Pauline Tradition and Catholic Authority Context

The Pauline tradition, particularly as expressed in Paul's letters, presents a complex understanding of "tradition" that has been interpreted differently across Christian history, especially concerning the authority of the Church. Paul himself uses the term "tradition" (Greek: paradosis) to refer to the doctrine he had laid down and in which believers had been instructed, emphasizing its role in securing faith ^[1]. This understanding suggests that tradition, in its original Pauline context, refers to the authoritative teaching delivered by the apostles.

However, the concept of tradition evolved, leading to significant divergence in how various Christian traditions, particularly Catholic and Reformed, view its relationship to biblical authority and the Church's hierarchical structure. The Catholic tradition, as articulated by figures like Thomas Aquinas, posits a hierarchical structure within the Church where a universal authority is necessary over particular authorities, much like a common good is superior to a particular good ^[8]. This structure implies a role for the Church's magisterium in interpreting and transmitting tradition.

In contrast, Reformed theology, notably articulated by John Calvin, draws a sharp distinction between apostolic tradition and human traditions. Calvin argues that human traditions are "laws enacted by men, without authority from the word of God, for the purpose either of prescribing the mode of divine worship, or laying a religious obligation on the conscience" ^[3]. one tradition contends that faithful ministers are not to "coin some new doctrine, but simply to adhere to the doctrine to which all, without exception, are made subject" ^[4]. This perspective underscores the sufficiency of Scripture as the primary rule of faith and practice, viewing any human additions as potentially undermining true worship and conscience ^{[3, 5]}.

Charles Hodge, a prominent Reformed theologian, further elaborates on this distinction, arguing that making tradition a part of the rule of faith "subverts the authority of the Scriptures" ^[2]. He suggests that if tradition serves as an "explanatory, and infallible interpreter" of Scripture, then the interpretation, rather than the Scripture itself, becomes the determining factor of faith ^[2]. Hodge also points to historical instances where Church councils and bishops, including the Bishop of Rome, sanctioned doctrines like Arianism, which were later rejected, illustrating the fallibility of human ecclesiastical authority when not strictly bound by Scripture ^[9].

The Reformed critique extends to the perceived dominion of the Roman See. Calvin questions the Roman Church's claim to primacy, asserting that the word of God provides no foundation for it, especially when considering Paul's apostleship to the Gentiles compared to Peter's to the Jews ^[10]. He also criticizes the "unbridled cupidity of the Roman See in usurping jurisdiction," citing complaints from churches about being "maimed and dismembered" by hierarchical encroachments ^[11]. Furthermore, Calvin highlights moral failings within the clergy, arguing that vices like "whoredom, lasciviousness, drunkenness" were tolerated, undermining the Church's moral authority ^[6].

The historical development of the Roman Church's authority, particularly its gradual assertion of influence over other churches, is also a point of contention for Reformed thinkers. Calvin notes that the Roman See gained some authority during periods when Eastern churches were troubled by factions, such as the Arians ^[7]. However, this historical development is seen not as a divine mandate but as a gradual accumulation of power, distinct from the "unlimited power which she seized at a comparatively recent period" ^[7].

