Question about tradition

[Michaeljc4]

I’m reading a book about the Protestant Reformation, and in the discussion of the difference between Catholics and Protestants, the author talks about the importance of tradition in the RCC. The author writes:

These teachings [things Jesus said that were not written down but passed on orally to the earliest disciples and the Apostles] would have been entrusted to the leaders of communities founded by the Apostles, and through apostolic succession of bishops, the orthodox church must be the custodian of these oral teachings.

The author also mentions Irenaeus, who I know nothing about.

Two questions. First, is this an accurate representation of the origins of tradition/apostolic succession in our Catholic faith?

Second, what is an example of a tradition that has been passed down from the earliest days of the church that’s not found in the Bible?

The book is called The Reformation for Armchair Theologians (which describes me to a fault!) It’s very readable, but I am not knowledgeable enough about the nuances of Catholic and Protestant theology to know if I am getting good information.

 

[Ignatius]

Second, what is an example of a tradition that has been passed down from the earliest days of the church that’s not found in the Bible?

One of the main things that were passed on from the earliest days is, which books belong in the New Testament. Another major example is the correct interpretation of those scriptures.

Of course, the Gospel and all of the teachings that we have in the New Testament were passed down as Sacred Tradition for a generation or two before any of it was even written down.

 

[Scoobyshme]

I’m reading a book about the Protestant Reformation, and in the discussion of the difference between Catholics and Protestants, the author talks about the importance of tradition in the RCC. The author writes:

The author also mentions Irenaeus, who I know nothing about.

Two questions. First, is this an accurate representation of the origins of tradition/apostolic succession in our Catholic faith?

Second, what is an example of a tradition that has been passed down from the earliest days of the church that’s not found in the Bible?

The book is called The Reformation for Armchair Theologians (which describes me to a fault!) It’s very readable, but I am not knowledgeable enough about the nuances of Catholic and Protestant theology to know if I am getting good information.

Couple of things to keep in mind here…

When Jesus walked the earth, He taught orally. As far as we know, He never wrote a book, or told the Apostles or anyone else to write anything. He taught the Apostles orally. He also commanded the Apostles to go forth and preach ALL that He had taught them (Matt. 28:20). They did this, passing on this “Apostolic kerygma” to their successors, the bishops, who did likewise, down through the centuries to today.

You may gain some insight from a careful reading of the Church’s Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation -Dei Verbum. It’s not that long (6 chapters, I believe). The Word of God is not a book. It is a Person, Jesus Christ. The Word of God was transmitted to us in two primary means: Orally, and later, in writing. SOME of what Jesus taught orally was written down. This, we call the New Testament. Note, I said SOME of what Jesus taught orally was written down. But not all. See John 21:25.

There is a proper methodology for doing many things in our world. Use the wrong methodology, you get undesired results. Say, for example, you ran across a bridge engineer who told you, “I just built a bridge over there. And I didn’t use normal engineering procedures and methods because I don’t believe in all that physics and math, frankly.” Are you going to drive across his bridge?! I don’t think so!!!

The proper approach for reading and interpreting the Bible are by using the following three principles:

1. Always read the Bible in context of the whole vs. snippets out of context.
2. Always read the Bible in light of Sacred Tradition (Oral teaching handed on from Jesus to the Apostles and their successors, the bishops).
3. Always read the Bible through the analogy of the faith as provided by the Magisterium of the Church (the Pope and the bishops in union with him).

Note that this methodology has a trinitarian nature. It has three parts. The mystery of unity, when talking about the Trinity, means that wherever we find One Divine Person of the Trinity, we always find the other Two Divine Persons of the Trinity. For example, wherever we find Jesus, we always and necessarily find the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Likewise, wherever we find any one of the three principles of the Word, we find the other two. For example, wherever we find the Bible, we find Sacred Tradition and Magisterial teaching. Wherever we find Magesterial teaching, we find the Bible and Sacred Tradition. And so forth.

An example of Sacred Tradition that is not in the Bible is the canon of Scripture.

 

[William_Pitts]

Great post, Scooby. One of the best explanations I’ve ever seen.

 

[DianaCC]

Also … tradition is not like a secret password whispered in the ears of the next generation, or a proprietary recipe preserved in verbal formulas never to be reduced to writing. Tradition is ***common knowledge that doesn’t need to be recorded ***in a fixed medium. Not at first, anyway.

***How ***to do certain things is also part of tradition, such as procedures to be followed in baptism or ordination or wedding. These typically get reduced to writing before long, but only as a supplement to hands-on training (pun intended).

In my family there is a traditional pierogi recipe.

• No written form of it spells out every detail because everyone in possession of a written copy was shown how to do it dozens of times over the course of many years, in a setting in which the junior family members knew they were having a tradition passed on to them. Therefore our family is the official, authoritative source of this recipe.
• The written forms of the recipe are just memory aids and further elaboration is unnecessary, not only because some common sense things are to be taken for granted (do you really need to be told how to boil water?), but also because some techniques are hard to describe in words and are better shown (how to pinch the edges to make them pucker). But if these things are left out of the written form of the recipe, it doesn’t matter, because the recipe is to be read, used, and interpreted in the context of our family life and history. Therefore not everything essential is necessarily spelled out in the recipe.
• No written form of the recipe anticipates the questions and objections of future generations, either. Are brown eggs licit, or is that an “unscriptural” novelty? Can we use margarine instead of butter, or is that invalid matter? The recipe doesn’t mention any of those things, but those of us who have been discipled in the family tradition either know the answers already or know how to get the answers, because the recipe has become second nature for us and we have an instinctive understanding of what is essential and what is accidental, especially the elders among us. Therefore when a question comes up, our elders have the authority to answer them.
• Yet nobody has the authority to change the recipe.

 

[Michaeljc4]

Any other examples of an oral tradition that’s been passed down from the earliest Church? I had thought–until this morning–that the Biblical canon was made official at the Council of Nicea. Nope! Live and learn…

 

[Scoobyshme]

Any other examples of an oral tradition that’s been passed down from the earliest Church? I had thought–until this morning–that the Biblical canon was made official at the Council of Nicea. Nope! Live and learn…

How 'bout worship on Sunday instead of the sabbath (Saturday)?

Also, there are many more subtle things that aren’t in the Bible, such as interpretation of the Bible. How do we KNOW that the Bible says this or that? Because it has always been taught orally, i.e., in the oral tradition.

Keep in mind that when we speak of Sacred Tradition, the word “Tradition” does not merely mean “custom” as it does in other places. In this case it means “Teaching.”

 

[Michaeljc4]

Can you give me an example of an interpretation that goes way back? I’m not trying to be difficult; I am putting arrows in my quiver of apologetics! Thanks for your help.

 

[zach_dunn]

Can you give me an example of an interpretation that goes way back? I’m not trying to be difficult; I am putting arrows in my quiver of apologetics! Thanks for your help.

There’s always infant baptism, reservation of orders to men only, the fact that marriage is a sacrament, and the fact of inspiration (which cannot logically been deduced from Scripture itself). Thanks DianaCC!

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

All very good answers you have received. One More Tradidtion would be the Mass. No matter what form the basic set up and parts are all the same. Some of the rubrics are different and the praers may differ but the basic parts are all the same. Going back as far as when have written account of the form of worship.