Tradition

[Archangel]

Why is tradition taught in churches when it is not part of scripture?

 

[gitlance]

Because Holy Tradition developed parallel to the Holy Scriptures. In fact, the Scriptures themselves are a product of Holy Tradition. There are many doctrines and theological propositions that are not explicitly taught in Scripture, but that developed through Tradition. For example, nowhere in the Scriptures is there a clear-cut definition of the Holy Trinity. Yet Tradition provides such a definition. Tradition is what makes the Scriptures complete. They are a dualistic entity. In order to properly understand one, you cannot be missing the other. They must work in a union, just as Christ operates as the Hypostatic Union (something else that Tradition teaches us).

Just as Faith must have Works -- for Works prove Faith and Faith proves Works -- Scripture must have Tradition, for Tradition proves Scripture and Scripture proves Tradition.

In short, Holy Tradition is the 2nd half of a dualistic authority structure when it comes to establishing and proving the Faith.

Hope that helped!

 

[Oblio]

Tradition is the word of God.

 

[Brother Simon]

We adhere to the word of God alone, not scripture alone.

With love,
Simon

 

[The Prokeimenon!]

II Thessalonians 2:15

Moses

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Why is tradition taught in churches when it is not part of scripture?

What a huge question hidden in that small question.

Consider this....

For the first 300 years of the Church... Christianity was illegal... additionally most people could not read nor write. Instructions were given to the Apostles by Christ verbally and they in tern gave instructions to the Bishops (community leaders) of the community Churches that they set up...

So many Churchs were started that the Apostles had a hard time getting around to all of them.... so they began to write letters to these Bishops to remind them of what they had been taught, or to pass on instructions about a situation that may have presented itself in one of the Churchs..... these letters were later collected and are recorded as the epistles.

The point of all this is that, for the most part everything taught was mostly verbal and by repetition. These teachings were refered to as "Holy Tradition" as they had been given by Christ himself.

Other traditions (of men) exist inside "The Church" and many vary from place to place. These traditions (small t) are not considered to be of any importance. The Holy Traditions (capitol T) are considered so important that we guard them with our souls. No change is allowed to "Holy Tradition", for Christ and the Holy Spirit have set them down.

Scriptures came along in a very haphazard way.... Many scrolls and letters were written... so many false ones... and some true.

The canon (scrolls to be included as scripture) was decided upon by councils consisting of Bishops of all the churches acting as equals, led by the Holy Spirit and ratified by all the Churches.

Several thousand scrolls were reviewed for thier accuracy and a list of those who closest matched "Holy Tradition" was drawn up. This list is called the "Long Canon".

From this you can see that "The Church" made the decision on what books to choose for scripture. Therefore "Holy Tradition" is the core of Christian belief and the scriptures are no more than a testament to it.

There is much more to "Holy Tradition" than is written in scripture. Do not confuse this with the "tradition" of men.

There is more to the "Long Canon" that what is in your Bible.

Forgive me...

 

[Dream]

The Word of God is Transfered Orally

Mark 13:31 - heaven and earth will pass away, but Jesus' Word will not pass away. But Jesus never says anything about His Word being entirely committed to a book. Also, it took 400 years to compile the Bible, and another 1,000 years to invent the printing press. How was the Word of God communicated? Orally, by the bishops of the Church, with the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit.

Mark 16:15 - Jesus commands the apostles to preach the Gospel to every creature. But Jesus did not want this preaching to stop after the apostles died, and yet the Bible was not compiled until four centuries later. The word of God was transferred orally.

Mark 3:14; 16:15 - Jesus commands the apostles to preach (not write) the gospel to the world. Jesus gives no commandment to the apostles to write, and gives them no indication that the oral apostolic word he commanded them to communicate would later die in the fourth century. If Jesus wanted Christianity to be limited to a book (which would be finalized four centuries later), wouldn't He have said a word about it?

Luke 10:16 - He who hears you (not "who reads your writings"), hears me. The oral word passes from Jesus to the apostles to their successors by the gracious gifts of the Holy Spirit. This succession has been preserved in the Holy Catholic Church.

