I’m not advocating Hermas as authoritative Gary, rather I quote it purely as a historical document. I would be weary of quoting this bit of Tertuallian though, for Tertullian speaks this directly to a Bishop of Rome when he says this, which gives more evidence for Tertullians lack of knowledge of a papacy.
I see your point yet when we speak Tertullian we open yet another door.
Tertullian
“For though you think that heaven is still shut up, remember that the Lord left the keys of it to Peter here, and through him to the Church, which keys everyone will carry with him if he has been questioned and made a confession [of faith]” (Antidote Against the Scorpion 10 [A.D. 211]).
“[T]he Lord said to Peter, ‘On this rock I will build my Church, I have given you the keys of the kingdom of heaven [and] whatever you shall have bound or loosed on earth will be bound or loosed in heaven’ [Matt. 16:18–19]. . Upon you, he says, I will build my Church; I will give to you the keys, not to the Church” (Modesty 21:9–10 [A.D. 220]).
We both acknowledge the NT as scripture, hence the words mean just as much for it as the OT, it demonstrates the Lord also believed people capable of understanding them.
The Lords teaching revolves around His Apostles which cames back to the Authority of the Church as Irenaeus indicates, and does Paul whom he quotes. Thus we also know the Scripture while Inspired is not all the teaching even of Jesus or of the Living Church.
The text itself is of great value to man, and man could find Salvation through it. However to understand the living church in and through time, the church itself becomes the Bibles authority. Which would have to preceed the fact to see the greater picture often missed.
When we use the formula visa-versa, well we see the result. For example through scripture a fellow decides to open a church to appeal to 2012 mankind and holds meetings at the local tavern to discuss scripture.
Orthodox Judaism and the Apostolic Churchs both acknowledge the Tradition first and not one seperate from the other.
We are viewing the intended formula in reverse to recreate the Church correctly, the only ones who even came somewhat close are the reformers who by large were Catholic. Thus they most certainly saw the bigger picture and First.
I do believe there are some very knowledgable Preachers out here who understand history and preach a somewhat similiar message. Yet they too seem to place their position ahead of the church and fault resides in critical issue’s, thus the Three Great Mysteries of the Church. One individual can never be bigger than the church based on its virtues. Here we run into who decides what and what isn’t relevant, and the most relevant issues become reduced by being compromised in what deems to be the “meat” of the teaching authority as the Bible alone.
We cannot prove from the Bible that the Bible is the only rule of Christian faith. Much the opposite I venture to say.
Peace
And because it gives a strong argument for its position.