Code Word: Tradition

I have finally decided that many people use the word "Tradition" as a code word. What they really mean is "Authority"... because that is how they are using it when you take it in the context of the conversation.

Traditions in themselves do not dictate anything. They simply exist. True traditions are a matter of fact and historical reference. If one chooses to observe a tradition or not has nothing to do with the actual tradition. A tradition, in and of itself does not force itself on anyone. How could it?

But that is not how "Tradition" is used when talking about the church. Many times church "Traditions" carry a great deal of force behind them as if observing them was mandated by the Tradition itself. They have confused "Tradition" and "Authority".

You find this a great deal in the "Tradition versus Scripture" debate. What is primary? In this discussion, the word "Tradition" does not mean "tradition" in the traditional sense. What they are really saying is "Authority". They are talking about the authority of the church to enforce its traditions just because they are traditions. Just as the Roman Catholics have added love to faith, they have added authority to tradition. Tradition is not a matter of fact. It is a matter of enforcement... no matter how new or contradictory the tradition may be.

The truth is that their "Tradition" is a cleverly phrased term that permits them to enforce progressive ideas that actually conflict with real tradition.

REAL tradition... ancient apostolic tradition allows pastors to be the "husband of one wife", but false tradition (i.e. modern church authority) upsets that and forces them to be celebate. If you hold to the older tradition, you are a radical. If you hold to the new change, you are observing "church tradition" and are most holy and pious. What gives?

REAL tradition... ancient apostolic tradition has bishops on an equal field with each other, but false tradition (i.e. modern church authority) upsets that and forces the Pope above all. If you hold to the older tradition, you are a traitor to Christ's vicar on earth. If you hold to the new change, you are a true servant of St. Peter. What gives?

REAL tradition... ancient apostolic tradition sets up Scripture as the authority for ALL teaching, but false tradition (i.e. modern church authority) upsets that and requires that we listen to the whims of the church through all ages without holding them to the standard of the apostolic record. If you stand with St. Paul against "even an angel in heaven", you are a damned heretic. If you hold to the new change, you are preserving the true faith and church tradition. What gives?

You see this in the debates of the Reformation. The Lutheran Reformers appealed to much older sources for their arguements while their opponents pointed to much newer ideas as matters of "tradition" and asserted that they were more valid than the older traditions that they had replaced, corrupted, and removed.

Is it just me or is this logic upside down?

Be careful when someone uses the word tradition to force you away from the historical teachings of the apostolic church. We must hold fast to the rich, ancient tradition that is witnessed to in Holy Scripture... not new novelties and midevil speculations.