Posted on 08/20/2024 7:56:12 PM PDT by ebb tide
In the context of a forum where my first article, dedicated to Hugo Klapproth’s[i] argument against the “sola scriptura” doctrine, was discussed, I encountered––as expected––one of the most frequently cited biblical quotes that Protestant believers use to reject the Tradition upheld by Catholics. While there are several such passages in the New Testament, the first of them, and likely the most frequently quoted, appears in the 15th chapter of the Gospel according to Matthew. Due to its significance, I will quote it in full:
“Then came to him from Jerusalem scribes and Pharisees, saying: Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the ancients? For they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he answering, said to them: Why do you also transgress the commandment of God for your tradition? For God said: Honour thy father and mother: And: He that shall curse father or mother, let him die the death. But you say: Whosoever shall say to father or mother, The gift whatsoever proceedeth from me, shall profit thee. And he shall not honour his father or his mother: and you have made void the commandment of God for your tradition. Hypocrites, well hath Isaias prophesied of you, saying: This people honoureth me with their lips: but their heart is far from me. And in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines and commandments of men” (Matthew 15:1-9).
One of the commentators who cited this passage added the following:
“Jesus addresses the issues of traditions. Sola Scripture says you test traditions against God’s word, you don’t test God’s word with tradition. Now which is the higher authority? Church tradition or God’s word?”[ii]
The hidden premise is based on the fact that, as seen in the quoted passage, our Lord Jesus Christ rejects the hypocritical traditions of the scribes and Pharisees in favor of the divine commandments found in the sacred texts of the Bible, authored by God Himself. Through a hasty generalization, based on this passage from Matthew as well as other similar passages (Mark 7:3 and 7:8-9; Colossians 2:8, etc.), it is concluded that anything called ‘tradition’ is always synonymous with what Christ the Savior condemns: the “tradition of men” (Mark 7:8; Colossians 2:8) or the “tradition of the elders” (Mark 7:3 and 7:5). In other words, from these passages, it is inferred that God has established an irreducible opposition between ‘tradition’ and ‘the commandments of God’ as found in Holy Scripture. This is incorrect. For if we carefully examine the texts of the New Testament, we will find an equally important passage where, on the contrary, faithfulness to ‘tradition’ is explicitly recommended. This passage, which I will present shortly, shows us that there are indeed two types of tradition that are irreducible: the Tradition of God and the hypocritical traditions of those who seek to justify their ignorance, lack of piety, and, above all, their own sins with religious arguments.
While researching Holy Scripture, I immediately identified the Greek term used for the word ‘tradition:’ παράδοσις. Although it indeed appears most often in contexts with pejorative connotations, there is one passage where it has positive connotations. This passage is found in the final chapter of the Second Epistle of Saint Paul the Apostle to the Thessalonians:
“And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition (τὴν παράδοσιν) which they have received of us” (II Thessalonians 3:6).
Thus, in an inspired text of Holy Scripture, ‘tradition’ is not only not condemned but, on the contrary, recommended to be respected and followed by the members of the first Christian community in Thessalonica. Clearly, the ‘tradition’ to which the apostle refers has nothing to do with the ‘traditions of men’ or ‘traditions of the elders’ mentioned in the passages cited earlier. Specifically, we are dealing with two antagonistic ‘traditions:’ the hypocritical one, created by men to justify their actions that oppose the Law of God, and the tradition of God, which, through His apostles, teaches us how to live as true Christians. Therefore, a first conclusion immediately presents itself: from the perspective of the texts of Holy Scripture, it is unacceptable to completely reject everything that bears the name ‘tradition.’ What is actually required of us is an act of discernment by which we distinguish false traditions, pseudo-traditions, from the true tradition of God. But what is the foundation of such an act of discernment? The text of Saint Paul also offers us the answer to this question: it involves pointing out those individuals with divine authority who can teach us the authentic content of God’s Tradition. These individuals are the first hierarchs (i.e., bishops) of the Church, the apostles.
