I almost said “and Jesus getting drunk” in the title but that might sound too offensive.
I was praying the Rosary this morning holding Edmund and came to the decade about the Assumption of Mary. The thought passed through my mind: “I believe this is true because I accept the authority of the Catholic Church.”
Fair enough. But it is not recorded in the Scriptures, which got me thinking about the fact that several stories and events in Jesus’ life only show up in one gospel.
Too Much Wine?
Prodigal son, woman caught in adultery*, Jesus turns water into wine, boy Jesus leaves family and sneaks back to Jerusalem for three days, etc.
Assume temporarily that two of those stories, say, the water into wine one and the boy Jesus leaves his family account, were not recorded in that lone gospel, but were only known through the Catholic Church’s sacred Tradition.
How would Protestants respond?
Here is my guess: “What?! You’re telling me that Jesus turned 180 gallons of water into wine? That doesn’t fit with the fact that the Bible condemns drunkenness. That is way too much wine for even a thousand guests to drink without many getting drunk and sinning.”
And, “What! Jesus disobeys his parents by abandoning them and sneaking back into the Temple for three days? They search frantically for him and finally find him and he smarts off to them? No, Jesus obeyed his parents and honored them, as the commandments dictate. It would not be honoring one’s parents to do such a thing, causing them great anxiety and pain.”
Assumed into Heaven?
Of course, these events are recorded in one of the four gospels, so instead, because we have all accepted the authority of someone** that these books are inspired, our bias is to defend them and find the way that they can harmonize with the rest of the Bible. We “know” that there cannot be a contradiction since all inspired books are inerrant, so we give them the benefit of the doubt.
I would guess there are hundreds of events in Christ’s life which everyone would love to know and read about, other stories like the prodigal son which can literally bring us to tears. God decided that they would not be included in the Scriptures. Because they are unimportant and worthless? No, but because he didn’t intend the Bible to be the end-all be-all of our Christian Faith. He entrusted the deposit of the Faith to the Church, the same Church in which the Scriptures were written and discerned to be inspired, the same Church which also held fast to those traditions taught by the Apostles by word of mouth and by letter.
* Interestingly, the account of the woman caught in adultery is not included in many ancient manuscripts–my Protestant NIV Bible put a big disclaimer around it.
** Catholics accept the authority of the Catholic Church. Protestants accept a selective combination of the authority of the Catholic Church in the first 700 years of her existence and of the Protestant Reformers (different Reformers depending upon which branch of Protestantism one comes from).
Hi Devin
So that brings the question- do you have any stories of Jesus that have been passed down through oral tradition? I’d love them, and that’s different than saying I’d believe they were true. Some say the phrase that I like from the Didache “Let the donation sweat in your hands until you know who to give it too” is probably Apostolic, I like it!
Jesus stories-
By far the most entertaining of the Gnostic gospels is the infancy gospel of Thomas here I quote
“On one of the days, there being a rainstorm, He went out of the house where His mother was, and played on the ground where the waters were flowing. And He made pools, and brought in the waters, and the pools were filled with water. Then He says: It is my will that you become clear and excellent waters. And they became so directly. And a certain boy, the son of Annas the scribe, came past, and with a willow branch which he was carrying threw down the pools, and the water flowed out. And Jesus turning, said to him: O impious and wicked, how have the pools wronged thee, that thou hast emptied them? Thou shall not go on thy way, and thou shalt be dried up like the branch which thou art carrying. And as he went along, in a short time he fell down and died. And when the children that were playing with him saw this, they wondered, and went away and told the father of the dead boy. And he ran and found his child dead, and he went away and reproached Joseph.”
Jesus turned the kid into a dried up mummy. The “gospel” has him then killing other kids, and creating chaos such as making sparrows in front of onlookers- so now Joseph has to discipline Him-
“5. And Joseph was sitting in his seat, and the child stood before him; and he took hold of Him by the ear, and pinched it hard. And Jesus looked at him steadily, and said: It is enough for thee.”
But the most famous example is the final one, you might have heard it before-
“And when Jesus had come to the eighth year of His age, Joseph was ordered by a certain rich man to make him a couch. For he was a carpenter. And he went out into the field to get wood; and Jesus went with him. And having cut two pieces of wood, and smoothed them with the axe, he put the one beside the other; and in measuring he found it too short. And when he saw this he was grieved, and sought to find another piece. And seeing this, Jesus says to him: Put these two pieces together, so as to make both ends even. And Joseph, in doubt as to what the child should mean, did as he was told. And He says to him again: Take a firm hold of the short piece. And Joseph, in astonishment, took hold of it. Then Jesus also, taking hold of the other end, drew it towards Himself, and make it equal to the other piece of wood. And He says to Joseph: Grieve no more, but do thy work without hindrance.”
So there we have a tradition providing examples and “answering” the question-”what did Jesus do when He was a young child?” It reminds me of the twilight zone episode where the kid controlled everybody in the town, because with a mere thought he could destroy you- do you remember it?
God bless,
Garret
Garret,
Those writings you list are not part of sacred Tradition, though, for instance, the Didache can give us glimpses into the early Church’s worship, etc. and so it interesting in that regard.
Sacred Tradition does not have a secret stash of stories about Jesus–that’s not the way it works or what it is. I encourage you to read more about Tradition and Pope Benedict’s writings. Just search my blog for Tradition Benedict.
There has been private revelation given to certain Catholics over the centuries which tell additional stories of Jesus’ life. No one is bound to believe them, nor are they necessarily inerrant, but one struck me where a friend of Jesus married an invalid woman, and after a long time they conceived a son; Christ’s friend was so proud and happy, but Jesus knew that the child was dead in the womb. Christ in his great love brought the child back to life and also healed the woman of her handicap so she could walk again. All the Apostles were amazed, except Judas, who disbelieved it.
The point of my post is that you would find problems with certain biblical stories if they had not been written down–180 gallons * 5 bottles per gallon gives 900 bottles of wine. When I was a Baptist (which I think you are as well), drinking was considered immoral and I signed a statement when I joined my Baptist church that I wouldn’t drink.
Anyways, you can read Dan Brown and get stories of Jesus from some “tradition,” but they have no relation to the sacred Tradition.
Where is this section: Tradition Benedict?
Leonard, here is the link that searches the blog for “sacred Tradition Benedict”
http://www.devinrose.heroicvirtuecreations.com/blog/?s=benedict+sacred+tradition&x=0&y=0
Hi Devin-
Yeah, you misunderstood me there if you think I was calling those valid tradition, or Roman Catholic tradition, nor are they historically sound facts. I didn’t get them from Dan Brown either- I read them occasionally for historical interest and edification- edification in that it makes me thankful for the real gospels!
Saying that visions are tradition is to stretch the word tradition to be effectively synonymous with new revelation. If that event was historical, (it does fit with the compassion, the mercy of Jesus) then this is a new revelation to those who hear it- but it’s not binding. If it’s not binding, there is really nothing to be worried about- enjoy the miracle, thank God for His mercy. It’s different to say that a vision is binding. It is also not possible to verify such a story as Apostolic or historical- but I’ll grant you, it’s a beautiful, edifying story. I don’t see how if I had a pile of those visions I would be a fuller, more complete Christian.
Strictly speaking, His healings were the sign of who He was, once that was established, we take seriously the things He says. This story is more building upon that foundation- He is the merciful Saviour who demonstrates who He is- believe the signs, Believe that He is Lord- repent of your sins and turn to him, for that is what He says, so that we will not die in our sins, and enjoy eternal life with Him. That is the point of the miracles- the recipients were grateful, and the stories give us hope in our times of need as well.
The point of my post is that you would find problems with certain biblical stories if they had not been written down
I agree with your premise. Many would have a huge problem with that- I would treat it as an apocryphal story, being outside of Scripture- but your Church would call it non-binding as well, right? Ultimately the fact would remain that God did not see it necessary to include them in Scripture. It’s the things that are in Scripture we should focus on ultimately, those the Spirit has provided for us to wrestle with and figure out.
Thanks Devin- I was glad to read that Edmund’s treatment was superb and that he is doing well. Praise God!
God bless,
Garret
Just to clarify- when I said It’s the things that are in Scripture we should focus on ultimately, those the Spirit has provided for us to wrestle with and figure out. I realize the RC position is that traditions are ‘Spirit provided’ too, per CCC 78.
God bless,
Garret