So we all know that as Catholic we believe that public revealation came in two forms: Scripture and Tradition. When it comes to Scripture we know we mean the Bible, but what exactly do we mean by tradition?

Does it include any of the following;

I) The points of consensus among the Fathers? (Do we assume later Fathers were only unanimous on what their predecessors back to the Apostles were unanimous on?)

Ii) Oral revealation not written down? (Are there words attributed to Christ or the Apostles not written down that we know of as to hold them up as public revealation?)

Iii) Some organizing principle for Scriptural interpretation? (I heard St Iraeneus defines tradition this way and it is a favourite of advocates of material sufficiency. I am not sure what it means.)

Iv) the Canon? (Why was consensus on the Canon so late if it was an Apostolic Tradition?)

V) Early Church liturgies?

A lengthy read but it answers most of your questions.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15006b.htm

In the East, Tradition has been described as the consciousness of the Church that illuminates what is written. For those of us that are Latins, it's sensus fidelium [SF] or the sense of the faithful......which is essentially the same thing. It's a lens or spiritual instinct the Church poses to expand on [and or] preserve what already is.

This personally throws me for a loop at times when specifically talking to more Traditional Catholics because this is more often invoked by them. Some will say Limbo is SF, for example. Others may point to the church teaching the wife should submit to the husband and how SF can better define the mechanics of how that works.

The problem is, it's sometimes difficult for many Catholics to distinguish from catholic public opinion and SF.

Thankfully, we don't have to. We have the Church for that. How else would we know?

The New Testament was a radical idea, that developed only slowly ("What?? There's gonna be ANOTHER Bible?")

The key to understanding the canon is to realize that reading scripture was part of the Mass from the earliest days (cf First Apology of Justin) -- so that distinguishing valid scripture was important. The Muratorian Canon or fragment (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... orian.html) dates to about 170 AD and shows the importance of defining the validity of documents to be read in church. It is through that practice that the New Testament emerged.

The choosing of these documents involved tradition -- "Is such-and-such a valid letter of Paul or not?" As a result, there was much resort to the words, written or oral, of earlier Christians.

The result was to elevate early beliefs and traditions, to distinguish genuine Christian documents from fakes and forgeries.