I read something the other day in Alan Schreck’s book “Catholic and Christian” that I had never thought of before. It said that the catholic church is actually older than the Bible as we know it. Now that I think about it, of course that is true. I’m sure most people reading this have already realized that, but for some reason, it never hit me.
Now, obviously the Old Testament was written long before, but the Bible that the old grey haired ladies carry to church with them every week (young people no longer carry bibles thanks to iphones and giant screens) wasn’t compiled until the 4th century. In fact, the New Testament wasn’t even written when the church was established at Pentecost.
Now, why is this important? Many churches these days, mainly protestant, subscribe to the idea of sola scriptura. This basically means that the Bible contains everything that we as Christians need to know. If its not mentioned or commanded in the Bible, it really isn’t that important. This is why a lot of modern churches have done away with so many ancient traditions.
Now, of course we believe that the Holy Spirit inspired the writings of the Bible. But since the Bible wasn’t completed when the church was founded, isn’t it safe to say that the Holy Sprit also inspired early church leaders/church fathers who may have taught us some of these traditions? The sign of the cross mentioned in my previous post is a good example.
God has always used random people to be leaders to his people. (Moses, Abraham, Noah, David, The Apostles, Paul, etc. Heck, even his Son was an ordinary carpenter!) So why would we assume that God did not inspire the early church leaders to teach certain traditions before the Bible was written years later? (And canonized WAY later!) Did the Holy Spirit just sit around and wait for the Bible to be written and completed? Or was it active in the formation of the early church by inspiring these teachings and traditions?
In conclusion, I do believe that the Bible contains all of the information necessary for salvation. But I, as a traditionalist, believe it is important not to ignore the teachings and traditions of the early church.
My question is this: If we ignore a tradition that isn’t explicitly mentioned in the Bible, are we ignoring a tradition that may have been divinely inspired? I’d love to hear from you!

