May 2, 2010

  • Question 245 - Tradition versus Scripture

    Dear Dr. Sungenis, I have a question concerning Tradition. In David King's Vol. I, Holy Scripture the Ground and Pillar of Our Faith, the following is said: "In the end, the matter of authoritative revelation boils down to a question of preservation. Regardless of the assertions of Roman apologists, when the dust settles, there is one question they cannot answer. Can you name one oral, extrabiblical tradition, demonstratively traceable to the apostolic age, which is necessary for the faith and practice of the Church of Jesus Christ?" (p. 45) My question is, if unwritten tradition was to be regarded as a reliabe means and/or source for the preservation of binding revelation beyond the time of the apostles, and intended to function perpetually as an authoritative norm alongside Scripture, then what exactly is the content of Tradition, can that content be known and studied like the Scriptures can be? Thank you for your time, God bless Steven.

    R. Sungenis: Steven, as for King’s challenge to name “one oral extrabiblical tradition demonstratively traceable to the apostolic age, which is necessary for the faith and practice of the Church of Jesus Christ,” yes we can do so. It is infant baptism. Infant baptism is nowhere taught in Scripture, it is only implied. Yet the Church, according to all the ecclesiastical and patristic documents available, from the very beginning of the Church, practiced infant baptism.

    As to your question regarding the “content” of Tradition, everything the Church taught and practiced regarding faith and morals is “tradition.” Even Scripture is Tradition, since we wouldn’t know what the content of Scripture is without Tradition telling us so. So, no matter how much Mr. King wants to elevate Scripture and demote Tradition, he is utterly dependent on Tradition for his Scripture. He is like the proverbial dog chasing its tail. The ingredients of Scripture and Tradition then, of course, require a third element, a Magisterium to decide what is authentic Scripture and what is authentic Tradition. Of all the hundreds of books claiming to be Scripture, the Church decided that only 73 would be canonized. Of all the hundreds of Traditions taught and practiced, the Church decided which were apostolic and authentic and which were not. It can really work no other way. In the end, for every adulation Mr. King gives to Scripture, he only reinforces the need for Tradition and the Magisterium to tell him what the content of Scripture is, as well as its interpretation.