World Council of Churches
Fourth World Conference on Faith and Order
Report of Section II: Scripture, Tradition and Traditions
Note: This document was issued as part of a larger report from Section II, thus the paragraphs numbered 38-73 constitute the complete report entitled Scripture, Tradition and Traditions.
38. We find ourselves together in Montreal, delegates of churches
with many different backgrounds and many different histories. And yet despite
these differences we find that we are able to meet one another in faith and
hope in the one Father, who by his Son Jesus Christ has sent the Holy Spirit
to draw all men into unity with one another and with him. It is on the basis
of this faith and hope, and in the context of a common prayer to the one God,
Father, Son and Holy Spirit, that we have studied together anew the problem
of the one Tradition and the many traditions, and despite the fact of our separations,
have found that we can talk with one another and grow in mutual understanding.
The Section warmly commends for study by the churches the Report of the Theological
Commission on “Tradition and Traditions” (Faith and Order Findings,
Part IV, pp. 3-63), which was the main documentary foundation of its work.
39. In our report we have distinguished between a number of
different meanings of the word tradition. We speak of the Tradition (with a
capital T), tradition (with a small t) and traditions. By the Tradition is meant
the Gospel itself, transmitted from generation to generation in and by the Church,
Christ himself present in the life of the Church. By tradition is meant the
traditionary process. The term traditions is used in two senses, to indicate
both the diversity of forms of expression and also what we call confessional
traditions, for instance the Lutheran tradition or the Reformed tradition. In
the latter part of our report the word appears in a further sense, when we speak
of cultural traditions.
40. Our report contains the substance of the work of three
subsections. The first considered the subject of the relation of Tradition to
Scripture, regarded as the written prophetic and apostolic testimony to God’s
act in Christ, whose authority we all accept. The concern of the second was
with the problem of the one Tradition and the many traditions of Christendom
as they unfold in the course of the Church’s history. The third discussed
the urgent problems raised both in the life of the younger churches and in the
churches of the West, concerning the translation of Christian Tradition into
new cultures and languages.
41. Part I received a full discussion and the complete approval
of the Section. Owing to the lack of time it was not possible to give the same
detailed attention to Parts II and III. The Section in general recommends them
I. Scripture, Tradition and traditions
42. As Christians we all acknowledge with thankfulness that
God has revealed himself in the history of the people of God in the Old Testament
and in Christ Jesus, his Son, the mediator between God and man. God’s
mercy and God’s glory are the beginning and end of our own history. The
testimony of prophets and apostles inaugurated the Tradition of his revelation.
The once-for-all disclosure of God in Jesus Christ inspired the apostles and
disciples to give witness to the revelation given in the person and work of
Christ. No one could, and no one can, “say that Jesus is Lord, save by
the Holy Spirit” (I Cor. 12:3). The oral and written tradition of the
prophets and apostles under the guidance of the Holy Spirit led to the formation
of Scriptures and to the canonization of the Old and New Testaments as the Bible
of the Church. The very fact that Tradition precedes the Scriptures points to
the significance of tradition, but also to the Bible as the treasure of the
Word of God.
43. The Bible poses the problem of Tradition and Scripture
in a more or less implicit manner; the history of Christian theology points
to it explicitly. While in the Early Church the relation was not understood
as problematical, ever since the Reformation “Scripture and Tradition”
has been a matter of controversy in the dialogue between Roman Catholic and
Protestant theology. On the Roman Catholic side, tradition has generally been
understood as divine truth not expressed in Holy Scripture alone, but orally
transmitted. The Protestant position has been an appeal to Holy Scripture alone,
as the infallible and sufficient authority in all matters pertaining to salvation,
to which all human tradition should be subjected. The voice of the Orthodox
Church has hardly been heard in these Western discussions until quite recently.
44. For a variety of reasons, it has now become necessary
to reconsider these positions. We are more aware of our living in various confessional
traditions, e.g. that stated paradoxically in the saying “It has been
the tradition of my church not to attribute any weight to tradition.”
