The Earnest Contender

Friday, January 12, 2007

Sources of Knowledge 2: Tradition

Sources of Knowledge 2

Tradition

What is meant by tradition? Tradition is handing over or handing down customs, beliefs, or stories, from generation to generation. There are basically two traditions of Theology the modern view and the biblical view.

Modern View is that we began with polytheism and progressed to monotheism.

Biblical View is beginning in monotheism we degenerated to polytheism

Tradition has some merit, and theologically it has more weight than intuition, but in the end it is another poor source of authority to rule ones life. Yet, there are many who put their complete trust in tradition following inventions of men rather than the Word of God. There is large cult built on tradition. Tradition can be helpful, but there are some definite limitations of tradition. Tradition tends to deny, the perspicuity (clarity) of Scripture, the priesthood of the believer, and the autonomy of the local church. Further, tradition can and does transmit both truth and error.

“Tradition is a wonderful servant, but a horrible master.” (Pettigrew)

Here are some traditions invented by the Church of Rome and the approximate dates they were canonized. I barrowed these from Bartholomew Brewer, a man who had quite an impact on my life as a new believer you can find his complete tract here.

1. Presbyters first called priests by Lucian 2nd c.

2. Sacerdotal mass instituted by Cyprian 3rd c.

3. Prayers for the dead A.D. 300

4. Making the sign of the cross A.D. 300

5. Wax candles A.D. 320

6. Veneration of angels, dead saints, and images A.D. 375

7. Mass became a daily ritual A.D. 394

8. Beginning of exaltation of Mary, term "Mother of God” first applied to her by Council of Ephesus A.D. 431

9. Priests began to wear special clothing A.D. 500

10. Extreme Unction (Rite of Healing) A.D. 526

11. The doctrine of Purgatory by Gregory I A.D. 593

12. Latin used in worship A.D. 600

13. Prayers offered to Mary, dead saints and angels A.D. 600

14. First man to be proclaimed Pope (Boniface III) A.D. 610

15. Kissing the Pope's feet A.D. 709

16. Temporal power of Popes, conferred by Pepon, King of the Franks A.D. 750

17. Veneration of cross, images, relics authorized A.D. 786

18. holy water, mixed with pinch of salt, chrism, and blessed by a priest A.D. 850

19. Veneration of St. Joseph A.D. 890

20. College of Cardinals begun A.D. 927

21. Baptism of bells instituted by Pope John XIII A.D. 965

22. Canonization of dead saints by Pope John XV A.D. 995

23. Fasting on Fridays and Lent A.D. 998

24. The Mass developed gradually as a sacrifice, attendance made obligatory 11th c.

25. Celibacy of priests declared A.D. 1079

26. Rosary adopted (pagan) by Peter the Hermit A.D. 1090

27. The Inquisition instituted by Council of Verona A.D. 1184

28. Sale of indulgences A.D. 1190

29. Seven Sacraments, defined by Peter Lombard 12th c.

30. Transubstantiation, defined by Innocent III A.D. 1215

31. Auricular confession (Rite of reconciliation) of sins to a priest instead of God, instituted by Innocent III A.D. 1215

32. Adoration of the wafer (called the Host), decreed by Pope Honorius III A.D. 1220

33. Scapular invented by Simon Stock of England A.D. 1251

34. The cup forbidden to the laity at communion by Council of Constance A.D. 1414

35. Purgatory proclaimed as a dogma by the Council of Florence in A.D. 1439

36. Tradition declared of equal authority with the Bible by the Council of Trent A.D. 1545

37. Apocryphal books are added to the Bible by the Council of Trent A.D. 1546

38. Creed of Pope Pius IV imposed as the official creed in place of the original Apostolic Creed A.D. 1560

39. Immaculate Conception of Mary (not virgin birth) proclaimed by Pope Pius IX A.D. 1854

40. Syllabus of Errors proclaimed by Pope Pius IX and ratified by the Vatican Council; condemned freedom of religion, conscience, speech, press and scientific discoveries which are disapproved by the Roman Church; asserted the Pope's temporal authority over all civil rulers A.D. 1864

41. Infallibility of the Pope in matters of faith and morals proclaimed by the Vatican Council A.D. 1870

42. Assumption of Mary proclaimed by Pius XII A.D. 1950

43. Mary proclaimed the "Mother of the Church" by Pope Paul VI A.D. 1965

These were barrowed from a tract written by Bartholomew Brewer you can see it in it’s entirety here.

