The ability to debate human tradition

[Julianah]

Hi Folks!

So, I am new to CAF, and my hope is to give and receive edification to and from our fellow Catholics, to learn and teach about our faith, and to (most of all) give all glory to Our Lord Jesus Christ, blessed be His Sacred Heart.

I have some limited knowledge of Catholic Theology, and apparently the directives from the Vatican fall into one of three categories:

1. Sacred Scripture
2. Sacred Tradition
3. Human tradition

For example, Sacred Tradition was what laid the groundwork for the the Dogmas of the Immaculate Conception, for example. Human tradition laid the groundwork for celibate priests. So far so good?

I think it is good and healthy to debate (in a loving and charitable manner) any directive that falls in the category of human tradition, while at the same time expressing our devotion to His Excellency, our Most Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

Blessings,
Jules

 

[Joe_5859]

I don’t know that I’ve ever seen it broken down in such a way. Divine Revelation consists of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition with the Magisterium of the Church safeguarding and interpreting it.

Not everything the Church does and says is an articulation of Revelation. Disciplines like clerical celibacy are the types of things that can change. But I don’t think creating a category and calling it “human traditions” is the best way to go. Scripture says some pretty harsh things about “traditions of men”, so I think that verbiage could cause confusion and lead people to thinking it’s actually good for them to question such Church disciplines because Scripture tells them to. I don’t think that’s the best attitude to have with regards to Church disciplines.

 

[mdkirkbride]

Are you asking about Dogma and Doctrine vs Disciplines?

Celibate priests is a discipline in the Western Rite, but isn’t in the Eastern Rite. Even in the Western Rite there are exceptions, Anglican priest converts that are already married have become non-celibate Western Rite priests.

 

[Iron_Donkey]

I think it is good and healthy to debate (in a loving and charitable manner) any directive that falls in the category of human tradition, while at the same time expressing our devotion to His Excellency, our Most Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

Blessings,
Jules

I agree, with the added stipulation that at some point enough is enough and it’s time to spend our effort elsewhere.

That is, there is nothing wrong with debating the pros and cons of something like priestly celibacy, but at some point if the Pope and bishops say “we’re not changing this any time soon,” then while it’s still ok to talk about it and debate the merits and such, especially in among ourselves in order to gain a better understanding for why the Church does what it does, we need to stop pestering the Pope and bishops to change it so that they don’t have to keep spending their effort telling us they aren’t going to.

Which might be part of what you meant “at the same time expressing our devotion to His Excellency, our Most Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI,” but I thought I’d be a bit more specific about this part of it.

 

[Julianah]

I agree, with the added stipulation that at some point enough is enough and it’s time to spend our effort elsewhere.

That is, there is nothing wrong with debating the pros and cons of something like priestly celibacy, but at some point if the Pope and bishops say “we’re not changing this any time soon,” then while it’s still ok to talk about it and debate the merits and such, especially in among ourselves in order to gain a better understanding for why the Church does what it does, we need to stop pestering the Pope and bishops to change it so that they don’t have to keep spending their effort telling us they aren’t going to.

Which might be part of what you meant “at the same time expressing our devotion to His Excellency, our Most Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI,” but I thought I’d be a bit more specific about this part of it.

Yes yes, exactly! <3

 

[Julianah]

Are you asking about Dogma and Doctrine vs Disciplines?

Celibate priests is a discipline in the Western Rite, but isn’t in the Eastern Rite. Even in the Western Rite there are exceptions, Anglican priest converts that are already married have become non-celibate Western Rite priests.

Oooh good question… yeah, Dogma and Doctrine fall into the Sacred categories, whereas the difference in Rites are associated with the human traditions.

 

[Joe_5859]

I agree, with the added stipulation that at some point enough is enough and it’s time to spend our effort elsewhere.

That is, there is nothing wrong with debating the pros and cons of something like priestly celibacy, but at some point if the Pope and bishops say “we’re not changing this any time soon,” then while it’s still ok to talk about it and debate the merits and such, especially in among ourselves in order to gain a better understanding for why the Church does what it does, we need to stop pestering the Pope and bishops to change it so that they don’t have to keep spending their effort telling us they aren’t going to.

Which might be part of what you meant “at the same time expressing our devotion to His Excellency, our Most Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI,” but I thought I’d be a bit more specific about this part of it.

Well put.

 

[Julianah]

…

But I don’t think creating a category and calling it “human traditions” is the best way to go.

…

Well, actually that is how it was taught to us in RCIA. I’m not sure if the Eastern Catholic version of RCIA taught it like that, but at least the Roman Rite version did. (Well, at least my RCIA did!)

That’s when we discussed how priestly celibacy was a human tradition. I used to be offended by married priests, but when I found out it was a human tradition, I was much more at peace about it.

Maybe if I have time this evening, I will look up some sources in the CCC.

Blessings,
Jules

 

[promethius]

Hi Folks!

So, I am new to CAF, and my hope is to give and receive edification to and from our fellow Catholics, to learn and teach about our faith, and to (most of all) give all glory to Our Lord Jesus Christ, blessed be His Sacred Heart.