Luke 24:47 - Jesus explains that repentance and forgiveness of sins must be preached (not written) in Christ's name to all nations. For Protestants to argue that the word of God is now limited to a book (subject to thousands of different interpretations) is to not only ignore Scripture, but introduce a radical theory about how God spreads His word which would have been unbelievable to the people at the time of Jesus.

Acts 2:3-4 - the Holy Spirit came to the apostles in the form of "tongues" of fire so that they would "speak" (not just write) the Word.

Acts 15:27 - Judas and Silas, successors to the apostles, were sent to bring God's infallible Word by "word of mouth."

Rom. 10:8 - the Word is near you, on your lips and in your heart, which is the word of faith which is preached (not just written).

Rom. 10:17 - faith comes by what is "heard" (not just read) which is the Word that is "preached" (not read). This word comes from the oral tradition of the apostles. Those in countries where the Scriptures are not available can still come to faith in Jesus Christ.

1 Cor. 15:1,11 - faith comes from what is "preached" (not read). For non-Catholics to argue that oral tradition once existed but exists no longer, they must prove this from Scripture. But no where does Scripture say oral tradition died with the apostles. To the contrary, Scripture says the oral word abides forever.

Gal. 1:11-12 - the Gospel which is "preached" (not read) to me is not a man's Gospel, but the Revelation of Jesus Christ.

Eph. 1:13 - hearing (not reading) the Word of truth is the gospel of our salvation. This is the living word in the Church's living tradition.

Col. 1:5 - of this you have "heard" (not read) before in the word of truth, the Gospel which has come to you.

1 Thess. 2:13 - the Word of God is what you have "heard" (not read). The orally communicated word of God lasts forever, and this word is preserved within the Church by the Holy Spirit.

2 Tim. 1:13 - oral communications are protected by the Spirit. They abide forever. Oral authority does not die with the apostles.

2 Tim. 4:2,6-7 - Paul, at the end of his life, charges Timothy to preach (not write) the Word. Oral teaching does not die with Paul.

Titus 1:3 - God's word is manifested "through preaching" (not writing). This "preaching" is the tradition that comes from the apostles.

1 Peter 1:25 - the Word of the Lord abides forever and that Word is the good news that was "preached" (not read) to you. Because the Word is preached by the apostles and it lasts forever, it must be preserved by the apostles' successors, or this could not be possible. Also, because the oral word abides forever, oral apostolic tradition could not have died in the fourth century with all teachings being committed to Scripture.

2 Peter 1:12, 15 - Peter says that he will leave a "means to recall these things in mind." But since this was his last canonical epistle, this "means to recall" must therefore be the apostolic tradition and teaching authority of his office that he left behind.

2 John 1:12; 3 John 13 - John prefers to speak and not to write. Throughout history, the Word of God was always transferred orally and Jesus did not change this. To do so would have been a radical departure from the Judaic tradition.

Deut. 31:9-12 - Moses had the law read only every seven years. Was the word of God absent during the seven year interval? Of course not. The Word of God has always been given orally by God's appointed ones, and was never limited to Scripture.

Isa. 40:8 - the grass withers, the flower fades, but the Word of our God (not necessarily written) will stand forever.

Isa. 59:21 - Isaiah prophesies the promise of a living voice to hand on the Word of God to generations by mouth, not by a book. This is either a false prophecy, or it has been fulfilled by the Catholic Church.

Joel 1:3 - tell your children of the Word of the Lord, and they tell their children, and their children tell another generation.

Mal. 2:7 - the lips of a priest guard knowledge, and we should seek instruction from his mouth. Protestants want to argue all oral tradition was committed to Scripture? But no where does Scripture say this.

http://www.scripturecatholic.com/oral_tradition.html

 

[Dream]

Learning through Oral Apostolic Tradition

Matt. 15:3 - Jesus condemns human traditions that void God's word. Some Protestants use this verse to condemn all tradition. But this verse has nothing to do with the tradition we must obey that was handed down to us from the apostles. (Here, the Pharisees, in their human tradition, gave goods to the temple to avoid taking care of their parents, and this voids God's law of honoring one's father and mother.)

Mark 7:9 - this is the same as Matt. 15:3 - there is a distinction between human tradition (that we should reject) and apostolic tradition (that we must accept).

