www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Scripture, Tradition and Reason

These are the three pillars of the Anglican Church, which calls itself a middle church or a bridge church. Sort of between the protestants and the Catholics.

Alex said,

Now, while the Catholic Church has held to the three, I do not think we view the three as equal, as able to trump one of the others. Which is what the "liberal" side did in the Episcopal Church did when they voted to ratify the Bishop who is living with his "partner", who is divorced, and last, who is in a gay relationship.

This is also how they allow woman ordination and now woman bishops.

Here is what I found on an Episcopal website, describing Scripture, Tradition and Reason.

Scripture:
Scripture is the word of God contained in the Old and New testaments of the Bible. The 39 books of the Old Testament contain the story of God's love from Creation up to the birth of his son, Jesus Christ. They contain God's laws as He gave them to the Hebrew people. The New Testament contains Christ's teachings, the accounts of his life as told by his followers, and the beginning of his church. It is written in 27 books.

Tradition:
We are not Christians in isolation but are part of a living faith that spans 2000 years. Tradition is the embodiment of our experience as Christians throughout the centuries. The heart of our tradition is expressed through the Bible, the Creeds (statements of faith, written in first centuries of the church's existence), the Sacraments (the Lord's supper and Baptism), and the ordained ministry passed on by Christ to his Church.

Reason:
Each one of us, with God's help, makes a decision about how we use tradition and Scripture in our lives. A personal relationship with God allows us to realize and celebrate our lives to the fullest. The gift of reason, as a complement to Scripture and tradition, leads us to seek answers to our own questions and to grow spiritually. Being active in a community of faith strengthens us to carry our faith into the world. Weaving scripture, tradition and reason together, we strengthen our faith and grow as children of god.

I do not see how this can be compared to the Catholic Church. I can only agree with the section on Tradition.

Here is what the CCC has to say about Reason.

47. "The Church teaches that the one true God, our Creator and Lord, can be known with certainty from his works, by the natural light of human REASON [cf. Vatican Council I, can. 2 # 1: DS 3026.]."

50. "By natural REASON man can know God with certainty, on the basis of his works. But there is another order of knowledge, which man cannot possibly arrive at by his own powers: the order of divine Revelation.[Cf. Dei Filius DS 3015.] Through an utterly free decision, God has revealed himself and given himself to man. This he does by revealing the mystery, his plan of loving goodness, formed from all eternity in Christ, for the benefit of all men. God has fully revealed this plan by sending us his beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. "

156. "What moves us to believe is not the fact that revealed truths appear as true and intelligible in the light of our natural reason: we believe 'because of the authority of God himself who reveals them, who can neither deceive nor be deceived'.[Dei Filius: 3 DS 3008.] So 'that the submission of our faith might nevertheless be in accordance with reason, God willed that external proofs of his Revelation should be joined to the internal helps of the Holy Spirit.'[Dei Filius: 3 DS 3009.] Thus the miracles of Christ and the saints, prophecies, the Church's growth and holiness, and her fruitfulness and stability 'are the most certain signs of divine Revelation, adapted to the intelligence of all'; they are 'motives of credibility' (motiva credibilitatis), which show that the assent of faith is 'by no means a blind impulse of the mind'.[Dei Filius: 3: DS 3008-3010; Cf. Mk 16 20 ; Heb 2:4 .]"

157. "Faith is certain. It is more certain than all human knowledge because it is founded on the very word of God who cannot lie. To be sure, revealed truths can seem obscure to human reason and experience, but 'the certainty that the divine light gives is greater than that which the light of natural reason gives.'[St. Thomas Aquinas, STh II-II 171, 5, obj. 3.] 'Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt.'[John Henry Cardinal Newman, Apologia pro vita sua (London Longman, 1878) 239.]"

I do not see any simularity between what the CCC says and what the section on Reason from the Episcopal Church says.


David

Dear David,

As the Holy Father recently said, as I read on the EWTN news site, reason can not be against faith and vice-versa.

I think liberals tend to understand "reason" in a modern sense of "being reasonable."

And the latter almost always means dispensing with those aspects of the faith of Christ that cause us discomfiture.

