Replies

For your lively discussion.

Catholic Ping

2John 1
9Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

10If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: 11For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

We have four Gospels which teach the doctrine of Christ, what more do we need?

Thanks for posting.

I grew up learning about both Scripture and Apostolic Tradition. Good to see its explanation here.

This was one of the first articles I read when (re)investigating the Catholic Church. Thank God for Catholic Answers.

To me it seems simple: either Jesus established a visible Church that had teaching authority or he established an invisible one, that has no teaching authority. And if all the churches in the invisible one agree on fundamentals, why aren’t they unified in some visible way?

It’s bootstrapping to say the invisible church groups all agree on what matters. Is bootstrapping because no one has ever told me what these important doctrines are that they all agree upon, and/or which denominations are in, and which ones are out.

they knew and understood so much about God and the Messiah already. The Bible says they were to be the Lord’s witnesses, and their testimony, along with power given them to do supernatural things like heal and raise the dead wherever they went, would quickly create a church of believers all over that area of the world. The Lord accomplished that through these first believers, who were surrendered to His will. So at that time, they didn’t have the New Testament, but they had the same thing in the disciples themselves, and their understanding of the Old Testament. And while they couldn’t write in detail about every possible situation, they did cover everything. So we see that the church at its beginning didn’t exalt Mary. In all the writings of what Christians are to be concerned with and think about, she doesn’t appear at all, while Catholic meditations on faith tend to turn to her very quickly. And where this has led to is to things like this. Last night on a Catholic radio station (11 p.m. on Relevant Cont’d

Radio) the hosts said that Mary was the spiritual leader in the Holy Family and Joseph “would have understood.” They repeatedly talked of how Mary instructed Jesus in spiritual matters. Yet the Bible says the MAN is the spiritual head of the family! Time and time again I’ve seen that when the Bible and Catholic tradition (the priesthood) conflict it is “apostolic tradition” that comes out on top.

While I believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God, I do not follow the doctrine of “I’m right because I say so and if you don’t agree then you are killed or cast out.

Further not supporting the doctrine of “I’m Right” is the doctrine of what I said before was right at the time but now what I said prior was wrong and what I am saying now is right!!! So pay no attention to what I said previously!!!!

Not so, reply Catholics. First, the verse from John refers to the things written in that book (read it with John 20:30, the verse immediately before it to see the context of the statement in question). If this verse proved anything, it would not prove the theory of sola scriptura but that the Gospel of John is sufficient.

Then there is a limitation placed on all the books with this understanding.

Again, catholics are cherry-picking verses to prove their point without taking Scripture into context.

The point of the verses in John 20:30-31 is to say that not everything Jesus did was written down, but what was written down was done so that we may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God; and that believing you may have life in His name.

Once again, a clear reading of the Bible is sufficient to learn the meaning of the text.

This is made clear when the apostle Paul tells Timothy: "[W]hat you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2:2). Here we see the first few links in the chain of apostolic tradition that has been passed down intact from the apostles to our own day.

How is this any different from a church replacing a pastor who dies or retires? Every church needs a new pastor from time to time.

Paul instructed Timothy to pass on the oral teachings (traditions) that he had received from the apostle. He was to give these to men who would be able to teach others, thus perpetuating the chain. Paul gave this instruction not long before his death (2 Tim. 4:6–8), as a reminder to Timothy of how he should conduct his ministry.

And just what would those oral traditions be? It's the Gospel message that Paul had written about so we could have the recorded Word so there wouldn't be these endless and pointless debates about adding to Scripture which the RCC seems to love to do.

It's obviously not the assumption of Mary, her sinlessness, perpetual virginity, penance, indulgences, etc. Paul never wrote about these. We have not idea if he did or didn't talk about these so we must defer to the written Word.

Furthermore, Protestants typically read 2 Timothy 3:16-17 out of context. When read in the context of the surrounding passages, one discovers that Paul’s reference to Scripture is only part of his exhortation that Timothy take as his guide Tradition and Scripture. The two verses immediately before it state: "But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it, and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 3:14–15).

Once again, let's look at the text in question in its context. I've included 2 Tim 3:10 through 2 Tim 4:5

As we read the text notice the admonitions beginning in verse 13 about evil men and impostors deceiving and being deceived.

v16 notes that ALL SCRIPTURE is inspired by God....nothing about RCC tradition being inspired by God.

What is the Scripture? The Old and New Testament. God in His foreknowledge had the Holy Spirit move Paul to write this knowing there would be debates in the future about what is the Word.

2 Tim 4:3-4 is where we really need to pay attention for it warns about people not wanting to endure sound doctrine, that will accumulate teachers in accordance to their own desires...they will turn from truth to myths.

If that is not a clear indication of the need to rely on the Bible and the Bible alone, I don't know what is.

Now you followed my teaching, conduct, purpose, faith, patience, love, perseverance, 11persecutions, and sufferings, such as happened to me at Antioch, at Iconium and at Lystra; what persecutions I endured, and out of them all the Lord rescued me! 12Indeed, all who desire to live godly in Christ Jesus will be persecuted. 13But evil men and impostors will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14You, however, continue in the things you have learned and become convinced of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15and that from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: 2preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction.

3For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires,

4and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths.

5But you, be sober in all things, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.

The task is to determine what constitutes authentic tradition. How can we know which traditions are apostolic and which are merely human? The answer is the same as how we know which scriptures are apostolic and which are merely human—by listening to the magisterium or teaching authority of Christ’s Church. Without the Catholic Church’s teaching authority, we would not know with certainty which purported books of Scripture are authentic. If the Church revealed to us the canon of Scripture, it can also reveal to us the "canon of Tradition" by establishing which traditions have been passed down from the apostles. After all, Christ promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church (Matt. 16:18) and the New Testament itself declares the Church to be "the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15).

Seeing as there IS no "canon of tradition" that can be proven to have been passed down through the Apostles that is not also declared in the ONLY infallible and divinely-inspired writings of Scripture, the Catholic Church declares essentially that it can invent new doctrines at will. I do not believe for a minute that this is what Paul told Timothy nor what St. Peter had in mind when he referred to Paul's writings to the churches as "Scripture". What is absolutely certain is there can be no tradition that contradicts or cannot be proved BY Scripture.

As Irenaeus stated in Against Heresies III.1.1:

We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.