Rejecting The Authority of Tradition

[AJB4]

Ha! I almost had you there. I'm not personally rejecting the authority of tradition.

I've come to just realize most recently that tradition is really quite hated in my current church (Restoration Movement 'Church of Christ'). It (the rejection of tradition) has been rather an eye-opener for me on two occasions:

1) One day, they (we, whatever) had a 'visitors day', a special time when people made a marked effort to reach out to their friends and bring them along. On this day, they changed the order of the service a bit:

"We can't be called traditional" is what the guy announcing it said (though perhaps I'm reading too much into it and taking it to mean something it didn't -- I'm not sure).

2) In my Bible-class, we get these mini study things each time that talk about different issues. Recently, it was about "the church" (as I'm sure you all are aware by my past posts, they teach that they're the 'one true church').

Anyway, the section was 'Corruption of the Church', and one thing that it taught was a deviation from the Biblical Pattern was the authority of tradition. The verse they had against tradition was

Matthew 15:3-9 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2015:3-9&version=9) - But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;
And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.
Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,
This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.
But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

The thing is, there a verse that says to keep traditions:

2 Thessalonians 2:15
(http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=60&chapter=2&verse=15&version=9&context=verse)
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

No doubt, the epistles are letters (which the Bible is made up of), so if that verse is correct, the Bible is tradition, which means that the Bible and "word" tradition, which is oral tradition, are to have just as much authority as each other.

Correct me if I'm wrong...

[MariaRegina]

AJ, have you ever read Becoming Orthodox by Father Peter Gillquist?

In that book he covers a lot of things you would find profitable, because he searched the Bible and uncovered protestant errors. In other words, through searching the Bible, he found the Orthodox Church.

[EmperorConstantine]

I've heard good things about the book Aria recommended. Even though I haven't read it myself, I'd say read it anyhow. There is another book called "Coming Home: why Protestant clergy are becoming Orthodox" (or something along those lines) and it is a collection of stories from Orthodox priests who were Protestants in a former life. Not just these Protestants or those Protestants, but Protestants ranging from Anglicans to Baptists to Church of Christ people to Pentecostals.

Great read. I recommend it. It was edited by Fr. Peter Gillquist.


Anyway, when Christ was "chastising" the pharisees there, He was chastising them not so much that they kept their traditions, but that all they had was traditions. Basically, no faith. They were too into their own individual power, influence and arrogance that they had absolutely no faith. The Son of God was standing right in front of them and they didn't even know it!

With St. Paul's writings, he is saying keep what we've taught you. This is how we worship; trust us, we know. ;) We're guided by the Holy Spirit here. Don't believe me? Just ask my horse!

Christ was criticizing the traditions of the pharisees because they had no faith and were only concerned about their own greed. St. Paul is saying what we're teaching you guys is the faith, don't add to it or take from it.


Phew!

If anyone would like to add, please don't hesitate. :)

[buzuxi02]

So AJ,
Concerning Matthew 15.3-9, Does this church support stoning to death teenagers who disobey their parents? Its pretty clear that the commandment of God refers to capital punishment for rebelious kids.

Jesus is playing devils advocate (excuse the pun), He supports the tradition of not killing their children for unruly kids, Jesus is using tradition against tradition.

When taken in context (Matt 15.2) Jesus shows that the pharisees also transgress scripture by not enforcing capital punishment on their children. The same authority of tradition gives the disciples the right to eat without washing.

[AJB4]

Which basically confirms what I was saying - that Matthew verse is not a valid argument against tradition.

[Dust and Ashes]

All churches have traditions. Many even have Traditions. For some, it is a Tradition to be "non-traditional."

I'm trying to get my friend on here who was raised CoC. He actually discovered Orthodoxy by doing research on Church history so he has had to face most (if not all) of the arguments that might be given. His wife is became Orthodox as well but the rest of his family and extended family are still CoC but he said they usually don't argue with him anymore because he's done so much research on the subject and makes them too uncomfortable with his arguments.

[Oblio]

All churches have traditions. Many even have Traditions. For some, it is a Tradition to be "non-traditional."


