On the Historical Christian Heritage: Analyses and Questions

by Dragomir Radulov

Abstract:

Dragomir Radulov, On the Historical Christian Heritage: Analyses and Questions. The Theology Gateway. Sofia: 2021.

This article examines the development of Christian tradition and authority, focusing on the paradigm shift precipitated by the invention of the printing press and the subsequent Reformation. The study argues that the year 1453, marked by the fall of Constantinople and Gutenberg's biblical printing, represents a watershed moment in which the Church's relationship to Scripture underwent fundamental transformation. Through historical analysis, the author contends that the pre-Reformation Church understood the Bible as an integral component of Holy Tradition alongside councils, patristic writings, hagiography, and ritual practices, rather than as an independent authority. The Reformation's principle of Sola Scriptura, while initially intended to purify the Church, is shown to be historically problematic, as the New Testament canon itself emerged from ecclesiastical discernment in the second century. The article identifies twelve specific practices in Orthodox and Catholic tradition (including veneration of Mary, saints, icons, infant baptism, prayers for the dead, and liturgical language) that lack explicit biblical foundation yet are not necessarily anti-biblical. The study concludes by calling for honest ecumenical dialogue in which traditional denominations provide robust historical and theological justification for these practices, and Protestant theologians remain open to re-evaluating their positions in light of historical evidence. Ultimately, the article advocates for a balanced approach that neither rejects tradition wholesale nor elevates it to equal authority with Scripture, proposing Prima Scriptura as a more historically tenable position than Sola Scriptura.

Keywords:

Christian heritage, Sola Scriptura, Church tradition, Reformation, Gutenberg, 1453, Canon, Ecumenical dialogue, Orthodoxy, Catholicism

Original language:

Bulgarian

The Pivotal Year 1453 and the Dawn of Printing

Introduction: The Global Political and Religious Stage

It appears that 1453 is a momentous year. Let us begin with Russia. The legitimate ruler of the Rurik dynasty, Vasily II the Dark, after returning to the throne, managed to kill his own blinding perpetrator and main rival, Dmitry Shemyaka. This would enable his son, Ivan III, to consolidate power and subsequently elevate the idea of Moscow as the Third Rome following his marriage to Zoe Palaiologina. Ivan III would bring all his projects to success and during his reign quadrupled the territory of Russia.¹

Constantinople falls. An "eternal" empire vanishes. The Balkan peoples conquered several decades prior would lose their last hope. The schism between Catholicism and Orthodoxy would deepen, the Renaissance active in Europe would be postponed in the Balkans for four centuries. Orthodoxy itself would experience a crisis and temporarily lose its influence on the main religious stage.

The Austrian princes officially receive recognition of the title "Archduke" from the Holy Roman Empire. Thus, Austria acquired a special status bordering on independence. This would lead to its gradual separation and growth into Austria-Hungary until the end of World War I. A European and always progressive empire.

In the Battle of Gavere, the Duke of Burgundy, Philip the Good, would defeat the militia of Ghent, thus postponing the independence of Flanders (Belgium) for four centuries.

The Hundred Years' War between France and England ends. England would abandon its continental ambitions, transfer its power and genius to the seas and oceans, and gradually become a global maritime empire.

Gutenberg and the Revolutionary Accessibility of Scripture

Against the backdrop of these pivotal historical events, we will also discuss a technological one, which in scale comes to overshadow the political ones—namely, printing. Knowing that Johannes Gutenberg had his printing press around 1450 and began work on printing the Bible in 1452, we can freely point to 1453 as the year of the first printed biblical books (the work was completed in 1455).

Scripture and Tradition in the Pre‑Renaissance Church

The Bible as an Auxiliary Part of Tradition

To claim that before these times the Church² possessed the Bible freely would be an exaggeration. Paper reached Europe only in the 11th century. Papyrus was rare and needed protection from moisture, while parchment was expensive and heavy (the raw material being skin). The books themselves were heavy and inconvenient to use. Therefore, before Gutenberg, the mass distribution of the Bible, as well as any large book, was impossible, at least because of the cost (one Bible likely cost as much as a large hereditary estate). Christianity, of course, possessed its Bibles in major centers; the preparation of the clergy necessarily included knowledge of the text of Scripture. The laity's poor knowledge of the Bible was primarily due to historical mass illiteracy (which would begin to be overcome on a large scale only from the beginning of the 20th century) and not necessarily due to an effort to strictly restrict access to the Bible only to the clergy.

