Philip Schaff on how appeals to tradition, contra the supposedly divisive and schismatic principle of sola scriptura, doesn’t actually do what its proponents think it does:
“By rejecting tradition, which imposes definite rules and limits on the interpretation of scripture, we throw open the door to lawless subjectivity. This is shown by the actual state of the protestant world, as rent into various conflicting parties, which without exception appeal to the scriptures in support of the most opposite doctrines and principles.” Here indeed a disadvantageous side of Protestantism is brought to view, which we are constrained to acknowledge with deep sorrow, as will appear here-after. Still however, whilst we readily allow that the curse of sects is to be ascribed, in large part, to the contempt of Church authority and the abuses of protestant liberty, we must decidedly reject the allegation, that tradition alone, and that in the Romish sense as an infallible judge of scripture, forms a sufficient remedy for the cure of this disease. The prescription at best leaves us where we were before, if it bring us not into a plight still worse. For tradition itself is capable also of various interpretations, and to a greater extent indeed than the bible, in proportion as the writings I which is to be found are of greater compass. It is prodigious injustice, to ascribe all clearness to man’s word, and all darkness to the word of God. The history of the Church besides informs us plainly, that different sects have stayed themselves on tradition as well as upon the holy scriptures.