Gal. 1:14; Col. 2:22 – Paul also writes about “the traditions of my fathers” and “human precepts and doctrines” which regarded the laws of Judaism. These traditions are no longer necessary.

Acts 2:42 - the members obeyed apostolic tradition (doctrine, prayers, and the breaking of bread). Their obedience was not to the Scriptures alone. Tradition (in Greek, "paradosis") means "to hand on" teaching.

Acts 20:7 - this verse gives us a glimpse of Christian worship on Sunday, but changing the Lord's day from Saturday to Sunday is understood primarily from oral apostolic tradition.

John 17:20 - Jesus prays for all who believe in Him through the oral word of the apostles. Jesus protects oral apostolic teaching.

1 Cor. 11:2 - Paul commends the faithful for maintaining the apostolic tradition that they have received. The oral word is preserved and protected by the Spirit.

Eph. 4:20 – Paul refers the Ephesians to the oral tradition they previously received when he writes, “You did not so learn Christ!”

Phil. 4:9 - Paul says that what you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, do. This refers to learning from his preaching and example, which is apostolic tradition.

Col. 1:5-6 – of this you have heard before in the word of the truth, the gospel, which has come to you. This delivery of the faith refers to the oral tradition the Colossians had previously received from the ordained leaders of the Church. This oral tradition is called the gospel of truth.

1 Thess.1:5 – our gospel came to you not only in word, but in the power of the Holy Spirit. Paul is referring to the oral tradition which the Thessalonians had previously received. There is never any instruction to abandon these previous teachings; to the contrary, they are to be followed as the word of God.

1 Thess. 4:2 – Paul again refers the Thessalonians to the instructions they already had received, which is the oral apostolic tradition.

2 Thess. 2:5 – Paul yet again refers the Thessalonians to the previous teachings they received from Paul when he taught them orally. These oral teachings are no less significant than the written teachings.

2 Thess. 2:15 - Paul clearly commands us in this verse to obey oral apostolic tradition. He says stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, either by word of mouth or letter. This verse proves that for apostolic authority, oral and written communications are on par with each other. Protestants must find a verse that voids this commandment to obey oral tradition elsewhere in the Bible, or they are not abiding by the teachings of Scripture.

2 Thess. 2:15 - in fact, it was this apostolic tradition that allowed the Church to select the Bible canon (apostolicity was determined from tradition). Since all the apostles were deceased at the time the canon was decided, the Church had to rely on the apostolic tradition of their successors. Hence, the Bible is an apostolic tradition of the Catholic Church. This also proves that oral tradition did not cease with the death of the last apostle. Other examples of apostolic tradition include the teachings on the Blessed Trinity, the hypostatic union (Jesus had a divine and human nature in one person), the filioque (that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son), the assumption of Mary, and knowing that the Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew.

2 Thess. 3:6 - Paul again commands the faithful to live in accord with the tradition that they received from the apostles.

2 Thess. 3:7 - Paul tells them they already know how to imitate the elders. He is referring them to the tradition they have learned by his oral preaching and example.

1 Tim. 6:20 - guard what has been "entrusted" to you. The word "entrusted" is "paratheke" which means a "deposit." Oral tradition is part of what the Church has always called the Deposit of Faith.

2 Tim. 2:2 - Paul says what you have heard from me entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. This is "tradition," or the handing on of apostolic teaching.

2 Tim. 3:14 - continue in what you have learned and believed knowing from whom you learned it (by oral tradition).

1 John 2:7 – John refers to the oral word his disciples have heard which is the old commandment that we love one another.



Examples of Jesus and the Apostle's Reliance on Oral Tradition


Matt. 2:23 - the prophecy "He shall be a Nazarene" is oral tradition. It is not found in the Old Testament. This demonstrates that the apostles relied upon oral tradition and taught by oral tradition.

Matt 23:2 - Jesus relies on the oral tradition of acknowledging Moses' seat of authority (which passed from Moses to Joshua to the Sanhedrin). This is not recorded in the Old Testament.

John 19:26; 20:2; 21:20,24 - knowing that the "beloved disciple" is John is inferred from Scripture, but is also largely oral tradition.

