Pilgrim Soldier

Twice in two days I’ve been challenged to think about the role of tradition within Christian thinking. Yesterday, I reached Chapter 15 of A Generous Orthodoxy by Brian McLaren. The chapter is entitled “Why I Am catholic” and one of the reasons he gives is because of the role of tradition within the Catholic/Orthodox experiences.

Within this section he quotes Gabriel Fackre who said:

The circle of tradition is not closed, for the Spirit’s ecclesial Work is not done. Traditional doctrine developes as Christ and the gospel are viewed in ever-fresh perspective. Old formulations are corrected, and what is passed on is enriched. The open-endedness, however does not overthrow the ancient landmarks. As tradition is a gift of the Spirit, its trajectory moves in the right direction, although it has not arrived at its destination.¹

This addresses one of the concerns I’ve had in recent years. As I grew up I remember very little teaching on the value of the traditions of the Church. Maybe it was there, but I don’t remember it. It feels as if I learnt about tradition in a negative sense, ie that using tradition to shape our thinking is bad, unless of course it goes back to the original New Testament Church, or the pioneers of the particular tradition (ie Booth, Railton, etc in The Salvation Army).

Which brings me to today’s exposure to tradition. This morning I attended a lecture at our training college for officers on Ethics. The speaker, Major Karen Shakespeare from the UK, was teaching on ethics and used the idea of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral as a basis for showing how we can develop our own ethical views on issues.

Of course within the Quadrilateral is the idea that Scripture, whilst being the most important, is illuminated by tradition. This tradition was not only restricted to the earliest days, or that of the Wesley’s and their immediate peers, but the whole 2000 year history of the church.

This whole train of thought sits well with me. I acknowledge that when I read the Bible I do so with some preconceptions on how to interpret what I read. To do so is to disregard my own humanity and would be arrogant in the extreme. I wish I knew more about church tradition, and intend to find out more so that my interpretation of the Bible becomes more developed.

It feels though at times that even those who espouse the renewed interest in tradition within faith, do so with an unwillingness to accept that there is an element of the Spirit’s work throughout the history of the Church. So when looking at how to overcome the effects of modernity on the church, they feel they must go back to before modernity started to pervade Christian thought and ignore the good that it has done. Conversely, those who back up a modernity based insistence on absolutes in all things Christian, seem to have an unhealthly disrespect for any part of Church history that doesn’t back up their view and an arrogant insistence that they only can truly interpret Scripture free of the preconceptions that most acknowledge.

No wonder so many people are searching for something in the middle of these views! I am coming to believe that in order to truly test the teaching we receive we need to learn more about church tradition so that we avoid heresy!