The Bible in the Churches: How Various Christians Interpret the Scriptures (Marquette Studies in Theology, Vol 4)

The BIBLE in the CHURCHES How Various Christians Interpret the Scriptures KENNETH HAGEN, EDITOR rita BEBÍ •MU MARQU...

Author: Kenneth Hagen

33 downloads 542 Views 10MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

The BIBLE in the

CHURCHES How Various Christians Interpret the Scriptures

KENNETH HAGEN, EDITOR

rita BEBÍ

•MU

MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY PRliSS

Marquette Studies in Theology No. 4 Andrew Talion, Series Editor

Cover design by Joan Skocir Assistant to the Editor: Aldemar Hagen

Copyright © 1 9 9 8 by Joseph A. Burgess, Kenneth Hagen, Daniel J. Harrington, Grant R. Osborne, Michael Prokurat, Marion L Soards, George H . Tavard

Library o f C o n g r e s s C a t a l o g i n g - i n - P u b l i c a t i o n D a t a The Bible in t h e c h u r c h e s : h o w v a r i o u s C h r i s t i a n s i n t e r p r e t t h e S c r i p t u r e s / [edited b y K e n n e t h H a g e n ] . — 3 r d ed. p.

c m . — ( M a r q u e t t e s t u d i e s in t h e o l o g y ; 4)

I n c l u d e s b i b l i o g r a p h i c a l references a n d i n d e x . ISBN 0-87462-628-5(pbk.) 1. B i b l e — C r i t i c i s m , i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , e t c . — H i s t o r y . 2. B i b l e — H e r m e n e u t i c s . BS500.B5443

I. H a g e n , K e n n e t h . II. Series.

1998

220.6'09—dc21

97-45377

MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY PRESS

T h e A—ucialioii of Jesuit l/niver^ily P r e s s e s

Contents Preface: T h i r d E d i t i o n

iv

Preface: S e c o n d E d i t i o n

v

Preface: First E d i t i o n The History of Scripture Kenneth Hagen

vi in the

1

Catholic Interpretation of D a n i e l J. H a r r i n g t o n . S.J Orthodox

Interpretation

Church

Scripture 29

of

Scripture

Michael Prokurat Lutheran

Interpretation

61 of

Scripture

J o s e p h A . Burgess Evangelical Interpretation G r a n t R. O s b o r n e Reformed

Interpretation

101 of

Scripture 129

of

Scripture

M a r i o n L. Soards Scripture

as the Word of Cod and

159 the Ecumenical

Task

G e o r g e H . T a v a r d , A.A

175

Index and Scripture Citations

199

List o f C o n t r i b u t o r s

218

T H K BIBI.K IN THK C H U R C H E S

IV

PREFACE Third Edition Everything stated in the prefaces t o t h e first a n d s e c o n d edition c o n tinues t o pertain in t h e third edition. T h e t h i r d edition is revised a n d e x p a n d e d . A new c h a p t e r has been a d d e d for t h e Reformed tradition by M a r i o n L. Soards. A n index has been prepared a n d a d d e d by J o a n Skocir. A n o t e t o teachers u s i n g this v o l u m e for a text: page n u m b e r s have c h a n g e d . In t h e (initial) H i s t o r y C h a p t e r , s o m e h e a d i n g s have b e e n c h a n g e d a n d s o m e stylistic c h a n g e s have b e e n m a d e , b u t t h e s u b s t a n c e a n d m a t e r i a l covered are t h e s a m e . D a n i e l H a r r i n g t o n ( R o m a n C a t h o l i c ) has a d d e d s o m e p a r a g r a p h s a t t h e e n d of his treatm e n t of E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 , a n d s o m e b i b l i o g r a p h i c i t e m s . The O r t h o d o x c h a p t e r ( M i c h a e l P r o k u r a t ) is c o n s i d e r a b l y e x p a n d e d ; a fuller treatm e n t in t h e text a n d n o t e s has resulted. The following c h a p t e r s remain the same: L u t h e r a n (Joseph Burgess), Evangelical ( G r a n t O s b o r n e ) , a n d Ecumenical (George Tavard). The s e c o n d e d i t i o n o f T h e Bible in t h e C h u r c h e s , as d o e s t h i s e d i t i o n , c o n t a i n s c h a p t e r s t h a t are different in focus. Since t h e b e g i n n i n g of o u r u n d e r t a k i n g as an i n s t i t u t e in 1 9 8 2 , w e have b e e n aware of t h e different s h a p e t h e s e c h a p t e r s have t a k e n . In t h e s e c o n d a n d t h i r d e d i t i o n , I t h i n k it is fair t o say t h a t H a r r i n g t o n , O s b o r n e , a n d S o a r d s are m o r e historical a n d d e s c r i p t i v e in t h e i r a p p r o a c h e s ( h o w t h e Bible is u n d e r s t o o d a n d u s e d in t h e i r t r a d i t i o n s ) , w h i l e Burgess a n d P r o k u r a t are m o r e a p o l o g e t i c a n d assertive ( w h y t h e Bible s h o u l d b e u n d e r s t o o d as it is in t h e i r t r a d i t i o n s ) . I have felt all a l o n g t h a t these differences were a p l u s , in t h a t t h e y reflect t h e c h u r c h s c h o l a r at w o r k o n t h e sacred text. E a c h c h a p t e r c o n t i n u e s t o be confessional. Kenneth Hagen October, 1997 For t h e record: M a r q u e t t e U n i v e r s i t y Press in A u g u s t 1 9 9 6 ran a l i m i t e d , slightly revised r e p r i n t of t h e s e c o n d e d i t i o n o f T h e Bible in t h e C h u r c h e s . Revisions w e r e m a d e o n l y in t h e P r o k u r a t c h a p t e r . A n d t h e list o f c o n t r i b u t o r s was u p d a t e d t o give his n e w p o s i t i o n . T h e i n t e n t of t h e press was t o g e t a few h u n d r e d copies o u t q u i c k l y for fall class use. T h e q u i c k e s t w a y t o tell t h e difference b e t w e e n t h e s e c o n d a n d revised s e c o n d e d i t i o n ( b o t h b e a r i n g t h e i m p r i n t d a t e of 1 9 9 4 ) is t o l o o k at t h e List of C o n t r i b u t o r s : For t h e revised s e c o n d e d i t i o n [ 1 9 9 6 ] , P r o k u r a t ' s address is Texas. The v o l u m e is b e i n g u s e d as a text by an increasing n u m b e r o f professors.

T H E BIBI.F IN THK C H U R C H E S

v

PREFACE Second Edition In 1 9 8 5 I h e Bible in t h e C h u r c h e s (Paulist), w h i c h essentially was a text d e d i c a t e d t o h o w C a t h o l i c , L u t h e r a n , a n d Evangelical c h u r c h e s have u n d e r s t o o d a n d u s e d t h e Bible, was p u b l i s h e d . A h i s t o r y o f t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e Bible from t h e early c h u r c h t o t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y was also i n c l u d e d . The v o l u m e sold o u t by F e b ruary 1992. S i n c e t h e u n a v a i l a b i l i t y of T h e Bible in t h e C h u r c h e s , I have a c c e p t e d t h e c h a l l e n g e t o see w h a t c o u l d be d o n e t o b r o a d e n t h e a p p e a l o f a revised v o l u m e for college a n d s e m i n a r y use. A single v o l u m e serves a real n e e d for t h o s e i n t e r e s t e d in h o w t h e c h u r c h e s actually a p p l y t h e S c r i p t u r e s . N o o n e v o l u m e c u r r e n t l y exists in E n g l i s h — o n e t h a t engages t h e s t u d e n t w i t h t h e r e c e p t i o n o f t h e S c r i p tures in t h e m a j o r C h r i s t i a n t r a d i t i o n s w r i t t e n b y representatives of t h e living t r a d i t i o n s . I n c l u d e d in t h e revised e d i t i o n are representatives of t h e R o m a n C a t h o l i c , E a s t e r n O r t h o d o x , L u t h e r a n , a n d Evangelical t r a d i t i o n s o n t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e Bible in t h e i r c h u r c h e s p l u s a c o n c l u d i n g c h a p ter b y G e o r g e T a v a r d . In an effort t o m o v e b e y o n d a n o t h e r v o l u m e o n t h e h i s t o r y o f h e r m e n e u t i c s , each of t h e c o n t r i b u t o r s exegetes E p h e s i a n s 2:1 - 1 0 , w h i c h gives a c o n c r e t e e x a m p l e of h o w t h e c h u r c h e s r e a d t h e s a m e text so differently. I n t e r e s t in t h e h i s t o r y of biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n c o n t i n u e s t o i n crease in scholarly historical circles; p l u s w e c o n t i n u e t o h e a r challenges t o t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y historical-critical m e t h o d o l o g i e s . It is a m a z i n g a n d gratifying t h a t interest in c h u r c h h i s t o r y as t h e h i s t o r y of biblical exegesis ( G e r h a r d E b e l i n g ) is actually b e i n g d o n e t h r o u g h o u t E u r o p e a n d t h e U n i t e d States. M a r q u e t t e U n i v e r s i t y Press, A n d r e w T a l l o n , D i r e c t o r , b e c a m e a s t r o n g s u p p o r t t o press o n w i t h a n e w a n d revised e d i t i o n . A l d e m a r H a g e n did the hard technical work. Kenneth Hagen D e c e m b e r 10, 1 9 9 3

T H E BIBI.K IN THK C H U R C H E S

PREFACE First E d i t i o n The idea for this v o l u m e o n biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n in t h e c h u r c h e s g r e w o u t o f a n i n s t i t u t e c o n v e n e d b y K e n n e t h H a g e n a n d h e l d at M a r q u e t t e U n i v e r s i t y in M i l w a u k e e in t h e s u m m e r of 1 9 8 2 . The goal o f t h e p r o j e c t was t h e e x p l o r a t i o n o f t h e m u c h a c c l a i m e d "crisis" in biblical study. The i n s t i t u t e e x a m i n e d t h e e c u m e n i c a l significance of biblical s t u d y t o d a y a n d in h i s t o r y as a s o u r c e o f b o t h u n i t y a n d division a m o n g t h e c h u r c h e s . K e n n e t h H a g e n ( L u t h e r a n ) , professor of t h e o l o g y at M a r q u e t t e , b e g i n s b y t r a c i n g t h e h i s t o r y of biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n from early Christianity to the nineteenth century. T h e o t h e r three contributors assess h o w t h e Bible is i n t e r p r e t e d in their respective t r a d i t i o n s , give a n exegesis of a c o m m o n text ( E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 ) , a n d p r o v i d e s o m e b i b l i o g r a p h i c s u g g e s t i o n s . A l t h o u g h t h e basic f o r m a t o f t h e s e t h r e e c o n t r i b u t i o n s is t h e s a m e , t h e a u t h o r s were free t o discuss w h a t e v e r t h e y c o n s i d e r e d m o s t p e r t i n e n t a n d m o s t v a l u a b l e in a d v a n c i n g t h e c o n versation. D a n i e l J. H a r r i n g t o n , S.J. ( C a t h o l i c ) , professor of N e w Testam e n t at W e s t o n S c h o o l of T h e o l o g y in C a m b r i d g e , M a s s . , investigates t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h C a t h o l i c biblical scholars have a c c e p t e d a n d a d a p t e d t h e critical m e t h o d s d e v e l o p e d largely in P r o t e s t a n t circles. G r a n t R. O s b o r n e (Evangelical), professor o f N e w T e s t a m e n t at T r i n i t y - E v a n g e l i c a l D i v i n i t y S c h o o l in Deerfield, 111., e x p l a i n s h o w t h e evangelical a p p r o a c h to S c r i p t u r e d e v e l o p e d o u t o f t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e C h u r c h in general a n d o u t of late n i n e t e e n t h a n d early t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y A m e r i c a n f u n d a m e n t a l i s m in p a r t i c u l a r . J o s e p h A. Burgess ( L u t h e r a n ) , executive d i r e c t o r o f t h e D i v i s i o n of T h e o l o g i c a l S t u d i e s for t h e L u t h e r a n C o u n c i l / U S A in N e w York, N.Y., deals w i t h s o m e of t h e u n d e r l y i n g theological issues from a L u t h e r a n p e r s p e c t i v e . T h e brief c o n c l u s i o n b y H a r r i n g t o n tries t o focus t h e areas o f c o n v e r gence and divergence. Kenneth Hagen organized the 1982 institute, directed the p r o g r e s s of t h e w r i t i n g p r o j e c t , a n d served as general e d i t o r of t h e v o l u m e . D a n i e l J. H a r r i n g t o n a c t e d as c o p y e d i t o r a n d w o r k e d o n relations w i t h t h e p u b l i s h e r . Kenneth Hagen March 1984

THE HISTORY OF SCRIPTURE IN THE CHURCH by

KKNNKTH HAGKX

PARI' O N K : EARLY C H U R C H TO THE REFORMATION

M

o d e r n biblical s c h o l a r s h a v e d e a l t w i t h S c r i p t u r e since t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y in t e r m s of t h e v a r i o u s critical m e t h o d s . It was n o t always t h a t way. T h e c o n c e r n for " m e t h o d , "

w h e t h e r in t h e o l o g y o r m e d i c i n e o r logic, etc., b e c a m e i m p o r t a n t in t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y a n d has c o n t i n u e d t o d o m i n a t e t h e intellectual s c e n e . T h e crisis t o d a y in s c r i p t u r a l s t u d y is d u e largely t o t h e develo p m e n t of t h e "historical-critical m e t h o d " after t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n tury. S i n c e t h a t m e t h o d has so d o m i n a t e d P r o t e s t a n t a p p r o a c h e s t o S c r i p t u r e for c e n t u r i e s a n d C a t h o l i c a p p r o a c h e s m o r e recently, P a r t Two will l o o k at t h e rise of t h e historical-critical m e t h o d . T o l o o k a t t h e h i s t o r y o f S c r i p t u r e before t h e m o d e r n c h u r c h , t h e m a t e r i a l in P a r t O n e will b e d i v i d e d i n t o four s e c t i o n s : (I) The Early C h u r c h , (II) T h e H i g h M i d d l e Ages, (III) T h e Late M e d i e v a l P e r i o d , a n d (IV) T h e Early R e f o r m a t i o n . In each case t h e s u b d i v i sions will t r e a t t h e place of t h e Bible in theology, t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e B i b l e , a n d a key figure ( A u g u s t i n e , A q u i n a s , E r a s m u s , a n d L u t h e r , respectively). I. T H E EARLY C H U R C H

A. T h e Place o f the Bible in T h e o l o g y For a b o u t t h e first t h o u s a n d years t h e o l o g y was sacrapagina

(sa-

c r e d p a g e ) . F r o m t h e age of t h e Fathers u p to t h e rise of t h e s c h o o l s ( S c h o l a s t i c i s m ) , t h e s o u r c e o f t h e o l o g y was t h e s a c r e d p a g e o f S c r i p t u r e . T h e o l o g y was all w r a p p e d u p in t h e s t u d y of G o d ' s s a c r e d i m p r i n t in H o l y W r i t .

