As for definition of “Tradition,” the Church has stated in Vatican II’s Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation,
Dei Verbum, Tradition is:
"…apostolic preaching…expressed in a special way in the inspired books…preserved by an unending succession of preachers until the end of time… 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… flowing from the same divine wellspring, [Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture] 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. [DV, 8-9]
Therefore, that which is Tradition is that apostolic preaching which had been taught
always, everywhere, and by all either explicitly or implicity according to what has been handed on since the advent of Christ.
St. Matthew’s Gospel exhorts the faithful to “
listen to the Church” (Matt 18:17). Why? Because the Church is the “
pillar and foundation of truth” (1 Tim 3:15)
Said similarly, the 5th century theologian,
St. Vincent de Lerins described Catholic Tradition as follows:
I have often then inquired earnestly and attentively of very many men eminent for sanctity and learning, how and by what sure and so to speak universal rule I may be able to distinguish the truth of Catholic faith from the falsehood of heretical pravity; and I have always, and in almost every instance, received an answer to this effect: That whether I or any one else should wish to detect the frauds and avoid the snares of heretics as they rise, and to continue sound and complete in the Catholic faith, we must, the Lord helping, fortify our own belief in two ways; first, by the authority of the Divine Law, and then, by the Tradition of the Catholic Church.
But here some one perhaps will ask, Since the canon of Scripture is complete, and sufficient of itself for everything, and more than sufficient, what need is there to join with it the authority of theChurch’s interpretation? For this reason,— because, owing to the depth of Holy Scripture, all do not accept it in one and the same sense, but one understands its words in one way, another in another; so that it seems to be capable of as manyinterpretations as there are interpreters. For Novatian expounds it one way, Sabellius another, Donatus another, Arius, …Pelagius, Celestius, another, lastly, Nestorius another. Therefore, it is very necessary, on account of so great intricacies of such various error, that the rule for the right understanding of the prophets and apostles should be framed in accordance with the standard of Ecclesiastical and Catholic interpretation.
Moreover, in the Catholic Church itself, all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been
believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and in the strictest sense “Catholic,” which, as the name itself and the reason of the thing declare, comprehends all universally. This rule we shall observe if we follow
universality, antiquity, consent. We shall follow
universality if we confess that one faith to be true, which the
whole Church throughout the world confesses note: in contrast to merely regional opinions];
antiquity, if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is
manifest were notoriously held by our holy ancestors and fathers note: in contrast to that which is a merely a novel opinion having no basis in patristic thought];
consent, in like manner, if
in antiquitywe adhere to the consentient definitionsand determinations of all, or at the least of****almost all priests and doctors. [St. Vincent de Lerins (d. ca. 450),
CHURCH FATHERS: Commonitorium (Vincent of Lerins)”]
Commonitorium, ch. 2]