Acts 20:35 - Paul relies on the oral tradition of the apostles for this statement ("it is better to give than to receive") of Jesus. It is not recorded in the Gospels.

1 Cor. 7:10 - Paul relies on the oral tradition of the apostles to give the charge of Jesus that a wife should not separate from her husband.

1 Cor. 10:4 - Paul relies on the oral tradition of the rock following Moses. It is not recorded in the Old Testament. See Exodus 17:1-17 and Num. 20:2-13.

Eph 5:14 - Paul relies on oral tradition to quote an early Christian hymn - "awake O sleeper rise from the dead and Christ shall give you light."

Heb. 11:37 - the author of Hebrews relies on the oral tradition of the martyrs being sawed in two. This is not recorded in the Old Testament.

Jude 9 - Jude relies on the oral tradition of the Archangel Michael's dispute with satan over Moses' body. This is not found in the Old Testament.

Jude 14-15 - Jude relies on the oral tradition of Enoch's prophecy which is not recorded in the Old Testament.


http://www.scripturecatholic.com/oral_tradition.html

 

[ps139]

St. Paul says to the Thessalonians:

"Stand firm and hold fast to the traditions we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth, or by letter."

"Letter" = Scripture
"Word of Mouth" = Oral Teaching

Paul never says one is better than the other, and nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Bible is the sole authority. Sola Scriptura is an assumption that is found nowhere in Scripture. You might even say its a tradition in itself.

 

[Dream]

What a huge question hidden in that small question.

Consider this....

For the first 300 years of the Church... Christianity was illegal... additionally most people could not read nor write. Instructions were given to the Apostles by Christ verbally and they in tern gave instructions to the Bishops (community leaders) of the community Churches that they set up...

So many Churchs were started that the Apostles had a hard time getting around to all of them.... so they began to write letters to these Bishops to remind them of what they had been taught, or to pass on instructions about a situation that may have presented itself in one of the Churchs..... these letters were later collected and are recorded as the epistles.

The point of all this is that, for the most part everything taught was mostly verbal and by repetition. These teachings were refered to as "Holy Tradition" as they had been given by Christ himself.

Other traditions (of men) exist inside "The Church" and many vary from place to place. These traditions (small t) are not considered to be of any importance. The Holy Traditions (capitol T) are considered so important that we guard them with our souls. No change is allowed to "Holy Tradition", for Christ and the Holy Spirit have set them down.

Scriptures came along in a very haphazard way.... Many scrolls and letters were written... so many false ones... and some true.

The canon (scrolls to be included as scripture) was decided upon by councils consisting of Bishops of all the churches acting as equals, led by the Holy Spirit and ratified by all the Churches.

Several thousand scrolls were reviewed for thier accuracy and a list of those who closest matched "Holy Tradition" was drawn up. This list is called the "Long Canon".

From this you can see that "The Church" made the decision on what books to choose for scripture. Therefore "Holy Tradition" is the core of Christian belief and the scriptures are no more than a testament to it.

There is much more to "Holy Tradition" than is written in scripture. Do not confuse this with the "tradition" of men.

There is more to the "Long Canon" that what is in your Bible.

Forgive me...

Great post. Very true.

 

[PaladinValer]

Because Holy Tradition came before Holy Scripture, which is a part of Holy Tradition anyhow.

Holy Tradition does not simply include just "oral" Traditions. The Ecumenical Councils, the writings of the ECFs, and the Creeds are all forms of Holy Tradition that are written down.

 

[Dream]

You've got to ask yourself: what did people follow before the Bible was compiled? Obviously it was oral tradition.

If the Bible was supposed to be the only thing that we follow, than what guided Christians for 300 years after Christ's ascention into Heaven?

 

[PaladinValer]

Also, let's all give him examples of what written forms of Holy Tradition include.

I'll start with:

1. The Holy Bible
2. The Chalcedonian Formula
3. The Apostle's, Nicene, and St. Athanasius' Creeds
4. The writings of the ECFs
5. The decisions of Ecumenical Councils

 

[ps139]

You've got to ask yourself: what did people follow before the Bible was compiled? Obviously it was oral tradition.

If the Bible was supposed to be the only thing that we follow, than what guided Christians for 300 years after Christ's ascention into Heaven?

