How do we know our traditions are the oral traditions that were passed down?

[annad347]

the same way we attribute the Gospels to Jesus.

but is it the same? CCC - 81 & 83

[81]" Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."

Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

that part that makes them very different is that Sacred Tradition has [83] Apostolic Tradition and ecclesial traditions…

one… they received from Jesus’ teaching and example of what they learned from the Holy Spirit.

one… to be distinguished from the various theological, disciplinary, liturgical or devotional traditions, born in the local churches over time.

not all Sacred Tradition is from Jesus teaching and learned from the Holy Spirit… some of them can be changed based on the understanding from man, how can they be the same we we attribute the Gospels to Jesus? They aren’t the same?

~~small side note and pat on one’s back ~~
I quoted from the catechism, I’m so proud of me. (those who read my other thread will understand this)

 

[Gorgias]

The question is what do we do about these other things Jesus did, the other things Jesus said?

The Catholic position is that the apostles taught them and they’ve been handed down since the beginning of the Church!

(In addition, the Church asserts that this apostolic authority (of teaching and governance) did not die with the apostles, but was handed down to their successors! So, what the successors of the apostles teach is likewise covered by the “binding and loosing” proxy of Christ.)

Should the apostles have just forgotten about them, since the scriptures contain everything needed for salvation?

That depends on what you mean by “the Scriptures contain everything needed for salvation”. If you mean material sufficiency, I can agree with that. If you mean formal sufficiency, then that is a non-Catholic doctrine.

(What’s the difference? I’ve seen some say that ‘material sufficiency’ can be compared to asserting “I have all the material here that I need to build a house”, whereas ‘formal sufficiency’ asserts “there are no parts here that require outside resources or effort – the house is already built.” The former allows that the Church is necessary to interpret / make explicit / establish doctrine; the latter says “nope; it’s already there, in manifest form.”

The Bible is a tool, not a rule of faith. The apostles found it valuable to write / edit / compile them into a resource for Christians. In fact, its primary use was liturgical rather than strictly pedagogical, as such.

So… yes! The apostles and their successors, following Jesus’ commission, continue to teach what He taught!

I quoted from the catechism, I’m so proud of me.

 

[JGD]

but is it the same? CCC - 81 & 83

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

that part that makes them very different is that Sacred Tradition has [83] Apostolic Tradition and ecclesial traditions…

one… they received from Jesus’ teaching and example of what they learned from the Holy Spirit.

one… to be distinguished from the various theological, disciplinary, liturgical or devotional traditions, born in the local churches over time.

not all Sacred Tradition is from Jesus teaching and learned from the Holy Spirit… some of them can be changed based on the understanding from man, how can they be the same we we attribute the Gospels to Jesus? They aren’t the same?

“ecclesial” traditions are traditions with a small “t”. They are not part of Sacred Tradition (capital “T”). And yes, small “t” traditions can be changed.

 

[annad347]

“ecclesial” traditions are traditions with a small “t”. They are not part of Sacred Tradition (capital “T”). And yes, small “t” traditions can be changed.

I meant Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition…can not be attributed the same because they are not the same.

One was inspired by the breath of God, the other was not.

 

[JGD]

I meant Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition…can not be attributed the same because they are not the same.

One was inspired by the breath of God, the other was not.

The “breath of God” is the Holy Spirit. Sacred Tradition as well as Sacred Scripture is enlightened and entrusted to the apostles & their successors by the Holy Spirit – as CCC 81, which you cited in your Post #42 notes.

CCC 81 … Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching.

 

[annad347]

But we can trust Sacred Scripture… the CCC doesn’t really give that same trust to Sacred Tradition.

Also if Sacred Tradition was the same, as important as Sacred Tradition why didnt the Holy Spirit inspire man to write it down as the Holy Spirit inspired man to write Scripture?

One was given to us through the breath of God. The Holy Spirit helped man remember what God neede us to be remembered from His Son’s lesson. Yet, that same emphasis wasnt given to Sacred Tradition… they are not the same.

CCC wants us to treat them the same but then the CCC explaines the difference between them that kind of tells us they are not the same.

Scripture is more important than the Tradition.

I know Scripture is God’s truth… I dont think I can say the same for Tradition… unless its written in Scripture, God’s Truth.

 

[Gorgias]

But we can trust Sacred Scripture… the CCC doesn’t really give that same trust to Sacred Tradition.

Yes! It does! Really! And in the paragraph immediately before the ones you quoted!

“Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal.” Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own “always, to the close of the age”.

And then, following your quote:

85 “The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.”

86 “Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith.”

So… yes! Both parts of the Deposit of Faith come from God and are revered by the Church! After all, it’s not “traditions of men” (which is the charge leveled recklessly by some), but rather, the Tradition of God, gleaned from Jesus’ teaching and Will!

 

[Dovekin]

Generally, it is easier to identify what is in Scripture than it is to identify what is in Tradition. Dei Verbum from Vatican II says of Tradition:

Now what was handed on by the Apostles includes everything which contributes toward the holiness of life and increase in faith of the peoples of God; and so the Church, in her teaching, life and worship, perpetuates and hands on to all generations all that she herself is, all that she believes.
Dei Verbum 8

“all that she herself is, all that she believes” is a pretty expansive definition! More nuanced definitions usually are given, like distinguishing between capital letter Tradition and small letter traditions. For the expansive definition to be true takes some clarifications, like the Church did not hand down heliocentrism, though some in the Church did believe in it.

The only way Tradition can stand beside Scripture is by the grace of the Holy Spirit, given in Baptism, Confirmation and in a special way, Ordination. The Holy Spirit lives with us in the midst of conspiracy theories, folk tales, partisan bickering to lead us to what is true and good. In some ways, it is a more powerful inspiration than that of Scripture, which is easily separated from the secular and profane.

 

[annad347]

Then why separate them? If Sacred Scripture is equal to Sacred Tradition why separate them? Why not just call them Sacred Scripture… if it was all put down in writing under the breath of the God, why not just keep it all part of God’s Word?

Also the Early Church Fathers and the declarations of the Church… was that also put in writing by the breathe of God?

 

[Gorgias]

Then why separate them? If Sacred Scripture is equal to Sacred Tradition why separate them? Why not just call them Sacred Scripture… if it was all put down in writing under the breath of the God , why not just keep it all part of God’s Word?

Why? Because they’re distinct modes of transmission.

Also the Early Church Fathers and the declarations of the Church… was that also put in writing by the breathe of God?

We don’t say that the “writing” of Apostolic Tradition is what’s protected by God; we say that the actual teaching is. So, we wouldn’t walk around revering the physical Catechism book the way some Christians fetishize their Bibles. (The Word of God is inspired; the physical book ain’t.)

However, we recognize God’s self-revelation in both.

 

[Cathoholic]

How do we know our traditions are the oral traditions that were passed down?

The same way we do the Scriptures.

Authority given from God.

For example, the SAME CANON of Scripture
that your Protestant friends affirm,
is listed NOWHERE in Scripture.

That authoritative canon is via oral Tradition too.

So if you assert the Divine aspect of Sacred Scripture,
you necessarily include Sacred Tradition (or contradict yourself).

No authoritative oral Tradition = No authoritative written Tradition

Hope that helps.

God bless.

Cathoholic.

 

[Cathoholic]

annad347 (on oral vrs written Tradition) . . .

Then why separate them?

We don’t.

Oral and written Tradition flow from the same Divine wellspring.

They are so dependent upon one another (along with the official authoritative teaching office - The Magisterium (the Pope and the bishops in union with him) - that one cannot stand witout the other two.