Scripture Interpretation: Part II Holy Tradition

The Holy Apostle Paul wrote in his first letter to Timothy: “I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these instructions to you so that, if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.” (1Tim. 3:14-5) This letter is estimated to have been written between 64 and 66 A.D.  This was long before the New Testament had been gathered into one book and all of its contents were not yet written.  Nevertheless, the Apostle Paul calls the Church the “pillar and bulwark of the truth”.  What was the source of the truth which was embodied by the Church: Tradition and to express it more properly we can say “Holy Tradition”.   But what does the term “Holy Tradition” signify for the Orthodox?

Hieromonk Sophronios Michaelidis tells us: “Holy Tradition is nothing other than the life of the Church in the Holy Spirit throughout the ages. Consequently, all the expression of this life in the Holy Spirit, that is the imparting of the revealed truth, the apostolic succession of Pastors, the liturgical and sacramental life, the correct teaching and interpretation of the gospel truth by the Holy Fathers, the experience of divine Grace in the life of believers and all the expression of ‘new’ life, which Christ imparts to people, through his Church, comprises Holy Tradition.”¹ 

In the catechetical book, These Truths We Hold, the following is written concerning Holy Tradition: “We take special note that for the Orthodox, the Holy Bible forms a part of Holy Tradition, but does not lie outside of it. One would be in error to suppose that Scripture and Tradition are two separate and distinct sources of Christian Faith, as some do, since there is in reality, only one source; and the holy Bible exists and found its formulation within Tradition.”²   

The Apostle and Evangelist Luke draws on Tradition when he writes his Gospel.  He begins, “Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished among us, just as they were delivered to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word.”  (Luke 1:1-2) The Apostle Jude does likewise when he writes: “Contend for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints”. (Jude 1:3)  The word “delivered” in both of these quotes is the same in Greek: paradidomi.  The Apostle Paul uses a Greek term with the same root when he writes of tradition: paradosis.  For example, he writes in his second letter to the Thessalonians, “Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.” (2Th 3:6) The Strong’s and Thayer Greek/English Dictionaries state that paradosis is derived from paradidomi.  The first definition for this term in the Thayer Dictionary is “to give into the hands (of another)”.³   So it can be thought of that which has been handed down, whether oral or written—this is Tradition. 

But let us now go on to see how the New Testament itself proves that it is not the sole source of Christian faith.  Here are some examples:   

In His intimate conversation with His disciples at the Mystical Supper our Lord tells them: “The Comforter, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” (Jn. 14:26). And a little later, “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth.” (Jn. 16:12-13)

“I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you.”   [1 Cor 11:2]

“What you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, do; and the God of peace will be with you.” [Phil 4:9]

“So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.” [2 Th 2:15]

“Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us” [2 Th 3:6]

“Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus.  Guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us.” [2 Tim 1:13-4]

“What you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.” [2 Tim 2:2]

“Though I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink, but I hope to come to see you and talk with you face to face.” [2 John 1:12]

 Another point which merits our attention are the references to sacred literature in the New Testament which are not found in the Old Testament, but were preserved and imparted through Holy Tradition.   For example, the Apostle Matthew tells us that the Holy Family “went and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that what was being spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, ‘He shall be called a Nazarene.’” (Mat. 2:23) There is the prophecy of Enoch, which the Apostle Jude mentions in his epistle: “Enoch in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying, ‘Behold, the Lord came with his holy myriads, to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness which they have committed in such against him.’” (Jude 1:14-15) The event of the dialogue between the archangel Michael and the devil related to the body of Moses, which Jude again mentions (Jude 1:9), and which is not found written in the Old Testament. The same applies also about the words of Christ “It is more blessed to give than to receive” which are not found in any gospel, and which the Apostle Paul mentions from Holy Tradition (Acts 20:35). Finally in critiquing the Scribes and Pharisees our Lord says, “Therefore also the Wisdom of God said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom they will kill and persecute.’” (Luke 11:49) None of the aforementioned are found in the Scriptures.