Especially during a time when the canonicity of many books was debated!! There was a good while where most people thought that Revelation was not inspired. So many books were doubted. So, sometimes the Scriptures people were reading - they weren't entiryl sure if they were true Scripture at all.
When Jesus ascended into Heaven, a bound and paginated Bible did not float down in His place. Instead, what happened was that a short time after the Holy Spirit came down on the apostles, and thus began the Church - which Scripture calls the "pillar and foundation of truth."

 

[Matthan]

But Jesus condemned traditions that contradict Scripture and serve only as stumblingblocks for people who want to serve God.....

Oh, some might say, but those were the traditions of the Pharisees, and not "inspired" traditions. Well, does anyone honestly believe Jesus would condemn "traditions" of the Jews and not "traditions" of anyone else, even if they claim the origin comes from God? All are stumblingblocks in the end....

Matthan <J>< (Festina Lente)

 

[gitlance]

But Jesus condemned traditions that contradict Scripture and serve only as stumblingblocks for people who want to serve God.....

Oh, some might say, but those were the traditions of the Pharisees, and not "inspired" traditions. Well, does anyone honestly believe Jesus would condemn "traditions" of the Jews and not "traditions" of anyone else, even if they claim the origin comes from God? All are stumblingblocks in the end....

Matthan <J>< (Festina Lente)

So the Trinity is a stumbling block? Or the Hypostatic Union? Or the nature of the Church? Or the canonization of the Scriptures? Or the Sacraments? Etc, etc, etc...

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

But Jesus condemned traditions that contradict Scripture and serve only as stumblingblocks for people who want to serve God.....

Oh, some might say, but those were the traditions of the Pharisees, and not "inspired" traditions. Well, does anyone honestly believe Jesus would condemn "traditions" of the Jews and not "traditions" of anyone else, even if they claim the origin comes from God? All are stumblingblocks in the end....

Matthan <J>< (Festina Lente)

So your proposition leaves the Church dead... with nothing to say for at least the first 300 years?

Everything was "Traditioned" (handed down like a baton in a relay race).

The NT scriptures themselves, which did not exist when Christ spoke those words, would have no value.. indeed would not exist without "Holy Tradition".

And once "The Church" decided which scrolls and letters were to be bound together as canon... we are to forget the "Holy Traditions" that inspired them in the first place?

Why not just burn them? You seek to destroy thier meaning by covering up where they came from.

Do not confuse the traditions of men with "Holy Tradition" (that which has been handed down by Christ).

Being outside "The Church" makes it difficult to dicern what is and what is not "Holy Tradition". Only "The Church" knows as she is the keeper of the truth.

Forgive me....

 

[Splendor Of My Soul]

But Jesus condemned traditions that contradict Scripture and serve only as stumblingblocks for people who want to serve God.....

Oh, some might say, but those were the traditions of the Pharisees, and not "inspired" traditions. Well, does anyone honestly believe Jesus would condemn "traditions" of the Jews and not "traditions" of anyone else, even if they claim the origin comes from God? All are stumblingblocks in the end....

Matthan <J>< (Festina Lente)

What scriptures? The Gospels and the Epistles of Paul didn't exist then, and wouldn't exist for another thirty years after the ascension of Jesus! What do you think the apostles used when preaching the Gospel to the Jews and Gentiles, when the written Gospels and epistles were yet to be written?

Also please remember that in the Roman Empire at the time of the apostles and for many years after, many people can't even read or write, and books were quite few, and very expensive, so what "scriptures" were you referring to? Do you expect them to "study" scripture when there was nothing for them to read and many cannot even do so?

The Bible, as we now know it, would not exist until the end of the 3rd century A.D. when the canon was fixed by the Councils of Carthage and Hippo.

It is not Scripture vs. Tradition but Scripture and Tradition!

Pax Vobiscum

Gerardo

 

[katherine2001]

There were more than a few saints who memorized the Psalms and other parts of the Scriptures by hearing them chanted in church services everyday. Remember when Paul is talking about the Scriptures in his epistles, he is talking about the Old Testament. The New Testament is a product of the Church.

 

[Bulldog]

II Thessalonians 2:15

What do you believe is the "word" here? Why?