Well, you might want to compare notes with your brethren, because far from being false accusations by ignorant people, I have seen many Catholics defend uniquely Catholic teachings based solely on the authority of a pronouncement of a particular pope or the church in general, and in doing so have used Paul’s statement as their sole scriptural defense.
“Well, you might want to compare notes with your brethren, because far from being false accusations by ignorant people, I have seen many Catholics defend uniquely Catholic teachings based solely on the authority of a pronouncement of a particular pope or the church in general, and in doing so have used Paul’s statement as their sole scriptural defense.”
(sigh) Do all Protestants start out life as failures in logic from Government Schools? Let me explain:
1) you started off with this: “...I’m always curious about the above defense [2nd Thessalonians] used to argue against the principal of sola scriptura. I notice, for instance, that Paul didn’t continue his thought with “... and feel free to make up more going forward.””
And we went through that - and I accurately outline what your (false) premise was even though you had not told me what it was. I can do that because as a lot, as a group, those who oppose the Catholic faith are quite often predictable in what they will say and do. We went from that, to this:
2) “I’m suggesting that you open yourselves up to that accusation when you justify every tradition that’s come down over the last 2000 years by claiming that Paul proactively okayed it with his statement regarding traditions that had been established up to that point.”
And I pointed out it didn’t matter what we opened ourselves up to as long as we were right in what we did - and we are. And then we got this:
3) “Well, you might want to compare notes with your brethren, because far from being false accusations by ignorant people, I have seen many Catholics defend uniquely Catholic teachings based solely on the authority of a pronouncement of a particular pope or the church in general, and in doing so have used Paul’s statement as their sole scriptural defense.”
And I freely admit I have no idea of what you’re trying to say. Whether or not a Catholic uses 2nd Thessalonians to defend sacred tradition in general or a particular sacred tradition is essentially immaterial to anything I have discussed with you. 2nd Thessalonians does not prove or disprove any scared tradition other than the existence of sacred tradition itself. Your point is meaningless. It has nothing to do with what I posted. You’re saying I should “compare notes” with my fellow Catholics because - YOU CLAIM - they are doing something I never mentioned. I don’t get how that matters or makes sense.
Also, if a Catholic uses 2nd Thessalonians to prove that scared tradition exists in a discussion about “the authority of a pronouncement of a particular pope or the church in general” on a sacred tradition, how is that even problematic? 2nd Thessalonians makes plain that sacred tradition is a reality. And?