Instead of obeying the Bible which commands, "Come out from among them and be ye separate..." (2 Corinthians 6:17) there are some Christians who feel in practice and/or name that they must or need to “reform” the Church of Rome (thus the name Reformation) and she will be OK again. Shame! Perhaps my friends who say they are Reformed can begin to see why I eschew the idea of Reformation and the name Reformed Christian. If you are among the reformed tradition why not try something radical for Christ, separate from the dusty "old time religion". I know this is a difficult step, but I am confident that God will bless you for it.

Stay salty,
Brother John

11 Comments:

I don't know what to think of this. My initial response is anger, then sadness.

It is pointless to try to argue, but I will just say that the Roman Catholic church is not a cult. If you say the local church can interpret Scripture the way it wants, you should have no problem with the Catholic church. It is just another interpretation.

If you believe there is a correct and true way to interpret Scripture and the Church's theology is outside that, then you are acting as the Catholic church.

As a Protestant people would tell me I wasn't saved because I didn't speak in tongues. I don't know where you stand on that, but I didn't and don't believe it. Do you consider that a legitimate and true interpretation of Scripture.

I find it interesting you don't give the Church credit in your list for deciding what books would be included in the Bible. You also didn't give the Church credit for her fight against heresy, and that a great many of theological truths shared by both Protestants and Catholics came from that period.

When I went back to the Church it was very eye opening to see how much misunderstanding existed on both sides.

I believe all followers of Christ should be unified, even if it isn't the most solid form of unity.

But none of this matters because I am obviously a duped cult follower.

Take care, MC.

By Anonymous, at 12/1/07 6:30 PM
Yahhhoooooo brother. Amen!!!! Preach it! Wake em up brother and knock down those bowling pins...strike!!!

Now go change those diapers:-)

By Bhedr, at 12/1/07 8:12 PM
John,
You make some good points and I think of all the sola's, sola Scriptura stands as beacon for the only authority for faith and practice. I also believe all church denominations including mine are susceptible to the negative effects of tradition.

By Anonymous, at 12/1/07 8:20 PM
Good post to get us Reformed types to thinking.

"Reformed" and "Reformational" were words developed when many of the "Reformers" had hoped that God would reform the Roman church -- however, the Roman Catholic Church kicked out the reformers, like Luther. Now while the name Reformation and Reformed, technically speaking, does not speak to the enormous break and distance of the two groups, it historically has meaning to identify those who were uncompromising on their stands on sola gratia, sola fides, Solus Christus, Sola Scriptura, Soli Deo gloria -- so much so that they identified the Pope and the Roman Church as the Antichrist and Babylon of Revelation.

So, I understand the inadequacy of the words “Reformation” and “Reformed” in describing the fundamental break. However, these are historical technical terms which convey the meaning – except to some liberal clerics and theologians of the mainline denominations of these areas, who seek compromise with the various documents (Evangelicals and Catholics Together, and the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification).

By Anonymous, at 12/1/07 11:22 PM
Here's the main reason I believe John is right in his stand. At a time when I was a member of a mainline denomintation called the Southern Baptist. My pastor even held the new movie up of Luther and said that he felt it wasn't a stretch to say that we were in concert and have done like Luther. Not long about that time I was driving down the road and a truck pulled in front of me with this Bible verse on the back...now take note: usually they have gospel verses on the back but this one had,

"And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her my people, that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues." Revelation 18:4

I thought up a few excuses as to why this verse may not apply to me and gave them to God but the answer came back,

"Come out of her my people, that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues." Revelation 18:4

Thus sayeth the Lord.