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN THE C H U R C H

2 1

T h i n k of m o n a s t i c life. It was t h e m o n a s t i c c o m m u n i t y ( m o r e so in t h e W e s t ) t h a t p r e s e r v e d l e a r n i n g u p t o t h e t i m e o f t h e s c h o o l s or universities. They were t h e bearers of classical a n d C h r i s t i a n civilization. T h i n k o f t h e m o n k in t h e S c r i p t o r i u m w o r k i n g w i t h S c r i p t u r e before t h e m o v a b l e p r i n t i n g press a n d t h e p h o t o c o p i e r . T h e disc i p l i n e d life e n t a i l e d c o p y i n g S c r i p t u r e , s i n g i n g it in t h e h o l y office, p r a y i n g it, c a r r y i n g it in t h e h e a r t t h e w h o l e day. The m o n k a n d n u n lived in t h e w o r l d o f t h e Bible. Their w h o l e life was c o n n e c t e d w i t h S c r i p t u r e . It was s o m e t i m e in t h e R e n a i s s a n c e (different t i m e s for different places) t h a t p e o p l e b e g a n t o see a difference b e t w e e n t h e i r c o n t e m p o r a r y c u l t u r e a n d t h e age o f t h e Bible. The m o n a s t i c s c o u l d n o t disassociate t h e m s e l v e s f r o m S c r i p t u r e . It is h a r d for us t o i m a g ine t h a t b e c a u s e w e have t h e Bible in a black b o o k , w e can t a k e it off t h e shelf, r e a d it, a n d t h e n p u t t h e b o o k b a c k ( o u t o f s i g h t , o u t of m i n d ) . The m o n a s t i c c o u l d n o t p u t t h e Bible away. The Bible was n o t a b o o k . The Bible w a s in t h e h e a r t . F r o m t h e earliest t i m e s o n , t h e place o f t h e Bible in t h e o l o g y was t h a t t h e Bible was t h e o l o g y a n d t h e o l o g y was t h e Bible. The Fathers refuted heresies, t h e m o n k s p r e s e r v e d t h e S c r i p t u r e s a n d Traditions, all o n t h e basis o f t h e Bible. T h e o l o g y was n o t s o m e s e p a r a t e discip l i n e as it b e c a m e in t h e h i g h M i d d l e Ages a n d as it is today. For t h e early p e r i o d t h e Bible was t h e s o u r c e o f all t h a t i s — G o d ' s w o r k in his c r e a t i o n a n d in his C h u r c h , a n d t h a t w o r k is e n c a p s u l a t e d in t h e monastic community. B. T h e Interpretation o f the Bible 'The Bible was seen t o c o n t a i n v a r i o u s senses o r levels o f m e a n i n g , s o m e t i m e s m a n y levels. The Bible was so rich, so full of m e a n i n g , t h a t its d e p t h o f m e a n i n g c o u l d n o t be e x h a u s t e d b y a literal r e a d i n g . 'The early c h u r c h o n u p t o t h e d i s c o v e r y of A r i s t o t l e was i n f l u e n c e d b y P l a t o n i c p h i l o s o p h y . In P l a t o n i c p h i l o s o p h y t h e p a r ticular t h i n g (in S c r i p t u r e , t h e letter of t h e text) is a m i r r o r o f reality. 2

:

" T h e m o n a s t i c vocation was as m u c h for w o m e n as for m e n ; indeed, it is often w o m e n w h o may justly claim the priority as monastic pioneers" (Kallistos Ware, "Eastern C h r i s t e n d o m " in The Oxford History of Christianity, ed. J o h n M c M a n n e r s [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993] 140). ' T h e literal approach of the Antiochene school in the early period was an exception. In fact t h r o u g h o u t the medieval church, m o r e so in manuscripts t h a n in w h a t later was printed, a literal approach can be found, a l t h o u g h very m u c h the exception.

Ki N \ : ri: HAGEN

3

The reality is t h e fuller m e a n i n g . As t h e m o n a s t i c s read S c r i p t u r e t h e y find s h a d e s o f m e a n i n g far b e y o n d w h a t first m e e t s t h e eye. " T h e letter kills, b u t t h e Spirit gives life" (2 C o r . 3:6) was N e w Testament w a r r a n t for t h e Fathers a n d t h e m o n a s t i c s t o d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n t h e literal a n d t h e s p i r i t u a l m e a n i n g . T h e N e w T e s t a m e n t itself, in its i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e O l d , d i s t i n g u i s h e s b e t w e e n t h e literal a n d s p i r i t u a l m e a n i n g . T h e p a t t e r n for i n t e r p r e t i n g S c r i p t u r e is c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n S c r i p t u r e . I n t e r p r e t i n g S c r i p t u r e m e a n t explicati n g t h e s p i r i t u a l d e p t h s o f m e a n i n g expressed in t h e letter. F o r us, i n t e r p r e t a t i o n m e a n s b r i d g i n g t h e g a p b e t w e e n an a n c i e n t t e x t a n d t h e m o d e r n w o r l d . W h e n t h e r e is o n l y o n e w o r l d , t h e r e is n o s e p a r a t i o n . So i n t e r p r e t a t i o n m e a n t c o m m e n t i n g , a n n o t a t i n g , e x p l a i n i n g t h e v a r i o u s levels of m e a n i n g t h e Spirit leads o n e t o see. T h e m o s t f a m o u s o f t h e multilevel a p p r o a c h b e c a m e t h e quadriga, t h e fourfold sense: t h e literal tells w h a t h a p p e n e d (historical sense), t h e allegorical teaches w h a t is t o be believed, t h e t r o p o l o g i c a l o r m o r a l w h a t is t o b e d o n e , a n d t h e a n a g o g i c a l w h e r e it is g o i n g o r " t e n d i n g . " T h e usual e x a m p l e is J e r u s a l e m , w h i c h refers literally t o t h e city, allegorically t o t h e C h u r c h , tropologically to t h e soul, a n d anagogically to h e a v e n . T h e m o n k s p u t this t o r h y m e . T h e p o i n t is t h a t t h e letter of S c r i p t u r e is a m i r r o r o f t h e a l m o s t limitless d e p t h o f m e a n i n g . C . T h e Key Figure is St. A u g u s t i n e A u g u s t i n e p u l l e d t o g e t h e r t h e v a r i o u s s t r a n d s o f biblical s t u d y in t h e early p e r i o d a n d b e c a m e t h e pillar o n w h i c h m e d i e v a l t h e o l ogy was built, t h u s t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t t h e o l o g i a n for t h e entire ( t h o u s a n d year plus) m e d i e v a l era a n d well i n t o t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y . N o w w e c o n s i d e r h o w A u g u s t i n e p u t S c r i p t u r e t o g e t h e r : t h r e e aspects of his u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f S c r i p t u r e . First, A u g u s t i n e , as w a s typical t h r o u g h o u t this p e r i o d , saw t w o eras o f salvation r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e t w o great b o o k s of S c r i p t u r e . T h e O l d a n d N e w T e s t a m e n t s r e p r e s e n t t h e o l d a n d n e w era of s a l v a t i o n . G o d h a d a p l a n for his p e o p l e ; h e gave revelation progressively as t h e p e o p l e w e r e p r e p a r e d a n d able t o a c c e p t w h a t it was t h a t G o d h a d in m i n d . A progressive revelation w e n t o n in S c r i p t u r e . T h e ages of S c r i p t u r e c o r r e s p o n d t o a p e r s o n g r o w i n g u p ; c o r p o r a t e l y it is t h e h u m a n race g r o w i n g u p . In t h e O l d Testament t h e h u m a n race was in its infancy o r in a d o l e s c e n c e , a n d o n l y as t h e h u m a n race (Israel) b e c a m e m o r e m a t u r e was it r e a d y t o receive C h r i s t a n d t h e h i g h e r revelation. By i m p l i c a t i o n t h e n t h e fuller u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f revelat i o n c o n t i n u e s in t h e C h u r c h .

4

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN THE C H U R C H

A n o t h e r c o n c e p t t h a t A u g u s t i n e u s e d was t h a t G o d is t h e " d o c t o r of m e d i c i n e " a n d is h e a l i n g his p e o p l e . Salvation is h e a l t h (wellb e i n g ) . T h e goal o f c r e a t i o n , revelation, a n d finally salvation is final a n d c o m p l e t e h e a l i n g . So G o d t h e d o c t o r p r e s c r i b e d m e d i c i n e to t h e e x t e n t t h a t t h e p e o p l e w o u l d r e s p o n d a n d g r o w u n t i l t h e c o m i n g of C h r i s t , w h o is b o t h t h e m e d i c i n e a n d t h e c u r e . C h r i s t is t h e c u r e as well as t h e curer. T h e h e a l i n g process c o n t i n u e s in t h e life of t h e C h u r c h . As A u g u s t i n e , t h e n , l o o k e d at S c r i p t u r e , h e saw G o d ' s p l a n , G o d ' s p r o v i d e n c e . H e s a w t w o eras of this p l a n , a n d in these t w o eras G o d is t h e d o c t o r h e a l i n g his p e o p l e . S e c o n d , A u g u s t i n e also w o r k e d w i t h t h e S c r i p t u r e s as b o o k s . As a theologian he h a d the Jewish a n d Christian manuscripts or books t o i n t e g r a t e . A great deal o f early h e r m e n e u t i c a l effort was s p e n t o n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e t w o great T e s t a m e n t s . Very generally, t h e N e w w a s c o n s i d e r e d t o be t h e fulfillment o f t h e O l d . A u g u s t i n e e m p h a s i z e d t h a t w h a t w a s h i d d e n o r veiled in t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t was revealed o r u n c o v e r e d in t h e N e w Testament. W h a t was prefigu r e d in t h e O l d was m a d e clear in t h e N e w . This is a " b o t h . . . a n d " r e l a t i o n s h i p , t h u s t h e necessity of b o t h Testaments: t h e N e w is c o n cealed in t h e O l d , a n d t h e O l d is m a d e clear in t h e N e w . S i n c e t h e H o l y Spirit is t h e a u t h o r of b o t h , t h e r e is u n i t y a n d h a r m o n y b e t w e e n t h e m . 'The u n i t y of t h e Testaments a n d t h e progress of revelat i o n is t h e basis o f h o l d i n g t h a t t h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t is s u p e r i o r t o t h e O l d Testament. The N e w is n e w in relation t o t h e O l d , a n d vice versa. B o t h are n e e d e d . The N e w is m o r e excellent. S o A u g u s t i n e l o o k e d at t h e Bible in t e r m s of s a l v a t i o n - m e d i c i n e a n d h e a l i n g . H e l o o k e d a t t h e Bible as a t h e o l o g i a n a n d s a w a u n i t y g e a r e d t o w a r d s t h e s u p e r i o r i t y of t h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t as t h e fulfillm e n t of t h e Jewish S c r i p t u r e s . Third, w h e n A u g u s t i n e l o o k e d at Script u r e , h e d i d so in t e r m s of s a l v a t i o n ; h e saw t h e t w o Testaments as t w o types o f p e o p l e , t w o ways o f life. This is a n o t h e r level o n w h i c h h e l o o k e d a t S c r i p t u r e a n d s a w t h a t t h e r e is n o t o n l y t h e c h r o n o l o g i cal d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e w h o l e race a n d t h e w h o l e d o c t r i n e , b u t t h e r e is also t h e s i t u a t i o n t h a t s o m e p e o p l e o f faith b a c k in O l d T e s t a m e n t t i m e s were actually living a h e a d o f t h e m s e l v e s ( J o h n 8 : 5 6 , [JesusJ "Your father A b r a h a m rejoiced t o see m y day: a n d h e s a w it, a n d was g l a d " ) . The a n c e s t o r s o f faith were actually living t h e N e w Testament b e c a u s e t h e y believed C h r i s t i a n d o c t r i n e ( T h e y s a w t h e p r o m i s e , e m b r a c e d it, a n d d i e d in faith, H e b . 1 1 : 1 3 ) . It was c o m m o n in t h e early a n d m e d i e v a l c h u r c h t o say t h a t M o s e s w a s a C h r i s t i a n , a l o n g w i t h all t h e faithful d e s c r i b e d in H e b r e w s 1 1 . A u g u s t i n e also said t h a t in N e w T e s t a m e n t t i m e s t h e r e were p e o p l e w h o h a d n o t believed t h e

Ki N \ : ri: HAGEN

5

message a n d w e r e srill l i v i n g t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t b e c a u s e t h e y w e r e living a c c o r d i n g t o t h e flesh a n d n o t a c c o r d i n g t o t h e Spirit. This is again A u g u s t i n e ' s f a m o u s l e t t e r / S p i r i t d i c h o t o m y , a n d ir b e c o m e s an i m p o r t a n t h e r m e n e u t i c a l tool t h r o u g h o u t t h e m e d i e v a l p e r i o d i n t o m o d e r n t i m e s . W e live e i t h e r a c c o r d i n g to t h e letter, o r a c c o r d i n g t o t h e Spirit. " T h e letter kills, t h e S p i r i t gives life." So if w e live a c c o r d i n g t o t h e letter, a c c o r d i n g t o t h e desires o f t h e flesh, w e are O l d Testament. It d o e s n o t m a t t e r w h e n w e live, c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y s p e a k i n g , b u t s o t e r i o l o g i c a l l y s p e a k i n g w e are o l d , A u g u s t i n e said. O r , if w e live a c c o r d i n g t o t h e S p i r i t a n d y o u see t h e S p i r i t in t h e letter of S c r i p t u r e a n d c a n see t h r o u g h t h e veil t o t h e p u r e light o f C h r i s t a n d C h r i s t i a n d o c t r i n e , t h e n w e b e l o n g to t h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t a n d are new, n o m a t t e r w h e t h e r w e are A b r a h a m or s o m e o n e in t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t o r s o m e o n e today. S o , o n b a l a n c e , w h a t we h a v e f r o m A u g u s t i n e is a fairly c o m p l i c a t e d v i e w of S c r i p t u r e , a m u l t i n u a n c e d view o f S c r i p t u r e ; a n d it is t h e s e v a r i o u s s t r a n d s of p u t t i n g S c r i p t u r e together a n d interpreting Scripture that continued through the medieval p e r i o d . In b e t w e e n t h e early p e r i o d a n d t h e h i g h M i d d l e Ages is s o m e t h i n g o f a t r a n s i t i o n a l p e r i o d f o c u s e d o n t h e a b b e y o f S a i n t V i c t o r in Paris, n a m e l y , t h e t w e l f t h - c e n t u r y V i c t o r i n e s . In g o i n g f r o m A u g u s t i n e t o T h o m a s A q u i n a s via these V i c t o r i n e s , w e see t h a t s o m e t h i n g of a shift in t h e a p p r o a c h t o S c r i p t u r e was u n d e r w a y , a shift t h a t is d e v e l o p e d in ' T h o m a s . The i m p o r t a n t t h i n g a b o u t t h e V i c t o r i n e s is t h a t s o m e of t h e m w e r e o r i e n t e d t o w a r d s t h e literal sense o f S c r i p t u r e , t o w a r d t h e historical s e n s e , a n d u s e d J e w i s h exegesis for t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e O l d Testament. W h a t w e h a v e in t h e V i c t o r i n e s was n o t so m u c h a t h e o r e t i c a l c h a n g e ; t h a t is, t h e y w e r e really n o t d e v e l o p i n g a n e w h e r m e n e u t i c . They w e r e s i m p l y p r e o c c u p i e d w i t h t h e literal-historical sense a p a r t from t h e allegorical or s p i r i t u a l i z i n g senses. II. T H E H I G H M I D D L E AGES

A . T h e Place o f the Bible in T h e o l o g y F r o m t h e e l e v e n t h c e n t u r y o n it is i m p o r t a n t t o t h i n k of t h e s c h o o l , t h e university, for it is a t t h e s c h o o l s t h a t t h e o l o g y takes o n a n e w focus. This p e r i o d b e c a m e k n o w n as S c h o l a s t i c i s m b e c a u s e t h e o l o g y increasingly b e c a m e s c h o o l - t h e o l o g y at t h e n e w l y f o u n d e d u n i versities. T h e o l o g y a n d t h e s t u d y o f S c r i p t u r e u n d e r w e n t q u i t e a shift as t h e y m o v e d f r o m t h e m o n a s t e r y t o t h e u n i v e r s i t y c l a s s r o o m . W e

