Replies

Well I wrote a brilliant reply which I evidently deleted before posting. Your loss - heh heh heh.

I susspecks that annalex wrote that with a little humor going on there.

Near here are two Baptist Churches whose names ought to be, "The "Holier Than Thou Baptist Church" and "The New Greater and Even Holier Than Thou (and sho' 'nuff holier than THEM) Baptist Church". Every December they put down their disagreements and put on a WONDERFUL hymn and carol sing to which everyone is invited. And every December one of the consecrated gentlemen or ladies delivers what he or she apologetically admits is a de rigeur altar call, explaining that that is what Baptists do.

Tradition much? "Tradition of men?" I would hesitate to call it so. To call people to repent and to give their lives to Jesus is surely of divine origin.

"Traditions of men" is, I think, a polemical phrase. WE have traditions. THEY have "traditions of men".

Similarly someone recently and wittily posted:

For Catholics the definition of "idolatry" is simply:
"not what we are doing".

IMHO idolatry is a matter of the heart not of furniture. I am perfectly capable of breaking the relevant commandments with or without a statue or picture in the vicinity. Similarly, whether a tradition is "of men" or "of God" may not be determinable by a dispassionate onlooker.

Someone who does not pray the Rosary can see it as "vain repetitions". And certainly if someone were to pray the Rosary to bamboozle God into thinking he is especially worthy of attention vanity would be one of the things that ought to come to mind.

AND there is certainly nothing indisputably pertaining to the Rosary in Scripture. But from Dominic through Fatima to Medjugorje there have been claims of miracles, visions, and instructions to pray the Rosary. If one believes the stories, the "tradition", the thing handed on, of the Rosary has a pretty good claim to be NOT "of men". If one doesn't, well then it doesn't.

I think we are unwitting slaves of our post-enlightenment Baconian cultural outlook, and in the face of matters impossible or at least extremely difficult to ascertain empirically, we retreat too readily into name-calling. Talk of "Traditions" or "Institutions" being "of men" is credal, not descriptive. It is a manifesto or declaration, not data. But human beings like ritual, formality, dances with set steps. If they don't get this in Church, they'll go watch the changing of the guard in Arlington or become Masons or something. I simply cannot imagine a human group or any kind which will not soon develop its customs, shared notions, and ways of distinguishing the in-group from the newbies and the outsiders. It seems to be part of our nature, so it may be depraved or tainted, but it's unlikely to be entirely and intrinsically bad. It takes, I think, a VERY broad view to determine whether a thing is "of God" or "of men". And so it should be, because in that determination as in everything of importance we must first and last throw ourselves on our faces before the throne and plead for help.

There. That's enough blether for this morning.

BTW thank you and bless you for your kind words. STM (Snickers to the minimum)