Before closing, a passage from the Apostle Paul’s letter to the Colossians should be considered.  “See to it that no one makes a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ…. Let no one disqualify you, insisting on self-abasement and worship of angels, taking his stand on visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind.”  I know of Protestants who apply these words to the Orthodox Church without researching the historical context in order to learn the contemporary problem the Apostle Paul was dealing with.  In The New Oxford Annotated Bible we read the following in the introduction to this epistle: “The Apostle heard the disquieting news of the activity of false teachers in the newly founded church, and he wrote this letter to correct their erroneous speculations.  These teachers who claimed to possess superior knowledge of divine matters (2:18) advocated a theosophical mixture of ascetic (2:16, 20-23) and ritualistic (2:16-18) practices, some of which had parallels in the Jewish sect of the Essenes.” (The New Oxford Annotated Bible With The Apocrypha, expanded edition, Revised Standard Version, Copyright 1962, Oxford University Press, Inc., p.1428)

The “erroneous speculations” are explained in more detail within the introduction for the letter to the Colossians of The Orthodox Study Bible as follows: “Error in Colosse was a local blend of Jewish (perhaps Essene) and Oriental ideas.  The heretics thought they were ‘supplementing’ apostolic Christianity, which they saw as primitive, with greater knowledge and better access to spiritual things. They imagined that (1) the hierarchy of celestial powers (the ‘angels’ in some Jewish thought) was supreme rather than Christ; (2) Christ was not unique in His divine nature nor in His actions, for He was not God but one of several mediators; (3) sin resulted from a lack of knowledge (Gr. gnosis), a particular sort of knowledge in which the heretics were specialists; and (4) salvation consisted in having this gnosis imparted by a series of rituals and ascetic practices (among which the Jewish rites were prized, but Christian baptism was considered a mere low-level initiation).” Pp. 461-2   

As a concluding comment we can refer to the words with which the Apostle John the Theologian ends his Gospel: “There are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.”  Archimandrite Vasileios of Stavronikita (he now lives as a recluse outside of Iveron Monastery on Athos) thus comments on this, “However, those things which the world could not contain if they were written in detail are found, made known and lived in the Church, where Jesus Himself lives.  Those who think they know Christ outside the Church know very few things about Him; those who belong to the Church live ‘in Him’”⁴

1. Orthodoxy and the Jehovah’s Witnesses, 2^nd Edition Improved and expanded, The Holy Metropolis of Kitios Larnaka – Cyprus 1997, Hieromonk  Sophronios G. Michailidis, p.39-41. (This publication exists only in Greek)
2. These Truths We Hold, St. Tikhon’s  Seminary Press 2010, p. 224
3. See https://e-sword.net
4. Hymn of Entry, Archimandrite Vasileios, St Vladimir’s  Seminary Press, 1984, pp. 17-8  

Scripture Interpretation

I believe that all of us—I assume I am writing primarily to Orthodox Christians—have, at least once, run into someone who has expressed the opinion that the Orthodox Church is not in harmony with the Bible.  These people typically claim to belong to a “Bible Church” and assert that they are non-denominational.  They maintain that they follow the Bible, and it is primarily the New Testament that they are referring to.  They have their own understanding and interpretation of the Scriptures and conclude that the Church contradicts the Scriptures by its way of life and therefore proclaim that they are a Bible church and we are not.  Again, I repeat that this is based on their own understanding and interpretation of the Scriptures.  Long ago, in the fourth century, a man Arius, who had a large following, denied that our Lord Jesus Christ is God; and he based his belief on the Scriptures, as well.  Today, the Jehovah Witnesses also deny that Christ is God, and they, too, claim to follow the Scriptures.  Likewise, I can offhand think of two other groups in our times which do not share a Trinitarian doctrine and who also claim to base their beliefs on the Scriptures.  I am speaking here of Christian Scientists and Unitarians. So then, who can understand and interpret the Scriptures?  Let us take one step at a time and begin by answering the question: Is the Orthodox Church a Bible church?  What is the answer?  NO!  So now, we must carry on with an explanation. 

The Apostolic preaching of the Christian Faith and the gathering together of communities of believers existed before the New Testament.  In the late fourth century St. John Chrysostom in his first homily on the Gospel of St. Matthew wrote the following:

“It were indeed meet for us not at all to require the aid of the written Word, but to exhibit a life so pure, that the grace of the Spirit should be instead of books to our souls, and that as these are inscribed with ink, even so should our hearts be with the Spirit. But, since we have utterly put away from us this grace, come, let us at any rate embrace the second-best course.