In the question raised by Hugo Klapproth, which I quoted in my article, the author clearly suggested an answer of the same nature as that of Saint Paul:
“Should you make use of the Bible alone as the source and norm of your Faith, then you must also be certain that the Bible that you have is the genuine Bible. Who vouches for that?”
It is impossible to accept the Biblical canon without someone with divine authority vouching for it. Otherwise, it would result in total chaos, where each new Christian convert would have to determine for himself which are the canonical, inspired books of the sacred texts. (This is similar to accepting our biological parents: we trust that those who present themselves as our parents are who they claim to be in relation to us. Otherwise, how would we know who our parents are? No newborn has memories from the moment of birth that would allow them to know who his mother is.) Holy Scripture itself shows us that it is impossible for someone to understand the revealed texts entirely on his own, without being guided by someone truly guided by the Holy Spirit. This is made abundantly clear in a well-known passage from the Acts of the Apostles. Here, in chapter 8, it is narrated how a high-ranking official of Queen Candace of Ethiopia was reading the book of the prophet Isaiah from the Old Testament while traveling back from Jerusalem. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the apostle Philip approached the chariot in which he was reading. Their dialogue is extraordinarily relevant:
“And Philip running thither, heard him reading the prophet Isaias. And he said: Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest? Who said: And how can I, unless some man shew me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him. And the place of the scripture which he was reading was this: He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb without voice before his shearer, so openeth he not his mouth. In humility his judgment was taken away. His generation who shall declare, for his life shall be taken from the earth? And the eunuch answering Philip, said: I beseech thee, of whom doth the prophet speak this? of himself, or of some other man? Then Philip, opening his mouth, and beginning at this scripture, preached unto him Jesus” (Acts, 8:30-35).
Here it is! In Holy Scripture itself, we have a crystal-clear instance where someone, reading a biblical text alone, acknowledges that it is not self-explanatory. Even more: the eunuch of Queen Candace states that he needs someone––a person––to interpret the text from Isaiah for him. In that case, through the grace of God, that someone was Saint Philip the Apostle. Just like in the text from the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians by Saint Paul the Apostle, the ‘vehicle’ of authentic Tradition was an apostle.
The true divine Tradition contains everything God teaches us, both through the teachings written in the sacred texts and through His unwritten teachings. Actually, the sacred Tradition itself can be written or unwritten.
Clearly, by this, I do not imply in any way that the apostles are the source of divine teaching. Not at all. The source is, categorically, God Himself. However, some of His representatives, like the scribes and Pharisees criticized by Christ the Savior for their invented ‘traditions,’ have falsified the true Tradition of God, instead of remaining true heralds of it. I will not address here the difficult discussion about who and how one can verify the correctness of Tradition when those who are God’s representatives (be they priests, bishops, cardinals, or Popes) go astray––unfortunately, this is possible––and do what those rebuked by the Lord Jesus Christ did. However, I emphasize that there is an authentic, divine Tradition, categorically opposed to false traditions. Therefore, it is wrong to reject the very notion of Tradition based on quotes like the one from Matthew (15:1-9).
The true divine Tradition contains everything God teaches us, both through the teachings written in the sacred texts and through His unwritten teachings. Actually, the sacred Tradition itself can be written or unwritten. Anyway, to make things as clear as possible, I will propose two examples. The first refers to how one of the commandments of the Decalogue has been traditionally understood: “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” The sixth commandment seems to speak only about extreme sexual sins––fornication, adultery. In fact, the authentic Tradition has always considered that this commandment encompasses all those numerous categories of sins that destroy the purity of human sexuality, created by God exclusively for the transmission of life and the manifestation of marital love within the absolute monogamy of marriage. If we were to reject the teachings of Tradition, we might say that certain sins like masturbation or contraception have nothing to do with violating this commandment. I hope it is evident to all of us that such a rejection would be profoundly erroneous.
