...is Scripture was largely validated by Tradition in the first place.
As we saw
yesterday, the existing teaching of Christ and the apostles were the
measuring stick against which all writings were compared. Wouldn't it
then be odd to reject these traditions and only keep the result of them?
Many folks claim to follow the Bible alone and not
any tradition but virtually all of these fine people have 46 (or 39)
books in their Old Testament and 27 in the New. What, other than the
tradition of their parents, pastor, or Martin Luther, gives confidence
that these are the correct writings to use? What gives confidence that
the Letters of Clement, the Didiche, and all the other first-century
writings not in the “traditional” Bible shouldn't be in the Bible?
That the Bible is born from a Church with established tradition is yet
another reason Catholics use both Scripture and Tradition.