See my sig :)

Kinda reminds me when Fr. Thomas Hopko relates the story of responding to someone who states they have 'No Creed but Christ'; by saying that is the shortest and dumbest Creed he had heard :)

[RobNJ]

See my sig :)

Kinda reminds me when Fr. Thomas Hopko relates the story of responding to someone who states they have 'No Creed but Christ'; by saying that is the shortest and dumbest Creed he had heard :)

:amen:

[MariaRegina]

Right on, Reader Christopher!

I heard Father Thomas Hopko say that many times when he came our West to give a retreat. He is a great retreat master.

No creed but Christ .... stupid indeed.

[Jacob4707]

IIRC, an Orthodox friend told me about a visit he made to a church, and as he was leaving, someone (the pastor?) asked him what he thought. They had the following exchange:

Friend: "What is your creed?"

Church member: "We have no creed but Christ."

Friend: "Okay, that's the first point of your creed. What's the second point?" :)

(I think my friend's comment went right over the guy's head.)

[Knowledge3]

lack of tradition = lack of discipline

[Knowledge3]

Ha! I almost had you there. I'm not personally rejecting the authority of tradition.

I've come to just realize most recently that tradition is really quite hated in my current church (Restoration Movement 'Church of Christ'). It (the rejection of tradition) has been rather an eye-opener for me on two occasions:

The traditions of the Orthodox Church are maintained by a valid priesthood that is in unity with a bishop along with the rest of the Orthodox Church. I can trace the use of tradition in the Orthodox faith back to the Church Fathers and the Fathers trace back to the Apostles. These are some points you should consider.

K3

[xristos.anesti]

Dear AJB4,

it is a valid point which is presented by other brothers and sisters here, and indeed through all the ages - when it comes to defending what we stand for.

The questions you are asking are the questions most of here asked at one point in time or the other.

The simple facts of the case are:

Humans require teaching - information and those teaching (information) will come from a source - one way or the other.

No matter how much protestants believe that what they hold is Only Bible and what we hold is "human traditions" - there is not one of us that goes through this life on our own - that is, none of us received anything by the way of formulation of our own opinion separate to what those around us formulated themselves.

No matter how much people will say that they "believe in Bible only" - the fact is that they use what others have written, either in big commentaries or as footnotes in Bibles. Or if not these than religious literature.

So, we all hold some traditions - even some of us won’t call it that way - but, rather - Biblical exegesis or whatever the term might be.

Even CoC - when they say No Creed But Christ - they are actually making a creed - for those words became a Creed.

So, if we agree that we all need some help by those "who know more", "are closer to God", "Prophets", "PhDs in Theology", "Preachers", "Elders"... or whatever you wish to call them - the question presents itself -

Who am I to believe?

This question is THE question.

Will I believe someone who has no historical connection with the teaching of Christ - indeed whose roots do not go beyond either British colonisation of the New World or Protestant Reformation? Or will I believe someone who can trace the route of his/her faith to those days when the New Testament speaks of at the start preserving what was given once for the salvation of all, without deletion, change or addition?

[ArmyMatt]

I think what many Protestants don't realize is that while every book of the New Testament was written down in the first century, the Bible as we see it today was not put together until the latter part of the fourth century (396 I think, I could be wrong with this). So the early Church had the Old Testament, her doctrines, and her beliefs.

In fact, when the New Testament was put together, the criteria that the Church used were is this a writing of an Apostle or close associate of and Apostle, and is this what the Church has always believed (ie the tradition).

If you know this, then it is illogical to believe that Christ made good Scripture and a bad Church (that's more Fr. Gilquist). The Holy Scriptures are a part of the Tradition, and can't be just pulled outside of it.

[EmperorConstantine]

In fact, when the New Testament was put together, the criteria that the Church used were is this a writing of an Apostle or close associate of and Apostle, and is this what the Church has always believed (ie the tradition).
I think part of the criteria was not only that, but also how much the different churches used such-and-such books.

[rusmeister]

A little GKC:


"Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to that arrogant oligarchy who merely happen to be walking around." - Orthodoxy, 1908