Tradition or Progress?

Is Tradition the enemy of Progress?

Progress definition

“Forward or onward movement in space; advance, development” – The Concise Oxford Dictionary 5th edition.

“An advance step by step; improvement” – The pocket Macquarie Dictionary

Progress outcomes

Is progress desirable? Let us first leave aside all pessimistic connotations regarding 20th century progress such as the negative effects of the industrial revolution and stick to the pure definition whereby progress is fundamentally and solely evidenced by improvement. By this definition, is this something everyone wants?
I would suggest that it is. Unless one is bold enough to suggest that the current situation is perfect, then clearly improvement can be made, and is desirable.

We can view improvement from a number of different angles:
1. Financial progress – this is expressed by an improvement in financial status. This can be reflected in two ways but always with the end result a balance of income and expenditure preferably with residual income. The scenario that is desirable is either an increase in income, or a reduction in expenditure (or a combination of both) with the outcome of relieving debt or enabling purchase of more or better material goods in order to improve the living standard, or to facilitate achieving better results in the other areas of progress.
2. Intellectual progress – an adding to the intellect by way of either increasing useful knowledge or broadening our perspective, in order to improve our understanding and more concisely perceive fundamental and Godly truths.
3. Spiritual Progress – a growth in the direction of increased focus on spiritual things. That is, all things associated with God and pertaining to a devotion to Him and His word, and reflecting a life of Christ-like nature.
4. Moral Progress – An improved state of morality within society, not only within particular socio-economic groups or sub-cultures such as the church, but also in society as a whole, engendered by Christian influence in all matters of state.
5. Civil Progress – Improvement in civilisation which separates us from the animal kingdom; honour, propriety, politeness, advanced culture. To improve civilisation is to remove us further from barbarism and barbaric practice of all sorts.

An altruistic view of progress would incorporate the concept of the greatest good for the greatest number of people. In essence, the priority is that of the welfare and benefit of the collective is of higher importance than that of the individual. This however does not mean that at any point that one person should suffer injustice in order that others receive the greater good. The type of progress that we are talking about does not include methods that are at best described as pragmatic. I do not believe that the end justifies the means. Horourable and just means are of prime importance,
Democracy supports such a principle or the greater good and it is one of the core tenets of Western society. As such, ideas of the majority rule in voting and a right of opinion were instituted and co-exist to provide what we believe to be the fair system of democracy.
To some extent then progress is achieved quite effectively through the expression of a democratic society. Contrast this to a society under the oppressive rule of a despot, or the state rule of a Communist country and it is clear to see where the most progress occurs.
There may be some debate about some of the particulars, and I will accede to the arguments of Solzhenitsyn regarding the problem of modernity, however the generalisation is relatively safe to make, and that is: democracy is a great facilitator of progress.
We vote our leaders into power in order to govern the country and we vote our elders in at church in order that they govern the church for the good of the majority. Further to this the elders of our church have a greater responsibility to remain true to God’s word and calling, and to shepherd the Church flock, leading them into Godliness.
Although partially flawed and taking second place to an ideal, but impossible to implement, government by Theocracy (whereby the people are governed solely by God) democracy has proven to be our best form of government both in Church and State, provided that the leaders remain on track with God’s will and purpose.


Tradition definition
“1. Opinion or belief handed down, handing down of these, from ancestors to posterity.
2. Doctrine etc, supposed to have divine authority but not committed to writing, …
3. Artistic or literary principle(s) based on accumulated experience or continuous usage” – The Concise Oxford Dictionary 5th edition

“The handing down of statements, beliefs, legends, customs, etc., from generation to generation, esp. by word of mouth or by practice” – The Pocket Macquarie Dictionary

The Point of Antagonism

The point at which most people probably believe progress is at odds with tradition is where tradition seems to contradict the democratic result. In other words, the voice of tradition is in resounding opposition to the direction that the majority has chosen as a means to progress. To flippantly use the modernistic approach that newer is always better would be a dereliction of Christian duty. This is a secular philosophical position that has no basis in scripture, and is actually antagonistic to a Christian world-view.
Is the voice of tradition a worthy one?
Does tradition have value in our cultural and spiritual discourse or is it hopelessly out-dated in today’s modern world?
The answer to this question lies in debunking a fundamental misconception about both the nature of truth and the origin of tradition.
Firstly, truth (universal, Godly spiritual truth) is unchanging. The origin of truth is the Living God who does not change according to the times (as a chameleon or changeling) but rather remains dependably and perfectly consistent.
Secondly, tradition is based around truth, and the perceptions that men (generation after generation) had regarding these truths and how they expressed these truths in a way that was honouring to God and helped remind us of His nature. Tradition is not fundamentally culturally based even though this can influence somewhat the form that tradition takes.
Of course the Achilles Heel of democracy is most evident when the sample of people in question are a unique collection of fools, and the outcome is inevitably foolish.
Likewise tradition can fail when men of equally foolish nature come to a false conclusion and implement this into a foolish tradition, which endures while subsequent men remain unthinking.
Have men got it wrong before? Yes.
Do men get it wrong today? Yes.
Should we gather the collective wisdom of the most discerning men available in order to ascertain the most correct interpretation and expression of truth possible? Absolutely!
But rather than limit ourselves to the men at hand now why not take into account the wisdom of those before us. Consider the words of Chesterton:

Democracy of the dead (Tradition and democracy)

“I have never been able to understand where people got the idea that democracy was some way opposed to tradition. It is obvious that tradition is only democracy extended through time”
"Tradition means giving a vote to most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about. All democrats object to men being disqualified by the accident of birth; tradition objects to their being disqualified by the accident of death. Democracy tells us not to neglect a good man's opinion, even if he is our groom; tradition asks us not to neglect a good man's opinion, even if he is our father. I, at any rate, cannot separate the two ideas of democracy and tradition; it seems evident to me that they are the same idea." – G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy Chapter 4 pp46-47

So is tradition the enemy of progress? Well it seems clear that tradition is at least the ally of democracy, and since democracy is so intrinsically associated with progress, then it can be argued that tradition is certainly not in opposition with progress.
Quite the contrary, tradition can actually aid in bringing about progress by refining our flawed system, through the provision of the accumulated wisdom of all those who have gone before.

The Japanese have a system called Kaizen, which we know as “continuous improvement” or “constant innovation”. There are two corollaries that ought to be provided with this saying:
“If it ‘aint broke, don’t fix it.” – If a traditional method is effective, don’t mess around with it. Change for changes sake is as bad as tradition for traditions sake. Both are superfluous and can often provide worse results than before.
“Don’t reinvent the wheel” – Refusing to consult the mass of wisdom encapsulated in tradition is ignorant and foolish. To decide to prove all the laws of physics from mathematical first principles, although challenging and intellectually rewarding for some, is a gross waste of time since these laws are universally recognised. Much more beneficial would be to apply these already-proven laws to make something useful like a motorcar or a washing machine. The concept is to build upon established and proven knowledge rather than start from scratch. Philosophically speaking we should act a–priori rather than a-posteriori.

To me, progress should submit to tradition. Tradition should aid in progress. The key lies in understanding the true form of beneficial progress.