Concerning tradition?

1.Provide a single example of a doctrine that originates from an oral Apostolic Tradition that the Bible is silent about? Provide proof that this doctrinal tradition is apostolic in origin.

2.Provide a single example of where inspired apostolic “oral revelation” (tradition) differed from “written” (scripture)?

#1–The Assumptionn of Mary - tSt. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, at the Council of Chalcedon (451), made known to the Emperor Marcian and Pulcheria, who wished to possess the body of the Mother of God, that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened, upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven.

#2 – There are none. Divine revelation/oral tradition cannot conflict with Holy Scripture.

Good answer!!!

tQUOTE=oneGODoneCHURCH;5324786]Good answer!!!

Thank you, I try, I read, I learn.

#1–The Assumptionn of Mary - tSt. Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, at the Council of Chalcedon (451), made known to the Emperor Marcian and Pulcheria, who wished to possess the body of the Mother of God, that Mary died in the presence of all the Apostles, but that her tomb, when opened, upon the request of St. Thomas, was found empty; wherefrom the Apostles concluded that the body was taken up to heaven.

Isn’t there still an open question as to whether Mary died before the Assumption?

Yes, but the more commonly held belief is that she indeed died.

True, but puppypatrol cited the statement at the Council of Chalcedon as an example of infallible Sacred Tradition. If this were the case, why would there be any uncertainty? Why would Munificentissimus Deus even need to be published, 1500 years later?

If I remeber this it is because it states that The Blessed Mother slept. so it could be argued that she was dead or just asleep. tit for tat the important part is the Assumption, not if she was dead or still alive at the Time.

Maybe Pius XII wanted a more exact dogmatic definition? It appears the Council of Chalcedon merely stated that Mary’s Assumption had been a conclusion derived from the emptiness of her tomb, and didn’t intend to define the dogma.

I see. I thought that the original poster wanted something that had been doctrine since Apostolic times, but now I see that that wasn’t the case.

But, to strengthen the Church’s case, I’ll bite:

Catholics believe (I think I am being accurate here, but I am not Catholic) that the Eucharist recreates the sacrifice of Christ, and that the Sacrament is truly the Body and Blood of Christ. These beliefs are testified from very early times:

The Didache, an early Christian treatise on beliefs, liturgy, and ministry, dates from no later than the first century AD, according to the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church — that is, the same time as the writing of the Gospels. Didache 14:1 explicitly refers to the Eucharist as a sacrifice, and also makes a reference to the Catholic Sacrament of Confession.

The Epistle of St. Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans was written around the year 110 AD. Chapter 7 of the Epistle explicitly condemns those who do not believe that the Eucharist is the body of Christ.

So, as you can see, many of the modern extra-scriptural doctrines of the Catholic Church are attested from very early sources.

JL: All Catholic teaching comes from oral revelation including the written Tradition=Scripture. The NT was written to already up and teaching churches. The Catholic Church did not look in a written NT and make up what she believes, as sola scriptura must do. The Scriptures are interpreted in the light of that already delivered, believed and lived out oral Tradition. I suppose a good doctrine that originates from an oral Apostolic Tradition that the Bible is silent about, would be, what books are inspired

To answer your second question, There is no Apostolic Tradition that differes from the written Apostolic Tradition. They must agree, their source is the same.

http://bestsmileys.com/waving/3.gifOh, me!! Me, me!! Please ask me!!

http://bestsmileys.com/waving/3.gif
Please, sir:
[SIGN1]:)The Bible’s table of contents.:yup:[/SIGN1]
The Bible never mentions it. But all the way down from the Apostles, it has existed. (Until :eek:Dr Luther:sad_yes: cut it out…:crying:)

This I did not know that Catholics believed! Thank you so much for clearing this up :slight_smile: I thought the belief was that she was simply “taken up” and did not experience death. This makes more sense.

Just to be clear, that’s not an official dogma (that she died). All we know is that she was assumed. However historically, Catholics have believed that she died and was assumed afterwards.

