Six reasons unwritten papal traditions cannot equal Scripture

The first reason is that they are deceitful and uncertain in many ways. First, as to origin. For many things can happen, as Peter de Soto himself teaches in his Defense of the Catholic Confession against Brenz, from which it may justly come into doubt whether some tradition is apostolic. And Andreas Fricius Modrevius: It is no light error of certain theologians of our time who, under the title of ecclesiastical tradition, do not indeed try to lead us away from the Scriptures, yet give first place to traditions and last to Scripture. As if any strength and firmness could be in that consensus and in those traditions that do not rest on the authority of the Word of God — which yet can be shown not even to have been born from the Apostles by this very thing, if they disagree with and are severed from the divine Scriptures, to which all things must be examined, and which must be ratified and firm in the Church of God.

Second, as to number. For in the Ratisbon Colloquy, when ordered to exhibit a certain number of traditions, the papists would not — indeed could not — because they are doubtful of it and do not agree among themselves about it, since some refer to traditions those heads of doctrine which others try to build from the Scriptures. Third, as to discrepancy: because some of the older fathers referred customs whose origin could not easily be shown to the Apostles, as if handed down by them — which yet Chemnitz proves from other writings of the ancients not to be apostolic.

The second reason is that they were proper to the Pharisees and to heretics, as is plain from Matthew 15:2–7; Mark 7:3–8; Irenaeus Against Heresies 3; Chrysostom on Matthew; Josephus; and Peter de Soto the Dominican in his Defense of the Catholic Confession against Brenz's Prologomena.

The third: because even if it were most certain that some unwritten traditions of Christ or of the Apostles remain, equal authority with Scripture could not therefore be given them. For to things that are from the same author the same authority belongs only when the author put it in and willed it to be in them — who, as an agent acting freely, not of necessity but of free choice, puts more or less authority in his things, and hands some down forever and simply, some for a time and in a certain respect. But God uniquely authorized those things which He handed down to us in writing through the prophets and Apostles, because He handed down Scripture as the perpetual and perfect canon of this our life, in which alone is all that is necessary for the man of God to be perfect (2 Timothy 3:16).

The fourth: because those unwritten dogmas that today set Christians colliding mostly fight openly with Scripture, which all Christians with one mouth confess to be the Word of God — as has been variously and solidly shown by the Protestants, and they are condemned as figments of the human heart (Matthew 15:6–9; Mark 7:7; Galatians 1:8; Colossians 2:8).

The fifth: because no sufficiently fit cause can be given why those things which men desirous of eternal salvation equally ought to know had to be partly written and partly unwritten, since God equally willed the help of Scripture for men's institution and memory in all things — unless perhaps we foolishly affirm that of those things which are equally necessary to salvation some are to be learned and committed to memory more lightly, others more accurately.

The sixth: because those very unwritten dogmas, without the support of some Scripture, neither were kept nor could have been kept, as the papists themselves confess.