Like Button

Monday, January 14, 2008

Tradition!

There is, in current Protestantism as well as our society, a tendency to discard the traditional. We question the need for tradition. We think that "the traditional" is simply a reference to "the old and worn out", stuff that only those nice but somewhat frumpy older folks prefer, but of little real use to the contemporary.

Part of this is part of Protestantism. The Roman Catholic Church (of which the Protestants protest) hold tradition as one of the basic components of orthodoxy. Scripture, the Church, and tradition are the three parts they contend that provide insight and instruction in how we should think and live. The Reformers protested, calling on sola scriptura instead. Only Scripture had the position as the source for matters of faith and practice. So there was a built in objection, at least to some extent, to tradition. But neither the Roman Catholic Church nor the Reformers actually rejected tradition outright. The question at the time was the authority of tradition, not the value. Protestants, however, have questioned the value to the point that there is in many cases an automatic rejection of anything that bears the tag "tradition".

The other part, of course, is sin. It is in the sin nature. We want to be independent. We want to be without authority at all. It's part of our nature. We are rebels from the start. Factor in the modern culture of youth that says that young is good and old is bad and we're ready to toss tradition at the face of it. Never mind that tradition has value. Don't think about the fact that we all have traditions and, if we don't, we're making our own. Don't even consider the possibility that these traditions actually have roots in truth and value in content. We're young and we're free and we don't want no stinkin' traditions. Those are for old folks.

I have learned a respect for tradition. Some people look aghast at me when I use the term or the concept, as if I'm trying to become a Roman Catholic or something. So, before you question my integrity, let me tell you my thinking. I'm speaking here of Christian tradition. I'm speaking of "orthodoxy", the long-standing views of Scripture that have been held through the centuries. These are particularly in the crosshairs of modern Christianity. We need to take them apart and likely discard them. But I wonder, and here's why. Jesus told His disciples, "When the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all the truth" (John 16:13). It seems to me that one of the primary functions of the Holy Spirit throughout the ages has been to "guide you into all truth". If this is accurate, then it would seem to me that one would be able to trace orthodoxy from the first century to today. It might be obscure at times. It might not be in the forefront. There might be gaps, at least in the documentation. But it seems that, assuming the Holy Spirit has been doing His job all this time, the truth must always have been in the hands of Christ's true disciples.

If this is true, then it would seem that tradition has value. We find so many "givens" from orthodoxy being questioned today. Look at some examples, and I'm sure you'll think of your own. The Church has always held that women cannot be in positions of leadership in the Church. That is not the sole perception today. Homosexual behavior has always been viewed as sin. Many today are arguing that the idea is archaic. The Bible has been considered inspired by God for nearly 2000 years. Many loud voices are scoffing at the idea today. Then there is the myriads of doctrines that are being questioned or discussed today that were settled in the Church so long ago. Old heresies are back, claiming that their perception is just as biblical as anyone else's.

What to do? One position would say, "Discard tradition. We need to re-evaluate all positions all the time." Well, they might not use the second sentence, but that's the requirement of the first. All Scripture is open to all interpretation all the time. You are not allowed to call on historic interpretation because tradition is out. I would suggest that if the Holy Spirit has been doing His job over the centuries, then we should be able to trace a long line of coherent truth on the concept in question that 1) agrees with Scripture (most important) and 2) has a history of agreement among the people of God. The alternative is a bit too difficult for me to tolerate -- that the Holy Spirit tried His best, but only recently has been able to get up enough momentum to get people to the truth.

I won't go over the arguments that traditional Christianity would settle today. You can do that for yourself. I would just like to offer a recommendation. If you are offered two positions on a particular biblical topic, both of which might seem to be well supported by the Word, perhaps you can try asking what saints through the ages held on that question. I think you'll often find that the question was asked and answered over and over in Church history, and we would do well to trust the Spirit to have been at work all that time. Tradition may have its problems, but let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

2 comments:

will said...

This is well done.

Personally, I find tradition useful, necessary, but not authoritative. Among other things, tradition (like the Patristic writings) can be very helpful in understanding how the early church understood Christianity. Within the context of Christianity, the Bible always trumps this - but it is still beneficial to grasp how Christian ideas were received.

I also have observed one item you mention here - there has always been an biblical / orthodox branch of the church. This is what is plainly demonstrated in Scripture (with very few leaps to understand) - but it has always been followed by some - though often a minority.

Stan said...

"Useful, necessary, but not authoritative." Perfect. That was what I had in mind.

As for the other, those who question whether or not there has always been a biblical/orthodox Church (somewhere) throughout history frankly baffle me. Is God God or isn't He? Will He not sustain His Church or won't He? I guess those who place human Free Will (capital letters there are not accidental) above the Sovereignty of God would be in that position.