Historical study and not least the encounter of the churches in the ecumenical
movement have led us to realize that the proclamation of the Gospel is always
inevitably historically conditioned. We are also aware that in Roman Catholic
theology the concept of tradition is undergoing serious reconsideration.
45. In our present situation, we wish to reconsider the problem
of Scripture and Tradition, or rather that of Tradition and Scripture. And therefore
we wish to propose the following statement as a fruitful way of reformulating
the question. Our starting-point is that we are all living in a tradition which
goes back to our Lord and has its roots in the Old Testament, and are all indebted
to that tradition inasmuch as we have received the revealed truth, the Gospel,
through its being transmitted from one generation to another. Thus we can say
that we exist as Christians by the Tradition of the Gospel (the paradosis of
the kerygma) testified in Scripture, transmitted in and by the Church through
the power of the Holy Spirit. Tradition taken in this sense is actualized in
the preaching of the Word, in the administration of the Sacraments and worship,
in Christian teaching and theology, and in mission and witness to Christ by
the lives of the members of the Church.
46. What is transmitted in the process of tradition is the
Christian faith, not only as a sum of tenets, but as a living reality transmitted
through the operation of the Holy Spirit. We can speak of the Christian Tradition
(with a capital T), whose content is God’s revelation and self-giving
in Christ, present in the life of the Church.
47. But this tradition which is the work of the Holy Spirit
is embodied in traditions (n the two sense of the word, both as referring to
diversity in forms of expression, and in the sense of separate communions).
The traditions in Christian history are distinct from, and yet connected with,
the Tradition. They are the expressions and manifestations in diverse historical
forms of the one truth and reality which is Christ.
48. This evaluation of the traditions poses serious problems.
For some, questions such as these are raised. Is it possible to determine more
precisely what the content of the one Tradition is, and by what means? Do all
traditions which claim to be Christian contain the Tradition? How can we distinguish
between traditions embodying the true Tradition and merely human traditions?
Where do we find the genuine Tradition, and where impoverished tradition or
even distortion of tradition? Tradition can be a faithful transmission of the
Gospel, but also a distortion of it. In this ambiguity the seriousness of the
problem of tradition is indicated.
49. These questions imply the search for a criterion. This
has been a main concern for the Church since its beginning. In the New Testament
we find warnings against false teaching and deviations from the truth of the
Gospel. For the post-apostolic Church the appeal to the Tradition received from
the apostles became the criterion. As this Tradition was embodied in the apostolic
writings, it became natural to use those writings as an authority for determining
where the true Tradition was to be found. In the midst of all tradition, these
early records of divine revelation have a special basic value, because of their
apostolic character. But the Gnostic crisis in the second century shows that
the mere existence of apostolic writings did not solve the problem. The question
of interpretation arose as soon as the appeal to written documents made its
appearance. When the canon of the New Testament had been finally defined and
recognized by the Church, it was still more natural to use this body of writings
as an indispensable criterion.
50. The Tradition in its written form, as Holy Scripture (comprising
both the Old and the New Testament), has to be interpreted by the Church in
ever new situations. Such interpretation of the Tradition is to be found in
the crystallization of tradition in the creeds, the liturgical forms of the
sacraments and other forms of worship, and also in the preaching of the Word
and in theological expositions of the Church’s doctrine. A mere reiteration
of the words of Holy Scripture would be a betrayal of the Gospel which has to
be made understandable and has to convey a challenge to the world.
51. The necessity of interpretation raises again the question
of the criterion for the genuine Tradition. Throughout the history of the Church
the criterion has been sought in the Holy Scriptures rightly interpreted. But
what is “right interpretation”?
52. The Scriptures as documents can be letter only. It is
the Spirit who is the Lord and Giver of life. Accordingly we may say that the
right interpretation (taking the words in the widest possible sense) is that
interpretation which is guided by the Holy Spirit. But this does not solve the
problem of criterion. We arrive at the quest for a hermeneutical principle.
