Ron: John, I saw your article on oral tradition. You are perpetuating a common misconception. Sacred Infallible Tradition is not an oral tradition. If it were, then you could quote for me from an infallible oral tradition. You cannot (other than quotes from Scripture), therefore such an infallible oral Tradition does not exist.
Tradition is ‘the deeds wrought by God in the history of salvation.’ Dei Verbum, n. 2. The transmission of Tradition involves words, written and spoken, as well as deeds, but Tradition itself is the deeds of God in salvation history.
See my article on Tradition.
Ron Conte
J. Salza: Ron, the Church does not subscribe to your definition of tradition. You cannot divorce the “transmission” of tradition from tradition itself, since tradition, by its very definition (in Greek, paradosis) means “to hand on.” See the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 81:
“And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching.”
Further, St. Paul commands us to obey the oral traditions in 2 Thess 2:14 (Douay-Rheims). Since the Scriptures are the living Word of God, this must mean that there are oral traditions for us 21st century Westerners to follow. Otherwise, Paul’s command would be meaningless. Therefore, it is erroneous to claim, as you do, that “an infallible oral tradition does not exist.” If that were true, then God through Paul would not have ordered us to follow oral tradition, for God does not command us to do the impossible.
Ron: John, You are ignoring the definition of Tradition given by Vatican II “the deeds wrought by God in the history of salvation” Dei Verbum, n. 2. Quote to me from this infallible oral tradition.
You cannot because Tradition is the Deeds of God, not the words. {2:14} Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle.
He does not say that the traditions are oral, but rather that they are transmitted by the spoken and written word. Tradition is distinct from the transmission of Tradition. But confusing Tradition with its transmission is a common error (which even the Catechism makes).
What you are teaching online, with the claim that it is Church teaching, is a common misunderstanding about Sacred Tradition. You are leading the faithful into an error about an important teaching within the Faith.
Again, e-mail me a quote from an infallible oral tradition. You cannot because if such an infallible oral tradition existed, it could be written down, and they we would have two Bibles (which is not possible).
J. Salza: Ron, you are basing your entire argument on a nebulous statement of Vatican II about tradition, but Vatican II was not issuing a dogmatic definition of tradition. Previous councils and the current Catechism of the Catholic Church have already provided us the definition of Tradition.
However, you have arrogated to yourself the authority to declare that the Catechism of the Catholic Church has made an error. Why don’t you write an article about the Catechism’s erroneous definition of tradition? And include all the councils before Vatican II in your condemnation as well.
You argue that tradition is limited to the “deeds of God.” Yet nowhere does the Church ever say that tradition “is limited to the deeds of God.” Nevertheless, let’s stick with your definition. If tradition is only the “deeds of God,” then what are those “deeds”? Where does the Church give us a list of those “deeds”?
The fact is, if you want to argue that tradition is the “deeds of God,” then one of these “deeds” is God’s transmission of His living Word into written form (Sacred Scripture). If that is true (which it is), then God’s transmission of His Word into unwritten form (Sacred Tradition) is also one of the “deeds of God.” It’s all or nothing. Either God’s word as communicated to us in written and unwritten form is tradition (Greek, paradosis), or it is not.
St. Paul gives us the answer in 2 Thess 2:14. He commands us to hold to the oral and written traditions (that is, whether by word or by epistle). Now, in response to Paul’s clear teaching, you write: “He does not say that the traditions are oral, but rather that they are transmitted by the spoken and written word.” This is a distinction without a difference. Tell me, if there is no “oral tradition,” then what is the “they” in your sentence that is being “transmitted by the spoken word”?
Ron: You are dismissing the insights offered by Vatican II because they disagree with your own understanding.
J. Salza: Quite the contrary, I am actually advancing Vatican II’s definition of tradition which, as Dei Verbum propounds, is the Word of God that has been entrusted by Christ and the Holy Spirit to the apostles and handed down to us. The same document identifies tradition with the transmission of those truths.
Ron: Previous Councils did not give a specific definition of Tradition; them mention it, but the topic has not received enough attention from the Magisterium.
J. Salza: The Catechism of the Catholic Church merely restates what the popes, councils, doctors and Fathers have taught always and everywhere about tradition – that it is the Word of God transmitted to us both orally and in writing, preserved, protected and propounded by the Church’s Magisterium. This is precisely my position. You, on the other hand, are arguing that there is no oral tradition. If you believe there is no oral tradition, then that makes you an adherent of sola Scriptura (written tradition alone).
Ron: On the point about tradition, it’s not so much an error in the Catechism as it is a confusion between tradition itself and the transmission of tradition. The prior Councils and prior magisterial documents do not give an infallible definition of Tradition. We do not have an infallible definition of Tradition from the Magisterium yet, so it is an open question as to what tradition is, what its limits are, etc.
