Posted on 09/13/2014 11:35:30 AM PDT by Blind Eye Jonez
One of the differences between Christians is that some believe in tradition -- Catholics and Orthodox -- and others -- the Protestants -- do away with tradition and believe in scripture, or Sola Scriptura.
For the Catholics tradition is an important tool for understanding and they point to the fact that both Jesus -- who didn't leave written word -- and Apostles taught by tradition.
So my question is, "Why were the Protestants so keen on removing tradition and relying so heavily on scripture, on Sola Scriptura?" Neither Paul nor Jesus ever said "You will only believe only what is written in the Gospels or my letters." But they did say you will believe in what is transmitted and taught to you.
The Bible seems to contradict the rule it is supposed to represent: it is impossible to represent a scriptural principle that is not seen within the Bible.
Maybe there are some Freeper scholars that can explain this issue. I welcome all input.
My personal favorite proof of Sola Scriptura is the temptation of Christ. There could be no higher stakes. Jesus could have answered Satan in His own authority, and been completely justified in doing so. Instead, He answered Satan with Scripture.
Blind Eye
I think you really don’t understand sola scriptora and what it meant during the reformation. In the nut shell sola scriptora is basically this. If scripture does not teach a doctrine or uphold a tradition Christians are not bound to believe it or make other Christians believe it. For example If tradition teaches doctrine A and scripture teaches doctrine A ALL Christians must believe it. An example would be the trinity. It is binding upon ALL believers
If tradition teaches doctrine B BUT scripture does not teach doctrine B then doctrine B does not have to be held by all Christians. For example Christmas. Tradition teaches Jesus was born Dec 25th etc...BUT scripture doesn’t. So If I want to uphold the tradition of Christmas that is fine for me BUT I CANNOT say that another Christian must believe it since scripture doesn’t give a date on when Christ was born, just that He was
If tradition teaches Doctrine C and scripture contradicts Doctrine C then Doctrine C is to be rejected. An example would be the Marian dogmas and many other Roman Catholic Marian teachings. The Marian doctrines were some of the main reasons why I left the roman catholic church 37 years ago. (wow I am old)
Sola scriptora does not deny validity of tradition at all. It just puts it in its proper place. Subservient to scripture rather than on par or equal to it. Tradition has a place in helping us understand scripture too BUT again it must be supported from scripture.
A good book on the subject, from a protestant perspective is by Keith Mathison “The Shape of Sola Scriptora”. In it he describes several positions of tradition versus scripture as I outlined above.
I would agree that there are those protestants that disregard tradition all together BUT they forget that they have their own traditions, altar calls Christmas etc...They are not representative on the reformation principle of sola scriptora. On the other hand there are roman catholics, and I know/knew several that for them tradition was all that mattered. If the pope, priest, Bishop said it then it must be true.
Worship is expressing worthiness. Why do I see stained glass windows depicting Jean Calvin at Westminister Presbyterian on the north side of the California State Capitol? Why didn’t iconoclastic Protestant America object to placing the image of Abraham Lincoln in a Greek style temple?
Catholics give reverence, doulia, to worthy models of holiness, called Saints in scripture. They give hyperdoulia to Mary, as saved ahead of time from sin by the merits of Christ’s sacrifice before her conception, a fitting vessel for the enfleshment of God as man. This was the Church’s consistent tradition before 1517, east, west, north and south.
The persons depicted as you say are not prayed to neither are Protestants instructed to direct prayers to their images. There is only one intercessor, our Lord Jesus.
The OT testifies about Jesus, Jesus *IS* salvation; therefore, the OT _is_ about salvation.
John 5:39 — “You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me,”
So the gospels, written AFTER the crucifixion, came too late to the party and should be ignored...?
The term "Co-redemptrix" refers to a subordinate but essential participation by the Blessed Virgin Mary in redemption, notably that she gave free consent to give life to the Redeemer, to share his life, to suffer with him under the cross, to offer his sacrifice to God the Father for the sake of the redemption of mankind. Related to this belief is the concept of Mediatrix which is a separate concept but regularly included by faithful who use the title of co-redemptrix.
There is a difference between tradition and Sacred Tradition.
The very fact that you own a TV tells me that you are most likely watching at least some junk.
Ignorance. Catholics do not worship Mary, and Sacred Tradition does not trump Scripture — both are equal pillars.
Back to when Christianity started? I'm glad you agree that Catholics have been doing right since the start!
In the Religion forum, on a thread titled Tradition vs Scripture or Sola Scriptura, Wyrd bið ful aræd wrote:
Ignorance. Catholics do not worship Mary, and Sacred Tradition does not trump Scripture — both are equal pillars.
81 “Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit.”42 (113)
“And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound, and spread it abroad by their preaching.”43
82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, “does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.”44
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. (1202, 2041, 2684)
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.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
That is a very good point; thank you for sharing it.
Um, I quoted from the Gospels (Jesus own words on the Cross)..
Yes, and the Gospel was written after the crucifixion.
Co=redemptrix is not a doctrine of the catholic church.
Did you not know?
Sorry, i meant to say dogma. :(
I thought it was; had an interesting discussion about it w/ a Catholic a while back where it certainly seemed to be presented as doctrine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.