The premises do not seem to warrant the conclusion

TF says of the 73rd chapter of the Rule of St. Benedict:

Like other fathers of the day, it exalts the teachings of the fathers, but gives the highest place to Scriptures.

He quotes the chapter, and bolds what he finds interesting, but does his conclusion really follow from the rule itself?

Of This, that Not the Whole Observance of Righteousness Is Laid Down in this Rule

Now, we have written this Rule that, observing it in monasteries, we may show that we have acquired at least some moral righteousness, or a beginning of the monastic life.

On the other hand, he that hasteneth on to the perfection of the religious life, hath at hand the teachings of the holy Fathers, the observance of which leadeth a man to the height of perfection. For what page or what utterance of the divinely inspired books of the Old and the New Testament is not a most exact rule of human life? Or, what book of the holy Catholic Fathers doth not loudly proclaim how we may go straight to our Creator? So, too, the collations of the Fathers, and their institutes and lives, and the rule of our holy Father, Basil -- what are they but the monuments of the virtues of exemplary and obedient monks? But for us slothful, disedifying, and negligent monks they are a source for shame and confusion.

Thou, therefore, who hastenest to the heavenly home, with the help of Christ fulfil this least rule written for a beginning; and then thou shalt with God's help attain at last to the greater heights of knowledge and virtue which we have mentioned above. [italics in original]

The point of the chapter, obviously, is that the Rule is not intended to spell out every jot and tittle of the life of righteousness. St. Benedict wrote it as "a beginning" to monastic life. So it would be silly to treat it as a summation of the whole of monastic life - to say nothing of life in general.

Although this is true, the man "that hasteneth on to ... perfection" is not left without resources to assist him. He has

the teachings of the holy Fathers, the observance of which leadeth a man to the height of perfection. For what page or what utterance of the divinely inspired books of the Old and the New Testament is not a most exact rule of human life? Or, what book of the holy Catholic Fathers doth not loudly proclaim how we may go straight to our Creator? So, too, the collations of the Fathers, and their institutes and lives, and the rule of our holy Father, Basil -- what are they but the monuments of the virtues of exemplary and obedient monks?

TF has boldfaced the second sentence here, as though it justifies his conclusion above. But does it?

The preceding sentence says of the "holy Fathers" that their teachings lead a man to "the height of perfection." TF's sentence extols the value of Scripture. And the following sentences praise the "Catholic Fathers" whose works tells us "how we may go straight to our Creator," and similarly for "the collations of the Fathers, and their institutes and lives," etc.

I submit that the Scripture is not set here as having the "highest place" as TF suggests, but rather it is a part of a greater whole that St. Benedict has in mind - namely, it is part of "the teachings of the holy Fathers," a list of which St. Benedict provides:

• Scripture
• Works of the Catholic Fathers
• Rule of Basil
• Example of the lives of the Fathers and great monks

Well, TF would most likely grant that. But can we say that Scripture is given "the highest place"? I'm not so sure.

What does St. Benedict say of Scripture? He says every page is "a most exact rule of human life".

What does he say of the Fathers? He says that their works "loudly proclaim how we may go straight to our Creator".

It seems to me, given that he is breaking down what he meant by "the teachings of the holy Fathers," that what he says about Scripture and the Fathers must be effectively the same as what he says about the whole - namely, that both of them lead a man "to the height of perfection."

There is no hint here of one being better than the other. Sacred Tradition has not been relegated to second place in the eyes of St. Benedict. He was no crypto-proto-Protestant.

But there are other things to notice, too. He doesn't say that we need only the Bible: there is not a breath of a hint of "sola scriptura" here. He does say that we begin and end our pursuit of holiness only with the help of Christ, with God's help, so that first of all holiness is the goal, and secondly it cannot be attained without God's grace from start to finish. Hence we find not a whiff of Pelagianism here, either - just as is true, of course, of the Catholic Faith from start to finish.