On the Articles: Article XXXIV

The Nineteenth Sunday after TrinityO GOD, forasmuch as without thee we are not able to please thee: Mercifully grant, that thy Holy Spirit may in all things direct and rule our hearts; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

XXXIV. Of the Traditions of the Church
It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one, and utterly like; for at all times they have been divers, and may be changed according to the diversities of countries, times, and men’s manners, so that nothing be ordained against God’s Word. Whosoever through his private judgement, willingly and purposely, doth openly break the traditions and ceremonies of the Church, which be not repugnant to the Word of God, and be ordained and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly, (that others may fear to do the like,) as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church, and hurteth the authority of the Magistrate, and woundeth the consciences of the weak brethren.
Every particular or national Church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish, ceremonies or rites of the Church ordained only by man’s authority, so that all things be done to edifying.

The role of tradition has been one that has challenged the Catholic Church since its creation. At the time of the English Reformation, continental Protestants had been claiming to abandon tradition in favour of Scripture alone while ironically establishing new traditions. Some practices and doctrines of the Church were heavily rooted in tradition, but these traditions were not always universal and might vary from region to region even within one country.

This variability, for instance, led to the Synod at Whitby in the mid-7th century as there was at that time two different models for calculating the date of Easter, one brought by the Celtic missionary tradition in the north and one from Canterbury in the south rooted in the Roman practice. This could cause significant problems when you combined people from both traditions (as might happen in the case of nobility) when one spouse would be fasting for Lent while the other feasted for Easter.

The first thing that ought to be noted is that while the Article makes it clear that traditions of the Church may be enforced, they may be enforced only insofar as they are not, “repugnant to the Word of God,” which is to say that Holy Scripture holds a place of Primacy (Article VI) and the Church may not ordain or teach what is contrary to the Scriptures (Article XX). This differentiates it from the Eastern Orthodox which hold that Scripture is a part of Tradition and therefore Tradition can hold a dogmatic authority, and the Roman Catholic Church which argues its teaching magisterium holds the ability to promulgate Tradition as an equal authority, and separate from, Holy Scripture. Anglicans by contrast would suggest all authority is ultimately rooted in Holy Scripture and the authority even of the Ecumenical Councils and Creeds is rooted in their Scriptural authenticity, not merely in their reception by the whole Church.

This Article goes on to address other aspects of tradition, noting that tradition need not be uniform in all senses, particular as it approaches issues of ceremony. So long as everything remains rooted in the authority of Scripture, the Article argues, different places and times may allow for differences in ceremony and tradition. That said, it notes that like St Paul argues in I Corinthians, there must be order in the Church: these traditions and ceremonies must be, “approved by common authority.”

It rebukes the notion of private judgement (a term often applied to interpretation of Scripture but here applied to the acceptance of Tradition) where it says that such actions taken against the lawful authority of the Church not only assault the authority of the Church but, “woundeth the consciences of the weak bretheren.”

That said, while this Article defends the lawful diversity in the land, it is not to suggest that the practice of the English Church was one of disunity. Indeed, with the compilation and publication of the Prayer Book, uniformity was imposed in many respects on English clergy. What this Article defends is the historic legitimacy in differing practices in general, and thus the legitimacy of the English Church maintaining different traditions, ceremonies and practices than other parts of the Western Catholic Church where Rome had imposed its form of uniformity. This Article thus reaffirms Article XXIV on the use of the vernacular, or even Article XXX which allows for the people and clergy alike to receive the Eucharist in both kinds.

This is made clear in the final paragraph and should be noted the emphasis on the fact that ceremonies and rites of the Church are ordained through the Church, “only by man’s authority,” again emphasizing the distinction drawn between tradition and Scripture, which holds authority bestowed by God himself, versus what the Church ordains for the edification of the people, maintenance of unity and the general good order of the Church.

On the Three-Legged Stool

The Feast of St Bartholomew the Apostle

O ALMIGHTY and everlasting God, who didst give to thine Apostle Bartholomew grace truly to believe and to preach thy Word: Grant, we beseech thee, unto thy Church, to love that Word which he believed, and both to preach and receive the same; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Tenth Sunday after Trinity

LET thy merciful ears, O Lord, be open to the prayers of thy humble servants; and that they may obtain their petitions make them to ask such things as shall please thee; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

In the 16th century, Richard Hooker was a priest of the Church of England and an influential theologian whose works continue to influence Anglicans today. His famous Of the Lawes of Ecclesiastical Politie was a response to emerging Puritanism and a defence of the organization and governance of the Church of England. His work had long-lasting influence on the development of coherent Anglican theology over the next centuries.

