Digging Out the Embedded Church - The Maranatha Community

Chapter 3 of the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, Dei Verbum, deals with the
divine inspiration of Scripture. We read:
„Since, therefore, all that the inspired authors, or sacred writers, affirm should be
regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of
Scripture, firmly, faithfully, and without error, teach the truth which God, for the sake
of our salvation, wished to see confided to the sacred Scriptures.
Thus… “all Scripture is inspired by God, and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for
correction and for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be complete,
equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3.16-17).‟ 193
The Orthodox Church, likewise, claims to have Scripture as its foundation for faith and
practice, but, with the Catholic Church, claims also that the Church, through „tradition,‟ has
faithfully interpreted the Scriptures throughout its history. Timothy (Kallistos) Ware writes:
„The Christian Church is a Scriptural Church: Orthodoxy believes this just as firmly, if
not more firmly, than Protestantism. The Bible is the supreme expression of God‟s
revelation to man, and Christians must always be “People of the Book.” But if
Christians are People of the Book, the Bible is the Book of the People; it must not be
regarded as something set up over the Church, but as something that lives and is
understood within the Church (that is why one should not separate Scripture and
tradition).‟ 194
Most Protestants are uneasy about the concept of tradition being placed alongside the
Scriptures, but even Protestantism finds it hard to do away with tradition. I know Protestants
who would claim that they abide by the Reformation principle of „sola scriptura„ but are
firmly rooted in a Calvinist or Anabaptist tradition and interpret the scriptures with the help
of a body of writings holding their viewpoint almost exclusively. Equally, few liberal
Protestants can escape a „tradition‟ in their handling of Scripture and many have a
demythologising tradition which treats the texts in a „non-realist‟ way.
How then can we tell which ‘tradition’ is acceptable? I suggest that if a tradition is
consistent with the plain meaning of the Creeds, and so uplifts Christ as Saviour, Lord and
God, and coheres with a doctrine of the Trinity, it is acceptable. Protestants will say that
the Catholic tradition teaches more than the bare text of the Creeds and will find that hard
to cope with, but at least it can be held that none of their traditions undermine the Creeds.
That is why adherence to the classical Creeds is so important for Christian Unity. When a
tradition parts company with the Creeds, then we must part company with that tradition.
If it is true that Christians in their traditions are more or less divided on ecclesiological
matters, yet understand each other better on doctrinal issues and views of spirituality, then
it seems sensible for Christians to speak with one voice where they can.
193 Ed Flannery, Austin, OP, Vatican Collection Vol 1, Vatican Council II, The Conciliar and Post-
Conciliar Documents, New Revised Edition 1992, (ninth printing) Dominican Publications, pp 757.
194 Ware, Timothy, The Orthodox Church, Penguin Books, 1967, p207.
Page 153