowledge and understanding, now have determined that Christ really intended for women and homosexuals to be clergy; that the Bible is full of myths and pious stories; and that Christ was a mere man who was misunderstood, most of all by His apostles.

 

'By it we can grow in deeper understanding of what has been revealed in the scriptures.'

Ray is saying, Please give us the old 'college try' by showing us in your Douay Bible where there is even a sintilla of a suggestion about Mary's Assumption into Heaven.

'Or put another way we can explain what the Apostles left us in greater clarity, based on new understandings.'

Ray is saying, There can be no new understanding of the Assumption if you fail to find a chapter and verse in all of the Bible about her feat of an ascension into Heaven. The Bible does not say that Christ caused the mother of our Lord to ascend; I guess she was on her own with this exploit.

'Yep, the RCC can claim unique dogmas as part of that "deposit of faith" for
which there is no biblical or patristic evidence. Sounds reasonable to me,
because when you have an "infallible magisterium" who needs universal
consensus and historical evidence? Let's proclaim an infallible dogma, then
read it BACK into the Bible and the Fathers. Yeah, that's it. Never mind that
the Eastern Church looks at the same biblical and patristic Tradition and can
find no basis at all for such novel concepts as papal infalliblity or the universal
jurisdictional supremecy of the Roman Bishop. (Primacy of honor AMONG
equals, yes; universal supremecy OVER other patriarchates, no!)

By it we can grow in understanding even in ways unheard of by those
ignorant wretches in the early church! Liberals believe in "development of
doctrine" as well--they, with their advanced knowledge and understanding,
now have determined that Christ really intended for women and
homosexuals to be clergy; that the Bible is full of myths and pious stories;
and that Christ was a mere man who was misunderstood, most of all by His
apostles.'

Ray-The Magisterium's evolving theology is a clever ploy; it is a sham and a shame that Christians are duped into believing their human machinations.

Ray-The post about the Catholics and Liberal Protestants was an excellent one. Unfortunately, to some of their believers it will secure for them 'the second death' or as Revelation 20:14 says, the destination of the Lake of fire.

A person has to believe that Jesus is Divine and have faith in this Person in order to be saved. [I John 2:23]

 

"Ray-The Magisterium's evolving theology is a clever ploy; it is a sham and a shame that Christians are duped into believing their human machinations."

The alternative is 30,000 conflicting denominations. Talk about duped (by themselves and those who they decieve) in to believing human machinations. Talk about NULLIFY THE WORD OF GOD which Sola scriptura does quite clearly.


"Ray is saying, Please give us the old 'college try' by showing us in your Douay Bible where there is even a sintilla of a suggestion about Mary's Assumption into Heaven"

I remember doing that just for you a couple months Ray. You were closed to it then and you will be now so I am not going to run through the details. It's in 2 Sam 6, Luke 1, Psalm 132:8 and Rev 11 and 12. Read them and perhaps God will lift the scales from your eyes this time. Thanks for stopping by.

 

When I was a Catholic and asked my priest exactly what "Tradition" included, I was never really given a definitive answer. I was assured, however, that "Tradition" has equal authority with the Bible. That was the moment when I knew that I could no longer remain a Catholic.

Hebrews 4:12 tells us "For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart." Only God's Word can do this -- not "Tradition".

God Bless!

Priscilla Ann

 

You must remember that for most Protestants, beibg Catholic is equal to following a pagan system of worship, and thus damning your soul to eternal perdition. That is why it is so hard for them to hear us (and why some of us resort to rather loud and pointed retorts to try to break through the defenses). It is fear of bringing the wrath of God upon themselves which keeps the shields up for them.

(PS I just KNEW God was going to strike me dead the first time I prayed the Rosary. Talk about "sweating bullets" )

 

Priscilla,

Could you provide me with that verse that says Word of Go equals explicitly and is only equal to scripture? I seem to have not found anyone in my 43 years as a Christian anyone who can provide that verse. I will agree that scripture is the Word of God. But note the distinction: I see no verse that says scripture is the whole word of God. Now I do see many verses that indicate that it is not such as 2 Thes 2:15: Hold Fast to the Traditions you have recieved, whether BY WORD OF MOUTH or in epistle from us" and right at the end of John's third epistle where he says he has more to say but will speak it in person. There are many other verses I could use. As for what is tradition, pick up a Catechism of the Catholic Church and you will have a pretty good handle on it. Generally it is explanations and true understandings of the word of God, whether by word of mouth or in writing from the Apostles.

Blessings

 

Priscilla Ann, can your current pastor recite every line of the Bible from memory? That's what you'd be asking if you asked the question "exactly what does the Bible include," isn't it?

You say that when you were assured that Tradition has equal authority with the Bible, that was the moment you knew you had to leave the Church. Given what the Bible says about Tradition, I would have expected that that would have been the moment that you knew that the Catholic Church was being true to Scripture! You seem to have drawn a non-Scriptural conclusion from the truth given to you by the priest!

 

Mike S:

Do you believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God? Is the Catechism the inspired word of God? Is Tradition inspired by God?

When I was growing up, we used to have a St. Christopher medal in our family car. Now I understand that the Catholic Church is not sure that St. Christopher actually existed. Was St. Christopher based on "Tradition" or was it just a story that was handed down from generation to generation? Is the Assumption of Mary based on "Tradition" or is it simply a story that was handed down. How do you know that Tradition is reliable? (Or have I confused "tradition" and "Tradition"?)

2 Timothy 3:16 tells us that all Scripture is "God-breathed." Can Tradition make that claim?

In Catholicism, how do you measure truth?

Truly, I do not mean to intend to offend anyone who is Catholic. I am simply trying to understand how you reach the conclusion that Tradition has equal authority with the Word of God.

