Apostolic Tradition and Scripture

[janman55]

Hello to all, I’m new to this site…what a wonderful source of information and enlightenment!

There is a thread in the “Ask an Apologist” section where a fairly serious debate is going on regarding what is included in the doctrines of the Catholic Church that is not already included in Scripture. I am nowhere in the league of the scholars engaging in that discussion but I have an understanding of the relationship between the two sources of information that I would like some feedback on.

When the Apostles were afraid when Jesus told them he was leaving, He promised to send the Holy Spirit and they would remember everything He taught them. They were to pass this teaching on to all who would listen. Paul indeed told Timothy that the Scriptures were “useful” in teaching. I personally have never read a text book that either was or claimed to be the entire body of knowledge on any subject. So, my understanding of how the two work together is that there is much in the Scripture that is unexplained and subject to interpretation. It is in the interpretation and teaching of the message and purpose of things contained in Scripture where these two forms of Revelation work in lock step.

For example,
Baptism is described in Sacred Scripture but the purpose and meaning of Baptism is not. The same can be said of Real Presence in Communion. There are other things which bind us together into a single Church. Such as the sign of the cross, the use and meaning of the term Catholic from St Ignatius? The Assumption of Mary, and teachings with regard to her importance.

So if I were going to put together a list of things which I believe are central to Catholicism which are not spelled out specifically in Scripture I would start with items like…

The teachings of the purpose of each sacrament
Real Presence
The definition of a Catholic Church
Papal infallibility
Assumption of Mary
Symbols like the Sign of the Cross

…just to name a very few.

I apologize for not having the time to develope these ideas further but I am curious your thoughts in this area.

 

[Chesster]

Add to that list:

The Sacred Liturgy
The Marriage ritual
The funeral ritual
The exorcism ritual
The distribution of ashes on Ash Wednesday
The fast of Lent

That’s off the top of my head.

 

[moira]

And

the Trinity
Pugatory

 

[rwoehmke]

When Paul wrote that statement about scripture he was talking primarily about the Old Testament. The New Testament had not yet been written down and was a part of the oral tradition or partial writings about Jesus and His actions and words. Doesn’t mean that that statement could not be applied also to the “new stuff” that became the canon of the New Testament. At some point in history, much of what we possess as a book we can hold in our hands was a part of oral tradition. Some stuff never did get written down to be a part of “The Book” but has been widely held to have value as Tradition with a large “T” that has been handed down in another venue. Thus we Catholics base our beliefs and faith on both the Bible and Sacred Tradition, the Bible being Sacred Tradition written down. Not all that is in the Tradition is in the Bible and not all that is in the Bible can be found in Tradition as we know it. However, where there is common material the one cannot contradict the other.

 

[Ter]

I read somewhere that in Acts of the Apostles, which were written after Luke’s Gospel, the Acts state that ‘they remained faithful to the teaching of the apostles’. The writer maintained that by speaking about the teaching of the apostles rather than the teaching of the Gospel the Acts are supporting the Catholic view of Church Authority & Tradition. I thought it was a good point.

 

[janman55]

I agree…good point!