During their mission to the Slavs, the brothers Cyril and Methodius recognized the importance of the written text. The breaking of the trilingual dogma and the subsequent translation of the New Testament, liturgical books, and the Old Testament marked the beginning of the Christianization of the Slavic-speaking world. And their work took root precisely thanks to the work of their disciples in Bulgaria.³

Thus, up to the beginning of the Renaissance (conventionally), we have as a paradigm the great institution—the Church—which possesses the great Book. The Bible is the auxiliary means that comes to communicate the initial historical events of the Faith and to set the pattern of Truth. It is regarded as an inseparable part of the so-called Church Tradition, including the Councils, the Fathers, the Lives of Saints, oral traditions, and inherited rituals. This remains so to this day in the traditional Christian denominations⁴. Axiomatically there, the Church space is unified and consistent in its constituent parts. Services are conducted according to rigid rules; the Book itself is always there, bound in gold and elevated in ritual veneration.

The Canon and the Emergence of Textual Criticism

But before the invention of printing, the very physical presentation of the Bible as separate books and sections (the Law – the Prophets – the Psalter – the Gospel – the Acts – the Epistles – Revelation) led it to be conceived as separate parts within Tradition. In the author's opinion, the question of the Biblical Canon at this time (and perhaps even today) is not argued with sufficient rigor. Textual Criticism would only begin to develop at the beginning of the 17th century – this is the system of hierarchizing textual sources according to criteria of language, chronological origin, territorial origin, scribal tradition, church tradition, reliability, etc., in order to present a maximally basic Greek and Hebrew text (Greek and Hebrew textual criticism have their own specifics⁵).

The Renaissance, Differentiation, and the Reformation

The Gradation of Sources during the Renaissance

The advent of the Renaissance⁶ is characterized by a free view of the world and a striving for education and science. In this freer atmosphere, attention is drawn to the different nature of the components of faith. Namely, the oral part (inherited catechesis + transmitted narratives and rituals), as well as the written. And in the written, a stylistic difference is observed: the style of Scripture is one, that of the Fathers is another (with different style and philosophy), that of the Lives is yet another. This differentiation inevitably leads to gradation, with the written emerging higher, and the highest in the written space naturally being Scripture itself. Another factor contributing to differentiation is the centuries-old interconfessional dialogue, especially with Islam, which was regarded as yet another Christian heresy. That is, on what will we rely to prove our religious claims, and what weight does each have. Thirdly, in the Roman Catholic world, with the increase in education, people dedicated to God find certain papal decisions and Church decrees untenable. And they ask themselves – "if we are to break with the Pope, what can we rely on?"

And to return to Gutenberg: The Bible is now becoming an accessible book: it has a lighter format, is affordable in price, and highly educated people begin to translate it into various languages. The Bible becomes available and surveyable⁷.

Alongside the Renaissance interest in refined ancient culture (literature – philosophy – painting – sculpture), the Greek language enjoys increased interest. Hence, the opportunity to read the New Testament in the original. There are ways to learn Old Hebrew as well – Jewish communities are everywhere and, in their conservatism, pass on their sacred heritage through generations. And with a view to the Bible as an independent subject of faith, it receives a new reading in its overall unity of mutual interpretation and complementarity.

Wycliffe, Hus, Luther, and the Rise of Sola Scriptura

And from this comes the amazement of readers at the difference between the "Biblical world" and the surrounding real religious world. Thus, John Wycliffe (1330-1384, English pre-reformer) decides to break with the Catholic Church by making the first translation of the Bible into English and basing his sermons on the simple truths of the Gospel, rejecting ritualism. His work is taken up by Jan Hus and the "Czech Brethren." The big nail would, of course, be driven by Martin Luther⁸. However, examining the early currents of Protestantism, we see a difference in that its pioneers Luther and Melanchthon plead for "clearing the heritage" with the help of Scripture (i.e., to reject church practices only if they contradict Scripture), while with John Calvin (about 20 years after Luther), we already encounter "Sola scriptura" in its fullness – to reject everything not mentioned in the Bible.

