Retrieving the Tradition and Renewing Evangelicalism: A Primer for Suspicious Protestants

by Daniel H. Williams

A learned and uniquely constructive book that gently urges "suspicious" Christians to reclaim the patristic roots of their faith. This is the first book of its kind meant to help Protestant Christians recognize the early church fathers as an essential part of their faith. Writing primarily to the evangelical, independent, and free church communities, who remain largely suspicious of church history and the relationship between Scripture and tradition, D. H. Williams clearly explains why every branch of today's church owes its heritage to the doctrinal foundation laid by postapostolic Christianity. Based on solid historical scholarship, this volume shows that embracing the "catholic" roots of the faith will not lead to the loss of Protestant distinctiveness but is essential for preserving the Christian vision in our rapidly changing world.

Genres: Theology, Church History, Philosophy, History, Religion, Nonfiction, Christian

253 pages, Paperback

First published September 1, 1999

Reviews

[Kevin Greenlee · Rating 3 out of 5]

Something is wrong with Free Church evangelicalism, or so D.H. Williams (I would say accurately) claims in Retrieving the Tradition and Renewing Evangelicalism: A Primer for Suspicious Protestants. The Christian Church has gone through splits before, first in the Great Schism between East and West, and again in the Protestant reformation, yet the massive proliferation of splinter groups in recent memory is unprecedented. The Free Church isn't going away though, in fact, it's growing with incredible rapidity. Almost any Christian would say the growth of the Christian faith is a good thing, but the divisions D.H. Williams rightly finds troubling. The problem isn't just divisions either, but the theological free-for-all that feeds them. When it's every man for himself in theology, then every man's convictions can become a cause for division. Treating the Bible as an authority certainly doesn't seem to be enough either, as the long history of Christian heresies bears out.

So how to solve the problem? Williams doesn't think the end of the Free Church is likely, or even desirable (he is a Baptist after all), but he does think the Free Church can be revitalized and given a theological center. The key, Williams claims, is to reclaim the early Tradition. He does not mean by the Tradition the Roman Catholic Magesterium, but rather the guides to theology, such as the Creeds, that act as lenses through which to read the Bible. What Williams wants to argue in his book is that Protestants, even Free Church Protestants, don't need to fear the tradition. The Reformers were right to emphasize scripture, but they also saw the place of Tradition as an aid in understanding and interpreting it. Indeed, they even used the early Tradition as weapons in their battle against the Roman Catholic church. There is no reason, Williams thinks, that the Free Church cannot lay hold of the benefits of the Tradition and still remain the Free Church.

The argument of the book is certainly unique and definitely compelling, but I'm not sure it's entirely successful. I'm not, of course, the audience of this book, as I'm a high church Anglican with a pretty positive view of the role of the Church's Tradition in Christian orthodoxy, but I'm entirely sure how persuasive the argument laid out in the book would be to his audience. Moreover, I'm not sure that the Free Church really can be what it is and at the same time respect the Tradition. I don't know the answer to that quandary, as my own understanding of the relationship between Christian orthodoxy, Scripture and the Church's Tradition is still something I'm definitely wrestling with, but I'm suspicious. For one thing, while the Tradition is a valuable thing, it too can be open to interpretation, so I'm not sure it solves the hermeneutical puzzle that troubles Williams. If all he wants to do is encourage Free Church protestants to at least converse with the Tradition, more power to him, but it hardly seems likely to solve, in and of itself, the individualism that plagues that expression of our faith.

Perhaps the biggest problem I see is a lack of clarity on the part of Williams as to what he means by Tradition. He makes the distinction, often made in certain circles, between Tradition and traditions, but I felt he did a rather poor job explaining what he saw as a difference.

Neverthless, not all is bad with this book. Certainly, Williams is bringing an important part of the Christian faith to the attention of those in the Free Church, and he is doing it as an insider. He does succeed in arguing that Protestants don't need to fear the Tradition, and successfully dismantles Anabaptist myths of the "fall of the Church" after Constantine.

So, there's certainly plenty of good material to be had here, but it's certainly not the earth-shattering book I was hoping for. Worth a read if your a Protestant, especially a Free Church Protestant, with questions about the Tradition, but it probably won't settle things for you.

[Daniel Kleven · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found this book because I was reading another book about the early church fathers, and that other book was critiquing the idea that the church “fell” away from the truth path when it aligned itself with empire at the time of Constantine. I felt that the arguments presented against the “fall” narrative were weak, but I wanted to see it more fleshed out and this book by D. H. Williams was a main reference.

What I found here was an excellent approach to the topic of “evangelicals and tradition,” one of those books that I checked out from the library, but quickly ordered my own copy because
I will want to reference this again.

While the other book offered a straw man version of the “fall” narrative for critique, Williams gave a thorough, even-handed, well documented historiographical account of the various iterations of the “fall” view throughout church history, including its weaknesses and shortcomings. While not dismissing the view, Williams complicates it by bringing in more historical information, which rings true: anytime a historical narrative seems to neat and tidy, it probably isn’t accounting for all the facts.

I did not know, for example, that the “fall” was not invented by 16th century protestants, or 20th century evangelicals, but already in the 390s Jerome wrote this:

“The church, by its connection with Christian princes, gained in power and riches, but lost in virtues” (The Life of Malchus, §1).

Williams highlights some great points to wrestle with. For example:

“The great irony in the success of christianizing any society is that the faithful must inevitably wrestle with Jesus’ claim that his kingdom is not of this world. For the church’s unity with the host culture results in the church’s loss of self-identity and ability to speak prophetically to that culture” (124).

