Can it be any clearer?
For many deceivers entered into the world, those not confessing Jesus Christ coming in the flesh; this is the deceiver and the antichrist. Keep on looking to yourselves, in order that ye might not lose that which we wrought, but that ye might receive a full reward. Everyone who transgresseth and abideth not in the teaching of the Christ hath not God; the one abiding in the teaching of the Christ, this one also hath the Father and the Son. If anyone come to you and bring not this teaching, cease receiving him into the house and saying to him fare-thee-well, for the one who saith to him fare-thee-well partaketh in his evil works. (2 John 7-11, Orthodox New Testament, © 2004 Holy Apostles Convent)
Not only does one not have the right to introduce teachings which are not the doctrine of Christ, but others do not have the obligation to be hospitable to one's teachings if one does. Note also how closely tied is union with God and Christ to believing the right doctrine about Christ.
Things that make ya go, "Hmmmm . . . "
Posted by Clifton at February 17, 2005 04:00 PM | TrackBackWow. Puts a perspective on the whole Tradition discussion. However, protestantly, we know how the "teaching of Christ" gets defined. What part of the Church is the "teaching of Christ". You have a yearning for priestesses, or even perhaps sodomy - then it was never part of the "teaching of Christ" - only that rude Paul, or some later addition.
In a way, one can see how the whole history of schism and heresy (both Western and Eastern) is a kind of willful self assertion and intellectual confusion over the "teaching of Christ"...
Posted by: Christopher at February 17, 2005 08:58 PMYou do realize the cognitive disjunct that this post is causing for those of us who are Reformationally minded? If one approaches this from the perspective that the doctrine of Christ is comprised of both Church Tradition and the interpreted Word of God, then it is true that he has no a right to depart from either one. The problem on this side of the divide comes in the phrase, "Not only does one not have the right to introduce teachings which are not the doctrine of Christ." We whole-heartedly agree, defining non-Scripturally based Church Tradition in just this way. At some point or another, a specific tradition was introduced and, rather than the individual or individuals introducing it being condemned, some portion of the Church said, "Wow! New and Improved!" In and of itself, antiquity of practice or belief does not argue against these things being innovative.
Let me admit that many Protestants have taken sola scriptura too far. With no consideration of the teaching and authority of the Church, it has often turned into 'me and my Bible.' The result has been churches that are little more than innovative voluntary societies. This is wrong. The Church needs tradition. In no sense, however, does it need a tradition that stands along side of the teaching of Scripture. Rather, Scripture, which is the alone teaching of Christ, is the sole foundation and continual lifesource of that tradition. The Reformation acted as a corrective against rootless, authoritative church tradition gone bad. It recognized that the Church, though she is truly Holy, is not some entity that stands in abstraction from its people. The Church is its people: a gathering of sinners with all the fallibilites thereof. Unless the Church would stray along with various individuals within it, it must constantly ask itself, "Is this really what Scripture teaches?" And it must constantly study that Scripture to affirm that it is. If such affirmation cannot be made, then it is the Church's responsibility to say, "We have been ignorant of the teaching of Christ; let us now repent."
It is the case that the established doctrine of Christ precludes the introduction of any other doctrine. But the automatic corollary is not an indiscriminate, "No one has a right to depart from Tradition." In some cases, such a departure may be required.
Posted by: Kevin at February 18, 2005 12:18 PMKevin:
I think the disjunct may be addressed from this standpoint: Before there was New Testament Scripture, there was Tradition. Indeed, Scripture itself is part of Tradition.
In other words, the ancient Church (and the present-day Church) had (and has) no need to place Tradition and Scripture side by side as though they are in opposition. Rather, Scripture is in whole part of the Tradition. It's not an either/or because we are not talking about two separate realities, but one single reality: Tradition. Scripture is a manifestation of the Tradition, and as such cannot contradict Tradition, nor Tradition Scripture.
The problem is when Christians try to excise Scripture from Tradition and interpret it outside of the Tradition. It is inevitable that the meaning of Scripture will then be distorted beyond, if you will, authorial (and Authorial) intent.
Let me offer some ponder-ous points. In the Thessalonian Church, when the Thessalonians were being led astray by a letter purported to be from Paul, what did Paul do? Did he send them back to the Old Testament to confirm his message? Did he say, "Go take a look at the letter I sent to the Church in Galatia?" No, rather what he said was:
So then, brethren, be standing firm and holding fast the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word or by our epistle. (2 Thessalonians 2:15)
And then, when it was a matter of the proper conduct of Christians, what did he tell the Thessalonians?
Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw yourselves from every brother who walketh disorderly, and not according to the tradition which they received from us. For ye yourselves know how it is needful to imitate us . . . (2 Thessalonians 3:6-7a)
Clearly, then, to settle disputable questions, Paul did not resort to Scripture (or most definitely not to Scripture apart from the Tradition), but appealed to the Tradition itself.
So there is no dichotomy, no tension, no opposition between Scripture and Tradition.
More to the point, if New Testament Scripture is fundamentally necessary for determi