Sacred Tradition

[pablope]

May I know how the Catholic Church define Sacred Tradition?

mark-shea.com/tradition.html

Sacred Tradition is the living and growing truth of Christ contained, not only in Scripture, but in the common teaching, common life, and common worship of the Church.

 

[Fuego]

God reveals himself to man in many ways.

• He revealed his law to Moses on the mountain.
• He revealed his will to the prophets whom he commanded to prophesy.
• He revealed his written word through the inspired authors of Scripture.
• He revealed himself in the person of Jesus; in his sayings and deeds.

Moses, the Old Testament prophets, the Old and New Testament authors, and the Apostles who walked three years with Jesus are allrecipients of revelation. They handed them on.

I’m sorry for my poor explanation. That is how I understand it. I am open to correction.

-Tim-

I understand that. What I am interested in is on the subject of Sacred Tradition as differentiated from Sacred Scripture. My understanding is that (correct me if I’m wrong) the Catholic Church’s deposit of faith are contained in both Sacred Scripture (the written revelation found in the Bible) and Sacred Tradition (the unwritten revelation), the Magisterium being its guardian and interpreter. Now, obviously, God revealed all these truths to the Church – some were committed to writing while others passed on by word of mouth.

Are there revealed truths handed on by word of mouth from God’s Old Testament prophets to the NT Church? My understanding is that there is none as all these truths were committed to writing in the books of the Old Testament. Therefore, the only truths in Sacred Tradition are those from the time of Christ and the establishment of the New Testament Church. Please correct me if I’m wrong here.

That now brings me to my question: Were these truths in Sacred Tradition first spoken by either Jesus or His Apostles as part of their oral teaching?

 

[Isaiah45_9]

What I am interested in is on the subject of Sacred Tradition as differentiated from Sacred Scripture.

Sacred Scripture is part of Sacred Tradition.

Were these truths in Sacred Tradition first spoken by either Jesus or His Apostles as part of their oral teaching?

We must first understand that not all Tradition is written but mostly practiced. Thankfully, we have the testimony of many witnesses on the Traditions of the Church.

Take making the sign of the cross, for example. You don’t find it in Scriptures but as early as the 2nd century, Tertullian in “De Corona” is writing about this Tradition:

In all our travels and movements, in all our coming in and going out, in putting on our shoes, at the bath, at the table, in lighting our candles, in lying down, in sitting down, whatever employment occupieth us, we mark our forehead with the sign of the cross.

How Christian Worship occurs (Divine Liturgy), we don’t find details in the Scripture, but as early as the 2nd century we have Justin Martyr writing about the weekly worship in his 1st Apology:

CHAPTER LXVII – WEEKLY WORSHIP OF THE CHRIS- TIANS.

And we afterwards continually remind each other of these things. And the wealthy among us help the needy; and we always keep together; and for all things wherewith we are supplied, we bless the Maker of all through His Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Ghost. And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.

Is this explaining better not really the difference but the practice?

 

[TimothyH]

I understand that. What I am interested in is on the subject of Sacred Tradition as differentiated from Sacred Scripture. My understanding is that (correct me if I’m wrong) the Catholic Church’s deposit of faith are contained in both Sacred Scripture (the written revelation found in the Bible) and Sacred Tradition (the unwritten revelation), the Magisterium being its guardian and interpreter. Now, obviously, God revealed all these truths to the Church – some were committed to writing while others passed on by word of mouth.

Are there revealed truths handed on by word of mouth from God’s Old Testament prophets to the NT Church? My understanding is that there is none as all these truths were committed to writing in the books of the Old Testament. Therefore, the only truths in Sacred Tradition are those from the time of Christ and the establishment of the New Testament Church. Please correct me if I’m wrong here.

That now brings me to my question: Were these truths in Sacred Tradition first spoken by either Jesus or His Apostles as part of their oral teaching?

I’m still not sure I understand. Maybe I’m just being dull.

The point in red/bold is interesting. I had not thought of that - whether all revealed truth prior to Christ was committed to writing or was some of it oral and carried forward into apostolic times. Paul certainly references many, many Jewish customs, phrases and ways of life.

I wish I could be of more help and sorry if my banter frustrated you.

-Tim-

 

[Fuego]

Sacred Scripture is part of Sacred Tradition.

Yes, but isn’t there a difference between the two in that one is written (in the Bible) while the other is unwritten?

We must first understand that not all Tradition is written but mostly practiced.

I think you are mistaken here. Isn’t there a lot more truths found in the Bible (Sacred Scripture) than what is contained in oral tradition (Sacred Tradition)?