53. This problem has been dealt with in different ways by
the various churches. In some confessional traditions the accepted hermeneutical
principle has been that any portion of Scripture is to be interpreted in the
light of Scripture as a whole. In others the key has been sought in what is
considered to be the center of Holy Scripture, and the emphasis has been primarily
on the Incarnation, or on the Atonement and Redemption, or on justification
by faith, or again on the message of the nearness of the Kingdom of God, or
on the ethical teachings of Jesus. In yet others, all emphasis is laid upon
what Scripture says to the individual conscience, under the guidance of the
Holy Spirit. In the Orthodox Church the hermeneutical key is found in the mind
of the Church, especially as expressed in the Fathers of the Church and in the
Ecumenical Councils. In the Roman Catholic Church the key is found in the deposit
of faith, of which the Church’s magisterium is the guardian. In other
traditions again the creeds, complemented by confessional documents or by the
definitions of Ecumenical Councils and the witness of the Fathers, are considered
to give the right key to the understanding of Scripture. In none of these cases
where the principle of interpretation is found elsewhere than in Scripture is
the authority thought to be alien to the central concept of Holy Scripture.
On the contrary, it is considered as providing just a key to the understanding
of what is said in Scripture.
54. Loyalty to our confessional understanding of Holy Scripture
produces both convergence and divergence in the interpretation of Scripture.
For example, an Anglican and a Baptist will certainly agree on many points when
they interpret Holy Scripture (in the wide sense of interpretation), but they
will disagree on others. As another example, there may be mentioned the divergent
interpretations given to Matt. 16.18 in Roman Catholic theology on the one hand,
and in Orthodox or Protestant theology on the other. How can we overcome the
situation in which we all read Scripture in the light of our own traditions?
55. Modern biblical scholarship has already done much to bring
the different churches together by conducting them towards the Tradition. It
is along this line that the necessity for further thinking about the hermeneutical
problem arises: i.e. how we can reach an adequate interpretation of the Scriptures,
so that the Word of God addresses us and Scripture is safeguarded from subjective
or arbitrary exegesis. Should not the very fact that God has blessed the Church
with the Scriptures demand that we emphasize more than in the past a common
study of Scripture whenever representatives of the various churches meet? Should
we not study more the Fathers of all periods of the church and their interpretations
of the Scriptures in the light of our ecumenical task? Does not the ecumenical
situation demand that we search for the Tradition by re-examining sincerely
our own particular traditions?
II. The unity of Tradition and the diversity of traditions
56. Church and tradition are inseparable. By tradition we
do not mean traditionalism. The Tradition of the Church is not an object which
we possess, but a reality by which we are possessed. The Church’s life
has its source in God’s act of revelation in Jesus Christ, and in the
gift of the Holy Spirit to his people and his work in their history. Through
the action of the Holy Spirit, a new community, the Church, is constituted and
commissioned, so that the revelation and the life which are in Jesus Christ
may be transmitted to the ends of the earth and to the end of time. The Tradition
in its content not only looks backward to its origin in the past but also forward
to the fullness which shall be revealed. The life of the Church is live din
the continuous recalling, appropriation and transmission of the once-for-all
event of Christ’s coming in the flesh, and in the eager expectation of
his coming in glory. Al this finds expression in the word and in the Sacraments
in which “we proclaim the Lord’s death till he come” (I Cor.
57. There are at least two distinctive types of understanding
of the Tradition. Of these, the first is affirmed most clearly by the Orthodox.
For them, the Tradition is not only the act of God in Christ, who comes by the
work of the Holy Spirit to save all men who believe in him; it is also the Christian
faith itself, transmitted in wholeness and purity, and made explicit in unbroken
continuity through definite events in the life of the catholic and apostolic
Church from generation to generation. For some others, the Tradition is substantially
the same as the revelation in Christ and the preaching of the Word entrusted
to the Church which is sustained in being by it, and expressed with different
degrees of fidelity in various historically conditioned forms, namely the traditions.