6

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN THE C H U R C H

have p i c t u r e d t h e m o n a s t i c s living, p r a y i n g , eating, a n d sleeping Script u r e , living their lives, as t h e y c o n t i n u e t o d o to this day, in t h e c o n text o f t h e life of S c r i p t u r e . W h e r e a s in t h e s c h o o l , n o t u n l i k e o u r c o n t e m p o r a r y colleges a n d universities, S c r i p t u r e b e c a m e a s u b j e c t of a c a d e m i c study. In t h e s c h o o l a p p r o a c h was a d i s t i n c t i o n or s e p a r a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e o l o g y a n d exegesis, a d i s t i n c t i o n o r s e p a r a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e d i s c i p l i n e of t h e o l o g y a n d t h e d i s c i p l i n e of biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . This is p a r t l y b e c a u s e o f t h e i n f l u e n c e of A r i s t o t e l i a n p h i l o s o p h y a w a y from P l a t o n i c p h i l o s o p h y . W i t h A r i s t o t l e , reality is seen c o n t a i n e d in t h e t h i n g itself. H e n c e in s c r i p t u r a l study, a t t e n t i o n shifts t o t h e sense of t h e letter. W i t h t h e reality seen in t h e t h i n g itself, r a t h e r t h a n b e i n g m i r r o r e d i n t o s o m e o t h e r - w o r l d l y realm of t h e s p i r i t u a l , S c r i p t u r e itself b e c o m e s t h e o b j e c t o f study. W h a t t h e H o l y Spirit i n t e n d e d t o say is there in Scripture, a n d all t h e levels of m e a n i n g are in t h e letter of t h e text, n o t in s o m e o t h e r levels of m e a n i n g . W i t h a shift in s c r i p t u r a l s t u d y t h e r e is a shift in theology. W h i l e w o r k o n t h e Bible b e c o m e s m o r e "literal" a n d " h i s t o r i c a l " ( t h o u g h , r e m e m b e r , w e are still in t h e twelfth a n d t h i r t e e n t h c e n t u r i e s ) , t h e o l o g y b e c o m e s s p e c u l a t i v e . A n i m p o r t a n t i n f l u e n c e o n this shift in t h e o l o g y is t h e interest in dialectic (a p a r t of logic). In t h e u n i v e r s i t y s i t u a t i o n , dialectic is t h e analysis o f a q u e s t i o n . S p e c u l a t i o n is l o o k ing i n t o s o m e t h i n g . It c o u l d a n d d i d have mystical o v e r t o n e s b e cause t h e o l o g y first a n d f o r e m o s t is l o o k i n g i n t o G o d . A q u e s t i o n is p o s e d , alternatives a n a l y z e d , often followed b y a r e s o l u t i o n . The shift in t h e o l o g y is a shift a w a y from sacrapagina t o sacra doctrina (sacred d o c t r i n e ) . ' The first q u e s t i o n in Thomas's Summa theologiae is: W h a t is sacred d o c t r i n e ? W o r k o n t h e sacred p a g e is c o n t a i n e d in t h e Commentaries o n S c r i p t u r e . 'Theological q u e s t i o n s are dealt w i t h in t h e Summaries o f ' T h e o l o g y ( t h e r e were s u m m a r i e s in o t h e r disciplines as well). ' T h e o l o g y t h e n t o o k o n a life o f its o w n . S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e F a t h e r s are t h e a u t h o r i t i e s ( f o o t n o t e s ) . The m e t h o d is p h i l o s o p h i c a l , faith s e e k i n g u n d e r s t a n d i n g .

' Simon of Tournai (d. 1201), t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t Parisian (early Scholastic) theologian at the end of the twelfth century, wrote Inslitutiones in sacram paginam. Scripture is n o t the subject. W i t h the use of dialectic, the work consists of" a series of questions related to Christian doctrine: the w o r k begins " I n c i p i u n t Sententiae m a g i s t r i S i m o n i s T o r n a c e n s i s / ' See R i c h a r d H e i n z m a n n ' s e d i t i o n of Die "Instituliones in sacram paginam" des Simon von Tournai. Einleitung und Quastionenverzeichnis ( M u n i c h : Verlag Ferdinand S c h o n i n g h , 1967).

Ki N \ : ri: HAGEN

7

B. T h e Interpretation o f t h e Bible A c c o m p a n y i n g t h e s e p a r a t i o n of Bible a n d t h e o l o g y is a differe n t a p p r o a c h t o t h e Bible (with A r i s t o t l e a n d reason in t h e b a c k g r o u n d ) . For a P l a t o n i s t , t h e soul (spirit) was seen h i d d e n o r i m p r i s o n e d in t h e b o d y (letter). T h e A r i s t o t e l i a n sees t h e s p i r i t expressed by t h e text. All m e a n i n g is c o n t a i n e d in t h e letter, a u t h o r e d b y G o d . The focus shifts a w a y from t h e m i r r o r o f universal t r u t h s t o t h e int e n t i o n of t h e a u t h o r (letter). T o u n d e r s t a n d t h e a u t h o r is t o d i s c e r n t h e w o r d s a n d t h e i r s i g n i f i c a n c e . T h e L a t i n w o r d to u n d e r s t a n d {intelligere) m e a n s t o r e a d w i t h i n , t o p e n e t r a t e t h e r a t i o n a l m e a n i n g . The t r u t h o f t h e m a t t e r is t h e r e in t h e Bible expressed by t h e letters. S o far in S c h o l a s t i c i s m w e h a v e t h e s e p a r a t i o n of biblical s t u d y from t h e s t u d y o f theology, a different a p p r o a c h t o t h e o l o g y {sacra doctrina), a n d a different a p p r o a c h t o S c r i p t u r e ( i n t e n t i o n of t h e letter). Also w e have s o m e t h i n g of a n e w h e r m e n e u t i c ; at least a great deal is m a d e o f t h a t in t h e l i t e r a t u r e . ( O n e is always s u s p i c i o u s o f n e w t h e o r i e s , b e c a u s e in t h e p r a c t i c e o f biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e t r a d i t i o n a l results usually p e r t a i n . ) T h i s n e w t h e o r y is seen develo p e d b y t h e i m p o r t a n t f o u r t e e n t h - c e n t u r y Franciscan biblical scholar, N i c h o l a s of Lyra, w h o in t u r n was t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t biblical c o m m e n t a t o r for t h e later M i d d l e Ages a n d early R e f o r m a t i o n . Nicholas's c o m m e n t a r i e s were often p r i n t e d in c o l u m n s a l o n g side t h e biblical text a n d t h e glosses of t h e Fathers in t h e later fifteenth a n d s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r i e s . T h e n e w h e r m e n e u t i c is called t h e "double-literal sense": t w o senses o r m e a n i n g s expressed b y t h e o n e letter or w o r d . There is t h e historical-literal sense a n d t h e s p i r i t u a l - or p r o p h e t i c - l i t e r a l sense. The e x a m p l e given is t h a t S o l o m o n m a y refer t o S o l o m o n t h e m a n or be a figure o f C h r i s t or b o t h . If b o t h , b o t h were i n t e n d e d by t h e a u t h o r , t h e H o l y Spirit. As will be seen w i t h T h o m a s , g r o u n d i n g e v e r y t h i n g in t h e letter d o e s n o t p r e c l u d e t h e use of t h e t r a d i t i o n a l fourfold sense (literal, allegorical, t r o p o l o g i c a l , a n d a n a g o g i c a l ) . 'The t h e o r y of t h e double-literal sense is widely a c c e p t e d in t h e later M i d d l e Ages (via T h o m a s a n d N i c h o l a s ) . The result is an increasing a t t e n t i o n t o t h e text. C . T h e Key Figure is T h o m a s A q u i n a s In t h e m o d e r n p e r i o d T h o m a s is f a m o u s for his Summa theologiae ( S u m m a r y o f T h e o l o g y ) . In t h e c e n t u r y following his o w n , his c o m m e n t a r i e s o n S c r i p t u r e w e r e m o r e influential. N o t e t h a t t h e A r i s t o telian ' T h o m a s w r o t e o n S c r i p t u r e , a n d in a s e p a r a t e literary g e n r e h e

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN THE C H U R C H

8

w r o t e o n theology. As an A r i s t o t e l i a n t h i n k s in t e r m s o f causality r a t h e r t h a n reflection, T h o m a s t h i n k s o f G o d as t h e first a u t h o r o f S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e h u m a n a u t h o r s as i n s t r u m e n t s of d i v i n e revelat i o n , c h o o s i n g their o w n w o r d s . The letter c o n t a i n s t h e i n t e n t i o n of t h e i n s p i r e d writer. ' T h o m a s o u t l i n e d his a p p r o a c h t o biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n in t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t : T h e author of Holy Scripture is God, in whose power it is to signify his meaning, not by words only (as man also can do) but by things themselves. So, whereas in every other science things are signified by words, this science has the property that the things signified by the words have themselves also a signification. Therefore that first signification whereby words signify things belongs to the first sense, the historical or literal. T h a t signification whereby things signified by words have themselves also a signification is called the spiritual sense, which is based on the literal, and presupposes it. For as the apostle says (Heb. 10:1) the Old Law is a figure of the N e w Law, and (Pseudo-) Dionysius says: " T h e N e w Law itself is a figure of future glory." Again, in the New Law, whatever our Head had done is a type of what we ought to do. Therefore, so far as the things of the Old Law signify the things of the New Law, there is the allegorical sense; so far as the things d o n e in Christ or so far as the things which signify Christ are types of what we ought to do, there is the moral sense. But so far as they signify what relates to eternal glory, there is the anagogical sense. Since the literal sense is that which the author intends, and since the author of Holy Scripture is God, it is not unfitting, as Augustine says, if even according to the literal sense one word in Holy Scripture should have several senses.' 1

' T h o m a s p r e s e n t s a r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e O l d a n d N e w 'Testam e n t s a l o n g t h e lines of sign a n d fulfillment. The p a t t e r n is from O l d t o N e w t o "future glory." A u g u s t i n e is c i t e d t o s h o w t h a t in o n e literal sense t h e r e are several (spiritual) m e a n i n g s . (It is always a m a z i n g h o w c u r r e n t A u g u s t i n e is for t h e medievals o n i n t o t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y . ) G o d is at w o r k in t h e O l d Testament t h r o u g h t y p e s a n d signs of t h e N e w . In s e e i n g t h e signs o n e sees t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n O l d a n d N e w , a n d in s e e i n g t h e s p i r i t u a l sense o f t h e N e w o n e sees t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t a n d t h e C h u r c h . In t h e allegorical, m o r a l , a n d anagogical senses, G o d uses visible w o r d s t o signify invisible t r u t h s . The p a t t e r n o f r e l a t i o n s h i p , fulfillment, d e v e l o p m e n t f r o m O l d t o N e w to C h u r c h is t h e p a t t e r n of T h o m a s ' s 4

Aquinas, Sumnui

tbeologiae

1.1.10.

Ki N \ : ri: HAGEN

9

theology, a n d his i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of S c r i p t u r e fits w i t h i n t h a t o r g a n i c pattern. For T h o m a s , t h e r e is an o r g a n i c u n i t y b e t w e e n O l d a n d N e w . A u g u s t i n e ' s v i e w o f t h e p r o g r e s s of revelation is e x p a n d e d by T h o m a s t o i n c l u d e e v e r y t h i n g f r o m b e g i n n i n g t o e n d , from c r e a t i o n t o history, t h r o u g h t h e h i s t o r y of Israel, O l d a n d N e w , t o t h e e n d of t i m e . T h o m a s ' s v i e w of revelation is t h a t it is s a l v a t i o n h i s t o r y develo p i n g organically. G o d is w o r k i n g s a l v a t i o n in history, a n d so t h e h i s t o r y o f G o d ' s p e o p l e is s a l v a t i o n history. 'The h i s t o r y o f s a l v a t i o n in S c r i p t u r e is t h e d e v e l o p m e n t f r o m O l d t o N e w , o l d law t o e v a n gelical law. 'The u n i t y is b a s e d o n G o d . The o r g a n i c c o n t i n u u m goes o n in t h e C h u r c h t o " e t e r n a l glory." The m a i n focus o f T h o m a s o n t h e O l d a n d N e w T e s t a m e n t is o n t h e i r o r g a n i c d e v e l o p m e n t , a p a r t o f t h e larger focus o f s a l v a t i o n history. In t e r m s of A u g u s t i n e ' s a p p r o a c h a n d c a t e g o r i e s , Thomas's a p p r o a c h is a b l e n d of t h e p r o v i d e n t i a l a n d h e r m e n e u t i c a l foci. The b l e n d is s e e i n g T e s t a m e n t as b o t h era a n d b o o k . C e r t a i n t h i n g s c o n c e r n i n g C h r i s t are p r e f i g u r e d in t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t t h r o u g h figures like D a v i d a n d S o l o m o n . This is so b e c a u s e t h i n g s o f C h r i s t are of s u c h m a g n i t u d e a n d p o w e r t h a t t h e y c o u l d n o t have b e e n i n t r o d u c e d " s u d d e n l y " : " T h e t h i n g s o f C h r i s t are so g r e a t t h a t t h e y w o u l d n o t h a v e b e e n believed unless t h e y h a d first b e e n d i s s e m i n a t e d g r a d u a l l y t h r o u g h t h e g r o w t h of t i m e . "

5

The d e v e l o p m e n t in t i m e (era o f sal-

v a t i o n ) is t h e d e v e l o p m e n t f r o m i m p e r f e c t t o perfect. Also t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t is a "figure" of t h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t . ' T h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t C h u r c h is a "figure" of t h e g l o r y o f h e a v e n . W i t h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f "figure," O l d t o N e w a n d N e w t o glory, t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t is a "figure of t h e figure." 'The d e v e l o p m e n t is t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f clarity. ' T h o m a s also refers t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f O l d a n d N e w L a w t o t h e relat i o n s h i p o f seed t o tree, i m p l i c i t t o explicit, fear t o love. The g r o w t h is c o n t i n u a l . III. T H E LATE MEDIEVAL PERIOD

A. T h e Place o f the Bible in T h e o l o g y The f o u r t e e n t h a n d

fifteenth

c e n t u r i e s w e r e a m i x t u r e of w h a t

w e n t before a n d n e w c u r r e n t s of t h o u g h t a n d p r a c t i c e . T h e s c h o o l s c o n t i n u e d t o b e t h e m a i n focus o f t h e o l o g i c a l a n d biblical s t u d i e s .

