A
aidanbradypop
Guest
Bingo
- Status
E
EIF5A
Guest
Define tradition.
J
joe371
Guest
Based on one’s denomination…Perhaps that is a better word…Three members of my family, niece, dad and sister, all view it differently…
A
aidanbradypop
Guest
Sola scriptura, osas, symbolic eucharist, women only wear dresses…etc…etc. That is only a dew Protestant traditions
E
EIF5A
Guest
Now my curiosity is piqued. What’s the practical definition of “tradition”?
Based on one’s denomination…Perhaps that is a better word…
J
joe371
Guest
I’m sorry I ever used the word…LOL…
Start a thread…might make for a nice thread brother…
E
EIF5A
Guest
Those are example of tradition. What is the Catholic definition of “tradition”?
I
Isaiah45_9
Guest
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
Apostolic Tradition and ecclesial traditions
83 The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus’ teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. The first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition.
Tradition is to be distinguished from the various theological, disciplinary, liturgical or devotional traditions, born in the local churches over time. These are the particular forms, adapted to different places and times, in which the great Tradition is expressed. In the light of Tradition, these traditions can be retained, modified or even abandoned under the guidance of the Church’s Magisterium.
S
Simka
Guest
Joe, that depends on whether you want to talk about the 16th century articulation of SS, that preceded the Council of Trent, or if you’re trying to wrestle with any of the more modern applications of it. As it was articulated by the Reformers (Luther and his contemporaries) it was quite simple: “Scripture contains all knowledge necessary for salvation and holy living.”I attempted long ago to pin down what sola scriptura was, and every time I did, someone would say: that’s not sola scriptura, so I gave up…
It did not attempt to invalidate the use of church tradition, or wise counsel, or any other source, in determining what Scripture meant by what it said. It did not require study in isolation, separated from any other resources, to learn what Scripture taught. What it did say was that no extrabiblical authority should be recognized as being empowered to overrule the Inspired Word of God. And again, specifically in the matter of one’s salvation, Scripture alone was both necessary and sufficient; no doctrine supplemental to Biblical content was required to be accepted or believed.
In response, for the first time in its history, the church said, “Not true!”
And since then, there have been many re-interpretations of SS, using the same Latin name, but sometimes so far removed as to make it difficult to see the connection with the underlying original.
K
KEP1983
Guest
holy moly! 27 pages?! I’m the OP, but I don’t think I could keep up with all this. I haven’t looked at it since page 5 I think. haha.
Scanning the thread, I find it funny to hear Protestants debating Sola Scriptura. Some say they believe in tradition, some don’t. Some say they believe in councils, some don’t.
They pray about it and believe the Holy Spirit reveals the truth to them, but they just can’t figure it out! I guess the Holy Spirit tells one Protestant one thing, and a different Protestant another.
The Holy Spirit of Protestantism must be schizophrenic!
Scanning the thread, I find it funny to hear Protestants debating Sola Scriptura. Some say they believe in tradition, some don’t. Some say they believe in councils, some don’t.
They pray about it and believe the Holy Spirit reveals the truth to them, but they just can’t figure it out! I guess the Holy Spirit tells one Protestant one thing, and a different Protestant another.
The Holy Spirit of Protestantism must be schizophrenic!
J
joe371
Guest
At the time I was simply looking for a consensus, embraced by all sola scriptura advocates, regardless of the century. The teaching should not change over time…However, I gave up…I actually started many threads, to no avail…
I
Isaiah45_9
Guest
No man is an island,
Entire of itself.
Each is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less.
As well as if a promontory were.
As well as if a manor of thine own
Or of thine friend’s were.
Each man’s death diminishes me,
For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.
John Donne
N
notredame4U
Guest
N
notredame4U
Guest
But even James (the one who’s a favorite for the works + faith argument) at the beginning of his 3rd chapter writes this bombshell (quoting from the DR version here):
"Be ye not many masters διδάσκαλος didaskalos, meaning a spiritual teacher], my brethren, knowing that you receive the greater judgment.
For in many things we all !!!] offend πταίω = err, make a mistake]. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man." That seems to call into question the whole concept of infallibility of one man.
K
KEP1983
Guest
The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod responses are very interesting.
Basically they believe “The Catholics are wrong, all the other Protestants are wrong… we alone are right.”
So after 2,000 years, God has only protected 2.3 million people from error-- even though LCMS admit the Holy Spirit doesn’t protect them from error.
So if the LCMS believe they’re the only truly correct denomination, but deny that the Holy Spirit protects the Church from error (i.e. infallibility), how does an individual LCMS believer really know that the LCMS is true? 
Basically they believe “The Catholics are wrong, all the other Protestants are wrong… we alone are right.”
So after 2,000 years, God has only protected 2.3 million people from error-- even though LCMS admit the Holy Spirit doesn’t protect them from error.
So if the LCMS believe they’re the only truly correct denomination, but deny that the Holy Spirit protects the Church from error (i.e. infallibility), how does an individual LCMS believer really know that the LCMS is true?
J
joe371
Guest
CatholicKnight3;10708059:
No man is infallible, except me. LOL…Seriously, that is not what infallibility is about. It’s about Infallible God guiding fallible men e.g. the apostles to write and teach infallibly at least when it comes to faith and morals, and that is what the Petrine office is all about. For some it is just too impossible to believe that God continues to ineffably and infallibly guide the fallible leaders of Jesus’ church. It is what is…
J
joe371
Guest
It actually says: “The Catholics are wrong, all the other Protestants are wrong… we alone are right.”The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod responses are very interesting.
Basically they believe “The Catholics are wrong, all the other Protestants are wrong… we alone are right.”
So after 2,000 years, God has only protected 2.3 million people from error-- even though LCMS admit the Holy Spirit doesn’t protect them from error.
So if the LCMS believe they’re the only truly correct denomination, but deny that the Holy Spirit protects the Church from error (i.e. infallibility), how does an individual LCMS believer really know that the LCMS is true?
S
Simka
Guest
CK, as I’m sure you realize, that is a series of questions having much broader concern than just SS.
But in the specific context of SS, the answers are simple. It would be wrong to presume that any of that hypothetical additional material is necessary for your salvation.
J
joe371
Guest
If everything that is necessary for a Christian’s salvation is found in the holy bible then what’s the church’s role, in terms of salvation, in your opinion? It should be the same as it was in the 1st century…
E
EIF5A
Guest
Somewhat analogous to theoretical science and applied science. Applied science puts into practice what is known in theory. A physical manifestation of and connection to spiritual truth. The Church can only practice what is revealed by God.
- Status