"I am not going to believe anything unless you can show it to me in the Bible. In any case, ‘tradition’ is condemned in the Bible as contrary to the Word of God (St. Matt. 15, 6)!"Does the Bible really teach that it is the sole rule of faith? According to "Bible Christians" it certainly does. They cite as proof the following verses:
"But these are written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name" (St. John 20, 31);
"All scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3, 16-17);
"These Jews were more receptive than those in Thessalonica, for they welcomed the message very eagerly and examined the scriptures every day to see whether these things were so" (Acts 17, 11).
However, when looking at these three verses closely, it is clear that all strictly say nothing in support of Sola Scriptura. The verse from St. John’s Gospel speaks only of the purpose why he wrote it, namely, to convince its readers that Jesus was the Christ. It makes no assertion that the Bible as it stands today contains all that is needed for salvation, nor does it exclude any other medium, either written or oral, as a means of passing on the truths of Christ. In fact, if one was to be consistent, St. John’s words could be construed as an argument that his Gospel alone, excluding the other three, is necessary for salvation - that is, Sola Joannem!
The second verse are words of St. Paul to St. Timothy. They are perhaps the cornerstone for most Protestant arguments in favor of Sola Scriptura. Yet, again, there are no words such as "alone" or "only" used with respect to Sacred Scripture. No-one who claims to be Christian, least of all the Catholic Church, denies that Scripture is "inspired" and "profitable" to perfect a "man of God." But it is certainly different to assert that Scripture is "sufficient." However, "sufficient" is not the word used by St. Paul. Cardinal Newman certainly saw the Protestant fallacy in using 2 Tim. 3, 15-17 to support Sola Scriptura over a century ago:
"It is quite evident that this passage furnishes no argument whatever that the Sacred Scripture, without Tradition, is the sole rule of faith; for, although Sacred Scripture is profitable for these four ends, still it is not said to be sufficient. The Apostle requires the aid of Tradition (2 Thes. 2, 14). Moreover, the Apostle here refers to the Scriptures which Timothy was taught in his infancy."1
The third passage from Acts refers to the Bereans who received the Gospel enthusiastically and were now checking its claims against "the Scriptures." At first glance it could be claimed that as the Bereans were using the written Scriptures as their only "rule of faith," they therefore established the precedent for all other Christians. However, what is often overlooked is that the Bereans had "received the word" orally, and that they were checking its claims against the Old Testament Scriptures only. Certainly no-one would reasonably suggest that Christians today imitate the Bereans and have only the Old Testament as the rule of faith.
Not only is the doctrine of Sola Scriptura not found in the Bible, it is expressly denied by it. The Scriptures we have in hand expressly state that they do not contain everything (St. John 20, 30; 21, 25), or give us an account of all that Christ had said or done (St. John 16, 12). In addition, we know that there existed other sacred writings now lost, such as an earlier letter of St. Paul to the Corinthians mentioned in 1 Cor. 5, 9: "I wrote to you in my letter...But now I am writing to you..." Also missing is St. Paul’s letter to the Laodiceans (Col. 4, 16).
Nevertheless, the fact there are parts of the written Word of God missing is of no fatal consequence to Catholics. This is so because the Catholic Church maintains that divine Revelation is fully contained in it’s Magisterium(body of teaching), comprised of both written Scripture and Tradition. Tradition here is Apostolic Tradition, not merely the tradition of men, and ranks equally with the written Word to complete divine Revelation. Tradition supplements the written Word of God, it does not contradict it. Further, it assists the Church to fully understand and appreciate the whole written Word. Tradition embraces all those truths which have been passed on from age to age either orally, in the writings of the Church Fathers, in the Acts of the Martyrs, in early paintings and inscriptions, in the practices and customs of the Universal Church etc.
Contrary to Protestant mythology, tradition is actually praised in Sacred Scripture: "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thes. 2, 15). Oral preaching was the medium of spreading the Gospel before the New Testament was written: Acts 2, 42; Rom. 10, 17; 1 Cor. 11, 2; 15, 3; 2 Tim 2, 2; 1 Pet. 1, 25. Were the early Christians, therefore, victims of false prophets preaching the "commandments of men" simply because they received the Gospel orally? Such an assertion would be ridiculous. What was condemned by Christ in St. Matt. 15, 6 (and by St. Paul in Col. 2, 8) was not tradition per se, but those traditions, whether doctrines or practices, which made God’s Word and Commandments ineffective. It is the Church, as the indefectible teaching authority established by Christ, which determines what is or is not authentic Tradition.
"But once the New Testament was finally complete there was no more need for ‘tradition.’"
Such an argument goes back to the very core of the Sola Scriptura debate. The short Catholic answer is: "Where does it say that in the Bible?" As time passed, the written New Testament would supplement Tradition, but not supplant it. The best response, however, is that Christ did not intend to leave all His teachings in a single book, but in the Church, whether written, oral or otherwise. When Christ ascended back into heaven He left behind a hierarchical authority to continue His mission in the world. This hierarchy was invested with divine authority to govern in His name (St. Matt. 16, 13; 18, 18); is to be obeyed by all the faithful (St. Luke 10, 16); and will last until the end of the world (St. Matt. 16, 18; 28, 20). Sola Scriptura, by implication, also rejects the need for an authoritative body outside of the Bible to determine vital questions of faith and morals. Yet, it is this same authority that St. Paul attests is "the pillar and bulwark of the truth" (1 Tim. 3, 15).
"But I can understand the Bible through the Holy Spirit without the need for a church or ‘tradition’!"
St. Peter himself warned that the "ignorant and unstable" would "twist" the Scriptures "to their own destruction" (2 Pet. 3, 16). One fruit of private interpretation of the Bible has been the spawning of over 25 000 different Protestant denominations all claiming to be "Bible-believing," yet agreeing on little more than their anti-Catholic tenets.
The Bible is a compilation of books all written in the ancient past and in languages for the most part dead to the average layman. Sacred Scripture itself mentions the difficulty of interpretation: 2 Pet. 3, 16; Heb. 5, 11-12. If the Holy Spirit gives an infallible explanation of the Bible to every individual reader, why did He not explain it to the Ethiopian minister in Acts 8, 30-31: "So Philip ran up to it and heard him reading the prophet Isaiah. He asked, Do you understand what you are reading? He replied, How can I, unless some one guides me?" It is the Catholic Church which has the true understanding of Sacred Scripture, aided by the Holy Spirit who will guide it in all truth until the end of the world (St. Matt. 28). It is insulting to Christ to assert that He would leave a written book without a divinely-protected living authority to safeguard and interpret it.
The Fathers:
St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies (C. 180 A.D.):
"If there should be a dispute over some kind of question, ought we not have recourse to the most ancient Churches in which the Apostles were familiar, and draw from them what is clear and certain in regard to that question? What if the Apostles had not in fact left writings to us? Would it not be necessary to follow the order of tradition, which was handed down to those to whom they entrusted the Churches?"
Tertullian, Demurrer Against the Heretics (200 A.D.):
"Wherever it shall be clear that the truth of the Christian discipline and faith are present, there also will be found the truth of the Scriptures and of their explanation, and of all the Christian traditions."
Origen, Fundamental Doctrines (C. 220 A.D.):
"Although there are many who believe that they themselves hold to the teachings of Christ, there are yet some among them who think differently from their predecessors. The teaching of the Church has indeed been handed down through an order of succession from the Apostles, and remains in the Churches even to the present time. That alone is to be believed as the truth which is in no way at variance with ecclesiastical and apostolic tradition."
St. Basil the Great, The Holy Spirit (375 A.D.):
"Of the dogmas and kerygmas preserved in the Church, some we possess from written teaching and others we receive from the tradition of the Apostles, handed on to us in mystery. In respect to piety both are of the same force. No one will contradict any of these, no one, at any rate, who is even moderately versed in matters ecclesiastical. Indeed, were we to try to reject unwritten customs as having no great authority, we would unwittingly injure the Gospel in its vitals."
St. Epiphanius, Against all Heresies (377 A.D.):
"It is not necessary that all the divine words have an allegorical meaning. Consideration and perception is needed in order to know the meaning of the argument of each. It is needful also to make use of Tradition; for not everything can be gotten from Sacred Scripture. The Holy Apostles handed down some things in the Scriptures, other things in Tradition."
St. John Chrysostom, Homily on 2 Thessalonians (C. 400 A.D.):
"‘Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you have been taught, whether by word or by our letter.’ From this it is clear that they did not hand down everything by letter, but there was much also that was not written. Like that which was written, the unwritten too is worthy of belief. So let us regard the tradition of the Church also as worthy of belief. Is it a tradition? Seek no further."
St. Augustine of Hippo, Letter to Januarius (C. 400 A.D.):
"But in regard to those observances which we carefully attend and which the whole world keeps, and which derive not from Scripture but from Tradition, we are given to understand that they are recommended and ordained to be kept, either by the Apostles themselves or by plenary councils, the authority of which is quite vital in the Church."
Catechism of the Council of Trent (1566):
Now all the doctrines in which the faithful are to be instructed are contained in the Word of God, which is found in Scripture and Tradition. To the study of these, therefore, the pastor should devote his days and nights, keeping in mind the admonition of St. Paul to Timothy, which all who have care of souls should consider as addressed to themselves: Attend to reading, to exhortation, and to doctrine, for all scripture divinely inspired is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct injustice, that the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.
Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992):
No. 80: Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing and move towards the same goal. Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own "always, to the close of the age."
No. 82: As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence.
No. 83: The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus’ teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. The first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition.
