The Council of Trent contradicted the usual Roman Catholic practice of the early church. The early church held to Sola Scriptura. It believed that all doctrine must be proven from the Scripture and if such proof could not be produced, the doctrine was to be rejected.
Ignatius, Polycarp, Clement, the Didache, Barnabas and others taught doctrine and defended Christianity against heresies. ** In doing this, their sole appeal for authority was Scripture.** Their writings continually show and quote the spirit of the Old and the New Testament. Justin Martyr and Athenagoras also reflected this same belief in their writings. There is no appeal in any of the writings to the authority of tradition as a separate and independent body of revelation.
Irenaeus and Tertullian give us the first concept of Apostolic Tradition, which means the word, **although first given orally, was then written down so that it could be proven with the written Scriptures. ** They both gave the actual doctrinal content of the Apostolic Tradition that was orally preached in the churches. Their writings show that all their doctrine was derived from Scripture. There was no doctrine in what they refer to as apostolic Tradition that is not found in Scripture.
Tradition was simply the teaching of Scripture. Irenaeus stated that while the Apostles at first preached orally, their teaching was later committed to writing (the Scriptures), and the Scriptures since that day had become the pillar and ground of the Chursh’s faith. This is his exact statement:
"We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith." Vol 1 Irenaeus “against Heresies” 3.1.1
Tertullian said that Scripture is the only means for refuting or validating a doctrine as regards its content.
Irenaeus said that the Church doctrine is certainly never purely traditional; on the contrary, the thought that there could be some truth, transmitted exclusively viva voce (orally), is a Gnostic line of thought. When Irenaeus wanted to prove the truth of a doctrine materially, he turned to Scripture, because there the teaching of the apostles is objectively assessable. There can be no proof without Scripture.
It was taken for granted that, for any doctrine to win acceptance, it had first to establish its Scriptural basis.
Cyril of Jerusalem also held to Sola Scriptura.
He stated in explicit terms that if he were to present any teaching that could not be validated from Scripture, it was to be rejected.
"This seal have thou ever on thy mind; which now by way of summary has been touched on in its heads, and if the Lord grant, shall hereafter be set forth according to our power, with Scripture proofs. For concerning the divine and sacred Mysteries of the Faith, we ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures." The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril" Lecture 4.17
There were many other early church fathers who believed as these I have listed. It was the common practice of the church in those days. It was much later when the church started drifting away from Scripture.
This was the early Catholic Church. It was and still is the same Church I belong to. The Reformers tried to get it back on track in the 15th and 16th century but the Roman influence was so great, it ended up with a great split. There are certainly remnants of the original church out there however, still believing the truth and teaching the Scriptures, nothing more.
[/SIGN]
but shouldn’t be required for faith
