>I am part of my parish RCIA team and I often run into people who attribute to hearsay, random speculations, and drivel, the status of Catholic dogma. Both Catholics and non-Catholics.
>
>So, no personal insult to you intended, I’m not surprised anymore when people take some wacky stuff as a doctrine without knowing a dang thing about it.
None taken. My point was more about ‘tradition’ [it really doesn’t matter WHOSE] than about any actual dogma/hearsay/doctrine.
For instance, as I am sure you are already aware, St.Paul wrote,
"So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us." (2 Thessalonians 2:15)
Here he is evidently talking about the oral teaching of the Apostles and Evangelists--- that is, the leaders of the Church--- and not just any speculative or gassy notions that happened to be "blowin' in the wind."
So with one tradition and another, it really does matter "whose." If it was the teaching of the Apostles and their co-workers (approved men like Titus, Timothy, etc.) it was quite different than the teaching of other "freelancers" who were not part of the Apostolic line:
"Keep away from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us." (2 Thessalonians 3:8)
You see what I mean. We always have to distinguish one from the other.
Have a good evening.