....”not willing to accept the authority of the Word beyond the ‘text”.....
That would depend on who or what authority you’re claiming is an authority ‘beyond the scriptures’... for...
There are many now, and in times past, groups of men and otherwise who have written their opinions about God’s word and what they think it means...we may respect what they say but that is not the same thing as what God has instructed us ‘to use’ as the final authority, ....for there’s no ultimate authority then that which He’s written. ....and surely should it oppose or conflict with God’s word then what He says about a matter will always trump mans traditions every time.
I realize that your catchisum tells you...Quote: “Both Scripture and Tradition ‘must’ be accepted and honored with ‘equal’ sentiments of devotion and reverence’....
.... However,.... if you use scripture in order to validate your traditions, which is often done on the threads, then the fact you would do so naturally shows that scripture is the ‘superior’ source, which makes tradition no longer equal but lesser of the two.
Thus you have a catch 22.....how do you justify traditions apart from His word? for by using it will only prove scripture trumps traditions.
Justifying their tradition using tradition is pulling themselves up by their boot straps.
Our tradition tells us the our tradition is equal to Scripture.
Well, how convenient is that?
With all due respect that's begging the question.
It's you Protestants that demand we Catholics "show that in Scripture" and then turn around and say that if we demonstrate something in Scripture, that "proves scripture trumps tradition"? Really?
This is actually why I personally never play this "show me from scripture" game anymore (other than to demonstrate on occasion there are alternate ways to read Scripture than the Protestant way). Because it's ultimately your burden to demonstrate Scripture is the only source of moral certainty for a Christian, because such a way of thinking was unheard of before the "Reformation".