J. Salza: So the Church, in 1992, got confused about what Tradition really is? That seems to be what you are suggesting. You are trying to create a distinction between “tradition” and the “transmission of tradition,” but I have told you that this is a distinction without a difference. The “tradition” is what is “transmitted,” which is the meaning of the word Tradition. Think of it this way. First, there are eternal truths of God. Second, God communicates these truths to us by way of Tradition. The “Tradition” is the truths of God (the first part), but “Tradition” is also the communication of those truths (the second part). That is why Scripture is called “tradition.” They are the written communication of God’s eternal truths. This is the same with oral Tradition. Christ told the apostles certain truths orally, and they communicated those truths orally to their successors.
Ron: The Church has never clearly defined Tradition. It is one of the areas of doctrine in need of development and further clarification.
J. Salza: The Church has indeed provided us the general definition of tradition in her magisterial documents and catechisms throughout the centuries. The only thing the Church has not done is given us a list of all the oral traditions. But the same would apply to the Scriptures. Almost 80 percent of the New Testament has corruptions (textual variants). The Church has almost never told us what the true Scriptures are where there are discrepancies. However, the Church could do this if she had to, just like she could give us a list of the oral traditions if she had to. The fact that there is not a list of oral traditions (or a list of the true Scriptures among textual variants) does not mean that such a list does not exist.
Ron: There is no list of God’s deeds, however, certainly the preeminent deed is the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross for our salvation. So Tradition, since it includes that deed, also includes the very source of our salvation. If Tradition is otherwise defined, then Salvation would not be found within Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium; it would be external to those three things.
J. Salza: You are basing your argumentation on a false premise – that tradition includes only the deeds of God. Vatican II never defines tradition that way, and neither did any other pope or council. But let’s assume your definition is correct. If tradition includes only the “deeds of God,” the “deeds” would include God’s transmission of His truths to us human beings through both the oral word (Jesus’ teachings; the Holy Ghost’s promptings) or the written word (divine inspiration of the Scriptures). If not, then the transmission of God’s truths from God would not be a deed of God which of course is false.
The fact is, if you want to argue that tradition is the “deeds of God,” then one of these “deeds” is God’s transmission of His living Word into written form (Sacred Scripture). If that is true (which it is), then God’s transmission of His Word into unwritten form (Sacred Tradition) is also one of the “deeds of God.” It’s all or nothing. Either God’s word as communicated to us in written and unwritten form is tradition (Greek, paradosis), or it is not.
Ron: Yes, the writing of Scripture is one of the deeds of God in salvation history, so the actual act of writing Scripture is a deed of Tradition. Scripture proceeds from Tradition, just as the Son proceeds from the Father.
J. Salza: Scripture doesn’t proceed from Tradition; Scripture IS Tradition, the written tradition that proceeds from God. It is the communicated Word of God in written form. Same thing with oral tradition. Oral Tradition proceeds from Christ; it is the communicated Word of God in oral form. Tradition is the eternal truth of God that has been communicated to us through these two modes.
Ron: ‘they’ refers to the truths taught to us by the deeds of God in salvation history. Such deeds are salvific, but not merely salvific, they also teach us truth. For example, Christ’s death on the Cross teaches us how to live. The deeds of God are Tradition itself. The deeds teach truths. The truths are handed down orally and in writing, and more so by the way that we live our lives.
J. Salza: Yes, and these deeds include His transmission of His truth to us in both the oral and written form.
Ron: St. Paul is referring to the process of transmitting the truths of Tradition, which of course includes the spoken word as well as the written word as well as the example of our lives.
J. Salza: St. Paul is telling us to obey tradition, which is what has been communicated to the faithful by either the oral or written word. God’s communicated Word is the tradition we must obey, whether it comes to us by way of the written or oral form.
Ron: I see from you words that you have insight into the Faith. Do not assume that you have completely understood Tradition and that you have nothing more to learn about it.
J. Salza: Amen. I always strive to learn more every day as I hold fast to the traditions that have been handed down to me.
Ron: Also, I notice that you have twice ignored my challenge to quote from an infallible oral Tradition.
J. Salza: I could similarly ask you to quote for me all of the true Scriptures. You would be unable to do so, because 78% of the New Testament has textual variants, and you have no way of resolving these discrepancies. Yet, based on your inability to do so, I would not declare that there is not one written tradition. Your challenge reminds me of how the Protestant apologists approach oral tradition.
Oral tradition refers to the truths that Christ taught the apostles. So when you say “quote from,” there is no document from which to quote. That, however, doesn’t mean that there are no oral traditions, just like textual variants don’t mean we don’t have true Scriptures. Oral traditions include the canon of Scripture, Mary’s perpetual virginity, Christ’s divinity, Christ’s two natures and two wills. These are truths that have been handed down to us from Christ and the apostles.
Ron: thanks for your interesting replies.