What I denounce, in reality, is anything that is not inspired writing, but only by comparison.
The traditions of our people varied from tribe to tribe, with the priesthood at the higher tier than tribal, and ultimately the Torah at the top, but not always revered as the one and only defining authority. The tendency to try and "fill in the gaps" with specifics for those who routinely demand answers to such things as "How many steps can I take on Shabbat before it becomes 'work' as a violation of Torah?" All of that stems from a lack of vision for the spirit of Torah.
As is written, the letter "killeth," but the Spirit "giveth life."
The traditions tended to be so deeply steeped in much of what we see within the RCC, historically speaking. A progressive building upon the heap of traditions always leads to inconsistencies, contradictions, along with lots and lots of interpretations from our contemporary rabbis. My lineage of rabbis, some secular and some overly religious, and everything in between, but almost always legalistic, have been somewhat of a thorn in my flesh upon reflection throughout my past.
Being a "Messianic Jew" (and I lay claim to that label very reservedly given that I don't subscribe to ALL the beliefs within ALL groupings who lay claim to that label), I'm forced to look toward inspired writing as being vastly more authoritative than anything else written by men who had not seen Yahshuah.
MM