SACRED TRADITION’S IDENTITY CRISIS

 

Sacred Tradition is a really big deal in Catholicism.  It is one of the foundational “legs” on which the Catholic Church stands.  According to the Catholic Church’s Vatican II document Dei Verbum:

“Therefore both sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of loyalty and reverence.” (chapter 2, paragraph 9, emphasis added)

In other words, they are to be considered equal.  So if Scripture is infallible/God-breathed, then (according to them) so is Sacred Tradition.  One is not above the other.

But is there biblical evidence for this Catholic concept of infallible Sacred Tradition?  Catholics will usually point to several Scriptures to make their case, but they will turn to one particular verse more than any other:

“Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word or our epistle.” (2 Thessalonians 2:15)

And Catholics will say, “See, there it is.  We must obey BOTH the oral tradition (“… by word”) and the written tradition (“… [by] our epistle,”), i.e., Scripture.

When Catholics see the terms “oral” and “written” in this context, they treat it as though they are two different (and equal) bodies of information, and that we need BOTH of them to have the complete picture, God’s word in two different forms.  They see Tradition as something outside of, and distinguishable from Scripture, otherwise it is all just the written Word of God.   

A Closer Look at 2 Thessalonians 2:15

Ok, let’s actually look at the context of this passage to see what the apostle Paul is actually saying about this.  Since this is the main and pivotal verse for Catholic Sacred Tradition, we must make sure that we understand Paul.  Here is the context:

In chapter 2, we see that the Thessalonians were disturbed about news they had received, i.e., they were “shaken” and “troubled” (2:2).  Someone made them believe that the Day of the Lord had already come upon them (v. 2), apparently through a letter, falsely claiming to be from Paul.  In this second letter to the Thessalonians, the apostle Paul goes on to calm their fears and he reminds them that he had already told them in person (orally) all about the timing of the Day of the Lord (v. 5) and that they need not worry.  Then, after explaining it to them again in this letter (v. 6-12), he says to hold fast to those traditions (those teachings about the Day of the Lord that he first handed on to them) (v. 15), whether they received them orally, or by writing.  This is important – Paul is telling them that the message he gave to them at the beginning (orally) is the SAME message he was writing to them now!  How could they have forgotten already?  He did not give them two different messages, but the same one in two forms (written and oral)!  He is NOT telling them that we don’t have all of God’s Word unless we have it in both written form and some kind of oral form.  This is where Catholics deviate from Scripture.

Paul is basically asking them, “Why are you so disturbed by this letter that was supposedly from my hand?  Any true letter from me will agree with the message that I already gave to you in person!  I will never contradict the original message I gave to you in person, just as I would never give you a different gospel than the one I already gave to you (e.g., Galatians 1:6-9).”

Paul’s distinction between the two forms was NOT to emphasize a difference in content between the two, but the very opposite – to demonstrate the unity of his message in both forms.  Catholics seem to think that the Word of God is somehow emasculated if it is only contained in infallible writing, but that is certainly not the case.  The point Paul was making here was that you can forever trust what Jesus and the apostles have given you!  His point was not that infallible revelation for the church always has to be in two forms.

But the content of this “oral” aspect of Sacred Tradition is now in question, and this brings us to our main point…

For God’s Sake, Show Us What It Is!

Again, what exactly was/is the content of this “Sacred Tradition”?  The Catholic Church is more than happy to point out the contents of their infallible seventy-three books of Scripture (the written Tradition) to all who would ask.  But many (both Catholics and Protestants) have often asked about the contents of this oral Sacred Tradition, as well.  But curiously, we find that the Catholic Church is unable (or not so anxious) to expose the contents of this “infallible” oral entity.

Oh sure, they’ll give us some incredibly vague, hazy and imprecise “definitions,” for example, it is said to be:

“… not simply a collection of pious practices but the living transmission of Christ’s teaching entrusted to the apostles and perpetuated in the Church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.”  See here:

https://catholicus.eu/en/sacred-tradition-an-unchanging-pillar-of-faith-in-a-changing-world/

But how can the person in the pew gain an understanding of such phraseology?  It seems the Church is purposely being vague when it talks like this.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

“This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called Tradition, since it is distinct from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it.  Through Tradition, ‘the Church, in her doctrine, life and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes… ’” (CCC #78 – emphasis added)

Any honest person has to admit that this is just too nebulous to help anyone to know its content.

Sacred Tradition has also been called “the living and growing truth of Christ contained, not only in Scripture, but in the common teaching, common life, and common worship of the Church.”  See here:

https://markpshea.com/archive_sheavings/what-is-sacred-tradition/

This is simply more obfuscation.

According to one other source:

“Catholic Tradition is the living transmission of the faith…”

That tells us absolutely nothing meaningful.

