[cothrige]

Well, if I may, I would not call that a tradition, but merely a very old model about how people imagined things worked.

Maybe YOU wouldn't; but ROME sure as Hell bet some BIG BUCKS on it!

What about it? Does that prove it is of the same type and quality as traditions such as those surrounding who wrote the books of the Bible or how old St. Joseph was? I don't remember anyone betting "BIG BUCKS" on those? They have merely discussed which of several competing possibilities is most likely. Questions of how the universe works may be a big deal, but such are obviously a matter of empirical reality and not of historical witness. The type of tradition I am speaking of is not of the same kind at all, and is merely a question of historical facts and various witnesses of contesting value and trustworthiness. I really don't see how you could confuse them.

[Elsie]

They have merely discussed which of several competing possibilities is most likely.

And then, by decree, said "This is it."

[Elsie]

Questions of how the universe works may be a big deal, but such are obviously a matter of empirical reality and not of historical witness.

It's hard to separate the tradition that is based on a WITNESS, from those that are not.

Empirical reality that went again the Church's teaching, could get a person KILLED!