At OrthodoxBridge an EO guy wrote,
Outlaw Covenator wrote, “Fair enough, but how do I adjudicate between Romanist claims of tradition and Orthodox ones? I have to use something like my autonomous reason to judge between the two.”
The answer to your question is to follow the road of history. Orthodox claims to the “full” tradition goes back centuries and centuries, many of them to apostolic times. The R.C.s have many teachings that stop at the middle ages — thus “NOT” Apostolic.
The context is how do I determine which tradition is authentic?
To which I responded,
Would I use reason and historical investigation to find that out?
Does anyone see where this is going? Earlier on my blog Canadian chastised Protestants for setting their reason above the church. This puts me in a bind. On one EO gloss I am supposed to just submit to the ancient wisdom of the church. On the other hand, I am to use that same reason in historical investigation. It appears we cannot escape private judgment.