In the churches that esteem the gospel, the Word of God dominates their common life together. Scripture is the guarantee of the authority of their preaching and the authorizer of their ministries. We preach, pray, and work “according to Scripture” because of a belief that God speaks through Scripture. Scripture is a human word about God it is God’s word to us and for us.
Yet all churches, even evangelical churches, approach Scripture through the grid of their own traditions. All churches rely on tradition and generate their own traditions when it comes to handling the Bible. Tradition, therefore, is a lot like a nose. Everybody has one, even if you cannot see your own, it is still there. We all read Scripture in the context of a tradition of some kind, even if we do so unconsciously at first.
As Anthony Lane put it:
“It is impossible to read scripture without tradition, save in the rare examples of those with no prior contact with the Christian faith who pick up a portion of scripture. We bring to the Bible a pre-understanding of the Christian faith that we have received from others, thus by tradition.”[1]
Tradition is a good thing as it provides the necessary context, interpretative frameworks, and communal support that shape how Scripture is understood and applied. Nobody approaches Scripture with a view shaped only by Scripture. Thus, it is nearly impossible to approach Christian scripture in a vacuum, free from the influences of a tradition.
Even the pulpit-pounding fundamentalist who claims that the Bible alone guides him, still appeals to an established consensus within his own community to validate his exposition of the Bible as a true and accurate account. This tradition, even if not openly acknowledged, is regarded as an authoritative declaration about what the Bible says in that group. Again, even the most jiving and thriving of Pentecostal churches have a normal way of doing Sunday morning worship that does not jump directly from the pages of the New Testament. This normal way of doing worship, how they organize everything from songs to sermons, is a type of tradition too.
The fact of the matter is that if anyone claims that they believe the Bible, sooner or later they have to state what they think the Bible actually says. As soon as they say what that is, when they teach it, or write it down, they are creating a tradition. I need to stress the point again, all churches are receivers and creators of tradition! Tradition, then, is inevitable. There is no question of whether we will have a tradition, the question is which tradition will we operate in?
I submit that we should embrace the bountiful and nourishing fruits of the Christian tradition, digest it, drink from it, and share it. This tradition gives us the best chance for remaining orthodox and remaining in the catholic faith of the ancient churches.
That is not to say we should absorb these traditions uncritically, far from it. We need to adopt an attitude of believing criticism towards traditions ancient, reformed, and new. The traditions embedded in the creeds, confessions, and liturgies of our churches should be afforded the opportunity to inform us as to what it means to believe in God and to worship him. Thereafter, we can assess them critically in light of Scripture so that they can be reinterpreted or corrected as required. In addition, we need to create traditions that orient our churches to Jesus through Scripture and the wisdom of the accumulated tradition.