Scripture and Tradition
How do we choose what we do in worship? As much as we can, we look to Scripture and Tradition. There is, of course, a distinction between tradition and the Great Tradition. Local customs and practicality also play roles in decision-making. As good Anglicans, we often look to employ the "three-legged stool" that has become the ubiquitous theological method in Anglicanism. This method is associated with Richard Hooker, a favorite of Queen Elizabeth I and a fierce preacher against Puritans. His book, Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, has become an authoritative voice for Anglican Theology. What is often referred to as the "three-legged stool" is holding to Scripture, Reason, and Tradition as three interdependent sources of authority. One of the most famous passages in Ecclesiastical Polity appears in book five:
“Be it in matter of the one kind or of the other [i.e. doctrine vs. church practice], what Scripture doth plainly deliver, to that the first place both of credit and obedience is due; the next whereunto is whatsoever any man can necessarily conclude by force of reason; after these the voice of the Church succeedeth. That which the Church by her ecclesiastical authority shall probably think and define to be true or good, must in congruity of reason overrule all other inferior judgments whatsoever.” (Ecclesiastical Polity, V.8.2)
Looking at this quote, however, it does not appear that Hooker is arguing for equal authority but rather that Scripture holds the primary authority and reason and tradition are there to help us understand how to live this out in our day and age.
An issue arises when we try to figure out what he means by "what Scripture doth plainly deliver."? The Church Fathers often used the term literal interpretation but it is far from what we would think when we say "literal." The quest is further clouded by how we understand what is commanded or merely described. Is the Old Testament authoritative for our worship today? What is prescribed in Scripture for us and what is simply described? These and many other questions are important, though a 900-word article is not the place to answer them all in one go.
A couple of helpful tools/terms when thinking about this topic can be found in the distinction between a regulative principle of Scripture and a normative principle of Scripture. The Puritans and Presbyterians have held to a regulative principle, meaning, you can only do what Scripture explicitly says. This is why many Puritans did not wear wedding rings and why, still to this day, some Presbyterians (OPC) do not have instruments in a worship service, because they are not explicitly commanded in Scripture. The regulative principle regulates what you can and cannot do. It shows you what is required. However, this is not the purpose of Scripture. Additionally, they don't often live by this in every way, especially today, as they celebrate birthdays. And when it comes to things like images and incense in worship, they tend to be selective in what parts of Scripture they follow and explain away the other parts.
On the other hand, you have the Anglican method of the normative principle. This means that what is prescribed for Christian worship in Scripture is the lowest bar that must be met, it is to be normative for the Church. However, this also means that worship can include things that are not explicit in Scripture as long as they do not contradict Scripture's teaching. A way of then understanding the essential, the helpful, and the non-essentials in worship, polity, and theology can be identified as the esse or the bene esse (terms put forward by Hooker). The esse, are the elements that are essential to the existence of the Church and the Christian faith. The bene esse are those things that are beneficial for the Church but not essential. This discernment is what Hooker would call reason.
The Episcopate has been an example of the debate between what is esse and what is bene esse. Hooker himself argued that it is for the benefit of the church and should therefore be retained but it is not essential to the life of the Church. However, Anglicans have argued the other way as well. The Tractarians argued that Christ instituted the apostolic order and, therefore, the episcopate is essential as it gives assurance of salvation and the efficacy of the sacraments. Additionally, this past Thursday was the Feast of King Charles I, king and martyr. He is considered a martyr by high churchmen because he died upholding the episcopacy. If he had renounced the episcopal structure of the church his life would have been spared. The normative principle, however, allows for a breadth in worship (both for the good and the bad). This is where tradition can help us.
There are the traditions of a parish (customs), the tradition of the Anglican Church, and the Great Tradition that is held by the historic and catholic (universal) Church. By tradition, Hooker means the latter, but this includes the Anglican Church as it participates in the Great Tradition, and, hopefully, it has trickled down into local custom. This is where we look for the aid of the Church Fathers and the Anglican patrimony in our understanding; what has the Church always taught? But in this way, tradition is not independent of Scripture; tradition is lived Scripture. In the normative principle, the question is what does Scripture say, what is permissible, and how is this lived out? Tradition is the Church's answers to these questions and how they lived them out.
Worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness,
Fr. Aaron