Ask Me Help Desk - Scripture & Tradition

JoeT777,
I agree with you.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

There is also the idea, which I know you've brought up, that the Holy Spirit is taken to guide this transmission. Something like this would seem to be imperative if Tradition is to be anything over and above tradition.

I don't remember you ever answering my question about how you deal with the contradictions in tradition and between tradition and scripture.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

I don't remember you ever answering my question about how you deal with the contradictions in tradition and between tradition and scripture.

I don't remember you answering Wondergirl's request that you provide some examples.

Oh, and I also don't remember you ever answering the question asked in the OP, nor the question regarding canon formation--both of which have been around on this thread for quite awhile now. I asked the questions. Why don't you give us all your answers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

I don't remember you ever answering my question about how you deal with the contradictions in tradition and between tradition and scripture.

Please give him a specific one to chew on.

I also await the answers to all of those questions,
I'm beginning to think we'll never see them
Fred

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

I don't remember you answering Wondergirl's request that you provide some examples.

How about when a doctor of the Catholic church says that we must worship Mary, and scripture says that we are not worship anyone but God?

How about when a doctor of the Catholic church says that we are to decide or test all doctrine by scripture, and other says that we are to use tradition?

Quote:

Oh, and I also don't remember you ever answering the question asked in the OP, nor the question regarding canon formation--both of which have been around on this thread for quite awhile now. I asked the questions. Why don't you give us all your answers.

I believe that I have as we have carried on the discussion.

Now, I am still waiting for your answer to my question - third time in asking. Consider it hypotehtical if you wish, I don't care - but what do you do when a contradiction arises in tradition or between tradition and scripture?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

How about when a doctor of the Catholic church says that we must worship Mary, and scripture says that we are not worship anyone but God?

Worship (proskunesis) is reserved for God alone. I've never heard of anybody saying that we should worship Mary. Veneration (dule) and worship (proskunesis) are different things. Catholics and Orthodox (as well as many Anglicans) who venerate Mary regard worship of Mary (or anyone other than the Trinity) as a grave sin.

Quote:

How about when a doctor of the Catholic church says that we are to decide or test all doctrine by scripture, and other says that we are to use tradition?

I don't see these as in competition with one another. Scripture and Tradition don't stand to each other in the relation of either/or.

Quote:

I believe that I have as we have carried on the discussion.

Perhaps you can indicate where you answered them (or just refresh everyone's memory):
1. How do we adjudicate when two honest, intelligent, and well-intentioned people disagree over the meaning of Scripture (I gave a more precise formulation of the question earlier--this is just to call your attention to it).
2. How did early Christians (of the late-first and second centuries, lets say) know whether they had the right NT canon, the one God intended. There were lots of texts swirling around, how did the decision get made and how did anyone know it was the right decision? How do we know which canon is right today? If the mysterious Q were to turn up next week, should it be included as well (I didn't ask this last one before--I only just thought of it. But it would be cool if you wanted to wade in on that one too. I think it's an interesting question.)

I also think it is a very interesting question.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

By the way I'll be leaving tomorrow morning.
Bonnie and I are going up near the Canadian border to visit USA And Canadian relatives for Christmas.
I'll be back Sunday nihj or Monday, God willing, to continue here.
Merry, Holy Christmas,
Fred

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcura

By the way I'll be leaving tomorrow morning.
Bonnie and I are going up near the Canadian border to visit USA And Canadian relatives for Christmas.
I'll be back Sunday nihj or Monday, God willing, to continue here.
Merry, Holy Christmas,
Fred

Be safe, Fred, and have a blessed Christmas!

Fred,

Have a safe trip and a wonderful Feast of the Lord's Nativity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

Worship (proskunesis) is reserved for God alone. I've never heard of anybody saying that we should worship Mary. Veneration (dule) and worship (proskunesis) are different things. Catholics and Orthodox (as well as many Anglicans) who venerate Mary regard worship of Mary (or anyone other than the Trinity) as a grave sin.