What is it about our flesh that wants to walk and not run?

We don't have to give an answer to Luther, Calvin or John Cole for defending the truth of seperation or anyone else on judgment day or even a sincere brother who does love the Lord but may not understand this Bible verse clearly. 1 Kings 13. At the end of the day all rationale will be delievered up to our Almighty God who sits on a throne and each case will be held before him. All we can do is encourage one another to listen and obey His commands so that there will be less tears on that final day.

It is good to be in an independent local Bible believing assembly. I encourage everyone who is not already in one, to go ahead and get in one. The cost may be great, but God will strengthen you in your desire to obey Him.

By Bhedr, at 13/1/07 9:14 AM
Hi Michael,
I know that frustrated feeling and I would dare say that there are a good number more that have felt this way at times too. I am going to answer your concerns the best I can, but I am taking the liberty to answer them in reverse order.

You said, “…none of this matters because I am obviously a duped cult follower.”

Michael, this does matter. It has eternal consequences, it is huge! I half think you were being a bit sarcastic when you said, “I am obviously a duped cult follower” and I understand that. I would be sarcastic too, but you do not need to feel duped nor do you need to adhere to everything the Church of Rome tries to guilt you into holding on to.

You said, “I believe all followers of Christ should be unified, even if it isn't the most solid form of unity.”

This is an excellent statement. The gospel truth to this is that all believers are unified in the most solid form of unity imaginable. Whether we recognize and realize this unity does not negate unity. In Christ we are all one (cf. Galatians 3:28; 1Corinthians 8:6; 12:12, 13; 2 Corinthians 1:21-22; Ephesians 1:12-14). There also happens to be distinctions in the body of Christ which also serves as her strength. The key to all this discussion is that those who are in Christ are therefore unified by the Holy Spirit. (See my short post on
What a Fellowship!.)

There is a lot of misunderstanding in the Church, I agree. We are, after all, still human and sinful.

Your comment about “my list” is moot since it is not “my list”. I give full credit to Bartholomew Brewer an ex-Carmelite Priest. I have included two links to his tract in the post.

Your concern about tongues is valid, though a bit off topic; I am sincerely bothered by those in the body of Christ who insist on tongues as a test of fellowship, and those who feel it is the evidence of salvation. My position on sign gifts is that they were to signify a certain group of men (namely the Apostles) who were commissioned by the Lord to propagate His gospel. Tongues is not a legitimate gift for believers today in my view.

You said, “If you say the local church can interpret Scripture the way it wants, you should have no problem with the Catholic church. It is just another interpretation.”

I would welcome the opportunity to clarify or discuss (from a biblical perspective) what is meant by a local church and what is meant by the autonomy of a local church. Please read this short post What is a Local Church? and this short post one onThe Autonomy of the Local Church. These should clear up some of your concerns, if not please let us reason together some more.

BTW, Michael, I want to commend you for being so polite I hope you sense that this is met with mutual respect.

Thanks for reading,
J. Wendell

By J. Wendell, at 13/1/07 4:30 PM
Hi Brian,
Your contributions here are welcome. Thanks for reading, and sharing that testamony.

Hi Jazzy Cat,
Truer words have not been spoken. I concur with a hearty amen! Baptists say “amen” from time to time. ;-)

Hi Earl-
Thanks for bringing that out.

My pastor is from Ireland and has said that he is reformed with a small “r” and has tried to explain that very thing to me. Yet at the same time brother, so many separated reformers still announce they are “always reforming”. Reforming what? Do you equate reformation with transformation?

Thanks for reading,
Brother John

By J. Wendell, at 13/1/07 4:49 PM
I come across that phase "always reforming" at various times. It is always when I visit a mainline Presbyterian church that my son is getting paid to play bagpipes at a service. I come to those out of great curiosity. What it means (Earl's Translation of their words) is that they keep bending and changing doctrine to suit the whims and fashions of the culture.