' C i t e d in K e n n e t h H a g e n , A Theology (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1974) 4 7 .

of Testament

in the Young

Luther

10

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN THE C H U R C H

The n e w c u r r e n t s o f s p i r i t u a l i t y (for e x a m p l e , G e r m a n m y s t i c i s m a n d Devotio modernd) approached Scripture more along the m o n a s t i c lines of sacra pagina. A m o n g t h e N o m i n a l i s t s (a n e w p h i l o s o p h y - t h e o l o g y ) a n d o t h e r s , a t t e n t i o n was p a i d t o t h e relation o f t h e S c r i p t u r e s t o t h e Traditions o f t h e C h u r c h . 'Tension a n d even c o n flict b e t w e e n t h e m w e r e p o s i t e d . The c o n c e n t r a t i o n o n S c r i p t u r e as an a n c i e n t b o o k a n d t h e use of S c r i p t u r e t o criticize t h e C h u r c h w a s intensified in t h e (very) late m e d i e v a l m o v e m e n t o f H u m a n i s m . The H u m a n i s t s were n o t t h e o l o g i a n s in t h e usual sense of t h e profession at t h e e n d o f t h e M i d d l e Ages, t h a t is, t h e y w e r e n e i t h e r m o n a s t i c s n o r scholastics. O f t e n t h e y were i n d e p e n d e n t s c h o l a r s , s o m e t i m e s lay, i n t e r e s t e d in c u l t u r e a n d l e a r n i n g a n d t h e effects of c u l t u r e a n d l e a r n i n g o n t h e r e f o r m of C h u r c h a n d society. I n t e r e s t in Bible a n d t h e o l o g y was a p a r t of a b r o a d e r c o m m i t m e n t t o reap t h e w i s d o m of t h e p a g a n classics a n d t h e C h r i s t i a n Fathers. The discip l i n e of biblical a n d theological s t u d y m e a n t l a n g u a g e study, classical L a t i n a n d G r e e k ( a n d H e b r e w for s o m e ) . The H u m a n i s t s were i n v o l v e d in all k i n d s of h u m a n e s t u d i e s . For o u r p u r p o s e s w e p e g their efforts a r o u n d t h e p r i n t i n g press a n d t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f s a c r e d l i t e r a t u r e (sacra littera). S o t h e a p p r o a c h e s t o S c r i p t u r e in t h e m e d i e v a l c h u r c h differed as it was h a n d l e d b y t h e m o n k s (sacrapagina), b y t h e s c h o o l m e n (sacra doctrina), a n d by t h e p r i n t e r s (sacra littera). 'That is a n e n o r m o u s d e v e l o p m e n t , t h e effects of w h i c h we are still appropriating: the relation of t h e H o l y B o o k t o t h e traditions of the C h u r c h , t o t h e s t u d y of theology, a n d to the life of faith. B. T h e Interpretation o f the Bible The fourfold m e t h o d c o n t i n u e d . The d o u b l e - l i t e r a l sense was used. The i m i t a t i o n o f C h r i s t was a n o t h e r e m p h a s i s . The use o f J e w ish resources for a m o r e historical u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e O l d Testam e n t increased. S t u d y o f H e b r e w a n d G r e e k g r e w t r e m e n d o u s l y . All of these interests a n d a p p r o a c h e s w e r e filtered i n t o t h e R e f o r m a t i o n t h r o u g h t h e H u m a n i s t s . The m o s t i m p o r t a n t w o r k o n S c r i p t u r e at the b e g i n n i n g of the sixteenth century was d o n e by the H u m a n i s t s . In t h e C a t h o l i c R e f o r m a t i o n t h e H u m a n i s t s led t h e w a y for critical e d i t i o n s o f S c r i p t u r e , v e r n a c u l a r t r a n s l a t i o n s , a n d t h e s t u d y of t h e G r e e k a n d Latin classics (as o p p o s e d t o t h e Scholastics). In these m a t t e r s t h e y w e r e d e f e a t e d a t t h e m i d - s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y C o u n c i l of Trent. It has b e e n in o u r c e n t u r y t h a t C a t h o l i c s have a d o p t e d H u m a n i s t a n d m o d e r n critical a p p r o a c h e s t o S c r i p t u r e . The P r o t e s t a n t s generally w e l c o m e d a n d u s e d H u m a n i s t s c h o l a r s h i p .

Ki N \ : ri: HAGEN

11

The effect o f t h e H u m a n i s t s o n t h e place a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f S c r i p t u r e in t h e C h u r c h c e n t e r e d a r o u n d t h e i r sense o f history, s t u d y of t h e classics, expertise in t h e biblical (original) l a n g u a g e s , p r e p a r a t i o n o f critical p r i n t e d e d i t i o n s of t h e Bible, a n d t h e use o f S c r i p t u r e for t h e r e f o r m of t h e C h u r c h . ( N o t e t h a t t h e i r effect o n t h e place a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of S c r i p t u r e is o n t h e C h u r c h in g e n e r a l , n o t j u s t o n theology, since their p r o g r a m s w e r e b r o a d e r t h a n m o n a s t i c a n d s c h o lastic theology.) A g r o w i n g sense a m o n g t h e R e n a i s s a n c e t h i n k e r s ( s o u t h o f t h e Alps) a n d H u m a n i s t s ( n o r t h ) w a s t h a t t h e historical p a s t is d i s t a n t a n d different from p r e s e n t c u l t u r e . This sense w a s n o t universally a c c e p t e d , a n d it t o o k u n t i l t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y for historical c o n sciousness t o be w i d e l y a c c e p t e d a n d t h e n largely o n l y in W e s t e r n c u l t u r e . T h e i r sense o f h i s t o r y was t h a t t h e t i m e a n d place of classical c u l t u r e was in t h e a n c i e n t w o r l d — n o t t h e i r o w n . In general for t h e medievals t h e age of t h e Bible was t h e i r o w n , a timelessness t o it all. The H u m a n i s t s p e r s p e c t i v e was t h e s e p a r a t i o n o f p a s t from p r e s e n t . The H u m a n i s t s were s c h o l a r s , s t u d e n t s o f a n t i q u i t y . The general R e n a i s s a n c e o f t h e t i m e was a revival of t h e arts, l i t e r a t u r e , a n d l e a r n ing. The H u m a n i s t s were i n t e r e s t e d in t h e l e a r n i n g c o n t a i n e d in classical l i t e r a t u r e . T h e s t u d y o f t h e classics was t o g o a l o n g w i t h t h e s t u d y of S c r i p t u r e , w h i c h also was from t h e classical w o r l d , for t h e p u r p o s e of m o r a l a n d intellectual reform o f t h e C h u r c h , theology, p h i l o s o p h y , e d u c a t i o n — t h e w h o l e p r o g r a m . T h e critical s t u d y o f t h e past h a d t h e edge to it of i n f o r m i n g a n d often a t t a c k i n g t h e present. The s t u d y of t h e past i n c l u d e d t h e e d i t i n g , p r i n t i n g , a n d l e a r n i n g from t h e c h u r c h fathers. The H u m a n i s t s were a p a r t of t h e revival o f H e b r e w a n d G r e e k s t u d i e s . S t u d y of t h e a n c i e n t w o r l d m e a n t t h e recovery of t h e i r l a n g u a g e s . S t u d y o f t h e original l a n g u a g e s o f S c r i p t u r e raised q u e s t i o n s a b o u t t h e L a t i n Bible. T h e s t u d y o f t h e Bible in t h e original often led t o a c r i t i c i s m o f t h e w a y t h e Bible h a d b e e n t r a n s l a t e d i n t o L a t i n a n d i n t e r p r e t e d . S t u d y o f a n c i e n t l a n g u a g e s w a s n o t w h a t we w o u l d call strictly a n a c a d e m i c exercise. A n c i e n t l i t e r a t u r e — c l a s s i c a l a n d C h r i s t i a n — w a s p r e s u m e d t o have value. The H u m a n i s t s were often critical o f Scholastics a n d o t h e r s w h o c o n c e n t r a t e d o n l y o n t h e literal m e a n i n g o f t h e text. H u m a n i s t interest in original l a n g u a g e s i n c l u d e d an interest in original m a n u s c r i p t s a n d codices. W i t h t h e i r historical p e r s p e c t i v e o n t h e e d i t i n g , t r a n s l a t i n g , a n d t r a n s m i s s i o n o f texts, t h e y w e r e c o n c e r n e d t o g e t as far b a c k as p o s s i b l e t o t h e original version of a w r i t ing. F o r s c r i p t u r a l study, this c o n c e r n led t o t h e discovery, c o l l a t i n g ,

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN THE C H U R C H

12

a n d p r i n t i n g o f early H e b r e w a n d G r e e k codices o f t h e Bible. In 1 5 1 6 E r a s m u s p u b l i s h e d t h e first G r e e k N e w T e s t a m e n t . The sixt e e n t h c e n t u r y w i t n e s s e d several critical e d i t i o n s of t h e Bible, p r i n t e d by m o v a b l e t y p e . The n e w m e t h o d in p r i n t i n g m a d e possible t h e m u l t i p l i c a t i o n o f b o t h critical e d i t i o n s a n d v e r n a c u l a r t r a n s l a t i o n s . The s t u d y of t h e classics, t h e Bible, a n d c h u r c h fathers was critical a n d scholarly. T h e p u r p o s e of it was t o r e f o r m t h e p r e s e n t . The H u m a n i s t s w e r e a m o n g t h o s e w h o were d i s t u r b e d a b o u t c o r r u p t i o n , lack o f e d u c a t i o n , a n d t h e generally sorry state of society. The C h u r c h was often b l a m e d for m o s t o f it, b l a m e d for b e i n g t o o i n t e r e s t e d in m o n e y , politics, war, e v e r y t h i n g b u t t h e care o f souls. The a t t a c k s w e r e b i t t e r a n d sarcastic. T h e o l o g y ( S c h o l a s t i c i s m ) was r e p r o a c h e d for b e i n g i n t e r e s t e d o n l y in syllogisms a n d n o t t h e s i m p l e p i e t y of S c r i p t u r e . The goal o f t h e i r w o r k w a s t h e r e f o r m o f C h u r c h a n d society t h r o u g h e d u c a t i o n for t h e p u r p o s e of piety a n d k n o w l e d g e . C . T h e Key Figure is Erasmus o f R o t t e r d a m W r i t i n g at t h e t u r n o f t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y ( d i e d in 1 5 3 6 ) , E r a s m u s was v e r y critical. H e l a m b a s t e d t h e s u p e r s t i t i o n s o f c u r r e n t m o n a s t i c practice, t h e ritualism a n d legalism c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e mass, S c h o l a s t i c t h e o l o g y (especially its p r e o c c u p a t i o n w i t h p r o p o s i t i o n s , corollaries, d e f i n i t i o n s , a n d c o n c l u s i o n s ) , t h e w o r l d l i n e s s of t h e P o p e (especially his p r e o c c u p a t i o n w i t h war, m o n e y , e x c o m m u n i c a t i o n s , a n d i n t e r d i c t s ) , t h e b e g g i n g o f m e n d i c a n t friars, clerical c o n c u b i n a g e , a n d so o n . The basis o f his a t t a c k s was a call to r e t u r n t o t h e s o u r c e o f S c r i p t u r e in its p u r i t y a n d original m e a n i n g for C h r i s t i a n living. T h e " p a g a n " classics a n d c h u r c h fathers were t o serve as an orientation to Scripture. E r a s m u s e d i t e d a n d p u b l i s h e d a n u m b e r o f t h e w o r k s of t h e F a t h e r s . A g a i n s t c r i t i c i s m , h e c o n t i n u e d to a d v o c a t e t h e s t u d y of t h e classics. "A sensible r e a d i n g o f t h e p a g a n p o e t s a n d p h i l o s o p h e r s is a g o o d p r e p a r a t i o n for t h e C h r i s t i a n life." H e d i s t i n g u i s h e d b e t w e e n t h e b a d m o r a l s o f t h e p a g a n s , w h i c h are n o t t o be followed, a n d t h e i r m a n y e x a m p l e s o f r i g h t living. " T o b r e a k in o n " S c r i p t u r e w i t h o u t t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e classics is " a l m o s t s a c r i l e g i o u s . " "St. C y p r i a n has w o r k e d w o n d e r s in a d o r n i n g t h e Scriptures w i t h t h e literary b e a u t y of t h e a n c i e n t s . " So g u i d e d b y t h e F a t h e r s o f t h e C h u r c h , classical studies were t a k e n as a necessary i n t r o d u c t i o n t o u n d e r s t a n d i n g C h r i s t i a n revelation. 6

6

Enchiridion (1503) cited in The Essential Erasmus, York: N e w American Library, 1964) 3 6 .

ed. J. P. D o l a n (New

Ki N \ : I i : HAGEN

13

S c h o o l e d b y t h e B r e t h r e n of t h e C o m m o n Life (a p a r t of late m e d i e v a l Devotio moderna), Erasmus's o r i e n t a t i o n t o t h e o l o g y was a w a y from s p e c u l a t i o n t o w a r d piety. H i s o r i e n t a t i o n t o S c r i p t u r e , t h e s o u r c e o f C h r i s t i a n piety, was t o w a r d t h e e x a m p l e o f Jesus. The ethical life, p r e a c h i n g , a n d t e a c h i n g of Jesus c o m b i n e i n t o t h e p h i l o s o p h y of C h r i s t , t h e s o u r c e o f r e f o r m for e v e r y t h i n g f r o m t h e p a pacy t o p e a s a n t r y . E r a s m u s ' s m a i n interest a n d w o r k was o n t h e N e w Testament. H i s G r e e k N e w ' T e s t a m e n t w i t h critical a n n o t a t i o n s was a m i l e s t o n e in R e f o r m a t i o n w o r k o n t h e Bible. It was used b y L u t h e r i m m e d i ately. E r a s m u s c o u l d b e very critical o f t h e p e o p l e o f t h e O l d Testam e n t , for their s u p e r s t i t i o u s a n d b a r b a r o u s ways, in c o m p a r i s o n w i t h t h e " g o o d letters" from G r e e c e a n d R o m e . In m e d i e v a l t e r m s his a p p r o a c h t o t h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t was largely t r o p o l o g i c a l — a s in C h r i s t , so in m e . Erasmus's sarcasm against Scholastic t h e o l o g y i n c l u d e d his charge o f s u p e r c i l i o u s s p e c u l a t i o n , especially t h e i r use o f dialectic. T h e o l o g y was t o o intellectually p r e o c c u p i e d w i t h d o c t r i n e , a n d n o t w i t h its m a i n t a s k — p e r s u a d i n g a n d b r i n g i n g p e o p l e t o t h e w a y o f C h r i s t . Practical p i e t y is t h e p o i n t of it all. W h e n c o n t e m p o r a r y c o m m e n t a tors d e a l t w i t h t h e N e w 'Testament, E r a s m u s c o m p l a i n e d t h a t t h e y c o n c e n t r a t e d o n l y o n t h e literal sense: Let me mention another requirement for a better understanding of Holy Scripture [the first being reading Scripture with a clean heart!. I would suggest that you read those commentators w h o d o not stick so closely to the literal sense. T h e ones I would recomm e n d most highly after St. Paul himself are Origen, Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine. Too many of our modern theologians are prone to a literal interpretation, which they subtly misconstrue. T h e y do not delve into the mysteries, and they act as if St. Paul were not speaking the truth when he says that our law is spiritual. T h e r e are some of these theologians w h o are so completely taken up with these h u m a n commentators that they relegate what the Fathers had to say to the realm of dreams. T h e y are so entranced with the writings of Duns Scotus that, without ever having read the Scriptures, they believe themselves to be competent theologians. I care not how subtle their distinctions are; they are certainly not the final word o n what pertains to the Holy Spirit." In t h e i r t h e o l o g y t h e Scholastics w e r e t o o s p e c u l a t i v e ; in t h e i r c o m m e n t a r i e s o n S c r i p t u r e t h e y were t o o literal. So a l e a d i n g s c h o l a r Ibid., 3 7 .