I realize that we are probably going to have to agree to disagree. I guess that's what keeps this board interesting!

Blessings!

Priscilla Ann

 

"Ray is saying, Please give us the old 'college try' by showing us in your
Douay Bible where there is even a sintilla of a suggestion about Mary's
Assumption into Heaven"

Thessalonian said, 'I remember doing that just for you a couple months Ray. You were closed to it then and you will be now so I am not going to run through the details.
It's in 2 Sam 6, Luke 1, Psalm 132:8 and Rev 11 and 12. Read them and
perhaps God will lift the scales from your eyes this time. Thanks for stopping
by.

Ray is saying, 'I read II Samuel chapter six and it is about David bring the Ark of the Covenant back to the sanctuary in the city of David. Also, the death of Uzzah . . . . David dancing before the Lord . . . . and Michal speaking against the Lord's annointed. Sorry, I did not find a fragment of evidence about the virgin Mary's ascension into Heaven.

In Luke chapter one there is a lot of beautiful thing said about Mary; I do respect all of the truth found therein. But, again, I personally cannot find anything about the Assumption of Mary into Heaven at the conclusion of her life on earth.

Psalm 132:8 says, 'Arise, O Lord, into Thy rest; Thou and the ark of Thy strength.' Can any on the board find anything about Mary in this verse? I cannot find anything spoken about Mary's assumption into Heaven.

Revelation chapter eleven deals with the Great Tribulation Temple and its measurements, the two olive trees, the two witness during this era of time in the future, and the 24 Elders. There is absolutely nothing in these nineteen verses that even hints of Mary.

Revelation chapter twelve again Mary's name is not mentioned once. There is a reference to Jesus birth and His ascension into Heaven as found in verse five. It speaks of Michael fighting against the dragon {Satan}. The woman spoken about is symbolic of the nation of Israel, and even if you thought it was Mary, nothing is nailed down as to her ascension into Heaven at the Father's right hand.

Thessalonian, I'm sorry but your theological basket is still empty. When you find something credible in the Bible about the Assumption of Mary into Heaven, please inform all of us. We will read with interest, I am sure.

If any Catholic people can find the Assumption in the passages cited by thessalonian, please exegete the Scripture for us. The only way you are going to try to prove this doctrine is by moving on to the mode of the 'traditions of the church.'

 

Indeed. That is the question.
(Priscilla Ann--or is it the RCC that has confused "tradition" and "Tradition"? That is the other question. )

------------------------------------------------

Ray, I think the Catholics will tell you that the Ark of the Covenant is supposed to be a "type" for Mary.

 

Ray,

You are exceedingly blind. Like I said, why bother. Prayer is the only way to drive some demons out so I will hold you as a special intention before the blessed sacrement during my holy hour in about a half hour.

Blessings.

 

Yes (as discerned by the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit). No. Yes (as discerned by the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit).

"stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter"

"Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us."

"I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you."

The Catholic Church affirms and obeys all of these Scriptures. My question to you is, does your church?

I know that Tradition is reliable, as discerned by the Church, because the Church, the pillar and foundation of truth, tells me so.

See the above Scriptures I quoted. Also, the Church, the pillar and foundation of truth, tells me that the Word of God is not limited to Scripture.

Truth is that which is taught by the Church, the pillar and foundation of truth. The Scriptures are one source of that Truth. Tradition is another source.

You are confusing the Word of God with Scripture. The one is wider than the other.

Yep, at least until we bring you back home!

And to you as well!

 

Actually, the question is where can we find, and how can we understand, the deposit of faith left by Christ. The answer is found in one supernatural organism, not 33,000 denominations and growing.

 

Ray, I think the Catholics will tell you that the Ark of the Covenant is supposed to be a "type" for Mary.

Ray is saying, Thanks! One of the Catholic men tried to try that on me for size; you are right. It is my understanding that the Ark of the Covenant was where the Presence of the Lord God was in the Most Holy Place. The mercy-seat was where the Lord resided, between the wings of the archangels. Is this basicly you understanding too?

If I am reading the Bible correctly, it does not say, 'And the Lord said, My soul doth magnify Mary,' but rather God's Word says, 'And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord.' [Luke 1:46]

 

thessalonian,

With all due respect, it was a nice try to throw out some verses as though you had researched the matter of the Assumption of Mary into Heaven. Next time don't offer Scripture if you don't think we will check them out. I noticed you ducked the idea of exegeting the verses you offered to us.

I know I learned in seminary about your belief in the Co-Redemptrix with Christ. This should almost earn for the mother of the Lord a throne in Heaven as magnificant as His. When you get there you will find only One Sovereign of Heaven and earth, our Lord Jesus Christ.

And as far as your prayers are concerned, thanks. I can use all the prayers that you offer before the Lord on my behalf.

 

Even though the church is made up of many denomination, one of which is the Catholic Church, Jesus declares that His true church is one church. This is suggested in John 17:11. Just as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are One, so too the church which He has bought in His own blood.

 

I'll try to answer your question, although I'm not at all qualified to do so. Are you encouraged now?!

The Catholic Church believes that Divine Revelation ended with the end of the apostolic era. Therefore, all revealed truth that lives in Tradition comes from the apostolic era. After that, there is no further truth revealed, but there is continuing refinement and maturation of dogma and doctrine based on continuing fuller understanding of the truth contained in the deposit of faith. In the writings of the Early Church Fathers we have a particularly rich combination of closeness to the original deposit of Tradition, and the initial refinement and maturation of the truth received from the apostles.

As to the Church changing the way things are done, or doing things not done previously, these would not be part of Sacred Tradition, but merely disciplines and small-t traditions, adapted for pastoral and any number of other reasons.

Now I invite the Smart Catholics to give their answers.