THE CATHOLIC CONCEPT OF TRADITION IN THE LIGHT OF MODERN THEOLOGICAL THOUGHT THE theological turmoil of the last decade is eloquent evidence that a neuralgic problem of our time is the theme of tradition. It is not simply that the role of tradition with respect to revealed truth is a sign of Christian contradiction: that much we have recognized since the Reformation.1 Today it is the very concept of tradition that divides us. The reactions evoked by Humani generis and Munifi- centissimus Deus have laid the axe to the root of the problem. Thus, Georges Barrois, who like Demas "has deserted [us]" (2 Tim. iv. 9), wrote in the Christian Century with reference to Humani generis: There is no doubt that the "new theologians" were about to rediscover a most neglected and misunderstood factor in the Christian heritage, that of tradition. Instead of the Council of Trent's unworkable definition of tradition, they came out with a fresh and at the same time critical appreciation of the common expressions of Christian thought throughout history. It looks as if Rome had given up the definition of Trent for all practical purposes. Humani generis discreetly casts a mantle of Noah on the ill-fated concept of unwritten tradition. Instead, it lays the major emphasis upon what it calls "the living teaching authority of the Church," vested in the hierarchy. .2 In the Ecumenical Review, H. Alivisatos discussed the dogma of the Assumption from an Eastern Orthodox standpoint and remarked: Simple ecclesiastical traditions, of quite chance origin, can- not be made into dogmas. In this, as is well known, we differ seriously from the Roman Catholic Church, because we remain 1 Cf. Joaquín Salaverri, "La tradición valorada como fuente de la revela- ción en el Concilio de Trento," Estudios eclesiásticos, XX (1946), 39: the de- nial of tradition was "the point of departure of Lutheran theology." 2 Georges A. Barrois, "An Overlooked Encyclical," Christian Century, LXVIII (Jan. 17, 1951), 79. For a synthesis of the reactions to Humani generis, mostly from the Catholic side, cf. Gustave Weigel, "Gleanings from the Commentaries on Humani generis," Theological Studies, XII (1951), 520- 49. 42 The Catholic Concept of Tradition 43 faithful to the basis of faith as this is contained in Holy Scrip- ture and in the Sacred Tradition. ... But the Roman Catholic Church professes belief in the power of the Church (with the Pope as its sole representative) to create the Sacred Tradition, and on his own authority to pronounce new dogmas, even where there is no evidence for them in Holy Scripture or the Sacred Tradition. .3 And from the Catholic side the patrologist Berthold Altaner ruffled theological tempers no end when he concluded (before Munificentissimus Dem) that "the definability of the Assumption cannot be maintained from the standpoint of scientific theology," because "there is no proof from Scripture" and "a proof from tradi- tion, which would establish a tradition going back in some form or other to the apostolic age, cannot be adduced. The declarations and texts usually cited ... do not rest on any historico-theological tradi- tion. ." Consequently a denouement achieved by definition would be a triumph of ecclesiastical positivism, a return to late-medieval Nominalism with its radical divorce between faith and knowledge.4 From out the welter of Protestant, Orthodox, and Catholic con- fusion has come an awareness: a contemporary exigence of Catholic theology is a precise understanding of the very concept of tradition.5 It is to this problem that the present paper addresses itself. The complexity of this single issue makes imperative a conscious dis- regard of several closely allied questions, and demands that we re- strict our research to the fundamental problem: What is tradition? I should like to approach the problem in three stages. The first stage is an historical survey, on broad lines, to indicate landmarks 3 H. Alivisatos, "The New Dogma from an Eastern Orthodox Standpoint," Ecumenical Review, III (1950-51), 154-55. For a number of Protestant and Orthodox reactions to the proclamation of the dogma, cf. Luigi Giussani, "Atteggiamenti protestanti ed ortodossi davanti el dogma dell'Assunta," Scuola cattotica, LXXIX (1951), 106-13; D. P. D., "Le dogme de l'Assomption et l'Orthodoxie grecque," Irinikon, XXIV (1951), 86-90. 4 Berthold Altaner, "Zur Frage der Definibilität der Assumptio B. M. V.," Theologische Revue, XLVI (1950), 19-20. 5 This contemporary necessity has been emphasized, with reference to the Assumption, by Otto Semmelroth, "Überlieferung als Lebensfunktion der Kirche," Stimmen der Zeit, CXLVIII (April, 1951), 1. 