Embracing tradition is a tricky matter. Sometimes tradition can refer to the broad, arms-wide-open gathering of a diverse and rich history of a social institution. On the other hand, sticking with tradition can mean following a very narrow and limited history of that same social institution.
I think that I spent a large part of my life with traditionalists who mostly chose the narrow path. I spent a dozen years living in a semi-monastic community that followed a rule of life that hadn’t changed much for over 700 years. In addition, that community had a loyal attachment to the narrow orthodoxy of the Catholic Church.
So I have have experience in following the narrow definition of tradition. Fortunately for me, there were a few departures from that narrow route. I had the good fortune to become aware of certain great thinkers, such as Duns Scotus, who lived in the Franciscan tradition, but notably never achieved sainthood, the official stamp of approval.
I also had one, perhaps two teachers, who had learned to see outside the boxed-in form of tradition. I also had close friends outside the monastic walls who kept me aware of the diverse reality of being human.
Those departures from tradition exposed me to a rich reality that prepared me for what would come later and continues to unfold. This change has happened only because I have stepped away from the narrow notion of tradition, especially that of the Franciscans and the Catholic Church.
At this time, I am immersed in the teachings that have come from the East, particularly the teachings of Thich Nhat Hanh, or Thay. It is interesting, and a bit disarming, to visit the notion of christian tradition as presented by Thay, especially in his book, “Living Buddha, Living Christ.”
Thay employs the idea of tradition to capture not a narrow point of view, but rather the diverse richness latent both in Christianity and Buddhism. He credits Christian tradition with a diversity I hardly recognize, except perhaps through the writings of biblical scholars such as Elaine Pagels or censured writers such as Teilhard de Chardin.
I think Thay is both generous and marginally correct in his attempt to describe early Christian thought. He brings to light a spark of richness and diversity that was kept secluded and hidden from public view for much of the past two millennia. I’m not sure most Christians would share his observations of christian tradition.
The tradition of christianity I know and lived so well, is constrained to the narrow confines of orthodox dogma, to carefully worded expressions of faith. I think this is largely the tradition embraced by most christians today.
It took me a couple of years before I was ready to read what Thay had to say about the Living Christ in christian tradition. I simply didn’t agree with him. I can now see that he has an eye to see something that I was searching for during many of my years of being immersed in a restrictive, traditional view of the past.
Mostly because of scholars like Elaine Pagels, I am ready to accept Thay’s insight and description of what early christianity included. Those years, before orthodoxy, were rich with notions very similar to those found in Buddhism. This is the tradition I can genuinely own because it is mirrored in my own experience.
I can embrace a tradition that is like a huge net that is capable of gathering a wealth of rich experiences and a variety of insights. I’m not so appreciative of a tradition limited by orthodoxy.