However, i am convinced that there have been times that “the fall paradigm has been cultivated to the point of distorting the ecclesiastical and political forces which composed the fourth century in order to supply a stronger case for the church’s need of radical restitution” (130). Williams himself thinks that “We may agree with the dangers of what the ethicists call “Constantinianism,”and yet we ought to expect God’s providential rule in the Roman Empire, visibly impacting his church through its strengths and weaknesses” (131).

Another gem: “If we are going to speak about a ‘fall’ of the church in moral and political terms, then we will ultimately be forced to find it no lesson the earliest generations of Christianity, including the time of Paul” (… and not just on October 28, 312). Agreed!

The book is a model of church historiography, i.e. the various ways people have told their histories over time. One big takeaway is that in every age, people construct histories with specific purposes in mind, and this applies to both imperial church historians and free church historians alike. Williams gives us a brilliant model for going back and accounting for why we tell these stories, and examining them in light of the actual evidence.

This was exactly what I needed to refine my thinking even further.

I still hold a version of the Constantinian fall; AND I want to read (am reading) all the early church fathers; AND I think some (many?) who also hold the "fall" view have gone too far, and ALL of us are in need of going back to the sources to refine our thinking in light of historical evidence.

[Wesley Caldwell · Rating 4 out of 5]

We read this book in Baptist Seminary in 2013. I decided to revisit it this year. I find it to be a refreshing reminder that the Catholic Church did not do "everything wrong" immediately following the New Testament. The importance of Tradition is nearly completely lost in the modern Protestant church, particularly on the independent scene. This book altered my understanding of Tradition and made me more open to the Rule of Faith that runs parallel to Scripture.

[Daniel Martinez · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book straightened out a lot of things for me in my own evangelical identity. As a person who grew up in evangelical Pentecostal Christianity, Williams makes a case for a positive view of the Tradition of the apostolic and patristic era that can potentially bring a more faithful Christianity and help shape an evangelical identity that has in mind the faith of the Tradition passed down from Jesus and the apostles.

[Will Standridge, II · Rating 4 out of 5]

Helpful book on understanding theological retrieval for Protestant Traditions.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wish I would have read this book a decade ago. The primary argument is that the free church needs to retrieve and reengage with the great tradition of the church. It is helpful that he writes as a baptist and one who is familiar and holds to the free church ideas. I was already persuaded by Williams's argument before reading the book, but I still learned a great deal. He does not just try to explain the positives of the tradition. He goes into specific historical reasons why the free church position has appeared. He repeated quotes from primary sources to show the roots of those who reject the "catholic church." I was surprised to learn about the dubious roots of the idea the church "all went astray after Constantine."

One weakness of the book is that it is geared more towards academics. I am not sure this book would resonate with the average person in the pews or the average pastor. It should be but I am not sure it is accessible. Overall this is a solid argument for those willing to listen.

[Joel Wentz · Rating 4 out of 5]

A solid apologetic for a more-robust engagement with church history, and especially the creedal confessions of historic orthodoxy for low-church (casual) evangelical types. I found the first half (or s0) of the book a bit slower and less compelling than the final chapters. Once Williams turns towards diagnosing the very-problematic historical philosophy of much of the "free church" expression today, the book really gains some traction and more coherence. I thought his discussion of the various approaches towards Christian history is very accurate and illuminating, and his defense of the creeds is well-argued. The chapter on the Protestant Reformers is probably my favorite in the book, and is very helpful when considering how to engage proud Protestant-evangelicals on why they should embrace ancient tradition.

[Frank Day · Rating 4 out of 5]

Obviously it took me a while to finish. We skipped sections in my Church History class and I went back to read what I skipped.

But this book gave me insight into the foundations of early Christianity and Protestantism.

It was valuable from a historical perspective.

It also shows the struggles of today’s church.

[Cody Layne · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this book to be very informative for someone in the Evangelical church. We should take the time and look at the church history when considering church tradition where that be a positive view or a negative one we must recognize that tradition plays a part in the faith and the bible that we have today.

[Peter · Rating 4 out of 5]

In spite of being nearly 20 years old, this book is still highly relevant - Free Church evangelicals too often think in historical detachment from or opposition to the Tradition passed down through the early church. The first and last chapters of Williams' book offer a compelling argument for the taking hold of this ancient Tradition in to move forward today with unity and purpose. One of the strongest points here is how a higher view of Tradition and the church actually leads to a higher view of Scripture, not a lower one as some might think. Regaining the Tradition as Williams encourages could provide a wide range of practical results - from helping young Christians understand the reasonable validity of Scripture, to uniting Christians across denominational lines, to reenforcing a sense of timeless faith in spite of our rapidly changing world.

The middle of the book is much more technical, as Williams moves through a detailed account of several areas of church history and development. These chapters are critical to proving the points that he proposes, although they are definitely not light and easy reading. It may feel like work instead of entertainment, but the ideas and their implications are well worth the effort.

[Ryan · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 stars rounded up

Great work, clearly articulated the importance of tradition in the early church and the necessity to rekindle the traditions the Apostles and Apostolic fathers instituted for good reason.

[Christopher · Rating 3 out of 5]

Please read my review on my website: http://www.wetalkofholythings.com/201...

[Eric · Rating 4 out of 5]

Protestants can appreciate tradition, too!

[Brookelynn · Rating 3 out of 5]

Recommend not for light reading, but for consideration

[Samuel Garcia]

Very interesting book that creates a bridge between more than 2000 years of Church history and contemporary evangelicalism