Skip to content

Course 11 · Lesson 3.1

Scripture and tradition in the early church

12 minute read

Lessons in this course

Course 11 outline

Module 1: What the Church Is

  1. Biblical images of the church: body, people, temple and bride
  2. One, holy, catholic and apostolic: the four marks
  3. The mission of the church
  4. The visible and invisible church in Augustine, the Reformers and the East

Module 2: Ministry and Apostolic Succession

  1. Ministry in the New Testament: apostles, elders, overseers and deacons
  2. The bishop in the early church: Clement, Ignatius and Irenaeus
  3. Apostolic succession: three meanings (a line of bishops, the teaching, the mission)
  4. Ordination in the Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant traditions

Module 3: Scripture, Tradition and Church Authority

  1. Scripture and tradition in the early church
  2. The Catholic account: Scripture, tradition and the magisterium
  3. The Orthodox account: the living tradition of the church
  4. The Reformation and the question of sola scriptura

Module 4: Three Systems of Authority

  1. The bishop of Rome in early history
  2. Papal primacy and infallibility in Catholic teaching
  3. Orthodox conciliarity and the role of the patriarchs
  4. Protestant principles of authority: Scripture, confessions and the priesthood of believers
  5. The strongest objections each tradition raises against the others

Module 5: Sacramental Theology

  1. Mystery and sacrament: the words and their history
  2. Augustine and the definition of a sacrament
  3. How many sacraments? Seven, two, or none
  4. Validity, efficacy and the role of faith

Module 6: Baptism and the Eucharist

  1. Baptism in Scripture and the early church
  2. Infant baptism and believers baptism
  3. The Eucharist in the early church
  4. Real presence: transubstantiation, the Orthodox mystery, Lutheran, Reformed and memorial views

Module 7: Reconciliation and Liturgical Worship

  1. The forgiveness of sins in Scripture
  2. Confession and penance in the history of the church
  3. Confession across the traditions: Catholic, Orthodox, Lutheran and Reformed practice
  4. Liturgy, word and table, and the church year
  5. Worship without a fixed liturgy and its principles

Module 8: Schism and Christian Unity

  1. Early schisms: the Donatists and the churches after Chalcedon
  2. East and West: the long division and the events of 1054
  3. The Reformation divisions
  4. Ecumenism and the prospects for unity

All courses

Program / Course 11: Church, Sacraments, and Authority / Lesson 3.1

What you will learn

  • Define tradition in the New Testament sense of something handed on.
  • Describe how Irenaeus, Tertullian, Basil, Athanasius and Vincent of Lerins spoke of Scripture, the rule of faith and tradition.
  • Explain why the formation of the New Testament canon bears on the question.
  • Identify how each tradition reads the early evidence and what the evidence does not settle.

The big idea

In the New Testament, tradition (paradosis) means teaching handed on, whether by word or by letter. The early church honored both Scripture and a rule of faith that summed up the apostolic teaching, and it treated them as agreeing. Writers differ in emphasis: Irenaeus and Tertullian appeal to the rule of faith and the apostolic churches, Athanasius stresses the sufficiency of Scripture, and Basil defends unwritten customs. The later disputes among Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants rely on this evidence and read it differently. The evidence does not give a ready-made answer to them.

Key terms

Tradition
From the Latin traditio, meaning handing on. In Christian use, the teaching and practice passed down from the apostles.
Paradosis
The Greek word translated tradition in the New Testament. It can describe human customs or apostolic teaching.
Rule of faith
A brief summary of the apostolic teaching, used by early churches to test interpretation of Scripture.
Canon
From a Greek word for measuring rod. The list of books accepted as Scripture.
Sufficiency of Scripture
The teaching that Scripture contains all that is needed for salvation or for the faith.
Unwritten tradition
Teachings and practices believed to come from the apostles but not set out in Scripture.

Background

The early church did not begin with a complete New Testament. The apostles preached, taught and founded churches, and some of their teaching was written down. Paul reminds the Corinthians of the gospel he passed on to them (1 Corinthians 15:1-3) and praises them for holding the traditions as he delivered them (1 Corinthians 11:2). He urges the Thessalonians to “hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle” (2 Thessalonians 2:15). Jesus himself criticized human traditions that set aside the commandment of God (Mark 7:8-9), which shows that the word can be used in both a good and a bad sense.