The Untenability of Literal Sola Scriptura

But "Sola scriptura" in the literal sense of "only and exclusively Scripture is authoritative" proves to be an untenable approach. Not only because from the very beginning of Protestantism the majority⁹ adhered to "Prima Scriptura" (that is, "Scripture First," which implies candidates for the other "places"). The most cursory analysis of the New Testament books shows that each of them was written with a specific purpose to a specific audience, not as a spiritual agreement among the chief apostles to compile a foundational corpus of the faith. Luke says at the beginning of his Gospel: "Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative... it seemed good to me also...": "Many" here does not mean only three (Matthew-Mark-John). Many accounts were written. And Luke does not necessarily have the idea of confronting them (to criticize them and argue his own point of view as correct), but rather – "it seemed good to me also," just as it seemed good to the other writers.

The Historical Formation of the New Testament Canon

And it is only later, in the 2nd century, that many writings will have been gathered, and the Church will need to, based on its Catechetical experience, sift through many writings according to a strict criterion (the so-called "canonization")¹⁰. To leave only that which was created to impart stability to the Catechesis itself, following the principle – "This may be read and used in Church practice" and in no way – "This and this alone will define (redefine) Church practice."

Continuity, Rupture, and the Shared Doctrinal Core

The Pitfalls of the "Babylonian Captivity" Narrative

Thus, the historical heritage¹¹ is fully shared only by the traditional denominations: Catholicism and Orthodoxy insist on their origin from the first Apostles, through the line of succession. Their doctrines and traditions are presented as the "development of the Church through the centuries." They present themselves to the world as the original bearers of Christianity, their institutions as organizations, and as buildings, are ready to instill respect in everyone. Protestant denominations are usually presented as societies or sects that emerged in such-and-such a century, out of nothing. All historicity and continuity are denied them.

Preoccupied with its immediate tasks within the church, the Protestant movement often falls for this trap and paints the period 325 AD (Council of Nicaea) – 1517 AD (Luther's 95 Theses) with a black brush, thinking of it as something like the "Babylonian Captivity of the Church"¹². This is mistaken. This period (and also the pre-Nicene period) must be viewed in detail, capturing nuances, not from a high panoramic position. Thus, the emergence of Protestantism (which is nothing other than a movement for elevating Scripture as the primary authority for Faith and filtering the so-called Church Tradition) will be recognized as a long-standing spiritual process, and that Luther, Melanchthon, Calvin, etc., are merely links (and perhaps not the largest) in a long chain.

Doctrinal Consensus Across Denominations

Nevertheless, the Reformation's idea is not so much about building as about purifying and restoring what has collapsed. Let us note that the major Christian doctrines, reflected in the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, fully coincide across the three denominations:

1) Salvation through faith in the redemptive work of Jesus Christ, confessing Him as Lord and Savior.

2) Salvation as a movement from sinfulness to holiness.

3) The Trinity of God.

4) Jesus Christ – 100% God and 100% man.

5) Jesus Christ – judge of the living and the dead at His Second Coming, etc.

Major Points of Divergence between Traditional and Protestant Praxis

A Catalog of Practices Subject to Scrutiny

The supremacy of Holy Scripture – the Bible – is contested by the traditional denominations, placing it as part of the monolithic Church Tradition. The reasonable Protestant approach to Tradition is to regard it as a historical expression of the Church, which should be under the supervision of Scripture, since it is open in its character and subject to "viral attacks." The total rejection of Tradition, in turn, is a sign of heresy: the key to the interpretation of Scripture is lost, so it can be interpreted solely from some linguistic position (always with claims to complete exegesis), which is a risky approach and breeds heresies. And the correct interpretation of Scripture leads to the fullness of the Christian doctrinal corpus. This provides an approach for assessing the pre-Reformation era.

Looking at Tradition from a dominant Protestant position¹³, with the aim of appropriating the "lost/unused heritage," one notices infiltrations that are difficult to define biblically (in the sense of not mentioned or not evident in the Bible). They are not necessarily anti-biblical and without a biblical root. The approach to their acceptance or rejection is based on the extent to which they correspond to the "character of Scripture." Here are example descriptors in a general list¹⁴:

Veneration of the Mother of God

Towards Mary, in addition to her veneration as equal-to-the-apostles and first among apostles¹⁵, specific theological attention begins to be directed:

- At the Second and Third Ecumenical Councils, time was devoted to her ontological definition as Theotokos (which is accepted by most Protestants), but later we also have the definition and attributing of:

- her immaculate conception (and somewhere her entire lineage back to Adam)

- Perpetual Virginity¹⁶

- Queen of Heaven, as well as Symbol of the Church and preeminent in its heavenly and earthly parts.

