The rest of Patrick Madrid’s article, excerpted above in my post #4495
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1992/9208chap.asp
And then there’s that small matter of the unity of doctrine among the apostles. If Paul had been promulgating sola scriptura in 1 Corinthians 4 he would have been in conflict with the practice of the rest of the apostles. Most of the apostles never wrote a single line of Scripture; instead they transmitted the deposit of faith orally. Did their oral teachings carry any less weight of authority than the written teachings of Paul or Peter or John?
None of the other apostles taught sola scriptura. In fact, John said, “I have much to write to you, but I do not wish to write with pen and ink. Instead, I hope to see you soon when we can talk face to face” (3 John 13). Why would the apostle emphasize his preference for oral Tradition over written Tradition (a preference he reiterates in 2 John 12) if, as proponents of sola scriptura assert, Scripture is superior to oral Tradition?
The already flimsy case for sola scriptura is further weakened by Paul’s comments in 1 Corinthians 11:2 where he praises the Christians in Corinth for holding fast to the traditions just as he had handed them on to them. It’s clear from the context that he was referring to oral Tradition because the Corinthians had as yet no New Testament Scriptures, 1 Corinthians being the very first letter Paul had sent them. Prior to this letter all his teaching had been oral.
The same is true in the case of the Ephesians to whom Paul said, “I did not shrink from proclaiming to you the entire plan of God” (Acts 20:27). This statement undercuts sola scriptura. Paul remained in Ephesus for over two years teaching the faith so diligently that “all the inhabitants of the province of Asia heard the word of the Lord” (Acts 19:10), yet his epistle to the Ephesians is a scant four or five pages and could not even begin to touch upon all the doctrines he taught them orally.
What’s more, if Paul had included sola scriptura among the doctrines which comprised “the entire plan of God” — especially in the sense of option three — why didn’t he simply say so? Why didn’t he tell the Ephesians, “Now that I’ve written you this letter, you can disregard my two years worth of oral teachings and consider this document to be your sole authority”? Nowhere in his epistles does Paul even hint at such a thing.
An examination of first-, second-, and third-century Church writings shows the early Christians did not believe in sola scriptura (in fact Irenaeus of Lyons [A.D. 140-202] delivered a withering attack on the notion in Against Heresies, as did Vincent of Lerins in Commonitoria [435]). It was not a subject of discussion in any early Church councils, nor was it mentioned in any of the many creeds formulated by the early Church.
Sola scriptura is the Reformation version of the emperor’s new clothes. In their attempt to evade the biblical and historical evidence of the Church’s magisterial authority the Reformers insisted on seeing in the Bible a doctrine which simply isn’t there.
From where did Paul receive his teachings, those doctrines he taught for over two years? (Actually it was 3 years) Verse 24 tells you the answer.
"But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the MINISTRY WHICH I HAVE RECEIVED OF THE LORD JESUS, TO TESTIFY THE GOSPEL OF THE GRACE OF GOD."
Paul was teaching the Ephesians THAT which he received by REVELATIONS from the Lord. They were NOT given to him by man, neither he received them of men, But by Christ. Traditions were not being established in Ephesus. THE WORD OF GOD revealed to Paul was being established in Ephesus.
There is a HUGE difference. Paul was given BY JESUS CHRIST, the dispensation of the Grace of God. As he received revelation, he taught those at Ephesus what Jesus Christ had given him.
Tradition in the sense of the Catholic Church is not comparable to what Paul was given. Unless you believe that your Church receives revelations from Christ to the Magesterium, and then on to the rest of the Church.
But THAT IS what your Church teaches isn't it? That you are receiving revelations from Christ? And that He gives them to the Pope, or the Magsterium, which is why they are "infallible", and on and on. Throughout the centuries...The revelations just go on and on until the last of the 'faithful' remaining is no longer.
I had the pleasure of meeting Patrick Madrid after a seminar he taught regarding Apologetics, especially, “Is Catholicism Biblical?”. What a wonderful man. His wife is incredible. They have 11 children and he is a tireless defender of the faith.