From the second century onward, the church had to decide which writings were Scripture and how to read them against competing teachers. The formation of the canon was gradual. Most of the New Testament books were widely used by the end of the second century, and a few were debated into the fourth. In AD 367 Athanasius of Alexandria listed the twenty-seven books of the New Testament in an Easter letter. This history is accepted by all traditions. They differ on what follows from it.

Step-by-step explanation

Step 1: The rule of faith in Irenaeus

Irenaeus faced teachers who claimed to find secret meanings in Scripture. He replied that Scripture must be read in light of the rule of the truth, which every baptized Christian received. The rule summarized belief in one God the Father, in Christ who became man and suffered, and in the Holy Spirit. He compared a heretic who ignores the rule to someone who takes the pieces of a mosaic of a king and rearranges them into the picture of a fox (Against Heresies 1.8). The images are his own, and the point is that the same words can be arranged to produce a different message unless the order is known.

For Irenaeus, Scripture and the teaching of the churches agree because both come from the apostles. He does not set them against one another. The authority of the churches is not independent of Scripture, and Scripture is not read in a vacuum.

Step 2: Tertullian and the Prescription

Tertullian, a North African writer around AD 200, argued in his Prescription Against Heretics that heretics have no right to use the Scriptures because the Scriptures belong to the churches that the apostles founded. He used a legal argument about prior possession. The churches have the rule of faith from the apostles, and the heretics came later.

Later readers use Tertullian in different ways. Catholic and Orthodox writers cite him for the priority of the church’s teaching. Protestants note that Tertullian elsewhere argued vigorously from Scripture in other works. Scholars also remind readers that he later joined the Montanist movement and left the main church, so he is not a simple witness.

Step 3: Athanasius and Basil

Athanasius wrote in the fourth century that the sacred and inspired Scriptures are sufficient for the proclamation of the truth (Against the Pagans 1). He also appealed to the tradition and faith of the catholic church against Arius and defended the Nicene wording, which is not a word of Scripture. Reading him fairly means keeping both statements.

Basil of Caesarea, in his work On the Holy Spirit (chapter 27), defended practices that are not written in the Bible, such as making the sign of the cross and turning to the east in prayer, by saying that some teachings came from the apostles in the form of silence or secret instruction. He held that both written and unwritten tradition have force for piety. Protestants answer that the examples are about practices, not doctrines necessary for salvation. Catholic and Orthodox writers cite Basil as evidence that the church always had more than the written text.

Step 4: Vincent of Lerins

Vincent of Lerins, a monk in southern Gaul, wrote his Commonitory in the 430s. He asked how to tell the truth when many claim to teach it. His answer was that Christians hold what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all (often called the Vincentian canon). He also said that Scripture is perfect and sufficient, but that because people interpret it in different ways, its reading must be guided by the tradition of the church.

He allowed for growth in the understanding of doctrine, as a child grows into an adult while remaining the same person, but not for change of meaning. This passage is used in all three traditions. Catholic writers use it in the discussion of the development of doctrine. Orthodox writers cite it for the consensus of the fathers. Protestants note that Vincent also affirms the sufficiency of Scripture.

Step 5: Augustine and the canon

Augustine wrote that he would not believe the gospel unless the authority of the catholic church moved him to (Against the Letter of Mani 5). Catholic and Orthodox writers cite the line to show that the church’s authority is bound up with Scripture. Protestant readers reply that Augustine is describing how he came to faith, not claiming that the church is above Scripture, and note that he also called Scripture the highest authority for settling disputes. This is a notable example of one sentence being read in more than one way.

The church’s role in recognizing the canon does not by itself settle which side is right. Catholics and Orthodox say that the church received and defined the canon and so has authority in interpretation. Protestants say that the church recognized books that already had divine authority, as a person recognizes a voice, and did not confer authority on them. The point is argued in the next lessons.

  1. Is the writer speaking about Scripture, the rule of faith, a custom, or all of them together?
  2. What problem is the writer addressing?
  3. Does the writer set tradition against Scripture or use them together?
  4. Is the tradition mentioned a matter of doctrine or of practice?
  5. How does a later tradition use this writer, and is that use fair to the original?
  6. What does the writer not claim?

Examples

The mosaic

Irenaeus compares false interpretation to a beautiful mosaic of a king that is rearranged into the picture of a fox, using the same pieces. The image helps explain why the early church thought the rule of faith was needed to read Scripture rightly, and why Protestants who value the Bible also honor the creeds.

The creed as summary

A new Christian in the second century was baptized with a statement of belief in Father, Son and Spirit, in question and answer form. The creeds of later centuries grew from this practice. The creed is not an addition to Scripture but a summary made by the church, which the churches treat as a guide to reading.

