Pope: The Unbreakable Unity between Scripture and Tradition

O'Meara Ferguson News ^ | April 12, 2013 | O'Meara Ferguson

[Salvation]

Pope: The Unbreakable Unity between Scripture and Tradition

April 12, 2013 by O'Meara Ferguson  

Filed under O'Meara Ferguson News

Vatican Radio – April 12, 2013

(Vatican Radio) On Friday Pope Francis received members of the Pontifical Biblical Commission at the end of their plenary assembly here at the Vatican on ‘inspiration and truth in the Bible’.

Listen to the report from Emer McCarthy

Pope Francis told them “the Holy Scriptures are the testimony in written form of God’s Word, the canonical memorial that attests to the event of Revelation. The Word of God, therefore, precedes and exceeds the Bible. It is for this reason that the center of our faith is not only a book, but a history of salvation and especially a Person, Jesus Christ”.

Citing the Vatican II Dogmatic Constitution, Lumen Gentium, he said: “The interpretation of the Holy Scriptures cannot be only an individual scientific effort, but must always confront itself with, be inserted within and authenticated by the living tradition of the Church…. The texts inspired by God were entrusted to the Community of believers…to nourish the faith …respect for this profound nature of Scripture conditions the very validity and effectiveness of biblical hermeneutics”.

Thus the Holy Father concluded, any interpretation that is either “subjective or simply limited to an analysis incapable of embracing the global meaning that has constituted the Tradition of the entire People of God over the centuries” is simply insufficient.

In short there is an unbreakable unity between Scripture and Tradition.

Below a Vatican Radio translation of the full text of Pope Francis’ discourse to the Pontifical Biblical Commission, April 12, 2013.

Venerable Brother,
Dear Members of the Pontifical Biblical Commission,

I am pleased to welcome you at the end of your annual Plenary Assembly. I thank the President, Archbishop Gerhard Ludwig Müller, for his greeting and summary of the topic that has been the subject of careful consideration in the course of your work. You have gathered again to study a very important topic: the inspiration and truth of the Bible. It is a matter that affects not only the individual believer, but the whole Church, for the life and mission of the Church is founded on the Word of God, which is the soul of theology and the inspiration of all Christian life.

As we know, the Holy Scriptures are the testimony in written form of God’s Word, the canonical memorial that attests to the event of Revelation. The Word of God, therefore, precedes and exceeds the Bible. It is for this reason that the center of our faith is not only a book, but a history of salvation and especially a Person, Jesus Christ, the Word of God made flesh. Precisely because the Word of God embraces and extends beyond Scripture, to understand it properly we need the constant presence of the Holy Spirit who “guides [us] to all truth” (Jn 16:13). It should be inserted within the current of the great Tradition which, through the assistance of the Holy Spirit and the guidance of the Magisterium, recognized the canonical writings as the Word addressed by God to His people who have never ceased to meditate and discover its inexhaustible riches. The Second Vatican Council has reiterated this with great clarity in the Dogmatic Constitution Dei Verbum: “For all of what has been said about the way of interpreting Scripture is subject finally to the judgment of the Church, which carries out the divine commission and ministry of guarding and interpreting the word of God” (n. 12).

As the aforementioned conciliar Constitution reminds us, there is an unbreakable unity between Scripture and Tradition, as both come from the same source: “There exists a close connection and communication between sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture. For both of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. For Sacred Scripture is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of the divine Spirit, while sacred Tradition takes the word of God entrusted by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and hands it on to their successors in its full purity, so that led by the light of the Spirit of truth, they may in proclaiming it preserve this word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known. Consequently it is not from Sacred Scripture alone that the Church draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed. Therefore both sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence” (ibid., 9).

It follows, therefore, that the exegete must be careful to perceive the Word of God present in the biblical texts by placing them within the faith of the Church. The interpretation of the Holy Scriptures cannot be only an individual scientific effort, but must always confront itself with, be inserted within and authenticated by the living tradition of the Church. This norm is essential to specify the correct relationship between exegesis and the Magisterium of the Church. The texts inspired by God were entrusted to the Community of believers, the Church of Christ, to nourish the faith and guide the life of charity. Respect for this profound nature of Scripture conditions the very validity and effectiveness of biblical hermeneutics. This results in the insufficiency of any interpretation that is either subjective or simply limited to an analysis incapable of embracing the global meaning that has constituted the Tradition of the entire People of God over the centuries, which “in credendo falli nequit” [cannot be mistaken in belief – ed](Conc. Ecum. Vatican II Dogmatic Cost. Lumen Gentium, 12).

