EN
The study analyses, from the perspective of the theory of historical sciences, the way of working with the category “tradition”. It differs between the tradition at the noetic level (interpretative tradition) and the tradition at the ontic level (dogmatic, doctrinal, and cultural tradition on the example of European reformation). The “tradition” is analysed in relation to the “innovation” and “experience”. The idea of tradition’s “continuity” was subjected to criticism. It is not the wording or the form of tradition, but the kerygma, the understanding of the “substance” that are really valuable. However, this can be addressed solely by patient questioning while observing the critically tolerant respect for traditions. And also with the awareness that the struggle for innovations is legitimate and it can be even more beneficial when connected with the humbleness towards traditions, which we try to maintain, and with the respect for experience. Of course, both traditions and innovations can come into conflict with the experience. In ontic culture, the constitutive tension exists between the tradition and the innovation, while in researcher´s culture the constitutive tensions exists between moving within the tradition and the effort to break it.