I have some limited knowledge of Catholic Theology, and apparently the directives from the Vatican fall into one of three categories:

1. Sacred Scripture
2. Sacred Tradition
3. Human tradition

For example, Sacred Tradition was what laid the groundwork for the the Dogmas of the Immaculate Conception, for example. Human tradition laid the groundwork for celibate priests. So far so good?

I think it is good and healthy to debate (in a loving and charitable manner) any directive that falls in the category of human tradition, while at the same time expressing our devotion to His Excellency, our Most Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

Blessings,
Jules

This is not correct. There are two types of teaching: Doctrine (Dogma) and Discipline.

Doctrine is composed of the following:

1. Sacred Scripture
2. Sacred Tradition
3. Magisterial Teaching
   Doctrine MUST be submitted to AND believed by all catholics, or at least they must submit to the teaching whilst forming their conscience. Doctrine is issued by competant magisterial authority, deals only with the subject of faith and morals, and is both intentional and universal. Male only priesthood is an example of a doctrine. A doctrine is a statement of a universal and eternal truth.

Disciplines are also binding on Catholics and are composed of:

1. Disciplinary Tradition
2. Human Traditions
   Catholics are required to submit to (but not necessarily agree with) disciplinary teachings, though disciplinary teachings are fallible and may one day be changed. Discipline is issued by the competant authority (not necessarily magisterial), may deal with routine practice, and generally is universal, although not always. Celebate priesthood is an example of a discipline. A discipline is a statement about what is qualitatively good for christian formation (either for the church or a portion of it).

So remember, human traditions define and support discipline, not doctrine.

 

[Joe_5859]

Well, actually that is how it was taught to us in RCIA. I’m not sure if the Eastern Catholic version of RCIA taught it like that, but at least the Roman Rite version did. (Well, at least my RCIA did!)

That’s when we discussed how priestly celibacy was a human tradition. I used to be offended by married priests, but when I found out it was a human tradition, I was much more at peace about it.

Maybe if I have time this evening, I will look up some sources in the CCC.

Blessings,
Jules

Ah, I see. The words “human tradition” do not appear together in the CCC. I can understand an RCIA session articulating it that way, though, in order to make the concept more understandable. I have also heard it differentiated as “Big ‘T’ Tradition” (Sacred Tradition which cannot change) and “Little ‘t’ tradition” (Church disciplines which can change).

I don’t disagree with that. It’s simply not the way I would choose to articulate it.

 

[Julianah]

…

Celebate priesthood is an example of a discipline. A discipline is a statement about what is qualitatively good for christian formation (either for the church or a portion of it).

So remember, human traditions define and support discipline, not doctrine.

Well… I guess that brings me back to my original point. A perfect example is the human tradition of not imparting a blessing to people as they approach the priest during communion if they are not able to receive (for whatever reason). This is a tradition that could be harmful to a Christian, and it seems to me that it should be helpful to discuss it in a loving and charitable fashion. The purpose of the discussion is not to cast doubt on the wisdom of the Vatican. It is to provide an opportunity for people to share the real consequences of these traditions when they harm people. In other words, if a “little t” tradition hurts the faith life of people, shouldn’t we be allowed to discuss it and provide people with options to obtain what they need from their Church? By options, I do mean different rites… not to imply that any are “superior” to any others, but that perhaps there are some which are most beneficial to certain people over others… Does that make sense?

Jules

 

[Julianah]

Ah, I see. The words “human tradition” do not appear together in the CCC. I can understand an RCIA session articulating it that way, though, in order to make the concept more understandable. I have also heard it differentiated as “Big ‘T’ Tradition” (Sacred Tradition which cannot change) and “Little ‘t’ tradition” (Church disciplines which can change).

I don’t disagree with that. It’s simply not the way I would choose to articulate it.

Well… yeah, there was an awful lot to learn in just a year… we didn’t have time to delve into the details of everything. The way it was explained to us was a little different though: Sacred Tradition is through Divine Revelation, through the Logos, whereas human tradition was not. That’s a key distinction and is why, as you say, Sacred Tradition cannot be changed, whereas human tradition can.

 

[thistle]

Well… I guess that brings me back to my original point. A perfect example is the human tradition of not imparting a blessing to people as they approach the priest during communion if they are not able to receive (for whatever reason). This is a tradition that could be harmful to a Christian, and it seems to me that it should be helpful to discuss it in a loving and charitable fashion. The purpose of the discussion is not to cast doubt on the wisdom of the Vatican. It is to provide an opportunity for people to share the real consequences of these traditions when they harm people. In other words, if a “little t” tradition hurts the faith life of people, shouldn’t we be allowed to discuss it and provide people with options to obtain what they need from their Church? By options, I do mean different rites… not to imply that any are “superior” to any others, but that perhaps there are some which are most beneficial to certain people over others… Does that make sense?

Jules

Its very simple. Its a Communion line and not a Blessing line. Non-Catholics and Catholics in a state of mortal sin may not join the Communion line. It is only for those who are to receive Communion.
Why would a person want to go up for a blessing anyway. The priest gives a blessing to everyone near the end of the Mass.