There are others whose understanding of the Tradition and the traditions contains
elements of both these points of view. Current developments in biblical and
historical study, and the experience of ecumenical encounter, are leading many
to see new values in positions which they had previously ignored. The subject
58. In the two distinctive positions mentioned above, the
Tradition and the traditions are clearly distinguished. But while in the one
case it is held that it is to be found in the organic and concrete unity of
the one Church, in the other it is assumed that the one Tradition can express
itself in a variety of forms, not necessarily all equally complete. The problem
of the many churches and the one Tradition appears very differently from each
of those points of view. But though on the one side it is possible to maintain
that the Church cannot be, and has not been, divided, and on the other to envisage
the existence of many churches sharing in the one Tradition even though not
in communion with each other, none would wish to acquiesce in the present state
59. Many of our misunderstandings and disagreements on this
subject arise out of the fact of our long history of estrangement and division.
During the centuries the different Christian communions have developed their
own traditions of historical study and their own particular ways of viewing
the past. The rise of the idea of a strictly scientific study of history, with
its spirit of accuracy and objectivity, in some ways ameliorated this situation.
But the resultant work so frequently failed to take note of the deeper theological
issues involved in church history, that its value was severely limited. More
recently, a study of history which is ecumenical in its scope and spirit has
60. We believe that if such a line of study is pursued, it
can be of great relevance to the present life and problems of the Church: “those
who fail to comprehend their histories are doomed to re-enact them” (Santayana).
We believe, too, that it would have great value in offering possibilities of
a new understanding of some of the most contested areas of our common past.
We therefore specifically recommend that Faith and Order should seek to promote
such studies, ensuring the collaboration of scholars of different confessions,
in an attempt to gain a new view of crucial epochs and events in church history,
especially those in which discontinuity is evident.
61. But at this point another problem arises. At a moment
when mankind is becoming ever more aware of itself as a unity, and we are faced
with the development of a global civilization, Christians are called to a new
awareness of the universality of the Church, and of its history in relation
o the history of mankind. This means that, both at the level of theological
study and of pastoral teaching, an attempt has to be made to overcome the parochialism
of most studies in church history, and to convey some idea of the history of
God’s people as a whole. But how is this to be done? Does it not demand
the work of historians with more than human capabilities? Is it possible for
the scholar, limited as he is by his own cultural, historical and ecclesiastical
background, to achieve this vision? Clearly it is not, though we believe that
by working in collaboration something could be accomplished. For specialized
but limited insights and points of view can be checked and supplemented by those
of others; for example, a group may command a larger number of languages and
literatures than is possible for an individual. Questions are being raised in
the philosophy and theology of history, pointing both to the danger of mere
traditionalism and the permanent value of authentic traditionalism. These demand
our constant consideration.
62. Still a third kind of historical concern has been with
us. We are aware that during the period of this Conference we have been passing
through a new and unprecedented experience in the ecumenical movement. For the
first time in the Faith and Order dialogue, the Eastern Orthodox and the other
Eastern Churches have been strongly represented in our meetings. A new dimension
of Faith and Order has opened up, and we only begin to see its future possibilities.
It is clear that many of our problems of communication have arisen from the
inadequate understanding of the life and history of the Eastern Churches to
be found even among scholars in the West, and vice versa. Here again is an area
in which we would recommend further study, e.g. of the problem of the filioque,
its origin and consequences. There are two other studies which we recommend
to the Faith and Order Commission. We believe it important to undertake together
a study of the Councils of the Early Church, and we recommend an examination
of the catechetical material at present in use by the churches, and of the methods
whereby it could be revised in the light of the ecumenical movement.
63. In all this we are not blind to the nature of the world
in which we live, nor to the cultural and intellectual problems of our day.
To many of our contemporaries a concern with the past will immediately appear
suspect, as revealing a desire for the mere resuscitation of old customs and
ideas, which have no relevance for the urgent questions of our time. We recognize
that in many places human traditions – national, social, and indeed religious
– are being shaken; and that in this age of scientific and technological
achievement many tend to regard the heritage of the past as unimportant. We
recognize the positive elements in the present situation. It is for this reason
that we have placed the contrast of tradition and traditionalism at the beginning
of this part. The past of which we speak is not only a subject which we study
from afar. It is a past which has value for us, in so far as we make it our
won in an act of personal decision. In the Church it becomes a past by which
we live by sharing in the one Tradition, for in it we are united with him who
is the Lord of history, who was and is and is to come; and he is God not of
the dead but of the living.