Dear Brothers, I wish to conclude my talk by expressing my thanks to all of you and encouraging you in your important work. May the Lord Jesus Christ, the incarnate Word of God, the Divine Teacher who opened the minds and hearts of his disciples to understand the Scriptures (cf. Lk 24:45), guide and support you always in your endeavors. May the Virgin Mary, model of docility and obedience to the Word of God, teach you to accept fully the inexhaustible riches of Sacred Scripture not only through intellectual pursuits, but in prayer and throughout your life of believers, especially in this Year of the Faith, so that your work will help to shine the light of Sacred Scripture in the hearts of the faithful. Wishing you a fruitful continuation of your activities, I invoke the light of the Holy Spirit and impart my Apostolic Blessing upon you all.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

"Martin Luther unilaterally removed seven books from the Bible" -------------------------------------------------------------------- FYI: "An obvious sign that someone has not read anything about Luther and the canon is the assertion, “Luther removed books from the Bible,” or “Luther removed books from the New Testament.” It is a simple historical fact that Luther’s translation of the Bible contained all of its books. Luther began translating the New Testament in 1521, and released a finished version in 1522. He published sections of the Old Testament as he finished them. He finished the entire Bible by 1534. During these years, various incomplete editions were released. Some Protestants might be surprised to learn that Luther also translated the Apocrypha. The editors of Luther’s Works explain, “In keeping with early Christian tradition, Luther also included the Apocrypha of the Old Testament. Sorting them out of the canonical books, he appended them at the end of the Old Testament with the caption, ‘These books are not held equal to the Scriptures, but are useful and good to read.’”[9]" http://tquid.sharpens.org/Luther_%20canon.htm#a2 "subtracted verses from others, and changed the wording of yet more." ----------------------------------------------------------------- Aha! So maybe it was Luther who wrote in the Angel of the Lord teaching and recommending witchcraft: Tob 6 [2] Then the young man went down to wash himself. A fish leaped up from the river and would have swallowed the young man; [3] and the angel said to him, "Catch the fish." So the young man seized the fish and threw it up on the land. [4] Then the angel said to him, "Cut open the fish and take the heart and liver and gall and put them away safely." [5] So the young man did as the angel told him; and they roasted and ate the fish. And they both continued on their way until they came near to Ecbatana. [6] Then the young man said to the angel, "Brother Azarias, of what use is the liver and heart and gall of the fish?" [7] He replied, "As for the heart and liver, if a demon or evil spirit gives trouble to any one, you make a smoke from these before the man or woman, and that person will never be troubled again. [8] And as for the gall, anoint with it a man who has white films in his eyes, and he will be cured." Ah, how sad! For how many years have you been burning fish guts and anointing people with it on the basis of Luther's mistranslation? I bet it was Luther who also mushed up history here and retranslated Judith like so: Judith 1:5, “Now in the twelfth year of his reign, Nabuchodonosor, king of the Assyrians, who reigned in Ninve the great city, fought against Arphaxad and overcame him.” Everyone knows Nubuchadnezzer was king of Babylon and ruled there, NOT in Ninveh as the King of Assyria. Silly Luther, messing up the Romanist Apocrypha!!! He must have struck again in Baruch when he changed "70 years" to 7 GENERATIONS: Baruch 6:2, “And when you are come into Babylon, you shall be there many years, and for a long time, even to seven generations: and after that I will bring you away from thence with peace.” Everyone knows it was 70 years! How many years have you been confused about this thanks to Luther's revision? Ohhh, and here's another one. He wrote this into Maccabees to get us to mistrust the information in it! "I also will here make an end of my narration. Which if I have done well, and as it becometh the history, it is what I desired: but if not so perfectly, it must be pardoned me" (2 Maccabees 15:28, 39) Wow, what CANONICAL SCRIPTURE (cuz the Roman Church declared that that's what they are) would declare it might have ERRORS? Obviously this was evil Luther's doing!!! "for why else do we have so many denominations?" ---------------------------------------------------------------- Yes, like the Roman Catholic Church. How come they split off from "Pope" Gregory and the other Bishops to declare the primacy of ROME over everybody? "Without confidence given to us by an authority divinely granted," ----------------------------------------------------------------- Oops, there's no reason to be confident about the Roman authority of a Pope who is a murderer and adulterer gets killed because he was caught in bed with another man's wife: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_John_XII I'm going to have to trust the Word of God on this one and "study to shew [myself] approved" instead of letting Rome do my thinking for me (2 Tim 2:15).