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN T H E C H U R C H

14

of t h e R e n a i s s a n c e calls for a p i o u s r e a d i n g of t h e Bible as t h e s o u r c e for C h r i s t i a n living. I V . T H K EARLY REFORMATION

A. T h e Place o f the Bible in T h e o l o g y T h e early r e f o r m e r s , for e x a m p l e L u t h e r , Z w i n g l i , C a l v i n , w e r e very c o n c e r n e d a b o u t t h e p l a c e of Bible in e v e r y t h i n g — C h u r c h , theology, a n d especially p r e a c h i n g . T h e m a i n p o i n t of t h e R e f o r m a tion was t h a t the G o s p e l m u s t be p r o c l a i m e d . T o c o n t i n u e o u r s c h e m a t i z a t i o n ( m o n a s t e r y — u n i v e r s i t y — p r i n t i n g press), n o w t h i n k p u l p i t , t h i n k o f t h e Evangelical cities ( W i t t e n b e r g , Z u r i c h , G e n e v a ) w h e r e t h e m e d i u m for i n f o r m a t i o n was t h e p u l p i t ( a l o n g w i t h t h e i m p o r t a n t p a m p h l e t s ) . T h e R e f o r m a t i o n was a m o v e m e n t o f t h e W o r d : C h r i s t , S c r i p t u r e , p r e a c h i n g — i n t h a t order. T h e y all are t h e W o r d o f G o d . The r e f o r m e r s used t h e p r i n t e d W o r d , s t u d i e d t h e W o r d , p r a y e d t h e W o r d . T h e i r c o n c e r n was t o b r i n g p r e a c h i n g b a c k i n t o t h e m a s s , p r e a c h i n g in t h e v e r n a c u l a r , a n d p r e a c h i n g o n t h e text of S c r i p t u r e . W h e n L u t h e r s a i d t h a t t h e C h u r c h is n o t a p e n - h o u s e b u t a m o u t h - h o u s e , he m e a n t t h a t the g o o d news c a n n o t properly be p u t in (dead) letters b u t is t o b e p r o c l a i m e d l o u d l y in G e r m a n . W h a t t h e Scholastics s e p a r a t e d — t h e o l o g y a n d c o m m e n t a r y o n S c r i p t u r e — t h e early r e f o r m e r s s o u g h t t o b r i n g t o g e t h e r a g a i n , a l o n g t h e lines of sacra pagina

( m i n u s t h e m o n a s t e r y ) . S c r i p t u r e a l o n e is

t h e sole a u t h o r i t y for t h e C h u r c h , t h e d i s c i p l i n e o f theology, a n d t h e life o f faith. The r e f o r m e r s c o n t i n u e d t h e call for t h e r e f o r m o f t h e C h u r c h o n t h e basis o f S c r i p t u r e . Every office a n d activity in t h e C h u r c h falls u n d e r t h e j u d g m e n t of S c r i p t u r e . All o f t h e o l o g y is c o n t a i n e d in S c r i p t u r e . G o d h a s revealed all t h a t we n e e d t o k n o w a b o u t h i m in C h r i s t . C a l v i n is especially s t r o n g o n t h e k n o w l e d g e o f G o d , t h e b e g i n n i n g p o i n t o f t h e Institutes

of the Christian

Religion.

God

is revealed in S c r i p t u r e , a n d t o see t h e revelation of G o d in n a t u r e w e n e e d t h e spectacles of S c r i p t u r e . T h e o l o g y m u s t b e biblical t h e o l o g y ; a n y o t h e r k i n d is h u m a n i n v e n t i o n . S c r i p t u r e is its o w n a u t h o r i t y b e c a u s e it is clear. N o o t h e r a u t h o r i t y is n e e d e d t o see t h r o u g h its m e a n i n g . The early r e f o r m e r s were n o t concerned a b o u t s o m e theory of inspiration. T h a t came later. The Bible is t h e W o r d . The r e f o r m e r s w e r e a w a r e o f t h e "critical" d i s c u s s i o n s a m o n g t h e H u m a n i s t s a b o u t t h e text, a u t h o r s h i p , l a n g u a g e , e t c . L u t h e r e n g a g e d in s o m e o f t h i s . The p o i n t o f t h e W o r d is t h e p r e s e n c e of t h e W o r d in S c r i p t u r e - C h u r c h - p r e a c h i n g . T h e H u -

Ki N \ : I i : HAGEN

15

m a n i s t sense o f t h e d i s t a n c e o f S c r i p t u r e from t h e p r e s e n t was n o t a c c e p t e d . The scholastic s e p a r a t i o n of t h e o l o g y from S c r i p t u r e was a t t a c k e d . The p u r p o s e of t h e o l o g y is t o serve p r e a c h i n g , t h e m a i n task o f t h e C h u r c h . T h e vast a m o u n t o f t h e o l o g i c a l l i t e r a t u r e from t h e early R e f o r m a t i o n was i n t e n d e d t o clear t h e r o a d b l o c k s t o S c r i p t u r e a n d t o facilitate t h e p r o c l a m a t i o n of t h a t G o s p e l . B. T h e Interpretation o f t h e Bible The early reformers w e r e p r e m o d e r n ; t h e y c o n t i n u e d t h e g e n eral m e d i e v a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n as c o m m e n t a r y , a n n o t a t i o n , a n d e x p o s i t i o n . The m o d e r n i n t e r p r e t e r c o n t i n u e s t o d e v e l o p t h e H u m a n i s t p e r s p e c t i v e of t h e historical past; t h u s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n in m o d e r n t i m e is b r i d g i n g t h e g u l f b e t w e e n a n c i e n t l i t e r a t u r e a n d m o d e r n t h i n k i n g . T h e early r e f o r m e r s c o n t i n u e d t h e m o n a s t i c a p p r o a c h o f total i m m e r s i o n i n t o t h e t h i n k i n g a n d l a n g u a g e o f S c r i p t u r e so t h a t t h e r e is o n l y o n e l a n g u a g e , o n e biblical theology. In t h e i r C a t h o l i c c o n t e x t , t h e reformers e m p h a s i z e d t h a t S c r i p t u r e was its o w n i n t e r p r e t e r (a very o l d p r i n c i p l e , g r o u n d e d in S c r i p t u r e itself). L u t h e r a r g u e d t h a t t h e p a p a c y h a d b u i l t a wall of a u t h o r i t a t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a r o u n d itself so t h a t S c r i p t u r e c o u l d o n l y be read as t h e p a p a c y saw fit. O n e late m e d i e v a l synthesis h a d it t h a t S c r i p t u r e is t o Tradition as f o u n d a t i o n is t o i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ( O c c a m ) . S t r o n g in t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y was t h e q u e s t i o n of an a u t h o r i t a t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of S c r i p t u r e . The C a t h o l i c C o u n c i l of T r e n t d e c r e e d in m i d c e n t u r y : that no one, relying on his own skill, in matters ol faith, and of morals pertaining to the edification of Christian doctrine, wresting the Sacred Scriptures to his own senses, presume to interpret the said Sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy m o t h e r church, whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the Holy Scripture, has held and does hold. 8

For C a l v i n a t this t i m e , t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f S c r i p t u r e b y S c r i p t u r e a l o n e is a i d e d b y t h e i n t e r n a l t e s t i m o n y o f t h e H o l y Spirit. S c r i p t u r e itself attests to its message a n d m e a n i n g . C h r i s t a n d t h e Spirit are at w o r k in t h e W o r d . The r e f o r m e r s insisted t h a t p o s t a p o s t o l i c claims o f a u t h o r i t a t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n were precisely t h e reason w h y t h e W o r d o f G o d lost its/his central place in t h e life o f t h e C h u r c h .

8 P Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, Vol. 2 (New York: Harper, 1919) 8 3 .

16

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN THE C H U R C H

The R e f o r m a t i o n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f S c r i p t u r e was c a u g h t u p in theological polemics. T h e H u m a n i s t s used Scripture to attack the C h u r c h , b u t t h e y were n o t so m u c h i n t e r e s t e d in t h e p u r e d o c t r i n e s of S c r i p t u r e as t h e y were in e x p o s i n g t h e c o r r u p t i o n a n d folly of t h e p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n in t h e l i g h t o f t h e p i e t y o f S c r i p t u r e . The early reformers f o u g h t for p u r e d o c t r i n e o n t h e basis o f S c r i p t u r e ( a n d t h e F a t h e r s ) . T h e d o c t r i n e o f justification b y faith a l o n e , b y grace a l o n e (by C h r i s t a l o n e ) , was seen as t h e c e n t r a l d o c t r i n e o f S c r i p t u r e . T h e d o c t r i n e o f justification b y faith is t h e c r i t e r i o n b y w h i c h all o t h e r d o c t r i n e s , offices, a n d p r a c t i c e s in t h e C h u r c h are j u d g e d . T h e criteriological p r i o r i t y of justification b y faith is e s t a b l i s h e d in S c r i p t u r e . T h e C h u r c h s t a n d s o r falls, said L u t h e r , o n t h e s c r i p t u r a l t e a c h i n g o f justification. T h e r e were o t h e r issues, o t h e r p o l e m i c s , b u t t h e p r o c e d u r e w a s t h e s a m e . D o c t r i n a l r e f o r m was forged a n d p l e a d e d o n t h e basis o f S c r i p t u r e . C . T h e Key Figure is M a r t i n Luther Basic for L u t h e r ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f S c r i p t u r e is his d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n law a n d G o s p e l . T h e G o s p e l of Jesus C h r i s t is t h e fulfillm e n t a n d e n d o f t h e M o s a i c law. L a w a n d G o s p e l are in all b o o k s o f t h e Bible. T h e G o s p e l is t h e g o o d n e w s t h a t salvation is in C h r i s t a l o n e . A b r a h a m a n d o t h e r s s a w t h a t G o s p e l in t h e p r o m i s e s , believed, a n d w e r e justified. L u t h e r transposes A u g u s t i n e ' s d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n O l d a n d N e w T e s t a m e n t as ways o f salvation t o law a n d G o s p e l as ways o f salvation. T h e w a y o f t h e l a w is d o this . . . a n d d o n ' t d o t h a t . . . . T h e w a y o f t h e G o s p e l is believe . . . a n d it has a l r e a d y b e e n d o n e for y o u in C h r i s t . T h e law is c o m m a n d , t h e G o s p e l is gift, t h e gift of forgiveness. W h e n t h e law c o m m a n d s , failure results b e c a u s e o n e c a n n o t fulfill t h e law o n one's o w n p o w e r ( " T h e g o o d 1 w o u l d , I d o n o t , " said P a u l ) . T h e law h u m b l e s ; t h e G o s p e l picks u p . O n e c a n n o t be p i c k e d u p unless o n e is p u t d o w n to size. B e i n g b r o u g h t l o w (law) a n d b e i n g raised u p ( G o s p e l ) are t h e daily struggles of t h e C h r i s t i a n life, t h e e x p e r i e n c e of sin ( b r o u g h t by t h e l a w ) , a n d t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f forgiveness ( b r o u g h t b y C h r i s t ) . T h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n law a n d G o s p e l , t h e d o c t r i n e o f justification b y faith a p a r t from w o r k s , a n d t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e c o r e o f S c r i p t u r e are all t h e s a m e for L u t h e r . T h e c e n t e r o f S c r i p t u r e for L u t h e r is C h r i s t , p r e s e n t in b o t h t h e O l d a n d N e w T e s t a m e n t . C h r i s t is t h e e t e r n a l W o r d o f G o d , p r e s e n t in O l d T e s t a m e n t t i m e s in t h e form of p r o m i s e , p r e s e n t in N e w Test a m e n t times in t h e p e r s o n of Jesus, a n d p r e s e n t in t h e C h u r c h t h r o u g h W o r d a n d s a c r a m e n t . In all cases, C h r i s t t h e W o r d is t h e effective

Ki N \ : I i : HAGEN

17

m e a n s o f grace ( h e a l i n g salvation for A u g u s t i n e ) . T h e c e n t e r o r c o r e of S c r i p t u r e is " w h a t drives C h r i s t " {was Christum treibet), i.e., w h a t p r e a c h e s C h r i s t , w h a t p r o m o t e s o r p o i n t s t o C h r i s t . C h r i s t is a t t h e c o r e of G o d ' s p l a n o f s a l v a t i o n . G o d p r o m i s e s t h r o u g h p r o p h e t s ; G o d delivers in p e r s o n . All of S c r i p t u r e leads t o C h r i s t , a n d Christ leads t o salvation. L u t h e r ' s r e s p o n s e t o t h e v a r i o u s senses of m e a n i n g in t h e M i d d l e Ages (fourfold, d o u b l e - l i t e r a l ) was t h a t S c r i p t u r e has o n e s i m p l e sense ( m o s t often, C h r i s t ) . The g r a m m a t i c a l sense is t h e s i m p l e s t sense a n d is t h e m e a n i n g of t h e text, t h e g r a m m a t i c a l m e a n i n g a n d t h e t h e o l o g i c a l m e a n i n g are t h e s a m e . L u t h e r availed h i m s e l f o f H u m a n ist s c h o l a r s h i p ( a n d H u m a n i s t s s a w a n early ally in L u t h e r ) a n d w a s a p a r t of a late medieval t r e n d t o h i g h l i g h t (once again) t h e christological m e a n i n g o f a text. L u t h e r also u s e d allegory, n o t t o establish a d o c t r i n e , h e said, b u t t o e m b e l l i s h it. H e also u s e d t h e o t h e r s p i r i t u a l senses. L u t h e r o n S c r i p t u r e is often p r e s e n t e d as a total b r e a k from t h e m e d i e v a l w o r l d . T h a t c a m e later. (You c a n t a k e t h e b o y o u t o f t h e m o n a s t e r y , b u t y o u c a n n o t take t h e m o n a s t e r y o u t of t h e boy.) In t h e area of t h e senses of m e a n i n g , L u t h e r is a p a r t of t h e m e d i e v a l t r e n d t o call for a r e t u r n t o t h e letter of t h e text, a n d t h e n , in p r a c t i c e , t o g o o n a n d find o t h e r senses of m e a n i n g . After all ( a n d all t h e m e d i e v a l s k n e w t h i s ) t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t itself uses allegory. L u t h e r ' s d i s t i n c t i o n is h i s c o n s t r u c t i o n o f S c r i p t u r e as c o n t a i n i n g a single t e s t a m e n t (will, p r o m i s e ) of C h r i s t . G o d ' s last a n d o n l y will a n d t e s t a m e n t is t h a t h e w o u l d d i e for o u r salvation. The p r o m ise is t h e d e c l a r a t i o n o f t h e will a n d t e s t a m e n t . T h e d e a t h o f t h e G o d - M a n validates his t e s t a m e n t . T h e i n h e r i t a n c e is t h e forgiveness of sins a n d e t e r n a l life. The ( n e w ) t e s t a m e n t o f C h r i s t is e t e r n a l . It is p l a y e d o u t in t i m e , b u t t h e r e is n o d e v e l o p m e n t in t h e e t e r n a l . A u g u s t i n e a n d t h e medievals generally s a w a d e v e l o p m e n t a n d t r a n s f o r mation within a n d between the O l d a n d N e w Testament. Luther h e l d t h a t t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t is o l d e r t h a n t h e O l d b e c a u s e it is t h e o l d e s t ( e t e r n a l ) . T h e O l d Testament b e g i n s a n d e n d s in t i m e . W e h a v e c o m e a l o n g w a y ( t o t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y ) . O r have we? W h a t often is seen t o b e n e w is n o t so n e w after all. T h e m o n a s tery {sacra pagina), t h e university {sacra doctrina), t h e p r i n t i n g press {sacra littera), a n d t h e p u l p i t ( H o l y G o s p e l ) all r e p r e s e n t shifts a n d e m p h a s e s . T h e w h o l e e n t e r p r i s e , h o w e v e r , was still "sacred."