Unwritten customs

Basil mentions that Christians turn to the east when praying. Nothing in the New Testament commands it. He treats it as a custom handed on. A Protestant may say that such customs are matters of order and not binding doctrine, while an Orthodox Christian may see them as part of a living tradition.

Different perspectives

Catholic

The Council of Trent and the Second Vatican Council teach that the gospel is handed on in Scripture and in tradition, and that both are received with equal devotion. Vatican II (Dei Verbum) describes them as flowing from the same source and moving toward the same end. Catholics see the early church’s use of the rule of faith and of the apostolic churches as support.

Orthodox

Orthodox theology does not speak of two sources. It speaks of a single tradition, of which Scripture is the central written expression, along with the creeds, councils, liturgy and the writings of the fathers, all held within the life of the church. The fathers are read as witnesses to the one apostolic faith.

Protestant

Protestants stress that the church fathers regularly argued from Scripture and treated it as the norm. They hold that the rule of faith and the creeds are faithful summaries of Scripture, and that the later church added teachings that go beyond Scripture. Many Protestants, including Lutherans and Anglicans, value the fathers highly as interpreters.

Scholarly view

Scholars of different backgrounds note that the early church did not have the later Reformation categories. Some historians, such as Heiko Oberman, distinguished a view in which tradition is the church’s interpretation of Scripture from a view in which tradition is an additional source. Which view the fathers held is debated, and probably varies by writer.

Why it matters

The Reformation disputes over Scripture and tradition rested in part on appeals to the early church. Anyone who wants to understand those disputes needs to see what the early writers actually said. The evidence is richer than slogans like the Bible alone or the church decides, and it shows why thoughtful Christians have read it in different ways.

Common misunderstandings

Misunderstanding: The early church had a Bible exactly like ours from the start.

Correction: The New Testament canon formed over generations. Most books were widely accepted by the end of the second century and the list was stabilized in the fourth. Some books were disputed for a time.

Misunderstanding: The fathers all taught that Scripture is the only authority.

Correction: Fathers such as Athanasius and Augustine praised the authority of Scripture. They also appealed to the rule of faith, the church’s teaching and customs. The phrase Scripture alone is a later formulation.

Misunderstanding: Tradition in the Bible always means a human addition.

Correction: The New Testament uses paradosis for both. Jesus criticizes human traditions in Mark 7, and Paul commends apostolic traditions in 1 Corinthians 11 and 2 Thessalonians 2.

Misunderstanding: The church created the Bible, so the church is above it.

Correction: Catholic and Orthodox Christians reason from the church’s role in the canon to its authority. Protestants hold that the church recognized and did not create the canon. The history alone does not decide the dispute.

Knowledge check

What does tradition mean in 2 Thessalonians 2:15?

It means teaching handed on from the apostles, whether by spoken word or by letter. Paul urges the Thessalonians to hold to it. The same Greek word can describe merely human customs in other passages, as in Mark 7.

What was the rule of faith, and how did Irenaeus use it?

It was a short summary of apostolic teaching about God, Christ and the Spirit, received at baptism. Irenaeus used it as a guide for reading Scripture against Gnostic interpretations. He saw Scripture and the rule as agreeing since both came from the apostles.

Why can Basil’s On the Holy Spirit be used by more than one tradition?

He defends unwritten apostolic practices, which Catholic and Orthodox writers cite as showing the role of tradition. Protestants note that his examples are customs and not doctrines needed for salvation, and that Basil also argues heavily from Scripture.

Why does the formation of the canon not by itself settle the debate between traditions?

Catholics and Orthodox argue that the church’s role in defining the canon shows its authority. Protestants argue that the church recognized books that already had divine authority. Both accept the same history and draw different conclusions.

Think it through

  1. Why might the early church have needed both Scripture and a summary of faith?
  2. Can a custom be binding without being in Scripture? Who decides?
  3. How might a writer’s circumstances change the way his words should be read?
  4. What is the danger of quoting one sentence from a father to settle a modern dispute?

Independent assignment

Three fathers, three quotations

In your notebook, read Irenaeus Against Heresies 3.1 to 3.4, Tertullian Prescription Against Heretics chapters 19 to 21, and Basil On the Holy Spirit chapter 27, using the library if you can. For each, copy a short passage, summarize what problem the author faces, and note how a Catholic, an Orthodox and a Protestant would each use it. Finish with 200 to 300 words on what the three do not settle. Keep the work in your notebook.

Further study