Sources

CCEL (Reformed) “Calvin, Commentary on Philippians, Colossians, 1-2 Thessalonians, section 79.2: order, and I admit that it is taken in this sense when human traditions are treated of, ( Matthew 15:6 .) Paul, however, will be found in the next chapter making use of the term tradition , as meaning the rule that he had laid down, and the very signification of the term is general. The context, however, as I have said, requires that it be taken here to mean the whole of that doctrine in which they had been instructed. For the matter treated of is the most important of all — that their faith may remain secure in th”
CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 1, section 37: hundreds of folios in which these traditions are recorded? Surely a guide to the interpretation of the latter must be far more needed than one for the Scriptures. Tradition destroys the Authority of the Scriptures. 6. Making tradition a part of the rule of faith subverts the authority of the Scriptures. This follows as a natural and unavoidable consequence. If there be two standards of doctrine of equal authority, the one the explanatory, and infallible interpreter of the other, it is of necessity the interpretation which determines the f”
CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 92: But if, without any regard to circumstances, you would simply know the character belonging at all times to those human traditions which ought to be repudiated by the Church, and condemned by all the godly, 584 584 Calvin on the Necessity of Reforming the Church. the definition which we formerly gave is clear and certain—viz. That they include all the laws enacted by men, without authority from the word of God, for the purpose either of prescribing the mode of divine worship, or laying a religious obligation on the conscience, as en”
CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 90: conclude, therefore, that it does not now belong to faithful ministers to coin some new doctrine, but simply to adhere to the doctrine to which all, without exception, are made subject. When I say this, I mean to show not only what each individual, but what the whole Church, is bound to do. In regard to individuals, Paul certainly had been appointed an apostle to the Corinthians, and yet he declares that he has no dominion over their faith ( 2 Cor. 1:24 ). Who will now presume to arrogate a dominion to which the apostle declares th”
CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 92: 2413 CHAPTER 10. OF THE POWER OF MAKING LAWS. THE CRUELTY OF THE POPE AND HIS ADHERENTS, IN THIS RESPECT, IN TYRANNICALLY OPPRESSING AND DESTROYING SOULS. This chapter treats,—I. Of human constitutions in general. Of the distinction between Civil and Ecclesiastical Laws. Of conscience, why and in what sense ministers cannot impose laws on the conscience, sec. 1-8. II. Of traditions or Popish constitutions relating to ceremonies and discipline. The many vices inherent in them, sec. 9-17. Arguments in favour of those traditions refut”
CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 93: is there any resemblance whatever between this and the institution of Christ, or ancient custom or ecclesiastical procedure? But there, too, vices are censured. Whoredom, lasciviousness, drunkenness, and similar iniquities, they not only tolerate, but by a kind of tacit approbation 2445 encourage and confirm, and that not among the people only, but also among the clergy. Out of many they summon a few, either that they may not seem to wink too strongly, or that they may mulct them in money. I say nothing of the plunder, rapine, pecu”
CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 89: over other churches. And here it will not be out of place to investigate the means by which she gradually attained to some influence. I am not now referring to that unlimited power which she seized at a comparatively recent period. The consideration of that we shall defer to its own place. But it is worth while here briefly to show in what way, and by what means, she formerly raised herself, so as to arrogate some authority over other churches. When the churches of the East were troubled and rent by the factions 2370 of the Arians,”
theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Supplement (Supplementum), Of the Things Annexed to the Sacrament of Order, Art. 6: Article: Whether in the Church there can be anyone above the bishops? I answer that, Wherever there are several authorities directed to one purpose, there must needs be one universal authority over the particular authorities, because in all virtues and acts the order is according to the order of their ends (Ethic. i, 1,2). Now the common good is more Godlike than the particular good. Wherefore above the governing power which aims at a particular good there must be a universal governin”
CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 1, section 37: ab omnibus . The Latin Church is no exception to this remark. It is an undeniable fact of history that Arianism prevailed for years both in the East and West; that it received the sanction of the vast majority of the bishops, of provincial and ecumenical councils, and of the Bishop of Rome. It is no less certain that in the Latin Church, Augustinianism, including all the characteristic doctrines of what is now called Calvinism, was declared to be the true faith by council after council, provincial and general, and by bishops and popes. So”
CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 88: Spirit may be firmly established among us, we ought to pay more regard to the apostleship of Paul than to that of Peter, since the Holy Spirit, in allotting them different provinces, destined Peter for the Jews and Paul for us. Let the Romanists, therefore, seek their primacy somewhere else than in the word of God, which gives not the least foundation for it. 16. Let us now come to the Primitive Church, that it may also appear that our opponents plume themselves on its support, not less falsely and unadvisedly than on the testimony”
CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 89: when he describes the abuses of appeals, no pious man can read them without being horrified. At length, speaking of the unbridled cupidity of the Roman See in usurping jurisdiction, he thus concludes (Lib. 3 de Concil.), “I express the murmur and common complaint of the churches. Their cry is, that they are maimed and dismembered. There are none, or very few, who do not lament or fear that plague. Do you ask what plague? Abbots are encroached upon by bishops, bishops by archbishops, &c. It is strange if this can be excused. By thus”

Ask Your Own Question