D
Daniel_Marsh
Guest
Is tradition merely interpreting that which has come before?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
U
USMC
Guest
Daniel Marsh:
St. Basil the Great: “Of the dogmas and messages persevered in the Church, some we possess from written teaching and others we receive from the Tradition of the Apostles, handed on to us in mystery. In respect to piety, both are of the same force. No one will contradict any of these, no one, at any rate, who is even moderately versed in matters ecclesiastical. Indeed, were we to try to reject unwritten customs as having no great authority, we would unwittingly injure the gospel in its vitals…” (Basil the Great - The Holy Spirit 27:66, 375AD)
Over the centuries, the Church has defined doctrines that have always been believed. In thus defining them they have brought greater clarity to what has always been held. For example: Christians always believed that the Eucharist is the body of Christ. That teaching was passed on through Tradition. But later, when it became necessary, the Church defined the matter and thus brought greater clarity to what had always been believed.
Tradition consists of those teachings that have been handed down from the apostles. That is basically what Tradition is.
Dogmas are those teachings of Tradition that have been defined by the Church.
There is an error of the modernists which has been condemend by the Church, but which is nevertheless alive and well today. The modernists claim that Tradition is not that which has been passed on by the apostles, but rather an ever changing and evolving interpretation of the truth. Since the modernists reject many of the dogmas of the faith, they have to find a way to justify it. They do so by claiming that the teachings of the Church change and evolve over time. They claim that Tradition is an every changing “interpretation” of the truth, rather than the unchangeable truth that has been passed on.
You ought to read the Oath Against Modernism, which is available online, and which exposes the true meaning of Tradition.
Tradition is that which has been handed down. All of the doctrinal teachings of Christianity were handed down by Tradition: the Divinity of Christ, the Trinity, the True Presence, the primacy of the Pope, purgatory, etc. All these teachings were taught by the apostles and passed on by way of Tradition. Some were passed on in writing, some orally.Is tradition merely interpreting that which has come before?
St. Basil the Great: “Of the dogmas and messages persevered in the Church, some we possess from written teaching and others we receive from the Tradition of the Apostles, handed on to us in mystery. In respect to piety, both are of the same force. No one will contradict any of these, no one, at any rate, who is even moderately versed in matters ecclesiastical. Indeed, were we to try to reject unwritten customs as having no great authority, we would unwittingly injure the gospel in its vitals…” (Basil the Great - The Holy Spirit 27:66, 375AD)
Over the centuries, the Church has defined doctrines that have always been believed. In thus defining them they have brought greater clarity to what has always been held. For example: Christians always believed that the Eucharist is the body of Christ. That teaching was passed on through Tradition. But later, when it became necessary, the Church defined the matter and thus brought greater clarity to what had always been believed.
Tradition consists of those teachings that have been handed down from the apostles. That is basically what Tradition is.
Dogmas are those teachings of Tradition that have been defined by the Church.
There is an error of the modernists which has been condemend by the Church, but which is nevertheless alive and well today. The modernists claim that Tradition is not that which has been passed on by the apostles, but rather an ever changing and evolving interpretation of the truth. Since the modernists reject many of the dogmas of the faith, they have to find a way to justify it. They do so by claiming that the teachings of the Church change and evolve over time. They claim that Tradition is an every changing “interpretation” of the truth, rather than the unchangeable truth that has been passed on.
You ought to read the Oath Against Modernism, which is available online, and which exposes the true meaning of Tradition.
T
Todd_Easton
Guest
15So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter. (2 Thessalonians 2:15)
Apostolic Tradition, its relation to Sacred Scripture, and ecclesial traditions are discussed in the , paragraphs 74-83Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Apostolic Tradition, its relation to Sacred Scripture, and ecclesial traditions are discussed in the , paragraphs 74-83Catechism of the Catholic Church.
M
MrS
Guest
An oft asked question by non-Catholics:
Show me a Catholic Tradition, not in the Bible, that I must believe.
ans: the contents of the bible… it is a Catholic Tradition (teaching, not displine) which determined what books are and will always be in the canon of Scripture, and as we all know, the bible does not teach or list its own contents.
Show me a Catholic Tradition, not in the Bible, that I must believe.
ans: the contents of the bible… it is a Catholic Tradition (teaching, not displine) which determined what books are and will always be in the canon of Scripture, and as we all know, the bible does not teach or list its own contents.
M
MrS
Guest
example of OT Tradition…
When Jesus refers to the Chair of Moses, the leaders knew what He was talking about, and the believe in the importance, the authority,and the reality of the Chair of Moses.
Chair of Moses does not appear anywhere in the OT
When Jesus refers to the Chair of Moses, the leaders knew what He was talking about, and the believe in the importance, the authority,and the reality of the Chair of Moses.
Chair of Moses does not appear anywhere in the OT
D
Daniel_Marsh
Guest
Hi MrS, the seat of Moses is in Exodus 18, it is the court system.
13 The next day Moses took his seat to serve as judge for the people, and they stood around him from morning till evening. 14 When his father-in-law saw all that Moses was doing for the people, he said, “What is this you are doing for the people? Why do you alone sit as judge, while all these people stand around you from morning till evening?”
15 Moses answered him, “Because the people come to me to seek God’s will. 16 Whenever they have a dispute, it is brought to me, and I decide between the parties and inform them of God’s decrees and laws.”
17 Moses’ father-in-law replied, “What you are doing is not good. 18 You and these people who come to you will only wear yourselves out. The work is too heavy for you; you cannot handle it alone. 19 Listen now to me and I will give you some advice, and may God be with you. You must be the people’s representative before God and bring their disputes to him. 20 Teach them the decrees and laws, and show them the way to live and the duties they are to perform. 21 But select capable men from all the people—men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain—and appoint them as officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens. 22 Have them serve as judges for the people at all times, but have them bring every difficult case to you; the simple cases they can decide themselves. That will make your load lighter, because they will share it with you. 23 If you do this and God so commands, you will be able to stand the strain, and all these people will go home satisfied.”
24 Moses listened to his father-in-law and did everything he said. 25 He chose capable men from all Israel and made them leaders of the people, officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens. 26 They served as judges for the people at all times. The difficult cases they brought to Moses, but the simple ones they decided themselves.
Matthew 23:2
"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat.
13 The next day Moses took his seat to serve as judge for the people, and they stood around him from morning till evening. 14 When his father-in-law saw all that Moses was doing for the people, he said, “What is this you are doing for the people? Why do you alone sit as judge, while all these people stand around you from morning till evening?”
15 Moses answered him, “Because the people come to me to seek God’s will. 16 Whenever they have a dispute, it is brought to me, and I decide between the parties and inform them of God’s decrees and laws.”
17 Moses’ father-in-law replied, “What you are doing is not good. 18 You and these people who come to you will only wear yourselves out. The work is too heavy for you; you cannot handle it alone. 19 Listen now to me and I will give you some advice, and may God be with you. You must be the people’s representative before God and bring their disputes to him. 20 Teach them the decrees and laws, and show them the way to live and the duties they are to perform. 21 But select capable men from all the people—men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain—and appoint them as officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens. 22 Have them serve as judges for the people at all times, but have them bring every difficult case to you; the simple cases they can decide themselves. That will make your load lighter, because they will share it with you. 23 If you do this and God so commands, you will be able to stand the strain, and all these people will go home satisfied.”
24 Moses listened to his father-in-law and did everything he said. 25 He chose capable men from all Israel and made them leaders of the people, officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens. 26 They served as judges for the people at all times. The difficult cases they brought to Moses, but the simple ones they decided themselves.
Matthew 23:2
"The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.