Traditions of Men

Constantine: You claim that Catholics don’t hold to any inspired writings after the close of the canon but you hold your oral “tradition” on a par with those sacred writings.

BFHU: Absolutely! That is because what we call Sacred Tradition is nothing less than the oral teachings of the Apostles of Jesus Christ. Why would we discount the oral teachings of the Apostles just because they did not get written down? Where in Scripture does it say oral teaching/oral Tradition is not to be trusted?

Constantine: And this oral tradition is alive today. So you try to have your cake, while eating it, and thereby give the lie to your assertion that Catholics don’t, in fact, add to the Scriptures.

BFHU:We don’t add to the Scripture. That is absurd. We have not added one word to the Bible.I ask for proof that we have added anything to Scripture. What book have we added? What chapter have we added? What sentence have we added? What word have we added?

Constantine: Oral tradition is an addition to the extent that it is not an expression of the written Scripture but is an “ongoing revelation” and not part of the “the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.”

BFHU: No, you are quite wrong. Sacred Tradition/Oral Tradition existed before the canon of the Bible. It IS “the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.” Jesus taught His apostles. His Apostles taught others and they taught others for decades. This was all ORAL! Then some of the apostles wrote down SOME of the things that Jesus taught them. John tells us that not all of it is written down b/c “the world could not contain all the books” if this were done. So, ORAL TRADITION GAVE BIRTH TO THE WRITTEN SCRIPTURES. They are all a part of the Truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Further, b/c the Written Tradition came from the Oral Tradition there is nothing contradictory between the Bible and the Catholic Faith.

Constantine:Secondly, apparently the use of the past perfect tense in Paul’s writing to the Thessalonians escapes you. When Paul says “hold fast to the traditions WHICH YOU WERE TAUGHT” he is clearly indicating a teaching that has been completed in the past.

BFHU: Exactly right. Oral Sacred Tradition was delivered to the Apostles by Jesus…in the past.

Constantine: This is not some new teaching that is, or will be developing. Paul’s teaching was finished. He then indicates how HE delivered it to the Thessalonians – by word of mouth or by letter.

BFHU: Exactly! Paul taught them Sacred ORAL Traditon! We don’t make up new doctrine and then call it Oral Tradition.

Constantine:If Paul were alive today, we would be bound to accept his oral teaching as authoritative. But he is dead. Therefore, our only reliable record is the written Scriptures.

BFHU: Where does Scripture teach that “our only reliable record is the written Scriptures”? Or is this a Protestant Tradition?

Constantine: Which is why this very same Paul, in his letter to the Corinthians said, “do not go beyond what is written.” (1 Cor. 4:6).

BFHU: And the very same St. Paul said

2 Thessalonians 2:15
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us

Was Paul contradicting himself or do you misunderstand the idiom in I Cor.?

Constantine: For you to twist the Thessalonian passage so that it contradicts Paul’s true teaching is to do a grave injustice to God’s Word.

BFHU: Twisted? How? I have merely pointed out St. Paul’s exhortation to hold firm to BOTH Oral and Written Traditions taught by him and the apostles. Where does scripture nullify this exhortation?

Constantine:You are guilty of exactly the same infraction for which Jesus rebuked the Pharisees: “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men.” (Mark 7:8.)

BFHU: These are NOT the traditions of men. They are the teachings of Jesus to His Apostles.And since Sacred Scripture itself recommends holding fast to both oral and written teachings from the Apostles, we do that very thing. Why don’t you obey Scripture. Sola Scripture was made up by Martin Luther and is a tradition of men if there ever was one.

Constantine: Paul NEVER recommended anything like your oral tradition.

BFHU: This is merely your opinion unless you can cite scripture to support it.

Constantine: Likewise, John 21:25 is not a grant of poetic license to anyone. To imply that because the Scriptures may not be exhaustive, they are not sufficient violates, among other things, the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

BFHU: Where does Scripture condemn everything except what is in the Bible? As I said before, Sola Scriptura is a tradition of men. And where does Scripture proclaim itself “sufficient” You see, we have here yet another Protestant Oral Tradition.

One Response

  1. The style of writing is quite familiar to me. Did you write guest posts for other bloggers?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: