I don't think you really want to go there with this argument.
The Marian dogmas, which are required belief by Roman Catholics, are not found anywhere in the Bible. And as noted, Rome's own Catholic Encyclopedia Online admits this about the Immaculate Conception.
Did the apostles talk about the Immaculate Conception? Nope. So this wasn't "passed down" as Rome likes to claim. It was something that came about much later.
The Mass has to be said in Latin? Nope. No Mass in Latin in the NT church. No Mass in the NT church as we see it today either for that matter.
Those two examples alone completely undermine the Roman Catholic claim to "Tradition" being equal with Scripture.
The Roman Catholic has been asked numerous times for exactly what this "Tradition" is they claim is taught in the Bible to which none so far have been able to provide.
I will also continue to note that not one of the writings that Roman Catholicism claims as "Sacred Tradition" was approved as Scripture at Trent when Rome declared its Canon. Ever wonder why? If I were a Roman Catholic that would bug me to no end.
The Bible itself testifies to why we rely upon Scripture and not Tradition.
I recommend you do a word search on "It is written" and "write". The study would do you good.
Is that a dog whistle off in the distance??