“… encompassing teachings, practices and worship passed down from the apostles through the church over centuries…”

Again, nothing.  Which practices/teachings/worship?  And how do we know they actually came from the apostles?  It would sure help if the Catholic Church could be more specific, especially if we are talking about something that is supposedly infallible.  Protestants are not looking for examples of Sacred Tradition, but the whole of it!  Where exactly can this “infallible” information be found?  How can any generation know that the correct information has been properly handed down to them if no one can articulate exactly what it is?

One source calls it an “unbroken transmission of Christ’s revelation” and then names things that are/include non-infallible things (e.g., liturgy, creeds, writings of the church fathers, spiritual practices).  

These are just a tiny sampling of the Catholic Church’s attempt at a usable definition of Sacred Tradition.  But none of these are convincing.  The Church is not being transparent at all and these “definitions” are meaningless!  They might sound good, but are absolutely useless to help the common person understand what its contents actually are.

The Church Retaliates

Ok, when pressed to provide a meaningful definition of Sacred Tradition, the Church will often retaliate with comments like this:

• ·      “Where is ‘Sacred Tradition’ in the Protestant faith?”

If Protestant churches do claim some kind of “Sacred Tradition,” they have the same obligation to show it as the Catholic Church does.  If anyone claims to have any kind of Tradition, it is their responsibility, their burden of proof to show what it is.  You can’t just say something is infallible, and not even be able to tell us what it is!

• ·      Is this really the question for you Protestants… if we Catholics would indeed actually show you the list of all Tradition, the real question is, “Would you then become Catholic?” 

Nice try, but the answer is no.  Asking the Catholic Church to show us what Tradition is, is only the beginning of the work ahead of you!  Answering the “Tradition location question” is just the FIRST step!  There are many, many more logical and biblical issues to settle before any Protestant should even think about becoming Catholic.  By the way, I could reciprocate and ask, “If you Catholics CAN’T show us this list, will YOU become Protestant?

• ·      Your request is unreasonable!  Sacred Tradition is not just a “static” entity that can be “listed,” but is “living,” “unchangeable,” “dynamic,” and it is something that is practiced and it develops over time.  One priest said, “Asking for a list of Sacred Traditions is a bit like asking, ‘What is culture and where can I find a list of it?’  It is not that simple.”

Well, you know what?  Culture has nothing to do with infallibility, while this Tradition supposedly specifically does.  If something is considered infallible, it must be validly identified.  The Catholic Church certainly fails to do that! 

They like to claim that Sacred Tradition is the “lived experience” of the Church, but this is far too broad a description.  Let me ask a question – Wouldn’t the pedophilia in the Catholic Church also be part of the “lived experience” of many of its victims?  So, is THAT rightly considered part of Sacred Tradition, as well?  After all, it is a real experience, isn’t it?  This frequently-used “lived experience” phrase is simply meaningless when describing Sacred Tradition.  There were millions of “lived experiences” in the history of the church, many of which were bad.  The Catholic Church is purposely deflecting the question of what its Tradition is and where it can be found.

Let’s Be Honest

Ok, Catholics, let’s be honest.  If you wanted some specific information from a Protestant, especially if it was claimed to be infallible, and the Protestant answered you with such vague and meaningless terms like the Church does, you would (rightly) accuse him of deflecting or withholding the desired information.  You would claim that he was simply obfuscating and insulting your intelligence with such phrases.

And this is exactly what happens when Catholics tell us that Sacred Tradition is “the living transmission of the faith,” or “the common life, worship and teaching of the Catholic faith,” or “the unbroken transmission of Christ’s revelation,” etc., etc.  These are simply nebulous and meaningless descriptions of something that is supposed to be equal to Scripture!  The fact that you withhold any meaningful description of this Tradition, shows us that you don’t really know exactly what it is.  Otherwise, you’d be glad to tell us.

Conclusion

Does anyone, especially the common man, have time to read/research 2000 years of church history?  Because it seems that this is what it would take for one to have any clue of what “Sacred Tradition” is.

If Sacred Tradition is THAT “living” and THAT “dynamic,” and THAT elusive and uncertain – if it’s THAT hard to pin down, then we have an obligation to proclaim that no such entity can claim, by any biblical standard, to be infallible.

When Cardinal Guidi of Bologna pointed out to Pope Pius IX that his (the pope’s) views on papal infallibility were not supported by Sacred Tradition, Pius roared, “I AM TRADITION!”  In one short statement, the pope said out loud what everybody already knew: that Tradition, in effect, is whatever the pope says it is!  But the corrupt and power-hungry Pope Pius IX was at least more honest about the definition of Sacred Tradition than the Church has ever been.  Pius, in his private meeting with Guidi, didn’t try to sugarcoat it or offer vague and nonsensical definitions, as we see so many do today.

It seems that none of the Church’s popes, councils, “infallible” documents, or its modern apologists are able to convincingly identify this elusive and baffling entity the Church calls Tradition.  Therefore, Sacred Tradition, a foundational claim of the Catholic Church, suffers an identity crisis about which Catholics should be quite embarrassed.