ContraMundum
30th March 2006, 11:57 AM
Hi All,
I guess it is obvious to all and sundry on this forum that we have a lot of discussion about "tradition" here. After all, it is part of our forum title.
I have been thinking about this for a number of weeks now, and have monitored my reading and study to take note of the role of tradition in Anglicanism.
I've come to a conclusion that is perhaps even more broad reaching that I had planned- that is, that what some people call "tradition" (eg. historic writings and practices of the early Church Fathers) is hardly a factor in the formative theology of most churches, ancient or modern.
Here's what I mean- take any old-school Anglican textbook on theology, one you might study in a formal seminary setting, and read it. There's hardly any references to the Fathers and when there is it is usually to bolster a Biblical doctrine or point out where a Father made have made an erroneous statement or been taken out of context or something. The main thrust and basis of the theology found in Anglican dogmatics is Biblical.
To find the kind of elevated view of the Fathers that is often demonstrated here one has to go to a book dedicated to the Fathers or to tradition in general, but otherwise, stock standard dogmatic works really do not rely on them much and this is pretty much the case across the board in the universal church.
I compared this with some other streams of church traditions, eg. the Romans and the Orthodox, and came to the same conclusion. The Fathers are not the formatives of the dogmatic elements of the Faith, even in other circles.
Why then, is there so much reference to the Fathers on a forum where within our tradition they are really jjst historic commentators? Simple- where the battle is, there the soldier is tested. Right now, Anglican dogmatics (as well as the dogmatics in other communions) is facing a trend of iconoclasm. What the church has historically taught on any given issue is being tested by those who wish to shatter the old icons of belief that we have. I do not in any way think this is the work of the majority of Christian scholars, just a well tenured few.
But, I'd like to see a return to Anglican prolegomena in our communion. We have been borrowing the epistemology of some very novel and recent trends in the history of the church (eg. Romanism, Liberalism) to form our new dogmas when in fact we had it right already.
I guess it is obvious to all and sundry on this forum that we have a lot of discussion about "tradition" here. After all, it is part of our forum title.
I have been thinking about this for a number of weeks now, and have monitored my reading and study to take note of the role of tradition in Anglicanism.
I've come to a conclusion that is perhaps even more broad reaching that I had planned- that is, that what some people call "tradition" (eg. historic writings and practices of the early Church Fathers) is hardly a factor in the formative theology of most churches, ancient or modern.
Here's what I mean- take any old-school Anglican textbook on theology, one you might study in a formal seminary setting, and read it. There's hardly any references to the Fathers and when there is it is usually to bolster a Biblical doctrine or point out where a Father made have made an erroneous statement or been taken out of context or something. The main thrust and basis of the theology found in Anglican dogmatics is Biblical.
To find the kind of elevated view of the Fathers that is often demonstrated here one has to go to a book dedicated to the Fathers or to tradition in general, but otherwise, stock standard dogmatic works really do not rely on them much and this is pretty much the case across the board in the universal church.
I compared this with some other streams of church traditions, eg. the Romans and the Orthodox, and came to the same conclusion. The Fathers are not the formatives of the dogmatic elements of the Faith, even in other circles.
Why then, is there so much reference to the Fathers on a forum where within our tradition they are really jjst historic commentators? Simple- where the battle is, there the soldier is tested. Right now, Anglican dogmatics (as well as the dogmatics in other communions) is facing a trend of iconoclasm. What the church has historically taught on any given issue is being tested by those who wish to shatter the old icons of belief that we have. I do not in any way think this is the work of the majority of Christian scholars, just a well tenured few.
But, I'd like to see a return to Anglican prolegomena in our communion. We have been borrowing the epistemology of some very novel and recent trends in the history of the church (eg. Romanism, Liberalism) to form our new dogmas when in fact we had it right already.