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

Repost, since the first came out so weird:

“Martin Luther unilaterally removed seven books from the Bible”

---

FYI: “It is a simple historical fact that Luther’s translation of the Bible contained all of its books. Luther began translating the New Testament in 1521, and released a finished version in 1522. He published sections of the Old Testament as he finished them. He finished the entire Bible by 1534. During these years, various incomplete editions were released. Some Protestants might be surprised to learn that Luther also translated the Apocrypha. The editors of Luther’s Works explain, “In keeping with early Christian tradition, Luther also included the Apocrypha of the Old Testament. Sorting them out of the canonical books, he appended them at the end of the Old Testament with the caption, ‘These books are not held equal to the Scriptures, but are useful and good to read.”

http://tquid.sharpens.org/Luther_%20canon.htm#a2

“subtracted verses from others, and changed the wording of yet more.”

---

Aha! So maybe it was Luther who wrote in the Angel of the Lord teaching and recommending witchcraft:

Tob 6 [2] Then the young man went down to wash himself. A fish leaped up from the river and would have swallowed the young man; [3] and the angel said to him, “Catch the fish.” So the young man seized the fish and threw it up on the land. [4] Then the angel said to him, “Cut open the fish and take the heart and liver and gall and put them away safely.” [5] So the young man did as the angel told him; and they roasted and ate the fish. And they both continued on their way until they came near to Ecbatana. [6] Then the young man said to the angel, “Brother Azarias, of what use is the liver and heart and gall of the fish?” [7] He replied, “As for the heart and liver, if a demon or evil spirit gives trouble to any one, you make a smoke from these before the man or woman, and that person will never be troubled again. [8] And as for the gall, anoint with it a man who has white films in his eyes, and he will be cured.”

Ah, how sad! For how many years have you been burning fish guts and anointing people with it on the basis of Luther’s mistranslation? I bet it was Luther who also mushed up history here and retranslated Judith like so:

Judith 1:5, “Now in the twelfth year of his reign, Nabuchodonosor, king of the Assyrians, who reigned in Ninve the great city, fought against Arphaxad and overcame him.”

Everyone knows Nubuchadnezzer was king of Babylon and ruled there, NOT in Ninveh as the King of Assyria. Silly Luther, messing up the Romanist Apocrypha!!! He must have struck again in Baruch when he changed “70 years” to 7 GENERATIONS:

Baruch 6:2, “And when you are come into Babylon, you shall be there many years, and for a long time, even to seven generations: and after that I will bring you away from thence with peace.”

Everyone knows it was 70 years! How many years have you been confused about this thanks to Luther’s revision? Ohhh, and here’s another one. He wrote this into Maccabees to get us to mistrust the information in it!

“I also will here make an end of my narration. Which if I have done well, and as it becometh the history, it is what I desired: but if not so perfectly, it must be pardoned me” (2 Maccabees 15:28, 39)

Wow, what CANONICAL SCRIPTURE (cuz the Roman Church declared that that’s what they are) would declare it might have ERRORS? Obviously this was evil Luther’s doing!!!

“for why else do we have so many denominations?”

---

Yes, like the Roman Catholic Church. How come they split off from “Pope” Gregory and the other Bishops to declare the primacy of ROME over everybody?

“Without confidence given to us by an authority divinely granted,”

---

Oops, there’s no reason to be confident about the Roman authority of a Pope who is a murderer and adulterer who gets killed because he was caught in bed with another man’s wife, like Pope John XII for example.

I’m going to have to trust the Word of God on this one and “study to shew [myself] approved” instead of letting Rome do my thinking for me (2 Tim 2:15).

[Revolting cat!]

And if there are no responses to this post, that is no further references to the contents of the post (as happens all the time), will you then promise to cease this practice of cutting and pasting lengthy fragments from god only knows where, that no one here ever reads? Thank you too much.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“will you then promise to cease this practice of cutting and pasting lengthy fragments from god only knows where, that no one here ever reads? Thank you too much.”

---

Sorry, I’m going to post it every time it comes up, precisely because no Papist can read it without having a fit or going blind!

[Revolting cat!]

No one ever reads these excerpts (and not only yours, can you get that to your skull? You are serving only yourself and persuading no one! Masturbation and posturing.

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“Does the Bible ban cloning? What does the Bible say about in vitro fertilization? What about biblical teachings on birth control or when life begins?”

