Protestants ( which I once was ) do not discus nor teach in the Capital T Traditions in how Authority within the Church is passed down from one to another . This is a major flaw in that one can claim to have authority and actually have it. It was originally Christ who picked the first 12 and one was in error and handed Him over to Chief Priest . Another denied Him three times . The difference was accepting their fallibility and seeking forgiveness and allowing Jesus to lead them . Christ sent the Holy Spirit down who BREATHED on them and they were given Authority to lead without error all others in matters of Faith and Morals , but they were not to removed from the ability to make human mistakes . The matter in which the Pope’s and the Bishops infallibility is put to question.

Each Priest can trace his lineage of ordination back through the Bishops in the laying of hands ( which is how authority is passed from one to the next , old testament included) .
This process of ordination was established and handed down to show true authority .

The Reformers must then believe that they do not need this line of succession in order to be ordained.
Else they would not have self proclaimed themselves to have authority outside of the Catholic Church .
It is this self proclaimed authority that they are in error from the start.
They have taken it upon themselves to declare authority over the Church’s authority in the loosing and binding of that Christ which gave to those He had chosen most certainly Peter . Now known as the seat or chair of Peter in which the Pope resides.
Authority starts and stops at some point . We make the personal choice to accept it or to deny it .

So then the question of Testing the Scriptures against Christian traditions comes into question.
The who’s traditions , who’s authority over these traditions become the first decision to decide before one can test the scriptures to the Christian traditions in the first place.
In other words which are the true traditions ?
Those in the Bible alone? There one is caught in a cycle of the bible says back to the traditions say.
The Devils are no fools in knowing how the minds of men work to rationalize the word of God in order to be correct . This is man’s biggest downfall when it comes to understanding what God intends .
Go ahead and eat of the tree for God surely knows you will not die, and when they ate their eyes were open.
This is why Christ left us His Church with His Authority to govern it in hands of fallible men guided by the Holy Spirit and the Gates of hell shall not prevail it.
In stating that this Church is in error , it is to concede that the gates of hell have prevailed and that Jesus lied.
All men fail and make mistakes, But Christ swore he would not leave His Bride. Ever , and He has not.

We must look to her ( the Catholic Church ) for discernment when it comes to interpretation of the scriptures and in matters of faith and morals.
Who else then decides which traditions we are use for interpretation ?

There lies the difference in interpretation of scripture between Catholics , Protestants or Reformers ?
Reformers of what , I never have been able to understand that concept ?
What needed to be reformed ? Christ Himself founded the Church and left it in the hands of fallible men .

Wisdom is knowing that the more intimate you become with God , the more you realize how little you actually know about Him. Therefore you seek Him out even more through the Sacraments and Guidance of the Church.
Unless you eat and drink of my flesh, you have no life in you.

There is no salvation outside of the Church : meaning it is hard to know the Truth outside of His Bride and one can not receive the True body and Blood of His Flesh outside of her. That right is handed down to His Priest alone through the laying on of hands by His Bishops . A Tradition most forgotten or not known.

Peace be with you.

As the article reminded us, apostolic authority and succession were not limited to bishops in the beginning. In fact, the very first mention is of elders.

Secondly, as Jerome and Chrysostom make clear, the greatest biblical scholars in the Patristic era in West and East respectively, the bishopric as you know it is the result of mere custom. For there is no such distinction between elders and bishops in scripture, nor in earliest post-era documents. Indeed, elder describes office and bishopric function. That is, an elder is one who oversees or superintends within the church.

Finally, the only times the Greek word for priest is used in the New Testament is in reference to Jewish priests. Christian ministers are always referred to as elders, a different word, but indeed, the only word Peter uses for himself.

Yes, but by the same token, one could say the Church only formalized the teaching that Jesus was consubstantial with the Father at Nicea in 325. Dogmas and creeds are proclaimed as correctives to error, rather than out-of-the blue pronouncements or innovations in doctrine.

That’s all good and well- except that Augustine himself was a priest, and even a bishop, ordained by apostolic authority as passed down through a concretely organized ecclesial structure.

I would proffer the demand that faithful Catholics hold to the Marian teachings as one. Ironically, Luther held to the historical Marian teachings, and the RCC only formalized those same teachings in 1854 (the immaculate conception of Mary) and 1950 (the assumption into heaven). For millennia before the Catholic Church taught these as tradition without threat of hellfire for those who weren’t convinced; what changed *suddenly* 15-18 centuries later?

Which Pope and which Council erred in matters of faith and moral teaching? Jesus said to listen to the Church and to the Apostles. Sola Scriptura does not allow that, which is rather ironic.

Where they differed was on matters such as indulgences, the treasury of merits, Mary veneration, which while being popular in the Middle Ages are scantily heard from if at all in the ancient Church, and completely absent in the Scriptures.

Augustine therefore appears to be vocalizing the same exact thing the Reformers did. Scripture is the only authority that is without error, but it must be interpreted within the stream of tradition that the Church has always interpreted an issue. Being that a treasury of merits is not part of this tradition from the beginning, on the grounds of Sola Scriptura t can be rejected.

I suggest you read the following article on Sola versus Solo Scriptura: http://www.modernreformation.org/default.php?page=articledisplay&var2=19 Protestants such as I am very deliberate in testing our interpretations against that of Christian tradition. Solo Scriptura guys think that every guy alone in the woods can understand the Bible. This is not what the Reformers believed. And being that Luther said that Popes and Councils can err, but the Scripture cannot, if you are honest about what you quoted from Augustine, there is no contradiction between the two men. Augustine affirms the importance of tradition, but never describes it as inerrant as he does the Scripture.