“For that the former was better, God hath made manifest, both by His words, and by His doings. Since unto Noah, and unto Abraham, and unto his offspring, and unto Job, and unto Moses too, He discoursed not by writings, but Himself by Himself, finding their mind pure. But after the whole people of the Hebrews had fallen into the very pit of wickedness, then and thereafter was a written word, and tablets, and the admonition which is given by these.

“And this one may perceive was the case, not of the saints in the Old Testament only, but also of those in the New. For neither to the apostles did God give anything in writing, but instead of written words He promised that He would give them the grace of the Spirit: for ‘He,’ saith our Lord, ‘shall bring all things to your remembrance.’(John 14:26)  And that thou mayest learn that this was far better, hear what He saith by the Prophet: ‘I will make a new covenant with you, putting my laws into their mind, and in their heart I will write them,’ and, ‘they shall be all taught of God.’ (Jer. 31:31-3) And Paul too, pointing out the same superiority, said, that they had received a law ‘not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.’ (IICor. 3:3)

“But since in process of time they made shipwreck, some with regard to doctrines, others as to life and manners, there was again need that they should be put in remembrance by the written word.”

Thus did Chrysostom assert that a diminution of grace among the believers was the cause of the need for a written word.  This may appear very speculative, but having reposed in the year 407, he was much closer to the days of the Apostles than we are and therefore had more insight into the Church as it existed in Apostolic times.   We are aware that the twenty-seven books of the New Testament were written at various times and places by separate authors who were “moved by the Holy Spirit and spoke from God” (IIPet. 1:21).  So let us approach the question: can the New Testament be the foundation of the Christian Church?

The Holy Scripture- and specifically the New Testament – can be neither the sole source of Christian faith, nor can it be single the criterion of the true Church because, very simply, the Christian faith and Christian Church preceded the New Testament.  It was men of the Church, who in a state of illumination through the grace of the Holy Spirit, produced the writings which in time came to comprise the New Testament.  The New Testament did not produce the Church.

“As is known, the New Testament, is comprised of twenty-seven books. These books were selected by the Church, from a multitude of other similar books.  It is known that in the two first Christian centuries, many “gospels” other works were circulated which were attributed to the Apostles or to their disciples. Examples of these works are the Protoevangelion of James, the Gospel According to Peter, The Gospel According to Thomas, The Gospel According to the Hebrews, the Gospel of the Twelve Apostles, the apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, the Preaching of Peter, the Epistle to Laodicaeans of the Apostle Paul, as well as others.  Among these are four familiar Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John – and the epistles. Of all these books, the Church- through the holy Father’s and the sacred Synods – selected, only twenty-seven, which She considered divinely inspired….

“From Church History we ascertain that the need for defining a specific Canon for the New Testament appeared around the end of the second century, when certain heretics (such as Marcion¹) tried to define their own Canon with the books which they wanted.  For this reason, various Fathers of the Church began referring to specific books which they considered divinely inspired. This problem of the Canon of the New Testament was not solved until the second half of the fourth century, when the Church accepted the opinion of St. Athanasios the Great who, in 367 A.D., presented a complete catalogue of books which ought to be considered divinely inspired: our familiar twenty-seven books which comprise the New Testament. Thirty years later, in 397 A.D., this final catalogue was made official in the West with the Synod of Carthage.

“This final declaration was the result of many long years of conversations, doubts, and differing opinions. But even after this final declaration of the Church, questions about some of these very books (for example the Epistle to the Hebrews, some of the Catholic Epistles, and The Book of Revelations) persisted. It was only during Justinian’s reign, in the sixth century, that all disagreement had vanished, at least in the Byzantine Empire….

Consequently, the validity and trustworthiness of the New Testament depends exclusively on the witness of the Church.  It is the Church, in other words, which assures us of the divine inspiration of the New Testament and, in general of all the Holy Scripture.  If we take away this witness of the Church, no one, but no one can prove that the New Testament is divinely inspired.”²(to be continued…)

1. Marcion of Sinope.  He founded a dualistic belief system. He believed the Old Testament God was vengeful and distinct from the benevolent God revealed through our Lord Jesus Christ in the New Testament.  He rejected the Old Testament entirely and created a modified version of the New Testament, excluding Old Testament references.  
2. Excerpts from Orthodoxy and the Jehovah’s Witnesses, 2^nd Edition Improved and expanded, The Holy Metropolis of KitiosLarnaka – Cyprus 1997, Hieromonk  Sophronios G. Michailidis, pp.39-41. (This publication exists only in Greek)