Veneration of the Saints

Transition from natural respect and striving for imitation of God's followers and martyrs to:

- communion with them as members of the higher (Heavenly) Church

- treating them as additional mediators between God and man

- possessors of powers (energies) and stewards of life's spheres, by analogy with appointing a ministerial cabinet by a prime minister.

Veneration of Icons and Statues

Shift in the attitude towards images from their decorative function (an expression of permissible deviation from the second commandment) to:

- objects of worship.

- icon (liturgical) processions.

- assigning a proper existence to icons – self-painting, independent journeys, miracle-working.

Infant Baptism

- proxy baptism of the infant (through a godparent, who confesses on behalf of the infant).

- baptism not only as confirmation of Repentance and turning to God, but also – as initiation into the Church and redemption from Original Sin.

Prayers for the Dead, Purgatory, and the Soul's Journey

Prayers for the dead. Purgatory. Wandering of the soul after death.

Shift in Monastic Emphasis

Shift of emphasis in monasticism from "go into the world" to self-contemplative cultivation of virtues.

Clergy‑Laity Division and Titular Honours

Strict division between clergy and laity. Uniforms for the clergy and monks. "Father" for addressing and titling. "Saint" for titular assessment of a life of complete righteousness.

Liturgical Symbolism and Rituals

Construction of liturgical symbolism "looking back to Jesus" (in analogy to the Old Testament "looking forward to Jesus"). Rituals (incense, processions, sacrifices, vows, strictly leavened/unleavened bread for communion, holy water). Indulgences in one form or another.

Veneration of Relics and Holy Objects

Veneration of dead bodies and their parts ("relics"). Veneration of New Testament realities – the Grail, fragments of the Cross, garments and personal belongings of saints, etc.

Church as Temple

Church = Temple (and not the "assembly of believers").

Pilgrimages

Pilgrimage travel.¹⁷

Ancient Liturgical Languages

Use of ancient (and unintelligible to the majority) language in divine services for reasons of sacredness. (Church Slavonic – Russia, Old Bulgarian – Bulgaria, Katharevousa – Greece (instead of "Dimotiki"), Latin – throughout Catholicism, Ge'ez – Ethiopia (instead of Amharic), etc.)¹⁸.

This list is open; in any case, some things have been omitted¹⁹.

Conlusuion: Toward an Honest Theological Dialogue and Doctrinal Reassessment

A Call for Non‑Arrogant Analysis

This is not a criticism of Protestantism towards the traditional denominations; these things are indeed not noticeable at least at first glance in the Scriptures, and for many of them, there are obvious counter-arguments. So, it is not a correct approach on the part of the Traditional denominations to arrogantly (and lazily?) avoid analyses, discussions, and answers on these issues. (A kind of – "Because salvation and truth are only with us anyway, and if someone has decided not to agree with this, that is their own concern"). On the contrary, with sufficiently good justification for the mentioned practices, we would have guaranteed Church unity.

A Fourfold Framework for Justifying Practices

It should include:

1) Historical analysis, when the practice in question was introduced. Sources.

2) Spiritual justification, why this was necessary.

3) What implications we have from the Scriptures.

4) To what extent the practice in question is considered obligatory and what are the consequences of its neglect or denial.

The answers should come from as high a tribune as possible, and not as private opinions.

The Call for Sincere Scholarship and Ecumenical Openness

Let this be a challenge for the Orthodox theologian, and also let the Protestant theologian have an open conscience when discovering evidence in the "traditional" direction in his own research, and let all avoid throwing around "evidence" of which they themselves are not sure. Through sincere effort, the Orthodox theologian can influence at least a billion-strong Church community, such as Protestantism, towards the "right path" in which he himself is confident.

This sincere attitude (without a lack of zealotry/fanaticism²⁰: i.e., meaning readiness and courage for concession from one's own views) can lead to the conclusion that points 1) 2) 3) 4) cannot be reasonably answered. This would require rethinking and correction of centuries-old practices. Which is not the worst thing: