Richard Kastner;7294032]So, if I understand you correct, you are saying that there is nothing in your tradition that is not in scripture. So, explain to me again why we need this tradition?
The assumption of Mary is not found in the bible, but other than that, the sacred traditions of the CC are supported by sacred scripture, and sacred scripture is a product of sacred tradition. If one is a Christian, one has some type of tradition, whether it is the “Baptist tradition,” “reformed tradition,” or even the “anti-tradition tradition.” Catholic and Orthodox Christians place special emphasis on Tradition, so much that we often call it “sacred Tradition.” We say this because we believe that just as the Holy Spirit inspired the Bible, the Holy Spirit has guided the Church throughout history, and today, producing Tradition.
Without the action of the Holy Spirit through catholic Tradition, most churches would look a lot more different from one another in my opinion. We would not have a coherent doctrine of the Trinity. We would not have the Bible as we know it, since the Church chose the books contained therein (The bible did not come with a Table of Contents). Even many other minor matters we often take for granted come from tradition: celebrating Christmas and sitting in pews. Tradition has influenced the way in which we view many doctrines, practices, and ethics. Even those in denominations that came from the radical Protestant Reformation (such as the Anabaptists) owe a large debt to Tradition, even though many are slow to admit it.
In opposition to tradition, some quote Jesus when he says to beware of the “traditions of men,” and simply ignore what the apostles had to say about apostolic tradition. (1 Cor. 11:2; 2 Thess. 2:15, 3:6) - Jesus did indeed warn against ma-nmade traditions, however, he also followed many of the Jewish traditions without question. Paul freely quoted from Jewish tradition that is not in the Bible, when he named the magicians in Exodus as Jannes and Jambres (2 Tim 3:8). Thus, the Bible distinguishes between good, Apostolic, Tradition and bad tradition. An analysis of early Christian writers shows that Scripture and Tradition were equally revered and seen to complement, rather than contradict, one another. One early Christian writer, Papias (c. 150 AD), said he preferred the many oral traditions about Jesus to written books. We must remember that in the ancient world, very few people were literate. A sizeable number of Christians were probably illiterate, and the oral traditions would have been the normal means of communication for them. Also, since the Gospels were written between 60-100 AD, the Church relied heavily upon oral Tradition, namely the preaching and teaching of the Apostles and their followers, even before writing down the truths they knew.
Many non-catholics have been shaped by the Reformation tradition of sola scriptura, which views the Bible as the sole foundation of Christian belief, even though the bible tells us that Jesus’ church is the pillar and foundation of truth. Even the subjective interpretation of the Bible by the individual reader, is a new tradition. I believe the following quote from the CCC:
Code:
*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....the Church does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from Scripture alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.*
You said in another post that the only way to the Father is through Jesus, and that we believe the only way to the Father is through His church. We believe, as you do, that Jesus is the only way to the father, by belonging to Jesus’ mystical body, the church, here on earth, of which Jesus is the head and savior. You do believe that Jesus is the head and savior of his body, the church, don’t you?
Richard, if Jesus is the only way to the father, and He is all we need, as opposed to His church or tradition, then why do we need the word of God? No where does the word of God tells us that the word of God is the way to the father, but we all believe that the word of God is necessary, but as catholics, we believe in the teaching authority of Jesus’ body, the church,
which includes both sacred scripture (such as the assumption of Mary, etc.) - and sacred scripture, and we trust that this deposit of faith is true and trustworthy for the simple fact that God is the one preserving said truths in the church He founded, via the perpetual guidance of the holy spirit. I can’t prove it, but it is biblical, and I have faith that it is true. If you want nothing to do with the church or tradition, and simply want to have a personal relationship with Jesus, well, I respect that decision; that’s what my sister does; to each their own.
Peace brother…