Is this explaining better not really the difference but the practice?

Sorry but I still don’t get it. What I was trying to have clarified is the original source of these doctrines and practices not written in Scripture (We can all agree that these all came as a revelation from God). But who first spoke or practiced these truths? Was it Jesus and His Apostles?

 

[Fuego]

I’m still not sure I understand. Maybe I’m just being dull.

Thanks for the effort, Tim. Maybe I’ve not explained it well enough. Let me try again.

When we consider the NT Scripture only, we say that this revelation from God came from the teachings of Christ and His Apostles, committed to writing and handed on to the NT Church.

Now, for the Sacred Tradition of the church, did this oral revelation from God (in as far as traditions that were introduced only during the NT times) also come from the teachings and practices of Christ and His Apostles?

 

[Fuego]

I think I finally found an answer to my question. This is from the New Advent website, article “Tradition and Living Magisterium”:

Is all revealed truth consigned to Holy Scripture? or can it, must it, be admitted that Christ gave to His Apostles to be transmitted to His Church, that the Apostles received either from the very lips of Jesus or from inspiration or Revelation, Divine instructions which they transmitted to the Church and which were not committed to the inspired writings?

The Council of Trent… contenting itself with saying that revealed truth is found in the sacred books and in the unwritten traditions coming from God through the Apostles; these were the sources from which it would draw. The Council, as is evident, held that there are Divine traditions not contained in Holy Scripture, revelations made to the Apostles either orally by Jesus Christ or by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost and transmitted by the Apostles to the Church.

So, Sacred Tradition are the unwritten revealed truths which were received by the Apostles either from Jesus Christ Himself or from inspiration of the Holy Spirit and transmitted to the church by the Apostles.

 

[Ignatius]

I’d like to know if the Sacred Traditions have been compiled and preserved for reference and authenticity.

Sacred Tradition began with what Jesus passed on to The Apostles and this was passed down for a couple of generations. The Sacred Tradition that had been passed down then began to be written down. Part of Sacred Tradition was compiled and written down, we call that The New Testament. The Church was founded by Jesus and propagated by His Apostles at His Command. The Church came first and the New Testament came out of That Church.

 

[Mintaka]

Perhaps we’re being a bit over-formal here.

One of the things promised to us by Jesus was that He would send us the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit would remind people of stuff they’d heard from Jesus and needed to know. It wasn’t just the Apostles who learned from Jesus; it wasn’t just the Apostles who served as eyewitness sources for the Evangelists; and Sacred Tradition doesn’t descend only through the Apostles. The Magisterium rests on the Pope and the bishops and those whom they give authority, but even normal members of the Church know certain bits and have certain bits of teaching powers.

For example, look at what St. Paul tells St. Timothy. He tells Tim to remember what he learned from his mother and his grandmother. They weren’t apostles or bishops or priests, but they taught him a good chunk of the doctrines and traditions he knows; and Paul thinks that’s a good thing. Likewise, St. Jerome told one of his friends that having her old pagan priest father live in the house with a bunch of good Christians like herself was almost like him being catechized as a catechumen. Not the same; but he was being exposed full force to stuff he needed to know.

There’s nothing wrong with being a convert, but someone raised in a Catholic home by observant Catholics ends up absorbing a huge amount of Scripture, doctrine, and Tradition, sometimes without knowing it. I remember reading the Church Fathers first, and being startled by how boringly normal they were, even saying some of the same things my mom would say. Some of the works of then-Cardinal Ratzinger are similar – he talks about stuff and gives advice that says the same thing as my grandfather; or he ties together two things I already know, while explaining the place those pieces of knowledge came from. But I already knew them, because I had always been living inside Sacred Tradition. We all are fish swimming in that lake; we don’t notice it until we jump out.

And when I need to know things, the Holy Spirit reminds me of what I’ve heard before from all my teachers – my family, my catechists, my reading, my parish priests. Some have more graces and authority than others, but He is not picky. He knows who I’ll listen to.

 

[Fuego]

Perhaps we’re being a bit over-formal here.

One of the things promised to us by Jesus was that He would send us the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit would remind people of stuff they’d heard from Jesus and needed to know. It wasn’t just the Apostles who learned from Jesus; it wasn’t just the Apostles who served as eyewitness sources for the Evangelists; and Sacred Tradition doesn’t descend only through the Apostles…

Can you please cite a Catholic authority that says Sacred Tradition doesn’t descend only through the Apostles? I think you are going beyond the official teaching of the church.

 

[mdcpensive1]

Can it be said that scripture came from sacred tradition because the apostles could only write what they were taught ? Or can it be said that it is true only for the New Testament and not the Old Testament ?

