Replies

When I read the scripture it is to confirm my oral impression of it as I heard it from the pulpit, refresh my memory, or, like here, to argue a point. I think this is fairly common among both Catholics and the Orthodox, that they are stronger in the internalized scripture than they are in bookish prooftexting.

That is what I was curious about. Does Tradition supplement scripture or the other way around, or neither? Without diminishing the importance of scripture, you seem to be saying that your instincts lead you to Tradition first. For example, when you are faced with an ethical dilemma, whereby there are reasonable arguments on both sides of a decision you must make, where do you look toward first for guidance?

I had no idea about the place of your upbringing. I sincerely hope that I run into you on an appropriate thread on something touching the subject. I have always wondered what that must have been like.

For example, when you are faced with an ethical dilemma, whereby there are reasonable arguments on both sides of a decision you must make, where do you look toward first for guidance?

I think you are still confused on what the Holy Tradition is. There is never a dilemma between the Holy Tradition and the Sripture.

Without diminishing the importance of scripture, you seem to be saying that your instincts lead you to Tradition first.

The Tradition is first, because I got it first. So is with you or anyone. Consider your native language. On occasion, we check with the dictionary, but even when we do, the first recourse is what you learned, not the dictionary. Scripture is not a separate from Tradition thing, it is an integral part of it.

when you are faced with an ethical dilemma, whereby there are reasonable arguments on both sides of a decision you must make, where do you look toward first for guidance?

Now that you force me to examine that, I discover three stages in the process. My first stage is thoroughly intuitive. I fall back on the elements of Christianity I know from the heart. God is love. Sanctity is goal. Christ leads. Cross shows the way. Suffering is fellowship with Christ. Etc. This is not scriptural, -- these are bumper stickers. Or if you prefer a more dignified term, these are instincts.

Second, I would reflect on the scripture. I cannot think of a single moment whe the scripture redirected the instinct, but it often reinforces the instinct. For example, I often get angry when the Church is offended. That is instinct. Then I think to Christ talking to St. Paul, "Why are you persecuting me?". And so I remind myself that persecution of the Chruch is persecution of Christ, because, of course, Saul was not persecuting Christ personally. This is the scriptural reinforcement.

Thirdly, I look inwardly. This is a prayer for guidance. It may moderate the anger, or quicken it, or it may inspire some research into the patristic literature. For example, the issue of original sin is very subtle and I do not intuitively understand the subtlety. I have enough understanding to confront a Pelagian, or a pagan, or a Calvinist, but I do not have depth. So I read St. Anselm, or, recently, that wonderful article that Kolokotronis provided. But, you know what? It is Mary that guides, really. Because, just like the Filipino ladies with their rosaries, this Russian 50+ year old male cannot identify with the Divine in a sterile way. I can only get to Christ through Mary, as a man, husband, and parent.