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN T H E C H U R C H

18

PART T W O : T H E M O D E R N C H U R C H

In t h e m o d e r n p e r i o d t h e historical-critical m e t h o d d o m i n a t e s m o s t Protestant approaches to Scripture and, since 1943 Afflante

Spiritu),

{Divino

also m o s t C a t h o l i c a p p r o a c h e s . By t h e m i d d l e o f

t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y t h e historical-critical m e t h o d is in place. O n e w a y o f p i c t u r i n g t h e shift t h a t takes place b e t w e e n t h e m e d i e v a l a p p r o a c h ( i n c l u d i n g early R e f o r m a t i o n ) a n d t h e m o d e r n a p p r o a c h o f t h e later s e v e n t e e n t h a n d e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y is t o c o n s i d e r t h e i r views of t h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e letter a n d t h e real, t h e c o r r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e text of S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e events S c r i p t u r e d e s c r i b e s . In t h e m e d i e v a l a p p r o a c h t h e letter o f t h e Bible was read as h i s t o r i c a l a n d real; t h e r e was n e v e r a n y q u e s t i o n t h a t w h a t was s a i d actually t o o k place. S c r i p t u r e was read as religion, history, g e o g r a p h y , liturgy, prayer, a n d so o n . S c r i p t u r e is G o d ' s W o r d o n t h e s u b j e c t . The a p p r o a c h of historical c r i t i c i s m is first to q u e s t i o n t h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e letter a n d t h e real, t h e n t o p o s i t a s e p a r a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e t w o , a n d

finally

to see t h e text as a faith r e s p o n s e t o a s t i m u l u s , a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f a n e v e n t b u t n o t t h e e v e n t itself. W h a t w e h a v e in t h e text are t h e r e s p o n s e s o f t h e c o m m u n i t i e s o f faith, n o t t h e s t i m u l i . In t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y it was s a i d t h a t w h a t we h a v e in t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t is t h e C h r i s t of faith a n d n o t t h e J e s u s o f history. In a n y case, it c a m e to b e p e r c e i v e d in historical c r i t i c i s m t h a t t h e Bible is t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f facts a n d n o t t h e facts t h e m s e l v e s . It was w r i t t e n f r o m faith t o (our) faith. The historical-critical m e t h o d is c o n c e r n e d a b o u t t h e o r i g i n of i n d i v i d u a l b o o k s of t h e Bible. M o d e r n s s t u d y i n d i v i d u a l b o o k s in t h e i r l i f e - s e t t i n g - i n - h i s t o r y , u s i n g h i s t o r y t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e Bible, n o t u s i n g t h e Bible t o u n d e r s t a n d history. C o n c e r n e d a b o u t t h e b o o k s as t h e o l o g i c a l l i t e r a t u r e a n d n o t history, it uses t h e b e s t critical ( o b jective, analytic) tools available for t h e s t u d y o f a n c i e n t l i t e r a t u r e . T h e m o d e r n a p p r o a c h d e v e l o p s s o m e o f t h e h u m a n i s t interests d e tailed earlier h e r e — i n t e r e s t in t h e h i s t o r i c a l past, t h e o r i g i n a l text, a n d language. There w e r e a n d are v a r i o u s m e t h o d s w i t h i n t h e h i s t o r i c a l - c r i t i cal m e t h o d . These will b e d e t a i l e d b y o t h e r s in t h i s v o l u m e . H e r e t h e c o n c e r n will b e t o t r a c e t h e rise o f t h e historical-critical m e t h o d , t o detail t h e shift f r o m m e d i e v a l - e a r l y R e f o r m a t i o n t o (early) m o d e r n a p p r o a c h e s (from t h e m i d d l e o f t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y t o late e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y ) . 'The m e d i e v a l s t r e a t e d S c r i p t u r e as t h e C h u r c h ' s h o l y

Ki N \ : I i : HAGEN

19

b o o k , a u t h o r e d b y G o d . The m o d e r n s t r e a t S c r i p t u r e as a p r o d u c t of h u m a n h i s t o r y w i t h t h e secular tools o f historical a n d literary criticism in o r d e r t o u n d e r s t a n d it b e t t e r in its a n c i e n t s e t t i n g . A m o n g t h e e l e m e n t s t h a t c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e rise o f t h e h i s t o r i cal-critical m e t h o d , in a d d i t i o n t o t h e s e p a r a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e letter a n d t h e real, i n c l u d e t h e following: (1) m e t h o d o l o g y , (2) D e i s m a n d r a t i o n a l i s m , (3) t h e disciplines of biblical i n t r o d u c t i o n a n d biblical theology, (4) t e x t u a l c r i t i c i s m , a n d (5) historical c o n s c i o u s n e s s . 1. M e t h o d o l o g y . T h e o l o g y b e c a m e i n t e r e s t e d in t h e q u e s t i o n s o f " m e t h o d " (way o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ) in t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y . In 1 5 5 5 Nils H e m m i n g s e n , a s t u d e n t of L u t h e r a n d M e l a n c h t h o n (especially t h e latter), p u b l i s h e d a b o o k On Methods, t h e first p a r t for p h i l o s o p h y , t h e s e c o n d for t h e o l o g i c a l m e t h o d . It was i m p o r t a n t because o f its s u b j e c t — m e t h o d u s . Earlier in t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y m e t h o d as a t e c h n i c a l t e r m c a m e i n t o m e d i c i n e , a n d in t h e s e c o n d half o f t h e c e n t u r y lawyers d i s c u s s e d m e t h o d . S o t h e o l o g y j o i n e d t h e o t h e r b r a n c h e s o f l e a r n i n g in t h e i r c o n c e r n t o t i d y u p t h e i r d i s c i p l i n e . Also i m p o r t a n t is t h a t H e m m i n g s e n b r o u g h t logic (particularly dialectic) i n t o t h e o l o g y in t h e d i s c u s s i o n o f m e t h o d . F o r biblical s t u d y this m e a n t t h a t discussion of "exegetical m e t h o d " was c a r r i e d o n in t h e p a r t o n p h i l o s o p h i c a l m e t h o d , a n d t h e n c a r r i e d over a n d p r a c t i c e d in t h e o l o g y a n d "exegesis," t h e actual w o r d b e i n g used. 9

"Exegesis" was w i d e l y u s e d in t h e s e v e n t e e n t h a n d e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y as t h e a r t for i n t e r p r e t i n g S c r i p t u r e . Exegesis is an a n c i e n t a n d early m o d e r n w o r d , n o t t o be f o u n d in ecclesiastical L a t i n in t h e a n c i e n t or m e d i e v a l p e r i o d . M e d i e v a l w o r k o n S c r i p t u r e was d o n e in the genre of a n n o t a t i o n a n d exposition. "Interpretation" m e a n t the translation a n d e x p l a n a t i o n of obscure a n d e n i g m a t i c w o r d s or d r e a m s . M o d e r n " i n t e r p r e t a t i o n " p r e s u p p o s e s a historical s e p a r a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e i n t e r p r e t e r a n d t h e text; a n d in t h e case of t h e " m e t h o d ists," t h e r e is t h e necessity o f first d i s c u s s i n g t h e m e t h o d o r w a y of i n t e r p r e t i n g before t h e actual i n t e r p r e t a t i o n or exegesis takes place. For L u t h e r , S c r i p t u r e was its o w n i n t e r p r e t e r . T h e difference is t h a t t h e (early) m o d e r n b e c o m e s c o n s c i o u s o f t h e d i s c i p l i n e , o r p r o b l e m , of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . W h a t c o m e s o u t of this w o r k o n m e t h o d o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is reflection o n t h e n e e d for an i n t r o d u c t i o n t o a biblical b o o k . A l r e a d y '' K. H a g e n , ' " D e exegetica m e t h o d o , ' Niels H e m m i n g s e n ' s D e M e t h o d i s ( 1 5 5 5 ) , " The Bible in the Sixteenth Century, ed. David Sreinmerz ( " D u k e M o n o graphs in Medieval and Renaissance Studies," Vol. 1 1; D u r h a m , N . C . : D u k e U n i versity Press, 1990) 1 8 1 - 9 6 , 2 5 2 - 5 5 .

20

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN THE C H U R C H

in t h e t h i r d q u a r t e r o f t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y , t h i s is f o u n d in H e m m i n g s e n a n d M a t t h i a s Flacius Illyricus w h o is often c r e d i t e d w i t h b e i n g t h e father of m o d e r n h e r m e n e u t i c s . I n H e m m i n g s e n ' s m e t h o d o l o g y four q u e s t i o n s n e e d t o be asked in an i n t r o d u c t i o n t o a p a r t i c u l a r b o o k o f t h e Bible in o r d e r t h a t it will b e u n d e r s t o o d " m o r e explicitly," " m o r e skillfully a n d correctly," " m o r e easily," o r " m o r e clearly." In t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n t h e first q u e s t i o n o f authorship determ i n e s t h e a u t h o r i t y o f t h e w r i t i n g . The s e c o n d , t h e occasion, leads t o an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e literary s t r u c t u r e s . The t h i r d , t h e status or p r i n c i p a l q u e s t i o n of t h e w r i t i n g , leads t o a p e r c e p t i o n of t h e u l t i m a t e goal a n d s c o p e of t h e w h o l e w r i t i n g . T h e f o u r t h is t h e method or o r d e r of p r e s e n t a t i o n . Flacius also reflected o n t h e n e e d for an i n t r o d u c t i o n , c o v e r i n g t h e s a m e four q u e s t i o n s , before o n e b e g i n s w i t h t h e biblical w r i t i n g itself. T h e shift a w a y from t h e m e d i e v a l - e a r l y R e f o r m a t i o n t o early m o d e r n a p p r o a c h e s , s o m e w h e r e in t h e m i d d l e o f t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n tury, is seen in t h e m o d e r n focus o n t h e p r o p e r o r d e r o f m e t h o d o l ogy, i n t r o d u c t i o n , exegesis, in o t h e r w o r d s , o n t h e p r o b l e m o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ( h e r m e n e u t i c s ) . For t h e m e d i e v a l s t h e r e was n o p r o b l e m of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . T h e r e were rules for r e a d i n g S c r i p t u r e , s u m m a r i z e d by L u t h e r as prayer, m e d i t a t i o n , a n d e x p e r i e n c e . For t h e m o d e r n , these b e c o m e h i n d r a n c e s r a t h e r t h a n h e l p s . T h e m o d e r n n e e d s a m e t h o d t o u n d e r s t a n d . L u t h e r often said he n e e d e d m o r e t i m e . 2 . D e i s m a n d rationalism. T o discuss t h e n e x t m a j o r a d v a n c e s in t h e rise of t h e historical-critical m e t h o d w o u l d m e a n j u m p i n g t o t h e late s e v e n t e e n t h a n d e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y , w i t h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t s in D e i s m a n d r a t i o n a l i s m . T o u n d e r s t a n d t h e attacks from these q u a r ters, generically all rationalists, o n e n e e d s t o see w h a t it was t h e y w e r e a t t a c k i n g , namely, w h a t is k n o w n w i t h i n ( W e s t e r n ) E u r o p e a n d P r o t e s t a n t a n t i s m as O r t h o d o x y a n d P i e t i s m . In t h e later s i x t e e n t h a n d s e v e n t e e n t h c e n t u r y t h e q u e s t i o n of m e t h o d in t h e o l o g y was c e n t r a l in L u t h e r a n a n d R e f o r m e d O r t h o doxy. T h e c o n c e r n was for p u r e d o c t r i n e in its p r o p e r place in t h e d o g m a t i c s y s t e m . S c r i p t u r e is t h e s o u r c e for s y s t e m a t i c a n d d o c t r i n a l theology. In t h e give a n d take w i t h R o m a n t h e o l o g i a n s , t h e O r t h o d o x Protestants d e v e l o p e d n u a n c e d theories of t h e inspiration o f Script u r e , t h e o n l y infallible a u t h o r i t y . Revealed t h e o l o g y is d r a w n o n l y from t h e revealed W o r d . S c r i p t u r e is d i v i n e , s u p e r n a t i o n a l revelat i o n . It is t h e very W o r d of G o d in its letters, w o r d s , d o c t r i n e s , a n d p r e c e p t s . S c r i p t u r e is t h e i n s t r u m e n t a l s o u r c e of t h e o l o g y : G o d is t h e " p r i n c i p l e o f t h e b e i n g " o f t h e o l o g y — t h e first cause of t h e o l o g y ; a n d

Ki N \ : ri: HAGEN

21

S c r i p t u r e is t h e " p r i n c i p l e of k n o w i n g " G o d — h e n c e t h e i n s t r u m e n t of theology. It is t h e O r t h o d o x t h e o r y of revelation a n d i n s p i r a t i o n t h a t d r e w t h e ire of D e i s m a n d r a t i o n a l i s m . T h e i r t h e o r y o f i n s p i r a t i o n is k n o w n as t h e d i c t a t i o n t h e o r y . The d e f i n i t i o n o f i n s p i r a t i o n w a s t h a t act of G o d w h e r e b y h e c o n veyed t h e c o n t e n t o f w h a t h e w a n t e d to be w r i t t e n a n d t h e very w o r d s expressing t h a t c o n t e n t . It is also t h e d o c t r i n e of p l e n a r y inspirat i o n — e v e r y t h i n g in S c r i p t u r e was i n s p i r e d a n d d i c t a t e d . If t h e ins p i r a t i o n o f o n e verse is d e n i e d , t h e i n s p i r a t i o n , a u t h o r i t y , a n d infallibility o f t h e w h o l e Bible falls. It is also t h e d o c t r i n e o f verbal i n s p i r a t i o n — e v e r y w o r d . The H o l y Spirit actually d i c t a t e d t h e very w o r d s . T h e biblical a u t h o r s were d e f i n e d as "secretaries," h a n d s of C h r i s t or p e n m e n o f t h e H o l y Spirit. It is also t h e d o c t r i n e o f i n e r r a n c y — t h e secretaries w e r e k e p t from e r r o r in t h e w r i t i n g by t h e H o l y Spirit. The m e t h o d o f i n s p i r a t i o n was discussed in m u c h detail. The effect was t o secure a s u p e r n a t u r a l revelation ( S c r i p t u r e ) t h a t was i n e r r a n t , a u t h o r i t a t i v e , sufficient, clear, a n d efficacious. T h e responses to O r t h o d o x y in t h e late s e v e n t e e n t h a n d eight e e n t h c e n t u r y w e r e as different as Pietism is from r a t i o n a l i s m . A n d O r t h o d o x y d i d n o t die. H e n c e a t h r e e - r i n g circus, w h i c h is still b e i n g played today. W h a t is a Pietist? He's o n e w h o hears t h e W o r d . A n d lives a h o l y life in t e r m s of w h a t he's h e a r d . There were Pietists in s e v e n t e e n t h - c e n t u r y E n g l a n d , H o l l a n d , a n d G e r m a n y . 'They were i n t e r e s t e d in n o n t h e o l o g i c a l s t u d y of t h e Bible for p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e a n d h o l i n e s s . They were m o r e interested in t h e effect of S c r i p t u r e t h a n its o r i g i n . S c r i p t u r e was t h e s o u r c e of p r o v i d e n t i a l g u i d a n c e for t h e p i o u s . 'They e n c o u r a g e d d i r e c t access t o t h e Bible w i t h o u t p o s t b i b l i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . 'They w e r e ( a n d are) r e s p o n s i b l e for t h e massive d i s t r i b u t i o n of i n e x p e n s i v e e d i t i o n s of t h e Bible. The d e v e l o p i n g historical-critical m e t h o d was of little or n o interest. The Pietists w e r e in o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e r a t i o n a l i s m of t h e age. A Bible in everyone's h a n d . For t h e O r t h o d o x , the Bible was a source b o o k of doctrine; for t h e Pietist, it was t h e m i r r o r of holiness. A rival t o O r t h o d o x y a n d P i e t i s m , b u t w a y over o n t h e secular side o f t h i n g s w h e r e t h e historical-critical m e t h o d was d e v e l o p i n g , was E n l i g h t e n m e n t Christianity. E n l i g h t e n m e n t C h r i s t i a n i t y i n c l u d e d English D e i s t s , D u t c h s k e p t i c s , F r e n c h n a t u r a l i s t s , a n d G e r m a n rat i o n a l i s t s — a l l generically rationalists. A central c o n c e r n of t h e E n g l i s h D e i s t s (rational belief in t h e d e i t y ) , w h o w e r e m o r e influential in F r a n c e a n d G e r m a n y t h a n in E n g l a n d , was t o a t t a c k s u p e r n a t i o n a l views o f revelation a n d t o ar-

