The deep divisions in the Roman Church on the subject of revelation as seen at the recent Vatican Council involve much more than differences of opinion between Rome and the Reformed churches. We Protestants need to think our way clearly through the subject of divine revelation. It is not enough to leave the matter by saying that some members of the Roman Curia feel that too much has been claimed by their colleagues who aver that oral traditions handed down from the Fathers, whether pertaining to faith or morals, must be received and venerated as if they had been orally dictated by Christ and the Holy Spirit. Nor is it adequate to leave the subject by stating the historic facts that Rome accepts tradition as revelation on an equality with Holy Scripture, and that Protestantism does not.
Once we accept the concept of infinite God and finite man, we must answer the question: How is infinity revealed to the finite? When Zophar the Naamathite was discussing the secrets of wisdom he rightly raised a warning question: "'Can you find Out the deep things of God? Can you find out the limit of the Almighty?'" (Job 11, R.S.V.). However much finite exertion is expended, it cannot of itself fully reveal God. Man must desire and strive, but in the final analysis man knows and understands God only in the manner and measure that God reveals Himself. "No human mind can comprehend God" however much it tries (Testimonies, vol. 8, p. 279). This brings us to—
Redemptive Initiative
Finite man was placed in an environment where everything was calculated to speak to him of an infinite God. How was man, apart from the first man—who was closer to God than we can understand—to explain beauty, immensity, the whole animate and inanimate creation, except on the basis that all this design required a Designer? However much men have rejected the argument from design, its very persistence gives it some point; and men, especially believers, continue to cry: "The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge" (Ps. 19:1, 2).
It was another Vatican Council (1870) that decreed as an infallible doctrine the idea that God can be discovered by the natural aid of reason, apart from the special revelation of Christ. Today most of us would say that God can be perceived in part through His created works and the light of reason.
After Adam ceased to hear God's voice the whole earthly creation entered upon a process of deterioration, but it never ceased to testify of God, though its witness was never complete enough to bring men to a full knowledge of divine truth. In Romans, chapter one, Paul is proud of the special revelation of the gospel in Christ, which is revealed "from faith to faith" (Rom. 1:17, R.S.V.) or "through faith for faith," for "it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith" (Rom. 1:17. 16, R.S.V.). He then leaves the man of faith who receives the special revelation of Christ, and beginning in verse 18, speaks of wicked men who "suppress the truth." How do they suppress the truth? "For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse" (verses 18-20).
Therefore this part of Paul's argument is not intended to prove that general revelation in nature is enough for man's full knowledge of God and for his own salvation. It shows that nature speaks to all in some measure about a Creator, and witnesses against the faithless, "so they are without excuse." God speaks first, last, and all the time, but at some point man must respond if he is to follow on to understand the complete special revelation in Christ.
The complicating factor today is that men can no longer assess evidence and draw sane conclusions:
"In losing the garments of holiness, they lost the light that had illuminated nature. No longer could they read it aright. They could not discern the character of God in His works. So today man cannot of himself read aright the teaching of nature. Unless guided by divine wisdom, he exalts nature and the laws of nature above nature's God."—The Ministry of Healing, p. 462.
The Question of Tradition
The easy way with the problem of whether tradition is equivalent to God's voice through written revelation is to sweep away all tradition as valueless, as is the manner of some. Thomas Arnold said he was convinced that if we let in the finger of tradition we shall soon have the whole monster—"horns and tail and all." But traditions are of various kinds, and some have historic value. Obviously, the earliest men communicated to their children by word of mouth the story of Eden and immediately subsequent events; and the Israelites were repeatedly commanded to "teach their children" the things they had seen and heard. All this created a body of priceless tradition that contributed to the peculiar beliefs and habits of the Israelites. The true meaning of paradosis ("tradition") is the passing on of instruction. Paul speaks respectfully of "the traditions of my fathers" (Gal. 1:14) and exhorts believers to "maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you" (1 Cor. 11:2, R.S.V.).
It is when we come to the sphere of morals and of dogmatic requisites for personal salvation that we have our troubles. It is inconceivable to us that the multitudinous traditions of the fathers supplementing the laws of Sabbath observance or of ceremonial washings could be in any sense essential to salvation. Yet our Lord came among men who zealously believed they were. In such hands traditions become what our Lord called "the commandments of men." And when men augment the recorded oracles of God with the commandments and traditions of men they can, to quote Jesus again, make a convert "twofold more the child of hell" than he ever was before. So dreadful can the traditions and injunctions of men become!
Christ's disciples were fettered by the Jewish traditions of their day, and our Lord sought by His teachings to emancipate them from these fetters.
"He had set before them the truths of Scripture in contrast with tradition. Thus He had strengthened their confidence in God's word, and in a great measure had set them free from their fear of the rabbis and their bondage to tradition."—The Desire of Ages, p. 349.
Early Christians invented traditions, some of them fantastic, such as the puerile stories of the supernatural childhood of Christ, the miracles of the saints, holy relics, et cetera.
Rome is rich in traditions that intelligent men, apparently some of the Roman Curia among them, find impossible to accept. It is difficult to see how the Roman Church can give up tradition altogether, but she may prove her versatility once more by some modifications to meet the exigencies of these times.
Traditionists go outside of and beyond the Scriptures, and therein lies trouble for the church. "The revelation of Himself that God has given in His word is for our study. This we may seek to understand.
But beyond this we are not to penetrate." —Testimonies, vol. 8, p. 279.
Do we Adventists, young as we are, have a few traditions that we try to add to the fundamentals of Christian faith? We need to put on what John Calvin called the "divine spectacles" (Holy Scripture) which will bring into proper context and relationship all questions of nature, tradition, and theology. God's Word must be our sole rule of faith and our criterion in all questions of divine revelations.
H. W. L.