Another example, much less known, refers to the principles of sacred architecture manifested in the construction of traditional Christian churches. Without exception, any connoisseur––Christian or non-Christian––of these principles can show that their origin is a revelation received by King David (I Chronicles 28:19). God, therefore, is the one who directly showed the author of the Psalms how to build both the temple and its contents. Based on this revelation encoded in the construction of the temple, as well as on the proportions revealed in the description of the heavenly Jerusalem in the Book of Revelation, medieval Christian architects created the magnificent Gothic churches. If you want to convince yourself, you can watch one of the most fascinating documentaries presented by the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS): “Building the Great Cathedrals. How did medieval engineers construct magnificent skyscrapers of glass and stone?”[iii] If you haven’t seen it, I assure you that you will be amazed by everything you will learn from this exceptional film. Thus, the construction rules for authentic churches belong to an authentic sacred tradition. Although they are not of the same importance as those regarding the interpretation of the sixth commandment of the Decalogue or those concerning the Sacraments of the Church and how they should be celebrated, they still belong to Holy Tradition.
If we want to take seriously both the criticisms of our Lord Jesus Christ in chapter 15 of the Gospel of Matthew, and at the same time follow the advice of Saint Apostle Paul in II Thessalonians 3:6, we must not reject everything that bears the name ‘tradition.’ On the contrary, we should learn from the holy masters of sacred hermeneutics (Hugo Klapproth included) how to discern between the true Tradition of God and the hypocritical traditions of men. I am convinced that this is a challenge to which all of us, Catholics or Protestants, are today more than ever invited by God himself.
Not getting into the intricacies of the debate— but you may find it interesting that in Judaism, washing our hands before eating bread is an edict from none other than King Solomon himself. Pretty cool, ey?
Here it is! In Holy Scripture itself, we have a crystal-clear instance where someone, reading a biblical text alone, acknowledges that it is not self-explanatory. Even more: the eunuch of Queen Candace states that he needs someone––a person––to interpret the text from Isaiah for him. In that case, through the grace of God, that someone was Saint Philip the Apostle. Just like in the text from the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians by Saint Paul the Apostle, the ‘vehicle’ of authentic Tradition was an apostle.
So you're a Christian.
NO, I'm Catholic.
I walked away.
Prefer God
Love truth
Be kind
Jesus is living water,
the well of Bethlehem,
by the gate,
satisfying the thirst of David,
nearby the Siloam Pool.
As did Judas.
Your posts are far from loving, charitable or seeking to further God’s Kingdom. honestly do you think Christ used mockery to promote the word of God, becuase you often do.
With that said, just because scripture encourages us to seek out others more mature in His word for clarity that does not mean it requires us to accept a man’s interpretation over what we can ourselves be inspired with through our own studies. See Acts 17:11
The clearest example of this is Mary, who should indeed be deeply respected but not worshiped, yet in Catholicism she has been elevated to the queen of Heaven and prayed to in lieu of praying to God the father. A Clear example of the same sins Jeremiah 44:15-30 addressed. No where in the bible does such a belief or doctrine exist, it is entirely of man and that practice is elevated above God’s word, justified through the tradition of man.
What about Women’s traditions? Oh wait, we dont know what a woman is anymore.
Was that supposed to be a “gotcha” statement? Did you take into account the context of philman_36’s post? It had nothing to do with walking away from Jesus and everything to do with walking away from someone who prefers to be called a Catholic to being called a Christian (or who thinks being a Catholic is superior to being a Christian).
Bkmk
Agreed.
That is one of the worst slams I have ever seen on FR.
Thank you.
I've thought about how to responsed to your quip and I'll leave you with this...
Judas walked towards the bag off silver.
Judas walked towards Jesus to kiss him to identify Him.
Judas walked towards his own death at his own hands.
I walked away from what I perceived to be a sanctimonious, self-righteous person, as should we all.
🚶♂️
Is that supposed to validate the idea that the Roman Catholic Church is the true church? It doesn’t.
BS PM
“sanctimonious, self-righteous person”
Exactly
Wise move.
This.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.