III. The Christian Tradition and cultural diversity
64. In what has been written so far, we have been concerned
primarily with the understanding of Tradition as it relates to the past, to
the once-for-all event of Christ’s coming in the flesh, his death and
resurrection, and to the continuing work of the Holy Spirit within the Church.
But we have recognized throughout, the Tradition looks also to the present and
to the future. The Church is sent by Christ to proclaim the Gospel to all men;
the Tradition must be handed on in time and also in space. In other words, Tradition
has a vital missionary dimension in every land, for the command of the Lord
is to go to all nations. Whatever differences of interpretation there may be,
all are agreed that there is this dynamic element in the Tradition, which comes
from the action of God within the history of his people and its fulfillment
in the person and work of Christ, and which looks to the consummation of the
victory of the Lord at the end of time.
65. The problems raised by the transmission of the Tradition
in different lands and cultures, and by the diversities of traditions in which
the one Tradition has been transmitted, are common in varying ways to all Christians.
They are to be seen in an acute form in the life of the younger churches of
Asia and Africa today, and in a less obvious but no less real form in what was
formerly called Western Christendom. To take the problem of the younger churches,
in one quite small typical country there are more than eighty different denominations.
How among these traditions are we to find the Tradition? In the building up
of new nations there is a particular need for all that will make for unity among
men. Are Christians, to whom the ministry of reconciliation has been committed,
to be a factor of division at such a time? It is in such testing circumstances
as these that the serious problems have to be faced of hw the Church may become
truly indigenous, bringing into the service of Christ all that is good in the
life of every culture and nation, without falling into syncretism.
66. When the Word became flesh, the Gospel came to man through
a particular cultural medium, that of the Palestinian world of the time. So
when the Church takes the Tradition to new peoples, it is necessary that again
the essential content should find expression in terms of new cultures. Thus
in the great missionary expansion of the Eastern Church, the Tradition was transmitted
through the life of the Church into new languages and cultures, such as those
of Russia and the other mission fields. Just as the use of the Slavonic tongue
was necessary for the transmission of the Tradition to the Slavs, so today it
is necessary to use new languages and new forms of expression which can be understood
by those to whom the good news comes. In order that this can be rightly done,
it is necessary to draw together knowledge of the culture and language in question,
along with a careful study of the languages of the Old and New Testaments, and
a thorough knowledge of church history. It is in this context that we begin
to understand the meaning of the gift of tongues at Pentecost. By the power
of the Holy Spirit the apostles were enabled to preach the mighty works of God
to each man in his own tongue, and thus the diversity of nations and cultures
was united in the service of God. Through recognizing this, Christians in countries
where they are a small minority can avoid the dangers of developing a “ghetto
67. The content of the Tradition cannot be exactly defined,
for the reality it transmits can never be fully contained in prepositional forms.
In the Orthodox view, Tradition includes an understanding of the events recorded
in the New Testament, of the writings of the Fathers, of the ecumenical creeds
and Councils, and of the life of the Church throughout the centuries. All member
churches of the World Council of Churches are united in confessing the Lord
Jesus Christ “as God and Saviour, according to the Scriptures, and in
seeking together to fulfil their common calling to the glory of the one God,
Father, Son and Holy Spirit”. This basis of membership safeguards a position
from which we may seek constantly to grow in understanding of the fullness of
God’s revelation, and to correct partial apprehensions of the truth. In
the task of seeking to understand the relation between the Tradition and the
traditions, problems are raised as difficult to solve as they are crucial in
importance. Such questions often cannot be answered apart from the specific
situations which pose them. There are no ready-made solutions. Yet some things
may be said.