Can it be said that all of scripture is contained in sacred tradition or just New Testament scripture ?

Can it be said that the Old Testament is not from sacred tradition because it was not directly revealed dogmas by God (except maybe for some things told to Moses) ?
I know that part of revelation is that God revealed Himself as “one” to the Hebrews and that God created the universe so I guess some tradition is from the old testament.

I would like to hear responses to this if someone may.

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

I think I finally found an answer to my question. This is from the New Advent website, article “Tradition and Living Magisterium”:
. . . .
So, Sacred Tradition are the unwritten revealed truths which were received by the Apostles either from Jesus Christ Himself or from inspiration of the Holy Spirit and transmitted to the church by the Apostles.

Perhaps I can shed some light on your question.

(1) The Catholic teaching has always been: God established that His word is transmitted down through time by the united and interrelated process of Scripture and Apostolic Tradition in the Apostolic Church (=STC).
The CC is continuous (and has always held itself to be so) with that of the Apostles at Pentecost and likewise the tradition it handed on. Unity and continuity are inherent in STC as understood by the CC.

If one doesn’t understand this everything else will be misunderstood.

(2) The CC and the Apostolic Tradition it hands on beginning with Pentecost and the Apostles’ preaching and teaching all existed before the NT was written and before the NT canon was discerned.
Numerous NT texts show the authoritative oral transmission of the deposit of faith by the Apostles and others they encouraged to preach after them.

(3) The NT books were written by believers who were already in the church within in the tradition for believers likewise situated. So the native hermeneutic environment of the NT texts is the apostolic tradition (that gave rise to them under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) and the apostolic church going back to Pentecost.

(4) The discernment of the canon itself and its proclamation as such is an act of the church and a part of tradition.
So the writing of Scripture, the discernment of the canon, and its proclamation as such are all part of tradition handing on the deposit of faith in/by the church.

(5) There is no proposition in Scripture or the early Christian writers (Fathers of the Church) stating that that everything taught by the apostles that God wanted humanity to have and transmit was written down such that one could find it by their individual interpretation of the NT text alone, nor stating that the authoritative transmission of the apostolic word in the Church was to cease after the NT canon was collected.

(6) The Reformers splitting STC to derive the deposit for faith from the results of their interpretation of the Bible alone produced the artificial view that one starts with their interpretation of Scripture alone and then anything outside the results of this process was added by additional content transmitted by Tradition alone. This transmission is usually (and falsely) viewed as a verbal whispering of fully formulated doctrinal propositions from bishop to bishop down through time à la the telephone game.

Any effort to define the CC’s understanding of STC or any one of them severally must start with these truths about its teaching.

 

[Fuego]

Perhaps I can shed some light on your question.

(1) The Catholic teaching has always been: God established that His word is transmitted down through time by the united and interrelated process of Scripture and Apostolic Tradition in the Apostolic Church (=STC).
The CC is continuous (and has always held itself to be so) with that of the Apostles at Pentecost and likewise the tradition it handed on. Unity and continuity are inherent in STC as understood by the CC.

If one doesn’t understand this everything else will be misunderstood.

(2) The CC and the Apostolic Tradition it hands on beginning with Pentecost and the Apostles’ preaching and teaching all existed before the NT was written and before the NT canon was discerned.
Numerous NT texts show the authoritative oral transmission of the deposit of faith by the Apostles and others they encouraged to preach after them.

(3) The NT books were written by believers who were already in the church within in the tradition for believers likewise situated. So the native hermeneutic environment of the NT texts is the apostolic tradition (that gave rise to them under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) and the apostolic church going back to Pentecost.

(4) The discernment of the canon itself and its proclamation as such is an act of the church and a part of tradition.
So the writing of Scripture, the discernment of the canon, and its proclamation as such are all part of tradition handing on the deposit of faith in/by the church.

(5) There is no proposition in Scripture or the early Christian writers (Fathers of the Church) stating that that everything taught by the apostles that God wanted humanity to have and transmit was written down such that one could find it by their individual interpretation of the NT text alone, nor stating that the authoritative transmission of the apostolic word in the Church was to cease after the NT canon was collected.

(6) The Reformers splitting STC to derive the deposit for faith from the results of their interpretation of the Bible alone produced the artificial view that one starts with their interpretation of Scripture alone and then anything outside the results of this process was added by additional content transmitted by Tradition alone. This transmission is usually (and falsely) viewed as a verbal whispering of fully formulated doctrinal propositions from bishop to bishop down through time à la the telephone game.