---

Isn’t the Roman claim that their tradition isn’t NEW, but was passed down by the Apostles from day-one forever and ever?

So, did the TRADITIONS of the Apostles talk about CLONING, or in-vitro fertilization, 2,000 years before it happened?

And why can’t we look at the Bible and read about marriage between a man and a woman to become “one flesh”, or read about Jeremiah or Christians being foreknown and predestinated by God before the foundation of the world, and not come to a conclusion against abortion or other weird stuff?

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“No one ever reads these excerpts”

---

Apparently you did, since you’re desperately asking me to stop posting them.

So, I’ll keep on doing what I’m doing!

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“Read the Holy Bible with attention and honesty and you, too, will be Catholic like me”

---

I did that, but instead of feeling compelled to bow to statues of Mary, I bowed down to God.

[annalex]

Bowing to God is good. So, are you Catholic now?

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“Bowing to God is good.

---

Bowing down to statues is bad.

[TradicalRC]

Love the Scripture. Ever wonder how all those books got preserved and brought together?

[TradicalRC]

Don’t forget the Real Presence in the Eucharist.

[BlueDragon]

response. Since the OT canon was being discussed with less than full agreement as to what properly belonged (only Apocrypha had less than full and complete support) right up to Trent, and Trent came AFTER Luther's own putting Apocrypha in an appendix, then there wasn't any removal of books from firmly established canon, as much as there was an enlargement and fortification of Jerome's ancient warnings concerning Apocrypha that had been carried forward in a great many copies of bibles used in those very days, by the RCC themselves.

[Religion Moderator]

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

Also, do not mention Chick at all - the subject is banned altogether.

[Salvation]

“There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church. ....As a matter of fact, if we Catholics believed all of the untruths and lies which were said against the Church, we probably would hate the Church a thousand times more than they do.”
Bishop Fulton Sheen

[TradicalRC]

First of all it is NOT from a "Eulogy’ to the Bishop of Alexandria", it is from a letter to Eulogius, the Bishop of Alexandria. And while he does seem to play around with the idea of three sees really being one (very Trinitarian, that) He also writes to Eulogius:

"Who does not know that the holy Church is founded on the solidity of the Chief Apostle, whose name expressed his firmness, being called Peter from Petra (Rock)?...Though there were many Apostles, only the See of the Prince of the Apostles...received supreme authority in virtue of its very principate." (Letter to the Patriarch Eulogius of Alexandria, Ep. 7)

And also in Epistle 13.50, he speaks of:
"the Apostolic See, which is the head of all Churches"

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“”Who does not know that the holy Church is founded on the solidity of the Chief Apostle, whose name expressed his firmness, being called Peter from Petra (Rock)?...Though there were many Apostles, only the See of the Prince of the Apostles...received supreme authority in virtue of its very principate.” (Letter to the Patriarch Eulogius of Alexandria, Ep. 7)”

---

Key words, the See of Peter in THREE places, governed with divine authority by three Bishops, who are yet “one” see, which is Antioch, Rome and Alexandria. We’re not talking about the Primacy of Peter, which they had believed at that time, but the Primacy of Rome.

[NYer]

Isn’t the Roman claim that their tradition isn’t NEW, but was passed down by the Apostles from day-one forever and ever? So, did the TRADITIONS of the Apostles talk about CLONING, or in-vitro fertilization, 2,000 years before it happened?

Some clarification is required with regard to your question. By "tradition", the Catholic Church is referring to oral communication. In Mark 13:31, we read that heaven and earth will pass away, but Jesus' Word will not pass away. But Jesus never says anything about His Word being entirely committed to a book. Also, it took 400 years to compile the Bible, and another 1,000 years to invent the printing press. How was the Word of God communicated? Orally, by the bishops of the Church, with the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit.

Since the Bible does not directly address issues such as contraception, IVF, cloning and other technologically advanced methods for procreation, each non-catholic church is left to its own devices to formulate an opinion. On the other hand, every papal encyclical is directly sourced to Scripture. This supports the need for a Magisterium to interpret Scripture and provide christians with a clear instruction based on the Word of God. To cite an example, consider this extract from HUMANAE VITAE, Pope JPII's Encyclical on the regulation of birth.

Neither is it valid to argue, as a justification for sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive, that a lesser evil is to be preferred to a greater one, or that such intercourse would merge with procreative acts of past and future to form a single entity, and so be qualified by exactly the same moral goodness as these. Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good," it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (See Rom 3. 8)—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general. Consequently, it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong.