Comparative Theology, book by H. H. Pope Shenouda III

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III



Why should a person whose parents were baptised and saved from Adam's sin, be baptised as well?




We did not inherit the penalty of death from our immediate parents so that we are saved if they are baptised, but we inherited it directly from Adam and Eve: the first of the human race. We were in Adam's loins. When Adam's nature sinned and he was condemned to death, everything in his loins became mortal,
. We came out of Adam's loins under the penalty of death. Therefore the sentence of death was passed on Adam and all his offspring; not only on Cain, Abel and Seth. Concerning this, the Holy Bible says: “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned" (Rom.5: 12) and also "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive" (1Cor.15: 22). Hence death was a judgment on the entire human race, being the offspring of Adam. Every born human being is condemned to death because He was in Adam's loins when Adam was condemned to death.

Salvation from death is an individual salvation, whether or not the parents received it. This salvation needs repentance and belief in baptism and in Christ's Blood as well as in all the means of Grace. There are no parents without sin. The Psalmist says: "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me" (Ps.51: 5).

We are born in sin until liberated from the bondage of corruption (Rom.8: 21). When are we going to be liberated from this corruption? The Apostle says about our bodies: "So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality" (1Cor. 15: 42,53). When will this be? When the trumpet will sound and the dead will be raised.

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III




Seniority of Tradition

Tradition

Tradition is every teaching, other than the words of the Holy Bible, that was entrusted to us, by the Apostles and the Fathers. This teaching constitutes subjects that might not be included in the Holy Bible but in no way contradict it.
Our Protestant brethren do not believe in Tradition. They only abide by the Holy Bible. In this way they exclude the heritage which the Church received from the previous generations: the writings of the Apostles and Fathers of the Church, the decisions of the holy councils, the Church Canons and regulations, the Church rituals and the oral Tradition.
Tradition is older than the Holy Bible. It goes back to the time of our father Adam.
The earliest written Law that reached us was written by Moses the Prophet who lived in the fifteenth and fourteenth centuries B.C. However, Tradition is much older than that. Thousands of years had elapsed before there was any written Law. Who led the thoughts of human beings? Their conscience (the moral law) on one hand, and Tradition, which is entrusted from one generation to the next, on the other.
We will try to give some examples of Tradition that preceded the written law:

(1) In the Book of Genesis it is written that Abel the righteous man brought fat portions of his flock (Gen.4: 4). The Apostle explains this, saying: "By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain" (Heb.11: 4). Here, we ask: How did Abel know the idea of offering sacrifices to God? From where did he get that faith? There was no written Law at his time. Undoubtedly, he received this idea through Tradition from his father Adam who had received it from God Himself. This took place fourteen centuries before Moses wrote about sacrifices and burnt offerings.

(2) The same applies to the burnt offerings which were offered by our fathers Noah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. They knew about the idea of sacrifices through Tradition entrusted to them. The same is said about the idea of building altars. After the Flood, our Father Noah "built an altar to the Lord" (Gen.8:20), and our Father Abraham built an altar at the great tree of Moreh (Gen.12: 7). The idea of building altars continued thereafter although there was no Holy Bible at the time to command them to do so.

(3) It is written in the Holy Bible that our Father Noah took some of the clean animals and birds and sacrificed a burnt offering on the altar and the Lord smelt the soothing aroma (Gen.8: 20,21). How did Noah know the idea of offering sacrifices of clean animals? He must have taken it directly from the Lord and then entrusted it to the generations after him, before Moses explained the idea of clean animals in the Torah.
(4) In the event of our Father Abraham meeting Melchizedek, it is written that Melchizedek "was the priest of God Most High" (Gen.14: 18). How was this priesthood instituted. Who gave Melchizedek the authority to bless Abram and what law made Abram offer Melchizedek the tenths of everything he had (Gen. 14:20)? Thus Melchizedek was considered greater than Abraham (Heb.7: 6,7).

At that time there was no written Law explaining priesthood, its honour, duties and blessing to others. In the previous chapters of Genesis there is no mention whatsoever of the words 'priest' or 'priesthood'. From where did the knowledge of priesthood come except through Tradition?

(5) In the same episode of Abram's meeting with Melchizedek, we hear that Abram "gave him a tithe of all" (Gen.14: 20). How was it known, at the time of our Father Abraham, that the tenth were to be given to priests, except through Tradition? The Law of tithing had not yet been received in the written Law.

This also applies to our father Jacob: How did he know the idea of giving the tithe when he said to the Lord: "... and of all that You give me I will surely give a tenth to You" (Gen.28: 22)? There is no doubt that he received the Law of tithing through Tradition, from his grandfather Abraham who offered the tithe to Melchizedek without receiving it from a written Law at all. It is obvious that Tradition was the teacher of all human beings before the written Law and remained so thereafter.

(6) We read that when Jacob was fleeing his brother Esau that he saw a ladder extending from earth to heaven, while the angels of God ascending and descending on it, and the Lord talked to him and gave him a promise. The Holy Bible says that Jacob said: "Surely the Lord is in this place... This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven!" And he called that place Bethel, which means 'House of God'. He took the stone he had placed under his head, set it up as a pillar and poured oil on top of it.

How did our father Jacob know the phrase ‘House of God'? How did he know the idea of consecrating. God’s houses by pouring oil on them since nothing of this sort had been given in a written Law? No explanation can be given except that it was through Tradition.

(7) When God gave the written Law He willed Tradition to remain as well,

. He commanded the fathers, on various occasions, to commend and entrust the teachings to their children. The Lord ordered them to inform their children of the occasion of sacrificing to the Lord the first male offspring of every womb (Ex. 13: 14-16). The Lord also said to the people: "Only take heed to yourself, and diligently keep yourself, lest you forget the things your eyes have seen, and lest they depart from your heart all the days of your life. And teach them to your children and your grandchildren" (Deut.4: 9).

(8) Even in Christianity, we find that some of the writers of the New Testament wrote information about events in the Old Testament which they had received through Tradition. For example, St. Paul the Apostle mentioned the names of the two witches who resisted Moses the Prophet. He said: "Now as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so do these also resist the truth" (2Tim.3: 8). We cannot find the names of these two witches either in the Books of Moses or in the rest of the Old Testament. The Apostle Paul must have known these names through Tradition.
(9) The entrustment of Tradition which occurred in the Old Testament recurred in the New Testament but to a lesser extent. A long time elapsed before there was any written gospel or epistle. For a period of approximately twenty years people received the entire faith, the entire story of Christ together with His teachings and His redemption, through Tradition.

(10) The Lord Jesus Christ did not write a gospel Himself nor did He leave a written gospel, yet He was preaching and teaching, leaving His words as spirit and life (John.6: 63) for the people who later spread them. When the Lord began His teaching and preaching, He said to the people: "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel" (Mark.1: 15). There was no written gospel (Good News) but there was preaching of the Good News representing the oral Gospel or the Divine teaching which was taught through entrustment. The same meaning applies to the Lord's words to His disciples: "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature" (Mark. 16: 15). That command was not within the written boundary.

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III

The Holy Bible does not mention everything

(11) Here I shall state an important fact. The Holy Bible does not mention everything:
(a) It does not mention all that the Lord Jesus Christ did or all that He said. What happened was that the Evangelists chose parts of the Lord Jesus Christ's sayings and parts of His works, recorded them at a certain time for the people and left out the rest. This is obvious from the last written Gospel. St. John the Apostle says: "And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written" (John.21: 25) and also "...truly Jesus did many other sign sin the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name" (John.20: 30,31).
Do not think that the miraculous signs which the Lord Jesus Christ did are only those mentioned in the Bible; thousands of miracles were not recorded. To prove this, it is sufficient to mention the words of St. Luke the Evangelist: "Now when the sun was setting, all those who had anyone sick with various diseases brought them to Him; and He laid His hands on every one of them and healed them" (Lk.4: 40).

How many were those sick? They were too many. Not all the healing miracles are recorded,
. Our teacher St. Matthew the Evangelist says: "Now Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all kinds of sickness and all kinds of disease among the people" (Matt.4: 23).
What are the details of the incidents of healing every disease? They are not recorded. What about the Lord's teachings in the synagogues and His preaching? They are not recorded either. Our teacher St. Mark the Evangelist says that when the Lord Jesus went to Capernaum, He went into the synagogue and "taught. And they were astonished at His teaching, for He taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes" (Mark.1: 21,22). What was that teaching which astonished them? It was not recorded.
In the miracle of the five loaves and two fishes, the Lord Jesus was teaching the people from morning until late in the afternoon. What did He teach them? Nothing was recorded in the Gospels. What were the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ on the shore of the lake, on the seashore, in the boat and on the roads? We do not know; as nothing was detailed about it in the Gospels.
(b) After the Lord's resurrection, we find the same situation. The Lord met the two disciples of Emmaus, and "beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself" (Lk. 24: 27). All these teachings, and others, were not recorded in the Gospels. But undoubtedly they, or some thereof, have reached us through Tradition.
(c) What about the forty days which the Lord spent with His disciples after His resurrection, speaking to them of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God (Acts 1: 3)?

What were the Lord's words about the things pertaining to the kingdom of God?
Undoubtedly His words were of such great importance that they were worth Him having many meetings with His Apostles after His resurrection. Yet despite their great importance, His words were not recorded in the Holy Bible. Most probably they were matters that concerned the leaders of the Church, for them to understand and teach, following the Lord's saying: "... teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you" (Matt.28: 20), without mentioning what His commandments to them were.
Have the teachings and commandments of the Lord Jesus Christ been lost or have they reached us? It is far fetched to believe that they have been lost since they are so important. How did they reach us then? With the exception of the Apostle Paul who was not one of the eleven Apostles and did not attend the meetings of the Lord with His Apostles after His resurrection, the eleven Apostles with whom the Lord spent forty days after His resurrection, wrote too little and what they wrote does not comprise all the Christian teachings. There is one explanation and it is that the Lord Jesus Christ's teachings to His Apostles have reached us through Tradition, that is, through the Apostolic Entrustment.
The Church has been living these teachings according to the Lord's saying: "The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life" (John.6: 63). The Apostles understood the spirit of the words and transcribed them into life, and these words have reached us in the life of the Church.
Therefore, we can say that Tradition is the life of the Church or it is the living Church. The Apostles entrusted this life together with all that they had learnt and received from the Lord, to the saints in the Church. However, they did not write them in the Gospels or in the Epistles, but they left them as living practices and teachings in the life of the Church. Among those teachings are the Church discipline, rituals and Sacraments.
Do you think that the Sermon on the Mount (Matt.5-7) is
the only sermon of the Lord during over three years? This is unbelievable. The Lord's words have not gone astray; the disciples kept them in their hearts, ears and minds. From the treasure of their good hearts, from their sacred memories, they brought out the Lord's sayings and entrusted them to the Church under the heading of 'Tradition’ or 'The Apostolic Entrustment. The Holy Spirit taught them everything and reminded them of everything the Lord had said, according to His true promise (John.14: 26).

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III

Tradition is taken from the teachings of the Apostles


Many Apostles did not write epistles. Where are their teachings? Where is the work of the Divine Inspiration in them? Where is the work of the Holy Spirit who speaks through the prophets? It is not possible that some of the Apostles taught only what they wrote. It is not possible that James the Apostle's teaching was only limited to one Epistle nor is it possible that Jude the Apostle taught just one chapter. What about the rest of the eleven Apostles of whose teachings we have received no word? What did they preach? What did they leave for the Church? Most probably those teachings, or some thereof, have reached us through Tradition.
The Apostles used to enter synagogues teaching and disputing against the opposition, however none of this was written. They preached in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria until everyone believed, but only a little of what they preached was recorded in writing. The Apostle Paul entered a house in Rome where he stayed for two years preaching the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ boldly and without hindrance (Acts.28: 30,31). None of that preaching has reached us in a written form. Where did it all go?
Undoubtedly the Apostles laid down disciplines for the Church. What are they?
Is it not reasonable to assume that the Lord's Apostles, after having received all those teachings from the Lord, left the Church without any disciplines or laws to direct her affairs. They did not write these in their epistles either because such things were not for the public or because they would be known to all through practice. Undoubtedly, those disciplines have reached us through Tradition and Entrustment.
St. John the Apostle says in the epilogue of his second Epistle: "Having many things to write to you, I did not wish to do so with paper and ink; but I hope to come to you and speak face to face" (2John. 12). He repeated the same words in the epilogue of his third Epistle (3John.13, 14). What was the content of this face to face dialogue? And why was it not written down? How has it reached us?
From the above quotation in the two Epistles, we notice that the Apostolic Fathers sometimes preferred speaking to writing whenever it was convenient for them. Their verbal teachings were entrusted from one generation to the next until they have reached us today.
Probably the Apostles concentrated in their Epistles on the main principles of faith as much as they could and left the details of the Church disciplines and rituals to the practical arrangements in the churches. People were learning them not from written books but through practising the sacramental life
St. Paul the Apostle says in his first Epistle to the Corinthians: "And the rest I will set in order when I come" (1Cor.11: 34). What were these apostolic instructions? Have we received them through Tradition? St. Paul the Apostle said to his disciple Titus, the Bishop of Crete: "For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you" (Titus 1: 5). He did not spell out in his Epistle how to appoint priests, with regard to the prayers, rituals and the necessary conditions thereof. How did St. Titus know about this matter other than by verbal instruction? That is why the Apostle said to him: "...as I commanded you". The details of this command were not recorded in the Epistle but the disciple the bishop learnt them verbally, 'face to face", and they reached us through Tradition.

The same applies to what St. Paul the Apostle said to his disciple Timothy, the Bishop of Ephesus: "And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2Tim.2:2). Here the Apostle refers to the word ‘hear’ and not ‘write'. He did not tell us what his disciple heard from him. But undoubtedly, that teaching was entrusted from St. Paul to St. Timothy then to faithful and reliable persons who in turn entrusted them to others. Thus the entrustment continued successively until it reached us.
Those who insist on proving everything by a verse from the Holy Bible disregard what the Apostle said about 'face to face" (2John. 12), the Apostles' instructions concerning the churches, which they did not record (1Cor.11: 34), the Apostles' commands to their disciples (Titus 1: 5) and the Apostolic teachings which turned into life and practice in the Church without being a verse from an Epistle or the Gospels.
We mention, to illustrate this point, the consecration of Sunday as the Lord's Day
All Christians who only believe in the Holy Bible and oppose Church Tradition, consecrate Sunday instead of Saturday as the Lord's Day and do not adhere to the literal meanings of the verses: "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy" (Ex.20: 8) and "Observe the Sabbath day, to keep it holy" (Deut.5: 12),

. From where do they derive the teaching of consecrating Sunday instead of Saturday? Is it from the Holy Bible or from Tradition? Undoubtedly, it is from Tradition because there is not one single verse which says: "Remember Sunday, to keep it holy" or "Observe Sunday, to keep it holy. In it you shall do no work".
The consecration of Sunday has been a Church Tradition, observed by the Apostles who took it from the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ; it is not mentioned plainly in the Gospels but there are references in the Book of Acts that imply this Divine entrustment. So the matter changed to a professed practice of the Church without the need for a written commandment. A proof of acknowledging Tradition is the unanimity of all Churches in keeping Sunday holy.
There is a reference in the Epistle of St. Paul the Apostle that he received teachings from the Lord
Regarding the Sacrament of the Eucharist, the Apostle says: "For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread" (1Cor.11: 23). Here the Apostle speaks about the entrustment he received from the Lord and which he commanded to the church in Corinth. The Holy Bible does not tell us how and when the Apostle Paul received it from the Lord. He is giving us an idea about the Church dogmas and how they entered the Church through entrustment.
We know from the Gospels that the Apostles received the Sacrament of the Eucharist from the Lord. But the Apostles did not tell us how they entrusted it to the Church. It was not necessary to write it down but what matters is that the Church lives and practises this Sacrament. However, St. Paul mentioned this entrustment.
The Apostles recorded in their Epistles things they received through Tradition
(a) We have previously mentioned some of them and now we shall add what Jude the Apostle mentioned in his Epistle regarding the dispute between Archangel Michael and Satan about the body of Moses. He said: "Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, ‘The Lord rebuke you!’ " (Jude 9). None of this was mentioned in the Old Testament, so Jude probably knew it through Tradition.
(b) When the Apostle Paul was describing the fear of the people on receiving the Law, he said: "And so terrifying was the sight that Moses said, 'I am exceedingly afraid and trembling' " (Heb.12:21). This phrase attributed to Moses was not recorded either in the Book of Exodus or Deuteronomy. So probably the Apostle Paul knew it through Tradition.
(c) We also add what is mentioned in the Book of Revelation about Balaam's perversion, the details of which are not recorded in the Book of Numbers (Num.24: 25). In the Book of Revelation, it is written: "...because you have there those who hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit sexual immorality" (Rev.2: 14). In the Book of Numbers it is mentioned that the people did that but not that it was Balaam's doctrine. So probably St. John the Visionary who wrote the Book of Revelation knew it through Tradition.
Also on the subject of Balaam is what the Apostle Peter mentioned: "They have forsaken the right way and gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Beor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness" (2Pet.2: 15), and also what the Apostle Jude mentioned: "...they have gone in the way of Cain, have run greedily in the error o Balaam for profit, and perished in the rebellion of Korah" (Jude 11).
(e) Likewise, St. Jude spoke about Enoch's prophecy which is not mentioned in the Old Testament. He said: "Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, 'Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, to execute judgement on all, to convict all who are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him"' (Jude 14,15). The source of this prophecy must have been Tradition.
(f) We notice that the commandment of circumcision was entrusted to our Father Abraham by God (Gen.17) and commanded to people through entrustment before the existence of a written Law commanding it.

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III

Benefits of Tradition

(1) Through Tradition, we came to know the Holy Bible itself. Through entrustment the Divine Books reached us and we would not have been able to know or distinguish them except through Tradition. The holy councils defined the books of the New Testament to us.

(2) Through Tradition, the Church heritage, rituals and disciplines have reached us.

(3) Tradition preserved for us the sound faith that was handed down from one generation to the next. If the interpretation of the Bible were left to the comprehension of each individual, we would have various groups and denominations fragmented by the one faith, because the Holy Bible is one thing and the way of interpreting it is another.

(4) Tradition has kept for us certain beliefs and teachings such as the consecration of Sunday, the making of the sign of the cross, the law of monogamy, prayers for the departed and the work of each order of priesthood.

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III


Valid and invalid Tradition



Those who reject Tradition build their objection on the pretext that the Lord Jesus Christ rejected Tradition when He reproached the scribes and Pharisees, saying: " Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?" (Matt.15: 3), and when He condemned some of the wrong traditions (Matt.15: 4-6).
They also use the pretext of the Apostle's words, "Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ" (Col.2: 8).
In our discourse about Tradition, we do not mean the vain traditions laid down by men or do we mean those traditions which are not in accord with the doctrine and spirit of the Holy Bible such as the traditions whose voidness the Lord Jesus revealed,.
But we mean the sound Tradition which conforms with
(1) The teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ, which was transmitted to us through Tradition.
(2) The Apostolic Tradition, that is, the teachings of the Apostles, transmitted to us through entrustment from one generation to the next.
(3) The Ecclesiastical Tradition, decreed by the holy
Ecumenical councils regarding the Church canons and disciplines
and what we received from the fathers, teachers and heroes of faith of the Church.This leads us to the next point:
Church authority in teaching and legislation

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III






Church Authority in Teaching and Legislation



This authority was given to the Apostolic Fathers by the Lord Himself when He said to them: "... whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" (Matt.18: 18). The Church commenced this duty of hers by holding the first Church Council in Jerusalem in 45 A.D. The Council discussed the acceptance of faith by the Gentiles, and the Apostles decided not to make it difficult for them, saying: "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality" (Acts 15: 28.29).
Therefore, holy councils, local and ecumenical, were held consecutively through the authority of teaching, legislating and canonising which the Lord endowed upon priesthood. These councils have laid down teachings, decisions and disciplines for the Church which have been included in Church Tradition.

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III

Conditions of sound Tradition

(1) It should not be incompatible with the Holy Bible (Gal. 1:8)

(2) It should not contradict other Church traditions

(3) The Churches should accept it

It is known that in every generation, new matters arise which had not existed in the previous generations. The point of view of Religion about such matters is sought so as not to perplex people's thoughts or make them confused between right and wrong, because not all people know the rules of Religion or what is written in the Holy Bible.

Hence the Church, through her teaching and legislative authority, presents the opinion of Religion in such matters, because the Holy Bible says that the Law is sought from the mouth of the priest. Through the succession of generations the Church teachings have become Tradition to be inherited by all generations

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III





The Apostles commanded that Tradition be preserved



St. Paul the Apostle said: "Therefore, brethren, standfast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle" (2Thess.2: 15). He also said: "But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us" (2Thess.3: 6), He also said to the Corinthians: "Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions as I delivered them to you" (1Cor. 11: 2).
We regret to say that our brethren the Protestants, in their translation of the Holy Bible (Beirut Arabic Translation), substituted “Traditions” with “Teachings”, in matters which confirm the teaching of Tradition. But kept 'tradition' for incidents relating to repugnant traditions, obviously rejected by the holy Church.

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III






Protestants have their own Tradition




Anyhow, although our Protestant brethren deny Tradition, they themselves instituted their own traditions. They maintain their own rituals although they deny rituals. They have recited
prayers and fixed readings on ordinations, matrimony, baptism and funerals although they do not acknowledge recited prayers. They keep their own tradition but deny any tradition that does not agree with theirs. It goes without saying that Tradition is a precious heritage and it would be a great loss for any Church to be devoid of it, such becomes a Church without history and without any rules to protect against people interpreting or teaching things according to their own preferences.