Any effort to define the CC’s understanding of STC or any one of them severally must start with these truths about its teaching.

I’m sorry, but I can’t understand how all these have anything to do with the question I raised. I am fully aware of the teaching regarding Scripture, Tradition and Teaching Authority, including all the points you have raised here.

As I have put it simply, the CC’s deposit of faith (or the truths revealed to the church) are contained in both Sacred Scripture (the written revelation found in the Bible) and Sacred Tradition (the unwritten revelation), with the Magisterium (or Teaching Authority) as the guardian and interpreter.

Now, if my statement above is in order (nobody made a correction so it must be fairly accurate), then my question regarding Sacred Tradition is this:

If we consider only the truths revealed during the NT times, were these truths (in Sacred Tradition) spoken first by either Christ or His Apostles?

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

I’m sorry, but I can’t understand how all these have anything to do with the question I raised. I am fully aware of the teaching regarding Scripture, Tradition and Teaching Authority, including all the points you have raised here.

OK, good. So acknowledging those as facts about Catholic teaching, we can move on to answer your question.

As I have put it simply, the CC’s deposit of faith (or the truths revealed to the church) are contained in both Sacred Scripture (the written revelation found in the Bible) and Sacred Tradition (the unwritten revelation), with the Magisterium (or Teaching Authority) as the guardian and interpreter.

Now, if my statement above is in order (nobody made a correction so it must be fairly accurate), then my question regarding Sacred Tradition is this:

If we consider only the truths revealed during the NT times, were these truths (in Sacred Tradition) spoken first by either Christ or His Apostles?

(1) The entire deposit of faith was revealed in NT times. There is nothing revealed after NT times–after the death of the last apostle.

(2) Regarding Sacred Tradition narrowly understood as a mode of transmission of the gospel in the Church other than writing, the answer to your question is “yes.”

(a) However the term “truths” suggests explicitly formulated propositions. This would be misleading. Without out excluding 'truths", there is far more transmitted in the gospel proclaimed (by the church) than can be explicitly grasped and formulated at any one time. The entire saving and transforming encounter with God in Christ along with the community life of the church was handed on in the proclamation of the word of God by the apostles and apostolic men. Newman is good on this point.

(b) Further, given that we hold all God wanted humanity to have comes down to us in STC, again understood as a whole, the Church has not made any statement suggesting whether or not any dogmatic truths are transmitted in Tradition alone apart from Scripture. I say this because your question could be understood as assuming a separation in STC with the resultant notion that a separate set of ready-formed dogmatic truths come down to us in Tradition alone.

(3) Sacred Tradition broadly understood as the transmission of Christianity as a whole includes writing, as I indicated, and the Church as its subject. Here too the "truths (in Sacred Tradition) spoken first by either Christ or His Apostles’ are included along with the possibility that some things some NT authors wrote were not spoken first but were written first . . . by believers for believers as I said.

 

[mdcpensive1]

OK, good. So acknowledging those as facts about Catholic teaching, we can move on to answer your question.

(1) The entire deposit of faith was revealed in NT times. There is nothing revealed after NT times–after the death of the last apostle.

(3) Sacred Tradition broadly understood as the transmission of Christianity as a whole includes writing, as I indicated, and the Church as its subject. Here too the "truths (in Sacred Tradition) spoken first by either Christ or His Apostles’ are included along with the possibility that some things some NT authors wrote were not spoken first but were written first . . . by believers for believers as I said.

I consulted with a good theologian about this question, especially about your point #1. His answer is that the deposit of faith is all the revelations through the prophets in the old testament as well as the direct words of Christ and His apostles in the New Testament. He quoted a passage in Hebrews and one other but I have forgotten them as it was as I was leaving his class.

For the sake of Fuego’s question, sacred tradition is all the revelations about God and what He wants us to know about Himself and what He wants us to do to relate to Him. This includes all the writings of the Old and New Testaments as well as other things that have been handed down by those chosen by God to speak for Him. The traditions have been written about by the Church Fathers when they felt called to write. They give credence to what had been known in the early Church and what had been known and practiced.
So in conclusion, it is not only Christ and the apostles but much more that comprise the body of sacred tradition.

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

I consulted with a good theologian about this question, especially about your point #1. His answer is that the deposit of faith is all the revelations through the prophets in the old testament as well as the direct words of Christ and His apostles in the New Testament. He quoted a passage in Hebrews and one other but I have forgotten them as it was as I was leaving his class.

Context, please! Fuego’s question was: “If we consider only the truths revealed during the NT times, were these truths (in Sacred Tradition) spoken first by either Christ or His Apostles?”