Of particular note was Hooker’s emphasis on the importance of Scripture, reason and Tradition. While he never expressed it as such, this has been commonly termed the “three-legged stool” which underpins Anglican theology and doctrine. As he did describe it,

Be it in matter of the one kind or of the other, what Scripture doth plainly deliver, to that the first place both of credit and obedience is due; the next whereunto is whatsoever any man can necessarily conclude by force of reason; after this the Church succeedeth that which the Church by her ecclesiastical authority shall probably think and define to be true or good, must in congruity of reason overrule all other inferior judgments whatsoever. (Book V, 8:2)

Richard Hooker’s writing established a classical understanding of the hierarchy of Scripture, reason and Tradition with Scripture as the ultimate authority on God’s revelation and reason and Tradition as tools we use to help understand Scripture.

This understanding of authority on doctrine provides for a balanced approach that rejects the Protestant sola scriptura practice of Holy Scripture as the sole authority as much as it rejects the notion of Papal Infallibility in teaching. Scripture, reason and Tradition are held together and against one another as a method of balanced discernment of the will of God towards true understanding and doctrine.

It is not, however, an approach which is always understood in its classical sense, particularly by those who know it on the basis of the “three-legged stool” which itself implies an equality between the three ‘legs’ which does not exist.

In Hooker’s words, “to [Holy Scripture] the first place both of credit and obedience is due.” The doctrine of the Anglican Church rejects sola scriptura of the Protestant Reformation in favour of prima scriptura. The primacy of Holy Scripture is the fundamental principle of Anglican doctrine. While not the only source of doctrine, it is the standard by which other doctrines are measured. Interestingly, prima scriptura is also the doctrine of the Eastern Orthodox Church, and although the Roman Catholic Church officially holds Tradition in equality with Holy Scripture, in practice Tradition is still measured against Holy Scripture as the ultimate revealed Truth.

After the primacy of Scripture, Hooker follows with, “whatsoever any man can necessarily conclude by force of reason.” Reason is a God-gifted faculty granted to man, and is useful for the understanding of Holy Scripture and the application of it in a modern context. The Bible was written to be understood by the people in the time it was written; the further we are from that time the more difficult it is for us to fully understand a simple reading of it. William of St-Thierry argued this in his The Golden Epistle, saying, “The Scriptures need to be read and understood in the same spirit in which they were created. You will never enter into Paul’s meaning until, by good intention in reading and diligent zeal in meditating, you drink of his spirit.” This is even made even clearer in Scripture itself:

So Philip ran to him and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” (Acts 8. 30-31)

In this passage, the Ethiopian is able to read the Book of Isaiah, but is not able to interpret it because his cultural and historical context is too far removed from the time and culture of Isaiah. While we have long traditions of Biblical exegesis dating back to the Church Fathers to help us understand much of the meaning of Scripture, reason is what allows us to further interpret and apply the revealed Truth of Scripture in our modern lives.

Reason, along with Tradition, helps to interpret Holy Scripture, however there are limits to the ability of reason to produce theologically sound interpretation. Reason can, for instance, be used to explain the nature of God on the basis of revealed Truth in Holy Scripture. Where reason causes theological error is when it is used to extrapolate, rather than simply interpret, the nature of God on the basis of Holy Scripture. While reason comes from God, it is shaped by our human natures, human logic and human understanding. If there is one thing shown repeatedly in the Bible, it is that God’s nature constantly confounds human expectations (viz. Mt 20. 1-16, Lk 15. 11-32) and therefore to apply human logic and understanding to extrapolate on the nature of God would doubtless lead to theological error and would be unprovable, lacking the standard of Holy Scripture to be properly measured against.

In Hooker’s age, the word Tradition had so many negative connotations but in its current use we deem to mean what Hooker was referring to when he said, “that which the Church by her ecclesiastical authority shall probably think and define to be true or good.” While Holy Scripture was the full standard by which all doctrine must be measured, unlike sola scriptura, prima scriptura leaves room for the Church to discern doctrine in areas where Scripture provides no clear doctrine, by applying the lessons of Scripture to new situations, after discernment and prayer, and with the aid of the Holy Spirit. According to the Articles of Religion, the Church has no authority to promulgate doctrine in conflict with Holy Scripture, supporting Hooker’s hierarchy.

The problem with the notion of a three-legged stool is that it implies equality between its legs while, in reality, Holy Scripture is the standard by which reason and Tradition are judged. To place them on an equal footing denies the supremacy of Scripture, which is laid out in Article VI of the Thirty-Nine Articles, and muddles the importance of God’s revealed Truth to us. While the concept of a three-legged stool sounds Anglican on its face--striking a middle way through the supreme authority of Scripture and Tradition in the Protestant and Roman Catholic traditions, classical Anglicanism demands a hierarchical approach to the understanding of Scripture, reason and Tradition.