22

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN THE C H U R C H

g u c r a t h e r for n a t u r a l r e l i g i o n — t h e n a t u r a l , t h e r a t i o n a l , a n d t h e universal. T h e A n g l i c a n p h i l o s o s p h e r , J o h n L o c k e , p r o v o k e d m u c h c o n t r o v e r s y w i t h his b o o k The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695). O t h e r w o r k s , typical a n d i n f l u e n t i a l , f r o m t h e D e i s t s w e r e J o h n T o l a n d , Christianity Not Mysterious ( 1 6 9 6 ) ; a n d M a t t h e w T i n d a l , Christianity as Old as Creation ( 1 7 3 0 ) . R e a s o n is t h e j u d g e of revelat i o n . Belief in t h e C r e a t o r G o d ( D e i t y ) is r e a s o n a b l e ; b u t belief in G o d ' s s u b s e q u e n t i n t e r v e n t i o n — p r o p h e c i e s , miracles, a t o n e m e n t — is n o t r e a s o n a b l e a n d t h e r e f o r e rejected. The t r u t h o f C h r i s t i a n i t y m u s t be d i s c o v e r a b l e in all ages. N a t u r a l religion is t h e i n n a t e c o r e of all religion. The universality o f reason is t h e o n l y c r i t e r i o n o f t r u t h . T h e a u t h o r i t y of t h e biblical r e c o r d is d o u b t f u l . W h a t c o m e s t h e n from t h e D e i s t s , n a t u r a l i s t s , a n d rationalists is t h a t t h e e n l i g h t e n e d are freed f r o m t h e d o g m a t i c s o f O r t h o d o x y a n d a n y s u p e r n a t u r a l t h e o r y o f i n s p i r a t i o n . D o c t r i n e s like t h e d i v i n i t y of C h r i s t , original sin, a t o n e m e n t , s a c r a m e n t s , a n d miracles are p u t aside. T h e N e w Testament n e v e r m e a n t t h e m t o be t a k e n seriously. V i e w s of t h e s u p e r n a t u r a l were r e g a r d e d as s u p e r s t i t i o n . S c r i p t u r e was int e r p r e t e d historically a n d critically. The " u n w o r t h y , " " i m p o s s i b l e , " a n d " u n r e a s o n a b l e " parts o f S c r i p t u r e w e r e e x p l a i n e d away. 3 . T h e disciplines o f biblical i n t r o d u c t i o n a n d biblical theology. By t h e m i d d l e of t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y ( J o h n D . M i c h a e l i s , Introduction to the New Testament, 1 7 5 0 ) , t h e discipline o f biblical int r o d u c t i o n was in place. W e have seen w r i t i n g s a b o u t biblical i n t r o d u c t i o n s already in t h e s e c o n d half o f t h e s i x t e e n t h c e n t u r y w i t h H e m m i n g s e n a n d Flacius. Their reflection o n t h e n e e d for an i n t r o d u c t i o n in o r d e r t o p r e p a r e t h e w a y for u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e b o o k m o r e clearly is n o t r e c o g n i z e d in s e c o n d a r y l i t e r a t u r e . R i c h a r d S i m o n , a F r e n c h C a t h o l i c in t h e s e v e n t e e n t h c e n t u r y , is often c r e d i t e d w i t h b e i n g t h e " f o r e r u n n e r " of t h e discipline o f i n t r o d u c t i o n ( 1 6 7 8 , Critical History of the Old Testament; t h r e e v o l u m e s o n t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t , 1689-93). In this d i s c i p l i n e t h e Bible is t r e a t e d as a n c i e n t l i t e r a t u r e w i t h a historical s e t t i n g . T o u n d e r s t a n d a w r i t i n g is t o u n d e r s t a n d its s i t u a t i o n in t i m e a n d space, t h e book's setting-in-life. A n i n t r o d u c t i o n raises all t h e q u e s t i o n s necessary t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e b o o k . In o n e int r o d u c t i o n , M i c h a e l i s asks t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s : W h a t t y p e of l i t e r a t u r e is it? W h e r e is it c i t e d elsewhere? To w h o m is it w r i t t e n ? W h a t was its place in t h e c o m m u n i t y ? W h e n was it w r i t t e n a n d in w h a t language? W h a t q u e s t i o n s are t h e r e a b o u t t h e G r e e k translation? W h o w r o t e it? W h a t a b o u t t h e literary t e c h n i q u e ? Is it c a n o n i -

Ki N \ : ri: HAGEN

23

cal? W h a t is its c o n t e n t ? In this I i n c - u p t h e r e are t e n q u e s t i o n s raised before t h e q u e s t i o n of c o n t e n t , b e c a u s e t h e message is l i n k e d t o its historical p l a c e . The d i s c i p l i n e o f i n t r o d u c t i o n p r e s u p p o s e s t h e relativity o f each b o o k . E a c h b o o k is u n i q u e u n t o itself a n d d e m a n d s a t h o r o u g h , o b jective (i.e., critical) s t u d y in o r d e r t o u n d e r s t a n d it. L a t e r in t h e eighteenth century, J o h n E i c h h o r n developed further the h u m a n i s t rationalist i n t r o d u c t i o n ( t h r e e v o l u m e s o n t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t , 1 7 8 0 8 3 ) . T h e O l d Testament m u s t be s t u d i e d like a n y o t h e r l i t e r a t u r e , free f r o m all a u t h o r i t i e s , d o g m a , a n d t r a d i t i o n . The discipline o f biblical t h e o l o g y followed closely o n t h e discip l i n e of biblical i n t r o d u c t i o n . The d i s c i p l i n e o f biblical theology, seen b y s o m e as t h e c r o w n o f biblical s c h o l a r s h i p , c o m e s o u t of t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t a n d t h e critical m e t h o d o l o g i e s w e have b e e n d e t a i l i n g . M o r e p a r t i c u l a r l y , G o t t h o l d Lessing's Education of Mankind ( 1 7 8 0 ) c o n s t r u c t e d a view o f t h e Bible w h i c h p a r o c h i a l i / x d it as p r e p a r a t o r y t o t h e m a t u r a t i o n o f t h e h u m a n race. The O l d T e s t a m e n t c a m e at t h e stage of t h e c h i l d h o o d of t h e race, w h i c h was m o t i v a t e d by t e m p o r a l r e w a r d s a n d p u n i s h m e n t s (law). 'The N e w T e s t a m e n t fits i n t o t h e a d o l e s c e n c e o f t h e race, w h e r e o n e is w i l l i n g t o p u t u p w i t h t e m p o r a r y h a r d s h i p s w i t h t h e p r o m i s e o f g r e a t e r (spiritual) rew a r d s later ( r e s u r r e c t i o n ) . A n d finally t h e race m a t u r e d i n t o a d u l t h o o d by t h e t i m e of t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t , w h e r e o n e lives in t h e h e r e a n d n o w g u i d e d b y reason a l o n e . In effect, t h e n , t h e Bible is p u t in its t i m e a n d p l a c e . Later in t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y t h e c o n c e r n was t o s e p a r a t e b i b lical t h e o l o g y from d o g m a t i c t h e o l o g y ( 1 7 5 8 , The Advantage of Biblical 'Theology over Scholasticism; 1 7 8 7 , 'The Difference between Biblical Theology and Dogmatic Theology). D o g m a t i c theology, perh a p s c o n n e c t e d t o p h i l o s o p h y , c o u l d have p e r m a n e n c e , w h i l e b i b l i cal t h e o l o g y is c o n n e c t e d t o its history. Late e i g h t e e n t h - c e n t u r y r o m a n t i c i s m , w i t h its e m p h a s i s o n e m p a t h y , a i d e d t h e d i s c i p l i n e of biblical theology. S o m e t h i n g like today's nostalgia, o n e c o u l d e m o t i o n a l l y i m m e r s e oneself i n t o t h e s p i r i t o f a past g e n e r a t i o n . Biblical t h e o l o g y is t h e t h e o l o g y o f a b o o k . If a b o o k has a h u m a n s i t u a tion—authorship, time, audience, language, purpose, content, m e t h o d — t h e n it also h a s a p a r t i c u l a r theology. As t h e r e are v a r i o u s b o o k s w i t h v a r i o u s historical s i t u a t i o n s , so t h e r e are various b o o k s w i t h v a r i o u s t h e o l o g i e s . As a result o f this e i g h t e e n t h - c e n t u r y develo p m e n t , t h e r e is n o s u c h t h i n g as biblical t h e o l o g y in t h e singular, o n l y biblical t h e o l o g i e s in t h e p l u r a l .

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN THE C H U R C H

24

R a t i o n a l i s m , c o n n e c t e d w i t h D e i s m , led to t h e rise of biblical i n t r o d u c t i o n s a n d t h e o l o g i e s , as well as w i t h a d v a n c e s in textual criticism, all a p a r t o f t h e d e v e l o p i n g historical-critical m e t h o d . 4 . Textual criticism. Textual criticism as a p p l i e d t o t h e Bible c o n cerns t h e analysis o f c o d i c e s , v a r i a n t r e a d i n g s , earliest m a n u s c r i p t e v i d e n c e , w i t h b o t h t h e o r y a n d p r a c t i c e . E r a s m u s ' s text o f t h e G r e e k N e w T e s t a m e n t , t h e first p u b l i s h e d in 1 5 1 6 , as m e n t i o n e d earlier, r e m a i n e d t h e "critical" e d i t i o n {textus receptus) u n t i l well i n t o t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y . A l t h o u g h t h e C o m p l u t e n s i a n Polyglot relied o n earlier m a n u s c r i p t e v i d e n c e , a n d was actually p r i n t e d earlier {New Testament, 1 5 1 4 ) t h o u g h m a d e p u b l i c in 1 5 2 2 , a n d is n o w r e g a r d e d as better, it was E r a s m u s ' s text, t h r o u g h s u b s e q u e n t e d i t i o n s , t h a t was "received by all" {textus receptus) a n d s e e m e d t o have an over t h r e e h u n d r e d year r i g h t t o be. R o b e r t S t e p h a n u s ' s text (Paris, 1 5 5 0 ) , w h i c h followed E r a s m u s ( 1 5 3 5 e d i t i o n ) , b e c a m e t h e textus receptus for B r i t a i n . The e d i t i o n of t h e p r i n t i n g firm, Elzevir ( L e i d e n , 1 6 3 3 ) , w h i c h followed S t e p h a n u s , b e c a m e t h e textus receptus for t h e C o n t i n e n t . R i c h a r d S i m o n , later in t h e s e v e n t e e n t h c e n t u r y , e n g a g e d in a critical i n v e s t i g a t i o n i n t o textual v a r i a n t s . In 1 7 3 4 J o h a n n Bengel ( T u b i n g e n ) issued a critical text, n o t exactly t h e textus receptus, a n d is r e g a r d e d as i m p o r t a n t for m o d e r n scientific textual criticism b e cause o f his p r i n c i p l e s (e.g., t h e m o r e difficult r e a d i n g is preferred) a n d theories of m a n u s c r i p t families (groupings of manuscripts). J o h a n n Wettstein's Greek N e w Testament ( 1 7 5 1 - 5 2 , Amsterdam) contained m a n y i m p o r t a n t (new) variants. J o h a n n Griesbach (text, 1 7 7 4 - 7 5 ) agreed w i t h Bengel o n t h e g r o u p i n g of m a n u s c r i p t families. His theories have lived o n in textual criticism (e.g., a reading m u s t have an ancient witness, the shorter as well as t h e m o r e difficult is preferred). 10

A n d so o n w e n t t h e r e c e p t i o n o f t h e textus receptus u n t i l 1 8 3 1 , w h e n Karl L a c h m a n n set it aside a n d p u b l i s h e d a text b a s e d entirely o n a n c i e n t m a n u s c r i p t s . In 1 8 8 1 , W e s t c o t t a n d H o r t p u b l i s h e d The New 'Testament in the Original Greek, w h i c h has b e c o m e in effect a n e w textus receptus. Textual criticism, w i t h t h e t h o u s a n d s a n d t h o u s a n d s o f m a n u scripts a n d t h e tens of t h o u s a n d s of v a r i a n t r e a d i n g s , w a s c o m p l i c a t e d n o t o n l y b y t h e d i s c i p l i n e itself b u t also b y t h e t r a d i t i o n ( C h u r c h ) t h a t has received t h e biblical text. Critical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e text d e v e l o p e d earlier u n d e r t h e aegis of r a t i o n a l i s m . C r i t i c a l r e n d e r i n g o f t h e t e x t itself was s l o w e r t o d e v e l o p n o t o n l y b e c a u s e x

Stephanus's 1551 N e w Testament introduced verse divisions still in use today.

Ki N \ : ri: HAGEN

25

E r a s m u s ' s text was b a s e d o n late e v i d e n c e b u t also b e c a u s e it has s e l d o m b e e n r e g a r d e d as p u r e l y a scientific task. 5. Historical c o n s c i o u s n e s s . Historical consciousness is t h e d a w n i n g o f p e r s p e c t i v e o n t h e past a n d p r e s e n t , o n d i s t a n c e a n d differe n c e . W h a t d e v e l o p e d in H u m a n i s m , a sense of a n t i q u i t y ' s d i s t a n c e from t h e p r e s e n t , i n c l u d i n g S c r i p t u r e , c o n t i n u e d t o d e v e l o p in t h e early m o d e r n p e r i o d w i t h all t h e critical m e t h o d o l o g i e s . H i s t o r i c a l c o n s c i o u s n e s s is p a r t a n d parcel o f w h a t w e h a v e b e e n discussing. The p r o b l e m o f h e r m e n e u t i c s as t h e p r o b l e m o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d l a n g u a g e is b r o u g h t i n t o t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y b y F r i e d r i c h S c h l e i e r m a c h e r a n d b e y o n d o u r s c o p e . H e r m e n e u t i c s as t h e p r o b l e m o f e x p r e s s i o n , i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , a n d t r a n s l a t i o n is b r o u g h t i n t o focus in t h e early m o d e r n p e r i o d w i t h t h e rise o f t h e historicalcritical m e t h o d . Key in this d e v e l o p m e n t is t h e s e p a r a t i o n b e t w e e n text a n d reader, n a m e l y , t h e c o n s c i o u s n e s s o f t h e s e p a r a t i o n . O n e w a y o f d e s c r i b i n g this d e v e l o p m e n t is t o use t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n a n d e x t e r n a l i z a t i o n u s e d in t h e s o c i o l o g y of k n o w l e d g e . In t h e m e d i e v a l - e a r l y R e f o r m a t i o n p e r i o d , as o u r a r g u m e n t has g o n e , t h e reader i n t e r n a l i z e d S c r i p t u r e , m o r n i n g , n o o n , a n d night. W i t h H u m a n i s m — p r i n t i n g , editing, translating, introd u c i n g — d e v e l o p e d t h e e x t e r n a l i z a t i o n o f t h e Bible as an a n c i e n t text. The c o n c e r n of m e t h o d o l o g y is t o find t h e way(s) o f b r i d g i n g t h e g a p b e t w e e n t e x t a n d i n t e r p r e t e r . O n c e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n (with h i s t o r i cal c o n s c i o u s n e s s ) b e c o m e s t h e focus of biblical study, t h e n t h e O r t h o d o x n e e d e d t o set u p a s y s t e m , w i t h logical c o h e r e n c e , t o m a k e t h e L u t h e r a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h e c o r r e c t o n e vis-a-vis t h e R o m a n a n d t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n s . T h e e m a n c i p a t o r from O r t h o d o x d o g m a t i s m is always d e s c r i b e d as reason ( a n d o n t o r a t i o n a l i s m ) . B u t O r t h o d o x y u s e d p h i l o s o p h y , a n d P i e t i s m c o n t r i b u t e d a n o t h e r crucial e l e m e n t in t h e e m a n c i p a t i o n — t h e subjective e x p e r i e n c e of t h e i n d i v i d u a l . So this p e r s p e c t i v e suggests t h a t o r t h o d o x p h i l o s o p h y p l u s pietist i n d i v i d u a l i s m h e l p e d create t h e a t m o s p h e r e for r a t i o n a l i s m , w h e r e t h e externalization process is a d v a n c e d . The Bible is t o b e treated as a n y o t h e r a n c i e n t d o c u m e n t , in n e e d o f historical i n t r o d u c t i o n a n d l i n g u i s t i c - l i t e r a r y analysis. The d i s t a n c e a n d task is e n o r m o u s . Biblical t h e o l o g y b e l o n g s t o t h e a n c i e n t w o r l d . D o g m a t i c t h e o l ogy, c o n s c i o u s o f its m e t h o d o l o g y a n d d i s t a n c e from S c r i p t u r e , is p a r t o f t h e C h u r c h ' s t r a d i t i o n , also past. If t h e r e is t o be a b r i d g e b e t w e e n biblical t h e o l o g y a n d c o n t e m p o r a r y t h i n k i n g , it is t h e task of h e r m e n e u t i c s (translation, i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , u n d e r s t a n d i n g ) t o b r i d g e t h e g u l f — a n d o n to t h e p r o b l e m s of t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y .