My good woman, is there some post or some blog or some electronic record keeping device to which you can point me to say WHY AREN’T YOU CATHOLIC!!!..I mean, lable-wise. I know you were baptised and all…and that the Methodists are the grandchildren of direct Catholocism…

…It’s because cat’s are evil and therefore, you can’t be Catholic, isn’t it?

If one reads the official doccument, it was half used in generic vaguey terms (I have only seen excerpts). It does state that She died, but, we are taught, that she might have just been taken up.

The Orthodox have a fuller history/tradition on this, She died, Apostles were there, save Thomas, who got there three days later (he was divinely transported). He saw that She WAS indeed dead, and later, he was the only one to see Her Assumption. He got Her belt as a token to show the other Apostles.

…Incidentally, is there a record/remnant of that garder?

Most, while not comfortable with Her dying (if She didn’t have any sin, then She didn’t have any need for death), most are even more uncomfortable with the oposite: if Her Son, God Himself died, the slave is no better than the Master.

It doesn’t state she died… Here’s the ex cathedra, infallible statement:

“By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.”

“Having completed the course of her earthly life,” is kind of vague. We don’t know whether she died or not.

Agreed with the critique of the statement, but, doesn’t the rest of the document state repeatedly that She died?

JL: All Catholic teaching comes from oral revelation including the written Tradition=Scripture. The NT was written to already up and teaching churches. The Catholic Church did not look in a written NT and make up what she believes, as sola scriptura must. The Scriptures are interpreted in the light of that already delivered, believed and lived out oral Tradition. I suppose a good doctrine that originates from an oral Apostolic Tradition that the Bible is silent about, would be, what books are inspired

To answer your second question, There is no Apostolic Tradition that differes from the written Apostolic Tradition. They must agree, their source is the same.

If the Holy Spirit can faithfully preserve the WRITTEN TRADITION=SCRIPTURE, without distortion, thru the Church, then the same Holy Spirit can certainly by the same Church preserve that APOSTOLIC ORAL TRADITION, without distortion, that same Holy Spirit acts thru, and is the origin of the Church, Apostolic Tradition and scripture.

1TIM 6: Timothy, KEEP THAT WHICH IS COMMITTED TO THY TRUST, avoiding profane and vain babblings,

PHILIP 4:9 THOSE THINGS, which YE HAVE both LEARNED, and RECEIVE, and HEARD, and SEEN IN ME, DO

2 THES 2:14 Whereunto he called you by OUR GOSPEL, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 Therefore, BREATHREN, STAND FAST, and HOLD THE TRADITIONS which ye have been TAUGHT, WHETHER BY WORD OR our EPISTLE.

1 THES 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye RECEIVED the WORD OF GOD which ye HEARD of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is IN TRUTH, the WORD OF GOD, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

Jn 14: 26: But the Comforter, which is THE HOLY GHOST, whom the Father will send in my name, he SHALL TEACH YOU ALL THINGS, and bring all things to your remembrance, WHATSOEVER I have SAID UNTO YOU.

2TIM 2:1 Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. 2 And the things that thou hast HEARD OF ME among many witnesses, the same COMMIT thou TO FAITHFUL MEN, who shall be ABLE TO TEACH OTHERS also.

2 TIM 1:13 HOLD FAST the form of SOUND WORDS, which thou hast HEARD of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. 14 That good thing which was COMMITTED unto thee KEEP BY THE HOLY GHOST which dwelleth IN US.

[Timothy received the gift of the Holy Spirit by laying on of hands, (holy orders, in apostolic succession.) It is thru the Holy Spirit that oral apostolic tradition is discerned, by the church, as opposed to a tradition of men, such as Sola Scriptura.] 1Tm 3:15 As the pillar and ground of truth the church’s testimony is of no less value than scripture, because the Holy Spirit is the origin of both and active in both, as the council of Jerusalem wrote to the churches, Act15:28 For it seemed GOOD TO THE HOLY GHOST AND TO US, other scriptures say, 1Jn 4:6 We are of God Whoever knows God LISTENS TO US and he who is not of God DOES NOT LISTTEN TO US. BY THIS WE KNOW the spirit of TRUTH AND the spirit of ERROR LK 10:16 He that heareth YOU heareth ME Jn 15:20…if they have kept NY SAYING they will KEEP YOURS ALSO Jn 17:20 Neither pray I for THESE alone but for THEM which shall believe on me THROUGH THEIR WORD. [Apostolic tradition is discerned by the help of the Holy Spirit, were scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit. The canon of the NT and OT were both discerned thru the Holy Spirit, by the church, using Apostolic Tradition, the scriptures themselves do not give a list of inspired books.]

I could go on, there are many more good scripture examples of tradition, the burden of proof is on you, you must show scripture alone, which is a tradition of men, made a doctrine of God around 1520, Jer 23:36 36 But you must not mention the oracle of the LORD again, because every man’s own word becomes his oracle and so you distort the words of the living God,… Or you must show scripture saying all oral tradition is now in the written tradition=scripture. Paul says in 2 Thes, OUR GOSPEL, brethren, whether word=oral OR epistle=written.

It is interesting that Jesus and Paul used an oral Jewish tradition, where is the following written in the OT?

Mt 23:1 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 2 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. [Find in the Old Testament, MOSES’ SEAT, you wont as it is OT oral tradition, that Jesus quotes.]

1Cor10:4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ. [Where does the OT tell us the rock FOLLOWED THEM, Its does’nt, it is an OT oral tradition.]

Jude used an oral Jewish tradition: Jude 1:9 Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke you! [Find in the OT, were it is says MICHAEL contended over Moses’ body]

Jude 1:14 Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, [Where does the OT QUOTE ENOCH as prophesing this.]

2Tim 3:8 Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these men oppose the truth men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. [Find the names JANNES and JAMBRES in the OT, you wont it is OT oral tradition.]

:hmmm: My copy of Luther’s Bible has the table of contents, and the dc books.
Sometimes it is best not to raise one’s hand unless certain of the answer. :thumbsup: :smiley:

:confused: Is the Table of Contents doctrinal?

Jon

I think Zooey was referring to the canon of scripture itself as being a non-written tradition that is not found in the bible. The bible does not self-authenticate the cannon of books that are included or excluded. It has been from the Tradition and Magesterial authority of the Church that the books of Scripture were identified, culled from non-inspired works, and declared to be inspired writings. Nothing in the bible identifies the 73 (or even 66) books of the bible.

However, I’m not sure if this answers the request for an oral tradition from Apostolic times that is not found in the bible. Since the books of the NT were not completed and compiled until some time after the Apostles, the answer may be technically incorrect. However, the point is well taken that the canon of scripture is itself a tradition that cannot be proved or disproved by scripture alone.

My example of an “oral apostolic tradition” not found in the bible is the mass. Although scripture documents the early Christian community coming together for community worship on the Lord’s Day, there are no specific instructions within Scripture for the Eucharistic liturgy and for community reading and reflecting on Scripture (the Liturgy of the Word). However, Tradition has passed down the mass in several forms (or liturgies) including one of the most ancient forms that, I believe, is still said in Aramaic - the language of Christ and the Apostles. (Can’t recall which Eastern rite it is however.)

Another oral tradition would be the baptism of infants.

Another oral tradition would be holy orders - priesthood and bishophric.

Another oral tradition would be the Christian marriage ceremony - which most christian churches have retained in some form.

Another oral tradition would be confession of sins for forgiveness.

Another oral tradition would be confirmation - also retained by many reformed churches as part of their liturgies - and linked directly to the practices of the Apostles and early Church.

While there is indirect proof of each of these in Scripture, the Church does not rely solely upon Scripture to support them. Each has been passed down by the Church as part of the entire Deposit of Faith.

Peace,
Robert

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.