Scripture and Tradition

[fif1189]

So I’ve been trying to figure out exactly what the relationship between scripture and tradition is. I’ve read several things (including the catechism) but am still confused.

From what I can gather it seems that tradition is used to interpret the scriptures (at least in a nutshell).

That said, what is guaranteeing that the said tradition is right? Is it because it came from the Church that is guided by the Holy Spirit and, therefore, God would not allow a wrong interpretation of the Bible?

I will say that I did ask a priest about it and he said the two were meant to be complimentary which leads me to another question: which is the final authority?

 

[Crumpy]

the final authority is the Pope.

the relation between scripture, tradition, and the magisterium (teaching authority of the pope) is spelled out in the Vatican II document called Dei Verbum.

The “tradition” and “magisterium” are very conservative and have been studied, obviously, for centuries. There is no error in sacred tradition.

“tradition” predates the New Testament, by hundreds of years. It’s all the early Church had what was tradition, regarding Christ. St Paul says someplace that he is only handing on what he received – tradition.

Everything in the Church wasn’t settled either at Christ’s ascension into heaven or after Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit was given to the apostles and other disciples. The most thorough and logical discussion of Tradition I’ve seen was given in a book by Msgr. George Agius, Tradition and the Church.

 

[po18guy]

Since the Church was not founded on, or with a bible, the oral teaching paradosis (Tradition) that Christ blessed the Apostles with is primary. It is that tradition that later produced the bible. None of the Gospels was written as those events occurred. All were written from 20-60+ years after the fact. How was all of that detail retained with accuracy? By the Apostolic Tradition of handing teaching on, guided by the Holy Spirit. Not only that, but almost 300 years later, the same magisterium, guided by the Holy Spirit, examined all available writings and narrowed them down to the bible as we know it.

Read the prologue to Luke’s Gospel, verses 1-4. In those four short sentences, we see that Theophilus learned zero, zip, nada from Luke’s Gospel. Luke wrote the Gospel only to confirm the oral Apostolic teaching that Theophilus had already received. The Church uses scripture and tradition, combined with the authority which Christ gave the Church, to teach without error.

In John 14:16, Christ promised to send the Holy Spirit to remain with the Apostles forever. He promised that His Spirit would remind them of everything He said, and would also teach them all things (John 14:26).

 

[pablope]

So I’ve been trying to figure out exactly what the relationship between scripture and tradition is. I’ve read several things (including the catechism) but am still confused.

From what I can gather it seems that tradition is used to interpret the scriptures (at least in a nutshell).

 

[MarcoPolo]

which is the final authority?

Maybe this will help. This is from the Church’s conciliar document Dei Verbum (I bolded what I think are the pertinent points):*#9 Hence there exists a close connection and communication between sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture. For both of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For Sacred Scripture is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of the divine Spirit, while sacred tradition takes the word of God entrusted by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and hands it on to their successors in its full purity, so that led by the light of the Spirit of truth, they may in proclaiming it preserve this word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known. Consequently it is not from Sacred Scripture alone that the Church draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed. Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence.

#10 Sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the word of God, committed to the Church. Holding fast to this deposit the entire holy people united with their shepherds remain always steadfast in the teaching of the Apostles, in the common life, in the breaking of the bread and in prayers (see Acts 2, 42, Greek text), so that holding to, practicing and professing the heritage of the faith, it becomes on the part of the bishops and faithful a single common effort. (7)

But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, (8) has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church [the Magisterium], (9) whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.

It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God’s most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls. (Dei Verbum, 9-10)*Essentially, any divine revelation is God communicating Himself to His people. So whether He reveals Himself by way of a pen or otherwise, one medium does not have “authority” over another, to answer your question. Both are movements of the Holy Spirit. So ultimately, God is the final authority, operating through the Magisterium which consists of the bishops in union with the Pope (CCC#100).