44 The Catholic Concept of Tradition 44 and emphases in the movement of Catholic thought on tradition from Trent to our own day. The second stage is an effort at syn- thesis, an attempt to fuse the best insights of Catholic theology into an acceptable conceptual scheme. The third and final stage will endeavor to relate the Catholic concept of tradition with what is sometimes called "purely historical tradition," by clarifying the difference between historical and theological method. The results thus achieved will be concretized by an application to Our Lady's Assumption. I First, then, the historical survey (1546-1951). I am acutely conscious that, in the development of ideas, sharply defined tem- poral divisions can be seductively deceptive; and I am well aware that the progression in the Catholic concept of tradition is rather a question of emphasis and explicitation than of radical dissonance. That much confessed, let me submit that the theology of tradition since Trent falls broadly into three periods.6 (1) From Trent to the end of the seventeenth century we find (a) the emphasis on tradition as a source; (b) a parallel stress on the objective aspect of tradition, i.e., on the doctrine contained therein; and consequently (c) a distinction, implicit at least, be- tween tradition and magisterium. (2) In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries there are no re- markable insights in regard of the fundamental concept, but there is (a) increasing insistence on a tradition that includes a living rule of faith; there is (b) a striking emphasis on tradition as itself a liv- ing, dynamic thing; and (c) the total Catholic theology of tradition, as it existed at the time of the Vatican Council, is summed up in Cardinal Franzelin. (3) The contemporary, twentieth-century theology of tradition (a) regards tradition not so much as a source, as rather the rule of faith; (b) it stresses the active aspect, the preaching of the Church, as the formal aspect; consequently (c) it insists upon identifying tradition properly so called and magisterium. « For the development of the concept of tradition since Trent I am greatly indebted to A. Michel, "Tradition," Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, XV, 1 (Paris, 1946), 1320-46. The Catholic Concept of Tradition 45 This progression of thought has been limned by Michel with a single bold stroke: the point of departure is the concept of tradition as doctrine received from the apostles; the end result is the concept of tradition as the Church's magisterium; neither concept, however, is exclusive of the other.7 1. TRENT TO END OF SEVENTEENTH CENTURY In point of time, and by reason of their consistent influence, the Council of Trent and Melchior Cano will serve as springboards for the study of modern thought on tradition.8 The Tridentine decree on Scripture and tradition (April 8, 1546) is inspired by a polemic.9 It is directed against the Protestant position that Scripture is the unique source of our knowledge of Christian revelation. Not only is tradition incapable (so said the Reformers) of witnessing to truths not contained in the sacred books; even where tradition testifies to 1 Cf. ibid., col. 1320-21. 8 To fathom Trent's terminology on tradition, an intimate study of the early sixteenth century theologians would be quite useful; among others, John Driedo, apparently the first theologian to treat ex professo of tradition, in the fourth book of his De ecclesiasticis scriptvrts et dogmatibus (Louvain, 1S33). For Driedo, traditiones are truths and customs which (1) are extra-scriptural, (2) cannot be substantiated explicitly by Scripture, (3) ought nevertheless to be received, and (4) originate either with Christ or with the apostles. Traditio is the movement of this extra-scriptural teaching across history. It is a professio, continuous from the Church's cradling to our own day; its object is the whole content of revelation, whether explicitly in Scripture or not ; its agent is the Catholic Church universal in time and space. The closest we come to a definition of traditio is "ipsa professio concors omnium sanctorum patrum secundum suorum temporum successiones concorditer reddentium testimonium scripturis sacris, sententiis Christi, et consuetudini primitivae ecclesiae" (op. cit. [folio ed. 1SS0], IV, S, fol. 227VC). A competent summary of Driedo's thought on tradition has been presented by Joseph Lodrioor, "La notion de tradition dans la théologie de Jean Driedo de Louvain," Ephemerides theologicae Lo- vanienses, XXVI (1950), 37-S3. In the above definition Lodrioor, unlike De- neffe, sees as the agent of tradition not merely the hierarchy but the Catholic Church whole and entire. 9 Cf. sess. IV, deer. 1 : "Recipiuntur libri sacri et traditiones apostolorum" ; Concilium Tridentinum: Diariorutn, actorum, epistularum, tractatuum nova collectio, ed. Societas Goerresiana (Freiburg, 1901 ff.), V, 91. 46 The Catholic Concept of Tradition 46 truths scripturally verifiable, tradition is not a distinct source of revelation. Its validity is based utterly on the presence of those same truths in Scripture. In a word, tradition has no value as an independent source.10 What was Trent's answer? (1) There are in the Church apostolic traditions. (2) These traditions are a source of divine revelation.