68. What is basic in the Old and New Testament record and
interpretation remains basic for the church in any situation. Moreover, the
Holy Spirit has been given to the Church to guide it into all truth. The decisions
which communities of God’s believing people have to take are to be made
in reliance on this leading of his Spirit within the Church, and in awareness
of God’s providential operations in the world. In the process of indigenization
(understood in its widest sense), nothing can be admitted which is at variance
with the good news of what God has done, is doing and will do, in the redemption
of the world through our Lord Jesus Christ, as expressed in terms of the Church’s
christocentric and Trinitarian faith. In each particular situation, the Gospel
should be so proclaimed that it will be experienced, not as a burdensome law,
but as a “joyful, liberating and reconciling power”. The Church
must be careful to avoid all unnecessary offence in the proclamation of its
message, but the offence of the cross itself, as foolishness to the world, can
never be denied. An so the attempt must always be made to transmit the Tradition
in its fullness and to remain within the community of the whole of God’s
people, and the temptation must be avoided of overemphasizing those elements
which are especially congenial to a particular culture. It is in the wholeness
of God’s truth that the Church will be enabled to fulfil its mission and
to bear authentic witness.
69. The traditionary process involves the dialectic, both
of relating the Tradition as completely as possible to every separate cultural
situation in which men live, and at the same time of demonstrating its transcendence
of all that divides men from one another. From this comes the truth that the
more the Tradition is expressed in the varying terms of particular cultures,
the more will its universal character be fully revealed. It is only “with
all the saints” that we come to know the fullness of Christ’s love
and glory (Eph. 3.18-19).
70. Catholicity, as a gift of God’s grace, calls us
to a task. It is a concept of immense richness whose definition is not attempted
here. It can be sought and received only through witness for Christ’s
lordship over every area of human life, and through compassionate identification
with every man in his own particular need.
71. In the fulfillment of their missionary task most churches
claim not merely to be reproducing themselves, but in some sense to be planting
the una sancta ecclesia. Surely this fact has implications which are scarcely
yet realized, let alone worked out, both for the life of the mother-churches,
and also for all that is involved in the establishing of any new church in an
ecumenical age. It demands that the liberty of newly-founded churches be recognized,
so that both mother- and daughter-churches may receive together the one gift
of God’s grace. This demands faithfulness to the whole koinonia of Christ’s
Church, even when we are engaged with particular problems. In this connection
we recognize a vital need for the study of the history of the Church’s
life and mission, written from an ecumenical perspective. All must labour together
in seeking to receive and manifest the fullness of Christ’s truth.
72. The problem of communicating this fullness of truth today
is felt throughout the whole modern world. This is a result of the emergence
in our time of a global civilization, shaped by rapid technological advances,
and grounded in a scientific outlook that transforms our concept of the universe.
The new cosmology which is taking shape challenges our traditional conceptions
of man and of nature, both in themselves and in their inter-relationship with
one another. Amid these developments, and to some degree because of them, radical
changes in social structure are taking place in every art of the world. The
Church is thus faced with a dual responsibility. The Tradition has to be simultaneously
transmitted in diverse ways; on the one hand, in popular everyday language;
on the other hand, in terms of the most complex and critical contemporary thought.
The seriousness of this revolutionary situation cannot easily be exaggerated.
We have seen its inherent dangers, but we must equally seek to realize its enormous
potentialities for good.
73. Our thinking about the Christian faith too often lacks
a forward-looking vision and orientation. The phrase “in partibus infidelium”
has already acquired a universal reference. Experiments in pastoral and evangelistic
work, such as industrial chaplaincies and “store front parishes”,
are first attempts at meeting this need. The deepest witness is always borne
by the life of the Church itself, through its prayer and sacramental worship,
and through the bearing of the cross in silence. As we address ourselves together
to our common problems, we may find that God is using the pressures of the world
to break the barriers which divide us from one another. We must recognize the
opportunity given to us, and with vigour and boldness fulfil the Church’s
great commission to transmit the Tradition, the word of grace and hope, to men
in this new global culture, as in the past it was preached to Jerusalem, to
Hellas, Rome and Gaul, and to the uttermost parts of the earth.