Catholic Tradition - Looking back or Looking forward?

May 4, 2025

The Book of Revelation, from which today’s second reading has been taken is probably the most difficult of all the writings of the New Testament.  It seems commonly accepted by Scripture Scholars that this book was not written by John the Apostle,  but by another John (the Elder), who was apparently well-educated and even had knowledge of Greek and Latin, which is something that the Apostle John did not have (Acts 4:13).  Furthermore, because the text is written in completely symbolic language, despite many many efforts to bring about a harmony in interpretations, there is no general agreement among Scripture scholars. Michael White, Professor of Classics and Christian Origins at the University of Texas summarises these various interpretative viewpoints in an interesting manner. According to him, the first type of interpretation is based on an understanding that the Book is referring primarily to ‘past history’ - i.e. events that had unfolded from the time when the Romans ransacked Jerusalem around 70 AD, with just a glance at the future when all would be made right  by the coming of the Lamb (Jesus). In the second approach, the book refers to a ‘symbolic’ history and refers to God’s ways of dealing with humanity throughout all of history even as evil tries to thwart God’s plan. The third perspective is that the text refers to an ongoing or ‘continuous history’ and so the events predicted in the Book are telling us of what happened and continues to happen to Christians even today and in the future, on a periodic basis; and the fourth that the Book refers primarily to a ‘future history’ which means that none of the events referred to in the Book have yet occurred and that these would all occur at the time of Jesus’ second coming. Obviously, then, each approach would offer different interpretations of the Book of Revelation.   

When the average Catholic is told these things about the authorship and the meaning or interpretation of this Book, there is a sense of disquiet. If each book of the Bible can be thus dissected and analysed in this manner in order to interpret it, then what sense does it make to claim that the Bible is the Word of God, when it seems to be the work of fallible human authors who each interpreted the story of Jesus and the post-Jesus life of his earlier followers, in order to proclaim the Good News (Gospel). Furthermore, how can we be sure we collected the right writings/ books in what we call the Word of God or the Bible?  

This kind of troublesome question is answered by Scripture scholars by referring to the various criteria that were used by the different Church communities before they came to the CANON of Scripture that includes the 27 books of the New Testament.  For example, one of the criteria that was used by the early Church communities was the frequency of use of these texts in the writings of early respected Christian authors, as this indicated the authenticity and value that the earliest Church communities attached to particular texts.  Another criterion used was to explore whether there were any explicit statements and decisions made by ecclesiastical Councils.  Eventually in 367 AD we see the emergence of the first list to advocate the exclusive use of the twenty-seven books that now comprise the New Testament. This list was later ratified by several church councils in subsequent years, and today no Christian Church questions this list.

The reality is that there was no sudden revelation telling the early Church communities as to which texts were inspired. Instead, there was a gradual and ongoing struggle among Christians (spread out over 4 centuries, and which continued long after the Apostles had all died), to discover together which texts would most faithfully retain the truth of Jesus’ proclamation and teachings. It is this gradual development of discovering the truth and then articulating it in its official teachings, that the Catholic Church calls its TRADITION.

Unfortunately, there are many who insist that this church Tradition  is infallible and that once a teaching is given by a Pope or Council, then it can never be modified, re-interpreted or ever changed, - or else the Church is not built on the Rock as Jesus promised, but on an uncertain foundation.  And yet, the very way the Canon of the Bible was decided, as described briefly above, tells us that there was a journey of 4 centuries, which meant that, at the very least, this Tradition was neither static nor infallible, but still evolving, during those first four centuries. So then do we draw a line at the end of the fourth century and say that after that, the Tradition is immutable?    

But then what do we do with the troublesome fact that today the Catholic TRADITION does not allow married priests, but Peter himself, and all the Apostles excluding John, were married and it was quite common in the first ten centuries that Popes, bishops and priests were married?  So then do we draw a line in the sand in the end of the 12th century, when the rule about priestly celibacy was enforced, and say that TRADITION  beyond that century cannot be changed. Perhaps that too would  have to be questioned for we have a generally conservative Pope John II, in the 20th century, publicly apologising over a hundred times for mistakes and wrongs the Catholic Church was responsible for - many of these mistakes having been made in good faith by Popes and others in the light of their then understanding of the Tradition. Should we then draw a line in the sand at the end of the 19th century (since Pope John Paul 2 apologised in the 20th century)?  

Not really, because, for instance, in 1920  we have Pope Benedict XV in his Encyclical, Spiritus Paraclitus  insisting, on the basis of the teachings by  many previous Popes and Councils, that everything in the Bible is literally true. Yet, just 23 years later, Pope Pius XII  in his Encylical, Divino Afflante (1943), taught that the Biblical passages were written in different literary forms and hence one gets their meaning only if one understands those forms which include hyperbole, certain Semitic idioms, certain approximations, etc. - all of which seem to clearly contradict what Benedict XV said.  Again in the 1960s we have Vatican 2 when the Church officially accepted the possibility of salvation outside the Church, which seemed to clearly go against Traditional teaching.  So then is the line in the sand to be drawn just before Vatican 2, as some arch conservatives would insist upon, and  claim that the infallible and unchangeable Tradition is all that was taught before Vatican 2?      

Seems a bit arbitrary, doesn’t it? The reality is that as the Congregation for Catholic Education in its instruction on the education of priests (1989) writes: “Tradition is not like  a monolithic, immovable and obsolete block, but a pluriform organism pulsating with life”.   This is why it is called the living Tradition. It is when this living Tradition is converted into a static (dead?) one, that we actually find ourselves on shaky ground. In fact if we look at the way the Popes have functioned over the entire history of the Catholic Church, we will see this continuous movement in Tradition, like an  ongoing pendulum-swing between those Popes who tried to ensure that we remained rooted in all that we have learnt in the past, and other Popes who fostered openness to the spirit which blows where it wills. In fact, the legacy left us by the last two Popes, Benedict XVI and Francis, clearly demonstrate  this constant struggle of the Church’s living Tradition. And so, in the same document mentioned above, the church actually cautions us that “following the living tradition of the Fathers does not mean orienting oneself to the past as such, but adhering to the rule of faith in a spirit of assurance and interior freedom, with continuing attention to the foundations of everything” and  “for the sake of dogma and … moral and disciplinary principles”, this living tradition manifests its “fecundity precisely at those times that open the way to innovations”.

And if this is true of the Church as a whole, it is also true for all individual Christians. In this context it is important to remember that the Church acknowledges, that in addition to the role of the bishops, there is a role for all believers in building up this living Tradition: “This tradition which comes from the Apostles develops in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit…… This happens through the contemplation and study made by believers, …. and through the preaching of those who have received through Episcopal succession the sure gift of truth.” (Dei Verbum, ch.2, para 8).  Cardinal Newman (now declared a Saint) calls this contribution by the ordinary believers the sensum fidelium (or sense of the faithful) which he says plays an essential role in contributing towards keeping the Church in truth. 

First Reading: Acts 5: 27-32, 40b-41

When they had brought them, they had them stand before the council. The high priest questioned them, saying, “We gave you strict orders not to teach in this name, yet here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and you are determined to bring this man’s blood on us.”  But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than any human authority. The God of our ancestors raised up Jesus, whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree. God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior that he might give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.  And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him.”

When they heard this, they were enraged and wanted to kill them. But a Pharisee in the council named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, respected by all the people, stood up and ordered the men to be put outside for a short time. Then he said to them, “Fellow Israelites, consider carefully what you propose to do to these men. For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and a number of men, about four hundred, joined him, but he was killed, and all who followed him were dispersed and disappeared. After him Judas the Galilean rose up at the time of the census and got people to follow him; he also perished, and all who followed him were scattered. So in the present case, I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone, because if this plan or this undertaking is of human origin, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them—in that case you may even be found fighting against God!”

They were convinced by him, and when they had called in the apostles, they had them flogged. Then they ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus and let them go.  As they left the council, they rejoiced that they were considered worthy to suffer dishonor for the sake of the name.

Second Reading: Revelation 5: 11-14

Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels surrounding the throne and the living creatures and the elders; they numbered myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, singing with full voice,

“Worthy is the Lamb that was slaughtered
to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might
and honor and glory and blessing!”

 

Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea and all that is in them, singing,

“To the one seated on the throne and to the Lamb
be blessing and honor and glory and might
forever and ever!”

And the four living creatures said, “Amen!” And the elders fell down and worshiped.

Gospel: John 21: 1-19

After these things Jesus showed himself again to the disciples by the Sea of Tiberias, and he showed himself in this way.  Gathered there together were Simon Peter, Thomas called the Twin, Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two others of his disciples. Simon Peter said to them, “I am going fishing.” They said to him, “We will go with you.” They went out and got into the boat, but that night they caught nothing.

Just after daybreak, Jesus stood on the beach, but the disciples did not know that it was Jesus. Jesus said to them, “Children, you have no fish, have you?” They answered him, “No.”  He said to them, “Cast the net to the right side of the boat, and you will find some.” So they cast it, and now they were not able to haul it in because there were so many fish. That disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, “It is the Lord!” When Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put on his outer garment, for he had taken it off, and jumped into the sea. But the other disciples came in the boat, dragging the net full of fish, for they were not far from the land, only about a hundred yards off.

When they had gone ashore, they saw a charcoal fire there, with fish on it, and bread. Jesus said to them, “Bring some of the fish that you have just caught.” So Simon Peter went aboard and hauled the net ashore, full of large fish, a hundred fifty-three of them, and though there were so many, the net was not torn. Jesus said to them, “Come and have breakfast.” Now none of the disciples dared to ask him, “Who are you?” because they knew it was the Lord. Jesus came and took the bread and gave it to them and did the same with the fish. This was now the third time that Jesus appeared to the disciples after he was raised from the dead.

When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you love me more than these?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.” Jesus said to him, “Feed my lambs.”  A second time he said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.” Jesus said to him, “Tend my sheep.”  He said to him the third time, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” Peter felt hurt because he said to him the third time, “Do you love me?” And he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” Jesus said to him, “Feed my sheep. Very truly, I tell you, when you were younger, you used to fasten your own belt and to go wherever you wished. But when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will fasten a belt around you and take you where you do not wish to go.” (He said this to indicate the kind of death by which he would glorify God.) After this he said to him, “Follow me.”