So, I don't like the phrase, "ever reforming" because of where I hear that coming from and what those people mean by it.

Reformed to me is going back to the pure gospel from the lips of Christ and the Apostles. That is pretty radical. I think that's what you mean too, John.

By Anonymous, at 13/1/07 10:36 PM
I was being sarcastic. I don't believe the Catholic Church is a cult. When someone throws out the word "cult" (or implies it) where does one go from there? The church does not make me feel guilty at all because I believe the authority of the Church comes from Christ and is in concert with Christ and his Word.

I was a Protestant for ten plus years, so if I thought any of the teachings of the Church were non-Biblical I would not follow the teachings. If I didn't believe the Holy Spirit had something to do with my return to the Church I would not be there. I fully believe it is God's will for me to be there. I did not return on a whim. I take my faith very seriously. The decision was thought out, prayed out, and talked out. The closeness I have experienced with Christ over this time has been one of the most spiritually fruitful periods of my adult Christian life. Initially it was a super high, but has tapered off to normal. Praying the Liturgy of the Hours has made it much easier to Adore, Confess, be Thankful and ask for things of God via Supplication on a daily basis.

The link for Fellowship didn't work, but the two Local Church ones did. Most of what was said there applies to my local church and the Catholic Church as a whole.
1. we are called out
2. there are multiple churches in multiple areas
3. we are born again. (If that means a decision to be surrendered to Christ)
4. we meet together with pastors and deacons
5. We glorify God and worship Him in public.
6. We edify the saints (meaning the people and the Saints)
7. We observe the ordinances of the Church.
8. We evangelize the lost and send out missionaries.
9. It is a very lively place.
10. I and many others are growing spiritually.

The Church is guided by God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, Sacred Scripture and Tradition. That is where the Church gets it's authority. The Bible must be interpreted. "If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off," has to be interpreted or we would all be handless. My tongues example was intended to show that Scripture has to be interpreted and can be interpreted incorrectly.

My frustration is your post does not tell the whole story of the meaning behind the teachings and practices of the Catholic Church. If I read this, knowing nothing about the Catholic Church and without context, I would probably think Catholics were crazy.

I am sorry I even got into this. I easily get wrapped up in apologetics. It is a personal hinderance to my faith because it lies in a selfish desire to be right. In another age I think apologetics would be a good evangelistic tool, not in this one. I don't believe folks today can be won over to Christ with information. They will be won over with practical examples of Christ's love. So as much as I enjoy apologetics and a respectful theological debate, it is not my focus.

My faith is streched pretty thin as I worry for the physical safety and spiritual condition of my sister. Please pray for her.

I appreciate you being polite also. If I didn't think you would be, I would not have left my comment. I also would have deleted this blog from blog list.

Take care, MC.

By Anonymous, at 14/1/07 2:46 AM
Hi Earl~
Thanks again for your patience with me. We do agree.
_______________________

Hi Michael,

One thing that is more important to me than any label, denomination, creed etc. is that folks understand the gospel you have said, “…we are born again. (If that means a decision to be surrendered to Christ)”

If you would please visit Evantell for a two to five minute presentation and see if we agree on this I would be most obliged.

My Pastor, Phillip DeCourcy, has written a book called Standing Room Only. It points out the various differences between Evangelicals and Catholics. I also have become more versed in this since marrying an ex-Catholic, but I do think the main thing is our salvation.

I hope the link to What a Fellowship! will work now.

I do hope to hear from you again.

I wish you God’s best,
J. Wendell

By J. Wendell, at 14/1/07 12:17 PM
Thank you for the links, especially the one on Fellowship becuase I wanted to see it.

I believe acceptance of Christ and his sacrifice on the cross is what makes forgiveness possible.

Take care, MC.

By Anonymous, at 15/1/07 11:57 AM