Putting aside you priavte interpretation of veneration vs worship, then would you consider a doctor of the Catholic church who demanded that as an essential to be in error or perhaps even heresy?

Quote:

I don't see these as in competition with one another. Scripture and Tradition don't stand to each other in the relation of either/or.

You did not answer the question.

Quote:

Perhaps you can indicate where you answered them

Sorry, Akoue, as I have told you in other threads, I am not up for playing games like that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

Putting aside you priavte interpretation of veneration vs worship, then would you consider a doctor of the Catholic church who demanded that as an essential to be in error or perhaps even heresy?

Please name this person.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

Putting aside you priavte interpretation of veneration vs worship, then would you consider a doctor of the Catholic church who demanded that as an essential to be in error or perhaps even heresy?

You did not answer the question.

Sorry, Akoue, as I have told you in other threads, I am not up for playing games like that.

I'm not sure what you mean by "private interpretation" here, so I'm not sure what your first question means. If anyone demanded worship (proskunesis) of Mary, I would regard that view as heretical.

The other question, the one you say I didn't answer, was rather vague. I'm not aware of a Doctor of the Church who said that we should not avail ourselves of Scripture and Tradition, so I'm not sure how to answer your question in a more precise way. Perhaps if you could flesh it out a bit I could try to offer a more satisfactory reply.

Tj, in fairness, no you didn't answer the questions, and this is unfair since you've been quite insistent about your own. I do remember you saying that God fixed the canon. But that doesn't speak to the question I reiterated above, namely, how do we know we've got the one he intended. And I am quite genuinely unaware--and unable to find--your answer to the first question. I think it only fair that everyone here have a voice, and I've invited you both politely and repeatedly a number of times to share your take on the questions (while at the same time trying to keep the thread on topic, with the exception of some felicitations). I think your view of these matters definitely has a place here: We've heard a lot about the Tradition-based view and I have all along asked those who don't share it to offer their own. I even challenged the Tradition-based view in hopes that more alternatives would begin to emerge. So, please, I welcome your input, as well as that of others--including non-Christians who don't have a personal stake in the matter.

If you'd be willing to reiterate your answers for my benefit, and for that of others who may be interested, that would be great and welcome.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

I know that the other Apostles chose him. I am asking where scripture says that He was God's choice.

Already answered.

Quote:

You count different than I do.

Apparently.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

This is specific with respect to Judas, and does not refer to Apostolic succession as a doctrine. Further, have a gander at what the Apostles said were the qualifications. One would have to be 2000 years old today to qualify.

The OP requests that you go to the other thread and let this one get back on topic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

That is why I frequently recommend that discussions be kept respectful. No name-calling, abuse, etc., that we see far too much of on boards like this. Likewise, respect for what others on the list are discussing is importaant, without one person unilaterally assuming authority to choose who is allowed to discuss what, and specifically suggesting that the rights of some to discuss differ from the rights of others.

All you need to do is just not discuss it or the discussing of discussing it and it will go away. I am not sure why, if you don't want it discussed, why you keep discussing the discussing of the topic.

Afterall, I was just responding to someone else's comment. And you for some reason did not comment on that. You just don't seem to want me responding to the subtopics raised by others. But I don't care - if no one else comments, it goes away. If you keep commenting, it keeps going.

So, your choice - we can keep discussing this, or you can let it drop.

Just trying to stay on topic TJ. From my perspective, it is you who seems to want to run the thread any direction you want. Is there something wrong with discussing Scripture and Tradition on the Scripture and Tradition thread?

Perhaps you should ask a moderator.

Wondergirl,
Thanks much.
We've got new snow here and the is several hundred miles so we'll drive carfully.
Have a blessed Chrsitmas,
Fred

Okay, Fred, shouldn't you be in bed? You're leaving tomorrow morning, there's bad weather all around... I'm not anxious for you to go anywhere, but I do want to make sure that you come back to us in one piece!

De Maria,
Thanks much for your concern.
I'll be headed for bed shortly.
It's 10:25 PM here.
Merry Christmas,
Fred

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

I'm not sure what you mean by "private interpretation" here, so I'm not sure what your first question means. If anyone demanded worship (proskunesis) of Mary, I would regard that view as heretical.

The other question, the one you say I didn't answer, was rather vague. I'm not aware of a Doctor of the Church who said that we should not avail ourselves of Scripture and Tradition, so I'm not sure how to answer your question in a more precise way. Perhaps if you could flesh it out a bit I could try to offer a more satisfactory reply.

I don't think Tj understands the role of 'doctor' in the Church. You might want to explain how it works. As I understand it among other things he must be a baptized Christian and subscribe to the profession of faith. As a rule only priests receive doctorate of theology and canon law. Their only role is to advise and may appear as advocates before the Roman tribunals. The Pope maintains has the authority to create doctors and sometimes delegates this authority to universities and seminaries. What is important here is doctors are advisory titles, the role being to 'teach' the faith not make it. Source: (link0 CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Doctor

JoeT

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeT777

I don't think Tj understands the role of 'doctor' in the Church...the role being to 'teach' the faith not make it.

That's why I asked him who it is. He cagily mentioned someone in authority who advocates the worship of Mary but didn't bother to name and quote that person.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

How about when a doctor of the Catholic church says that we must worship Mary, and scripture says that we are not worship anyone but God?

What you have described can't happen. All "doctors" of the Church, of which I'm aware, have been designated such, post mortem. Here's a list:
http://www.doctorsofthecatholicchurch.com/IOD.html

And they would not have been designated such if they had interpreted Scripture incorrectly.

What you are describing is a conflict between a personal interpretation and Scripture. The Church judges whether the interpretation is valid. If the judgement is that it is invalid, the person is asked to change his interpretation in line with the Church.

Quote:

How about when a doctor of the Catholic church says that we are to decide or test all doctrine by scripture, and other says that we are to use tradition?

Can't happen. Doctors of the Church are so named postmortem.

However, what you describe is two Catholics who disagree on doctrine. This has happened frequently in history. The Church decides which is right based upon whose interpretation is supported by Scripture and Tradition. A famous case is Arius vs. Athanasius.

Quote:

I believe that I have as we have carried on the discussion.

I don't recall it either. Why don't you refresh our memory?

Quote:

Now, I am still waiting for your answer to my question - third time in asking. Consider it hypotehtical if you wish, I don't care - but what do you do when a contradiction arises in tradition or between tradition and scripture?

You are spelling tradition with a little "t". When laypeople begin cultural traditions which contradict Scripture. The Church steps in and corrects them.

Traditions spelled with a big T signifying that they are the Word of God do not contradict Scripture. Its impossible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcura

By the way I'll be leaving tomorrow morning.
Bonnie and I are going up near the Canadian border to visit USA And Canadian relatives for Christmas.
I'll be back Sunday nihj or Monday, God willing, to continue here.
Merry, Holy Christmas,
Fred

May God keep and protect you.

Merry Christmas!

De Maria< right you are.
Good night.
Fred

Quote:

Originally Posted by De Maria

Already answered.

No, you showed me where scripture says that he was chosen by men, but where does it say that God endorsed him as an Apostle?

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcura

De Maria< right you are.
Good night.
Fred

Have fun and stay safe. We'll be talk'en when you get back.

Merry Christmas

Joe

Quote:

Originally Posted by De Maria

What you have described can't happen. All "doctors" of the Church, of which I'm aware, have been designated such, post mortem. Here's a list:
Introduction to the Doctors of the Catholic Church

And they would not have been designated such if they had interpreted Scripture incorrectly.

Heh heh, squirming a bit are you because what you believe cannot happen did.

Alphonse Liguori

Quote:

What you are describing is a conflict between a personal interpretation and Scripture. The Church judges whether the interpretation is valid. If the judgement is that it is invalid, the person is asked to change his interpretation in line with the Church.

Private interpretation of men.

You want to believe that it cannot happen. It did, it has happened, and it does happen.

But now answer my question - why do you do when tradition contradicts itself or scripture? You are doing a great job of avoiding the question.

So there are 32 officially designated Doctors of the Church. They include the 8 Fathers (Athanasius, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, John Chrysostom, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine, and Gregory the Great). The last two Doctors to be named were Catherine of Sienna and Teresa of Avila (in 1970).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

No, you showed me where scripture says that he was chosen by men, but where does it say that God endorsed him as an Apostle?

No. The lot fell on Matthias. If you believe in chance, then he was chosen by men. But if you believe that God ordains everything, then God made the lot fall on Matthias.

Acts 1:26
And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles

How do you interpret it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeT777

I don’t think Tj understands the role of ‘doctor’ in the Church. You might want to explain how it works. As I understand it among other things he must be a baptized Christian and subscribe to the profession of faith. As a rule only priests receive doctorate of theology and canon law. Their only role is to advise and may appear as advocates before the Roman tribunals. The Pope maintains has the authority to create doctors and sometimes delegates this authority to universities and seminaries. What is important here is doctors are advisory titles, the role being to ‘teach’ the faith not make it. Source: (link0 CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Doctor

JoeT

Heh heh heh, I find it interesting that you have to suggest that I don't know what I am talking about because the reality is just unthinkable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by De Maria

No. The lot fell on Matthias. If you believe in chance, then he was chosen by men. But if you believe that God ordains everything, then God made the lot fall on Matthias.

Acts 1:26
And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles

How do you interpret it?

So we see that they cast lots - I never said that they did not. Men do lots of things that are are not ordained by God to try to figured out things. Often men do not wait upon the Lord as they should. This is not taking anything away from Matthias as a godly man, but I don't see where scripture says that He had God's endorsement as an Apostle.

Where does it say that God endorsed Matthias as an Apostle?

Tj, really, there's a whole thread dedicated to the number of the Apostles. Why don't you respond to De Maria's post there? This isn't the topic of this thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by De Maria

Just trying to stay on topic TJ. From my perspective, it is you who seems to want to run the thread any direction you want. Is there something wrong with discussing Scripture and Tradition on the Scripture and Tradition thread?

Perhaps you should ask a moderator.

Who said that there was? Is there something wrong with responding to questions asked of one on a thread?

Perhaps you should ask a moderator.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

heh heh, squirming a bit are you because what you believe cannot happen did.

Alphonse Liguori

St. Alphonsus "Marie" de Liguori. My deep respect and veneration for him is one of the reasons I also adopted Mary's name.

Show me what you think he did to contradict Scripture.

Better yet. Your question regarding how contradictions to the Word of God are dealt with has been answered. Now you simply have a problem with St. Alphonsus Liguori or with your interpretation of something he may have or may not have said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

Tj, really, there's a whole thread dedicated to the number of the Apostles. Why don't you respond to De Maria's post there? This isn't the topic of this thread.

I did not see it, but I guess my question is, I just responded to comments made to me. I am not carrying on on that sub-topic, but you are. I suggested before that if you don't want to discuss it, then don't discuss it and it will die off.

But for some reason you and De Maria keep raising it and then suggest that I should not respond.

Quote:

Originally Posted by De Maria

St. Alphonsus "Marie" de Liguori. My deep respect and veneration for him is one of the reasons I also adopted Mary's name.

Show me what you think he did to contradict Scripture.

I told you already.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

Who said that there was? Is there something wrong with responding to questions asked of one on a thread?

Perhaps you should ask a moderator.

Done. I hope we'll receive a prompt answer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

Who said that there was? Is there something wrong with responding to questions asked of one on a thread?

Perhaps you should ask a moderator.

Well, until you start answering the questions that have been repeatedly put to you, I can't see why anyone here should be obliged to answer yours. If you want to start a topic of conversation, click the ask question button and start your own thread. Please stop trying to hijack this one--which has been going along very nicely, thank you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by De Maria

Done. I hope we'll receive a prompt answer.

Thank you, De Maria.