Man-made Traditions - Ok!

[MorphRC]

Pax Iesus.

Got a reply from my question to a Priest on Catholic.Org about man-made traditions, heres what he answered:

[quote]Pax Iesus Christi Fr. [/quote]

[quote]I was just reading over Matthew 15:1-20 'Traditions of the Elders' NAB, and from what Ive read and understood, Jesus is condemning their traditions, because they degrade the position of God, I was wondering as long as a tradition, man-made, doesnt degrade or take away from God's position to us, would it still be acceptable?[/quote]

[quote]Thanks. Katoliut.[/quote]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Katoliut:

Yes. Certainly, not all traditions are bad. Some are absolutely to be observed. Some are good. Some are neutral. Some are bad.

A tradition of prejudice and related acts (forbidding mixed-race marriages, for example) is bad; is wrong; is evil. A tradition that women or men cover their heads as a sign of respect in a worshipping assembly would be neutral in general, but to be observed if someone was in that culture. A tradition of respecting elders would be good.

That Jesus/God would not condemn all traditions can be seen in the Scriptures as well. In 2 Thessalonians 2:15, the Thessalonians are told to keep the traditions that they were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter. Paul gives an example of keeping neutral cultural traditions when he speaks of head coverings in 1 Coronthians 11. In Matthew 15, we see that there are priorities that need to be observed when considering observing traditions.


God bless you,

Fr. Rick

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Pax Iesus Christi
Paul.

[Dave]

Priestly celibacy is an example that comes to mind. It's man-made, essentially, but that doesn't mean it's a bad thing. On the contrary, it's a very good thing!

[phatcatholic]

[quote name='Dave' date='May 27 2004, 11:23 AM'] Priestly celibacy is an example that comes to mind. It's man-made, essentially, but that doesn't mean it's a bad thing. On the contrary, it's a very good thing! [/quote]
well, w/ its biblical premise and its realization in the life of Jesus Christ, i say its "spirit-made"

[MorphRC]

Pax Iesus

Yep. I thought it was kinda stupid if Christ condemned ALL traditions, we would lose so much and Im sure Christ wouldnt want us to not use our gifts because we thought man-made tradition was wrong. Now I just have to knock out some Protestant thinking about that.

Pax Iesus Christi
Paul.

[Livin_the_MASS]

[quote name='Dave' date='May 27 2004, 11:23 AM']Priestly celibacy is an example that comes to mind.  [b]It's man-made, essentially,[/b] but that doesn't mean it's a bad thing.  On the contrary, it's a very good thing![/quote]
[u]Bold added by me[/u]


[quote][b][u]Matthew 19: 11-12[/u][/b]
[b]He answered, "Not all can accept [this] word, but only those to whom that is granted.[/b]

Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; [b]some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it."[/b] [/quote]

[color=red]I say Christ made![/color]

[Bruce S]

Jason

Here is the FULL unedited verse you just quoted, however it was sanitized:

The KJV, doesn't make that sanitizing effort.

[quote]Mat 19:12 For there are some [b][color=red]eunuchs[/color][/b], which were so born from [their] mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be [b]eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake.[/b] He that is able to receive [it], let him receive [it].  [/quote]

I checked six different versions, most use the best translation of the Greek, EUNUCH , it is a very descriptive term.

YOUR version, turns eunuch into "renounced marriage" and THAT is NOT what the world means. It has a definate specific overtones, and that needs to be included, not turned into a preference only thing.

LINK to DICTIONARY definition:

[url="http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=eunuch"]http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=eunuch[/url]

Edited June 7, 2004 by Bruce S

[Dave]

[quote name='Jason' date='Jun 7 2004, 01:25 AM'] [color=red]I say Christ made![/color] [/quote]
Now wait a minute ... priestly celibacy is a discipline, not a doctrine. Since doctrine comes from God and is immutable, then because discipline can be changed, then doesn't that mean it's essentially man-made? Again, that doesn't mean God doesn't approve of it, but even so, Christ didn't require priests to remain celibate. He said it was a great thing to be, though, but He didn't make it doctrine. Besides, didn't it take some time before mandatory celibacy was enforced? And let's not forget the Eastern rites of the Church, which allow married priests!

[Aloysius]

Christ made the discipline but didn't make it mandatory.

Bruce, i never want to be near you with a pair of sissors :ph34r:

i'm pretty sure the intention behind the verse doesn't mean if people aren't gonna marry they should cut off anything that was supposed to be used in marriage

[quote][i]ΕΙΣΙΝ ΓΑΡ [b]ΕΥΝΟΥΧΟΙ [/b]ΟΙΤΙΝΕΣ ΕΚ ΚΟΙΛΙΑΣ ΜΗΤΡΟΣ ΕΓΕΝΝΗΘΗΣΑΝ ΟΥΤΩΣ ΚΑΙ ΕΙΣΙΝ ΕΥΝΟΥΧΟΙ ΟΙΤΙΝΕΣ ΕΥΝΟΥΧΙΣΘΗΣΑΝ ΥΠΟ ΤΩΝ ΑΝΘΡΩΠΩΝ ΚΑΙ ΕΙΣΙΝ ΕΥΝΟΥΧΟΙ ΟΙΤΙΝΕΣ ΕΥΝΟΥΧΙΣΑΝ ΕΑΥΤΟΥΣ ΔΙΑ ΤΗΝ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙΑΝ ΤΩΝ ΟΥΡΑΝΩΝ Ο ΔΥΝΑΜΕΝΟΣ ΧΩΡΕΙΝ ΧΩΡΕΙΤΩ [/i][/quote]

[b]ΑΓΙΟΣ ΜΑΘΘΑΙΟΝ 19:12[/b]

the word in the Greek, if you really wanna know, is ΕΥΝΟΥΧΟΙ.

[quote][b]ΕΥΝΟΥΧΟΣ[/b],n  {yoo-noo'-khos}
1) a bed keeper, bed guard, superintendent of the bedchamber, chamberlain  1a) in the palace of oriental monarchs who support numerous wives  the superintendent of the women's apartment or harem, an office  held by eunuchs  1b) an emasculated man, a eunuch  1b1) eunuchs in oriental courts held by other offices of greater,  held by the Ethiopian eunuch mentioned in Ac. 8:27-39.  1c) one naturally incapacitated  1c1) for marriage  1c2) begetting children  [i]1d) [u]one who voluntarily abstains from marriage[/u] [/i][/quote]

seeing as we're not in the context of oriental courts and such, i'd say the only two possible definitions given the context are 1b or 1d. and seeing as the Church that read the original manuscripts and understood them better than us most likely condemned people like Origen for self-mutilation, 1d seems more probable.

Pax Amorque Christi

Edited June 8, 2004 by Aloysius