(1) By “entire” I wanted to ensure he realized the Catholic teaching is that no new public revelation was given after the death of the last apostle, as I said. Be sure to check that with the theologian.

(2) I had already said that God’s word was transmitted by STC. The theologian can verify that STC (i.e., Scripture, T, and C) includes the OT.

(3) Check with him also to see that “the gospel” (what Jesus and the apostles taught) includes the proper interpretation of the OT as fulfulled in Christ, which Jesus and the NT authors plainly teach, and the transmission of the OT.

(4) Fuego’s question concerned what was specifically Christian and the how of transmission in that context. The theologian can verify that Sacred Tradition has an active and passive dimension, process versus content, how versus what.

(5) One cannot cram every last theological truth explicitly in every theological sentence.

For the sake of Fuego’s question, sacred tradition is all the revelations about God and what He wants us to know about Himself and what He wants us to do to relate to Him.

Covered above (1)-(5). He wants to know what is specifically Christian and placed emphasis on the question of how it is transmitted, not as much on the what, content.

This includes all the writings of the Old and New Testaments as well as other things that have been handed down by those chosen by God to speak for Him.

Covered, see (2), (3) and (5).

The traditions have been written about by the Church Fathers when they felt called to write. They give credence to what had been known in the early Church and what had been known and practiced.

Actually (as the theologian will verify) the ECFs are witnesses to the life and teaching of the early church and consent among them gives us access to Apostolic Tradition transmitting what was already given in the deposit of faith. They also give us access to ecclesiastical traditions such as the form for some of the sacraments as they have developed in time, and other practices like the date of Easter. But perhaps this is what you meant to say.

So in conclusion, it is not only Christ and the apostles but much more that comprise the body of sacred tradition.

Fuego asked about truths spoken by Christ and the Apostles with reference to the deposit of faith; and truths spoken by Christ and the Apostles with reference to the deposit of faith includes everything you mentioned. Again, (5).

 

[FathersKnowBest]

Are there revealed truths handed on by word of mouth from God’s Old Testament prophets to the NT Church? My understanding is that there is none as all these truths were committed to writing in the books of the Old Testament.

If I understand what you’re saying here, I disagree. The Jews have always believed in a “sacred Tradition” (although they don’t call it that) akin to the Catholic belief.

For example, you’ll nowhere find mention of the Seat of Moses in the OT. However, not only is its existance (metaphorically, of course) mentioned in the NT, but Our Lord verified the authority of those who occupy it.

I could have misunderstood your meaning, but you’ll need to correct me.

 

[FathersKnowBest]

(1) By “entire” I wanted to ensure he realized the Catholic teaching is that no new public revelation was given after the death of the last apostle, as I said. Be sure to check that with the theologian.

I’m glad you clarified this statement; I was considering asking you to.

All the rest is nicely written and clear (at least to me!).

 

[AmbroseSJ]

quote=Fr of Jazz One cannot cram every last theological truth explicitly in every theological sentence.

[/quote]

Beyond this, it is HOW the Christian Dispensation works. Jesus told the Apostles, There is much that I have to say to you but you can not bear it all now.

The Church, reveals over time, (necessarily) the fullness and depth of Truth. It unfolds like a blossoming flower. The Deposit of Faith, handed down by the Apostles was a bud, but it had not yet blossomed. Over the ages the Church has continued to REVEAL the further depths of this Deposit of Faith. That is why the Church CONTINUES to be the Oracle of Divine Revelation. The Deposit of Faith was complete at the death of the last Apostle, but Divine Revelation (by way of Sacred Tradition in the Church) continues to this day. That is why Catholics hold WITH A DIVINE FAITH, that which is taught by the Catholic Church. We believe that it is Divine Revelation.

 

[Fr_of_Jazz]

Beyond this, it is HOW the Christian Dispensation works. Jesus told the Apostles, There is much that I have to say to you but you can not bear it all now.

The Church, reveals over time, (necessarily) the fullness and depth of Truth. It unfolds like a blossoming flower. The Deposit of Faith, handed down by the Apostles was a bud, but it had not yet blossomed. Over the ages the Church has continued to REVEAL the further depths of this Deposit of Faith. That is why the Church CONTINUES to be the Oracle of Divine Revelation. The Deposit of Faith was complete at the death of the last Apostle, but Divine Revelation (by way of Sacred Tradition in the Church) continues to this day. That is why Catholics hold WITH A DIVINE FAITH, that which is taught by the Catholic Church. We believe that it is Divine Revelation.

Exactly. You gotta love Newman . . . and Vincent of Lérins.