Tractatus de divina traditione et Scriptura

On the stricter signification of Tradition, by which it is distinguished from doctrines handed down through sacred Scripture.

« Although the Fathers sometimes call by the name of Tradition in a wider sense all dogmas and institutions transmitted from the antiquity of the Church, even insofar as holy Scripture is considered as the medium of propagation; yet in the stricter and specific signification the name Tradition implies a mode of transmission and preservation distinct from sacred Scripture — which signification of the name is so common that it is always presumed, unless the other, wider one is demonstrated in particular contexts. »

We do not deny that this name — evangelical Tradition, Tradition of the Apostles, or, with an express addition, Tradition of the Scriptures — is sometimes used by the Fathers of doctrine transmitted through the sacred Scriptures themselves (see Suicer's Thesaurus under παραδοσις); yet the more restricted signification according to which Tradition is opposed to Scripture, and is so called insofar as a mode of transmission other than Scripture is indicated, is so common that, if the name is uttered simply, it is always presumed to be taken in this and in no other sense. Hence the Protestants unjustly reproach Catholics, as if we took Tradition, as often as this name is found, as distinct from the Scriptures; and they err and deceive much more when they abuse that ambiguity of the word to deny the existence of a Tradition distinct from the Scriptures, and to impugn the arguments which are wont to be brought forward by Catholic theologians from the monuments of antiquity for the truth of Tradition taken in the stricter sense.

1°. Thus in the Scriptures of the New Testament themselves the name Tradition or the verb to hand down occurs in at least twelve places in a sense pertinent here, and only once — 2. Thess. II. 15 — is it certainly used promiscuously both of doctrine handed down through Scripture and of the other handed down by word of mouth; in all the remaining places it signifies, certainly or at least probably, unwritten Tradition: Matth. XV. 2. 3. 6; Marc. VII. 3. 5. 8. 9. 13; Luc. I. 2; Act. XVI. 4; 1. Cor. XI. 2. 23; XV. 3; 1. Pet. I. 18; 2. Pet. II. 21; Iud. 3; doubtful are Gal. I. 14; Act. VI. 14.

2°. The holy Fathers distinguish Tradition expressly from holy Scripture, and in manifold ways. a) Institutions received from the forefathers, which they confess cannot be proved from the Scriptures, they call, in opposition to the Scriptures, simply Tradition, apostolic Tradition, dominical Tradition: Tertull. de corona c. 4; Cyprian. ep. 63. ad Caecil. p. 104; August. de Baptism. l. II. c. 7; l. V. c. 23. b) They distinguish Tradition from the Scriptures expressly, not by reason of the doctrine it contains, but from the mode of propagation. « For what, » says Irenaeus l. III. c. 4, « if the Apostles had not even left us the Scriptures, ought we not to follow the order of Tradition, which they handed down to those to whom they committed the Churches? To which ordination many nations of the barbarians assent ... having salvation written in their hearts without paper and ink, and diligently guarding the ancient Tradition. » See also Tertull. de coron. c. 3. Indeed Vincent of Lérins common. n. 32 distinguishes Tradition even from ecclesiastical writings, regard being had to the principal organ for the preservation of Tradition, which is constituted not by written books but by guardians of the faith perpetually succeeding one another¹. c) The Fathers exhibit Tradition and Scripture as two distinct things, when they join the one with the other as a twofold fount and twofold principle of Christian knowledge, as Iren. l. III. c. 5. n. 1; Tertull. Praescript. c. 19; when they compare the authority of Tradition and call it equal to the authority of Scripture, as Basil. de Spiritu Sancto c. 27; Chrysost. in 2. Thess. hom. 4. n. 2; when finally they compare Tradition and Scripture insofar as the former extends more widely, the latter less widely, as with other Fathers Origen de Princip. l. I. n. 2; Epiphan. haeres. 61. c. 6; Lirinens. commonit. n. 2. Yet all these things partly suppose, partly constitute the common usage of speech, that Tradition be understood as distinct from the Scriptures either in matter together with the mode of propagation or, if the matter is the same, at least according to the consideration of the diverse mode of preservation and propagation. Whence it is also established that this signification of the name is always presumed unless another is demonstrated; for the common signification is presumed, while the rarer and less frequent is not presumed, nor is it to be asserted unless demonstrated from the individual contexts.