Alex

Hi,


Yes, of course. And what that means is that when one is actually against the other, then at least one of them is wrong.

If "faith" is the faith of the Catholic Church, taken from Divine Revelation expressed in Holy Scriptures and the Tradition of the Church, both interpreted by the same Church, then the one that would be wrong is reason.

Reason cannot be considered at the same level of Scripture and Tradition, because Reason is subjective by nature. It is very possible that my reason would tell me something and your reason would tell you exactly the opposite. In this situation we cannot be both correct, one of our "reasons" has to be wrong, and therefore, it doesn't play in the same league of Scripture and Tradition, which can never be wrong.

Shalom,
Memo.

Dear Memo,

Yes, but we could have two different interpretations of both Scripture and Tradition based on different reasoning.

And in that case, as long as what we say doesn't contradict the Magisterium, then we could both hold on to our views.

Alex

Yes, Alex, very good!

As long as the Magisterium has not formally defined something as an article of faith, people of good faith can disagree on interpretations.

One famous example is that St. Thomas Aquinas argued against the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. Since this doctrine had not yet been formally defined, he was within his rights to do so (even though he was flat out wrong! )!

Hello Dolly!

Yes, you are more than correct . . .

Another point, true in fact, is how there were two parties in the Catholic Church that disagreed on the moral quality of coffee . . .

Those that were "agin it" said that it was the devil's brew since it kept you up at night.

Those that were "fer it" said that it gave one clarity of thought.

Then this came to the Pope's attention and he tasted some - he then silenced the opposing party.

And so the coffee industry was born . . .

It was a Ukie, Kulchitsky, a Kozak in Austria who helped with the defenses of Vienna during the Turkish attack and helped repel the heathen hordes.

He received a charter to sell coffee - the drink really caught on, I'm told . . .

His relative, Innocent Kulchitsky, became a missionary in Siberia and was later canonized by the Orthodox Church as "St Innocent of Irkutsk."

Believe it or not . . .

Alex

This is great, thanks for helping me to get a handle on this but I think what the Catholic Church teaches and what the Anglican Communion has listed as one of its 3 pillars is different.

The sticking point for me is this line, "Each one of us, with God's help, makes a decision about how we use tradition and Scripture in our lives.

This says that each of us make a decision on how we use traditon and Scripture, not that the Church teaches us.


David

Dear David,

Are you into coffee yourself?

Did you know that Cappuccino is named for the Capuchin Friars?

Alex

Dear Alex,

Yes I am, I love coffee..... I lived on it when I worked as a paramedic.... sure helped me get though those 24 hour shifts.

As for the cappuccino thing, no I did not know that.

Now, why do you ask?


David, the Byzantine Catholic

And all this time, I thought Cappucino was named for the white tufted capuchin monkey.

So who came first the Capuchin Friar or the Capuchin Monk(ey)?

Dear Father Deacon,

Two Franciscans set up a fish and chips stand as a fundraiser for their monastery.

Some smart guy came up to one and asked, "So are you the 'fish-friar?'"

"No," he replied. "I'm the 'chip-monk!'"



Alex

Dear David,

No particular reason . . .

Alex

Alex,
That is bad..... :rolleyes:

But I can go one better.

One day a group of friars decided to open up a florist shop and as their needs were modest they were able to undercut the competition.

By being so cheap and haveing such good quality they soon cornered the market.

The other florist in town paid them a visit and explained how he could not meet their prices and was going out of business, he begged them to leave, they refused.

So the florist sent his brother inlaw, Hugh, to talk to them.

After Hugh paid the friars a visit, they left town that night.

Do you know the moral of this story?

Its, Hugh, and only Hugh, can stop florist friars.

:p :p

David, the Byzantine Catholic

Dear David,

Ha-ha-ha-ha!

Sorry, I inadvertently tickled myself . . .

Alex

Hi,

Different? Yes, of course.

Contradictory? No. If we have contradictory views after interpreting Scripture and/or Tradition, then at least one of us is wrong.

But even in the case of different views, they are just that: our own personal views and those will never rank with the Divinely inspired Scripture and Tradition in the defining "the Christian way" of things.

Shalom,
Memo.