26

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN THE C H U R C H

It is w i t h historical c o n s c i o u s n e s s t h a t p r o b l e m s are p e r c e i v e d t h a t w e r e n o t b e f o r e — m e t h o d , exegesis, critical text, i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , a n d h e r m e n e u t i c s — a l l w i t h t h e positive use o f reason. T h e rise o f t h e historical-critical m e t h o d itself is a historical p h e n o m e n o n . Its p o s t u r e t o d a y is t h a t it is p u r e l y objective a n d scientific. It d i d n o t b e g i n t h a t w a y n o r d e v e l o p u n t o u c h e d b y h u m a n historical e l e m e n t s . P r a c t i t i o n e r s of t h e historical-critical m e t h o d m a y w a n t t o use t h e m e t h o d o n itself a n d see it in its historical s e t t i n g , w h i c h this essay has t r i e d t o set o u t w i t h p u r e objectivity. T h e usual s u r v e y o f t h e historical-critical m e t h o d is d e s c r i b e d w i t h " a d v a n c e " l a n g u a g e , n o t totally a b s e n t from t h e foregoing. As o n e a u t h o r p u t it, g o i n g t h r o u g h t h e c e n t u r i e s , "It finally w o n out!" W h a t d i d it w i n , o u t s i d e o f c o n trol o f a c a d e m i c biblical studies? D i d it w i n a n y n e w o r b e t t e r o r clearer u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e text t h a t was u n a v a i l a b l e to St. A u g u s t ine, T h o m a s , L u t h e r , o r C a l v i n ?

Ki N \ : ri: HAGEN

27

RECOMMENDED

READINGS

A l d r i d g c , J o h n W. The Hermeneutic of Erasmus. R i c h m o n d : J o h n K n o x , 1 9 6 6 . Basic level; c o n c e n t r a t e s o n t h e p h i l o s o p h y o f C h r i s t , e r u d i t i o n , a n d philology. Cambridge History of the Bible, 3 v o l u m e s . C a m b r i d g e : U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1 9 6 3 - 7 0 . Reference v o l u m e s by specialists t h a t cover t h e early p e r i o d (I), m e d i e v a l (II), a n d m o d e r n (III). C h a u , W a i - S h i n g . The Letter and the Spirit: a History of Interpretation from Origen to Luther. N e w York: Peter L a n g , 1 9 9 5 . A s u r v e y o f historical a p p r o a c h e s t o S c r i p t u r e , f o c u s i n g o n law a n d G o s p e l in t h e P a u l i n e epistles. G r a n t , R o b e r t . A Short History of the Interpretation of the Bible. N e w York: M a c m i l l a n , 1 9 6 3 ; 2 n d e d i t i o n w i t h D a v i d Tracy, P h i l a d e l p h i a : Fortress, 1 9 8 4 . Basic i n t r o d u c t i o n t h a t starts w i t h t h e Bible itself. H a g e n , K e n n e t h . Luther's Approach to Scripture as seen in his "Commentaries" on Galatians. ' T u b i n g e n : J. C . B. M o h r (Paul S i e b e c k ) , 1 9 9 3 . Places L u t h e r in t h e c o n t e x t of t h e w h o l e h i s t o r y o f biblical interpretation. H a h n , H e r b e r t F. The Old Testament in Modern Research. P h i l a d e l p h i a : Fortress Press, 1 9 5 4 / 6 6 . Extensive s u r v e y of O l d T e s t a m e n t criticism; strong on the m o d e r n s . K o o i m a n , W i l l e n J. Luther and the Bible. Translated b y J o h n S c h m i d t . P h i l a d e l p h i a : M u h l e n b e r g , 1 9 6 1 . I n t r o d u c t o r y level a i m e d a t a b r o a d coverage of m a n y facets. K u m m e l , W e r n e r G . The New Testament: The History of the Investigation of its Problems. 'Translated by S. M . G i l m o u r a n d H . C . K e e . N a s h v i l l e : A b i n g d o n , 1 9 7 2 . E x t e n s i v e survey o f N e w Testam e n t criticism; several p r i m a r y s o u r c e s . E m p h a s i s o n t h e m o d e r n s . de L u b a c , H e n r i . The Sources of Revelation. Translated by L. O ' N e i l l . N e w York: H e r d e r a n d H e r d e r , 1 9 6 8 . A n a b r i d g m e n t o f his m o n u -

28

T H E HISTORY OI SCRIPTURE IN THE C H U R C H

m e n t a l w o r k in F r e n c h o n p a t r i s t i c a n d m e d i e v a l exegesis; e m p h a sis o n t h e spiritual u n d e r s t a n d i n g of S c r i p t u r e . Smalley, Beryl. 'The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages. O x f o r d : Blackwell, 1 9 5 2 . S c h o l a r l y a n d r e a d a b l e h i s t o r y from t h e Fathers o f t h e C h u r c h t o t h e friars o f t h e t h i r t e e n t h c e n t u r y . S t u h l m a c h e r , Peter. Historical Criticism and Theological Interpretation of Scripture. T r a n s l a t e d b y R. Harrisville. P h i l a d e l p h i a : F o r tress, 1 9 7 7 . S h o r t o v e r v i e w from t h e a n c i e n t s t o t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y ; r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h e c u r r e n t d i l e m m a .

CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE by

DANIEL J. HARRINGTON, S.J.

I. T H E BIBLE IN CATHOLIC LIEE TODAY

A

friend w h o by u p b r i n g i n g a n d c o n v i c t i o n is a n evangelical

Christian m a d e a c o m m e n t s o m e t i m e ago that startled m e . H e said t h a t w h e n e v e r h e h a s h a d o c c a s i o n to a t t e n d R o m a n

C a t h o l i c liturgies recently, h e has b e e n s t r u c k b y h o w " P r o t e s t a n t " t h e y s o u n d e d . H e m e a n t t h a t as a c o m p l i m e n t , a n d h e w e n t o n t o

e x p l a i n t h a t w h a t m a k e s h i m feel a t h o m e in C a t h o l i c w o r s h i p t o d a y is t h e massive dose o f biblical l a n g u a g e — n o t o n l y in t h e r e a d i n g s t a k e n directly from t h e Scriptures b u t also in t h e s o n g s a n d t h e prayers. H i s c o m m e n t led m e , as a p r o f e s s i o n a l biblical s c h o l a r w h o also p r e a c h e s a n d presides regularly at w o r s h i p services in t h e C a t h o l i c C h u r c h , t o reflect o n a d r a m a t i c d e v e l o p m e n t in m y o w n c h u r c h . T h e f o u n d a t i o n s for t h i s d e v e l o p m e n t w e r e a l r e a d y laid in t h e 1 9 4 0 s a n d 1 9 5 0 s b y P o p e Pius XII's encyclical o n biblical s t u d i e s {Divino

Afflante

Spiritu)

a n d his revision o f t h e liturgical services

for H o l y W e e k . B u t t h e decisive t u r n i n g p o i n t was t h e S e c o n d Vatican C o u n c i l . B u i l d i n g u p o n t h e directives a p p r o v e d by P o p e Pius X I I a n d w o r k e d o u t in m o r e detail b y biblical s c h o l a r s a n d t h e o l o g i a n s , t h e C o u n c i l F a t h e r s affirmed in a p o w e r f u l w a y t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e Bible in t h e life o f t h e C a t h o l i c C h u r c h . Before w e l o o k at t h e key d o c u m e n t r e l a t i n g t o t h e Bible f r o m V a t i c a n II, it m a y b e useful t o c o n t r a s t t h e place o f t h e Bible in t h e C a t h o l i c C h u r c h before t h e C o u n c i l a n d its place today. T h e t h r e e areas for c o n t r a s t are liturgy, t h e o l o g i c a l e d u c a t i o n , a n d e c u m e n i s m . P r i o r t o Vatican II, S c r i p t u r e was c e r t a i n l y an integral p a r t of t h e M a s s . A s e l e c t i o n f r o m a N e w T e s t a m e n t epistle o r t h e O l d Testa-

30

CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

m c n t , as well as a passage from o n e o f t h e G o s p e l s , was read at every e u c h a r i s t i c service. T h e priest r e a d these biblical selections in L a t i n , w h i l e s o m e o f t h e laity followed a l o n g w i t h t h e h e l p o f an E n g l i s h t r a n s l a t i o n . O n S u n d a y s , t h e passages were also read a l o u d in E n glish, e i t h e r as an a c c o m p a n i m e n t t o t h e L a t i n o r after it. T h e r a n g e of S c r i p t u r e r e a d i n g s was n a r r o w a n d repetitive. M a t t h e w ' s G o s p e l w i t h its e m p h a s e s o n c h u r c h o r d e r a n d P e t r i n e a u t h o r i t y was especially p r o m i n e n t . Vatican II r e m o v e d t h e l a n g u a g e b a r r i e r b y d e c r e e i n g t h a t t h e sacred liturgy c o u l d n o w be c e l e b r a t e d in m o d e r n l a n g u a g e s as well as L a t i n . T h e Bible is n o w read in English (or w h a t e v e r l a n g u a g e is m o s t a p p r o p r i a t e ) , a n d t h e r e a d i n g s have a very p r o m i n e n t place. S h o r t l y after t h e c o u n c i l , t h e liturgists w o r k e d o u t a n e w a n d m o r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e cycle o f S c r i p t u r e r e a d i n g s . F o r S u n d a y s t h e r e is a t h r e e - y e a r cycle, each S u n d a y h a v i n g passages f r o m t h e O l d Testam e n t , t h e b o o k o f P s a l m s , t h e N e w Testament Epistles, a n d t h e G o s pels. For w e e k d a y s t h e r e is a t w o - y e a r cycle c o n s i s t i n g o f a passage from t h e O l d 'Testament or t h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t Epistles, a p s a l m , a n d t h e G o s p e l s . This d e v e l o p m e n t m e a n s t h a t in t h e i r w o r s h i p services, C a t h o l i c s t o d a y are e x p o s e d t o large a m o u n t s o f S c r i p t u r e in t h e l a n g u a g e t h a t t h e y m o s t readily u n d e r s t a n d . P r i o r t o V a t i c a n II, t h e Bible was n o t o r d i n a r i l y read directly as p a r t o f t h e p r i m a r y - o r s e c o n d a r y - s c h o o l p r o g r a m in religious e d u c a t i o n . In C a t h o l i c colleges, t h e s t u d y of t h e Bible was s u p p l e m e n t e d by c o n s e r v a t i v e t e x t b o o k s t h a t g u i d e d s t u d e n t s a l o n g a p p r o v e d p a t h s . In t h e t r a i n i n g of C a t h o l i c priests, biblical courses were usually p l a c e d at t h e e n d o f t h e p r o g r a m , after t h e p r o p e r d o g m a t i c t h e o l o g i c a l f o u n d a t i o n s w e r e a l r e a d y in place. Professors of S c r i p t u r e in p r e Vatican II s e m i n a r i e s w e r e generally very c a u t i o u s n o t t o stray i n t o t h e realms o f d o g m a t i c t h e o l o g y o r m o r a l t h e o l o g y . They focused o n philological a n d historical m a t t e r s . W h a t t h e y t a u g h t were officially classified as " m i n o r c o u r s e s . " Vatican II m a d e clear t h a t biblical s t u d i e s are central in C a t h o l i c theology. In t h e m a n y years t h a t I h a v e t a u g h t in C a t h o l i c s e m i n a r i e s since 1 9 7 1 , 1 h a v e n e v e r h e a r d a s t u d e n t q u e s t i o n o r c o m p l a i n a b o u t t h e n e e d for S c r i p t u r e courses. These courses are t a k e n a t t h e b e g i n n i n g , m i d d l e , a n d e n d o f s e m i n a r y p r o g r a m s . The s t u d e n t s w o r k h a r d a t t h e s e courses a n d enjoy t h e m . 'The professors d i a l o g u e w i t h a n d even t e a c h courses w i t h t h e i r colleagues in s y s t e m a t i c a n d m o r a l theology. A t every level in t h e C a t h o l i c e d u c a t i o n a l s y s t e m — c o l l e g e s , h i g h schools, g r a m m a r schools, religious e d u c a t i o n c l a s s e s — t h e Bible is r e a d a n d discussed. C a t h o l i c s are b e c o m i n g increasingly familiar

D A N I K I . J . HARRINGTON, S.J.

31

w i t h t h e l a n g u a g e a n d t h e m e s of S c r i p t u r e a n d t h u s b e t t e r able t o appreciate their language of worship. M y P r o t e s t a n t friend's c o m m e n t a b o u t t h e m o r e " b i b l i c a l " c h a r acter o f C a t h o l i c life raises t h e issue a b o u t t h e e c u m e n i c a l signific a n c e of t h e Bible for C a t h o l i c s . P r i o r t o V a t i c a n II, m a n y C a t h o l i c s l o o k e d u p o n t h e Bible as a " P r o t e s t a n t " b o o k . Those C a t h o l i c s w h o r e a d it w e r e careful t o follow officially a p p r o v e d h a n d b o o k s a n d c o m m e n t a r i e s a n d loyally d e f e n d e d t h e n e e d for s u c h a u t h o r i t a t i v e g u i d a n c e f r o m t h e t e a c h i n g offices o f t h e c h u r c h . ' T h o s e w h o q u o t e d t h e Bible e x c e p t t o affirm t r a d i t i o n a l t h e o l o g i c a l p o s i t i o n s w e r e c o n s i d e r e d p e c u l i a r or e v e n d a n g e r o u s . V a t i c a n II has e n c o u r a g e d C a t h o l i c s t o c l a i m t h e Bible as t h e i r o w n b o o k . O n local, n a t i o n a l , a n d i n t e r n a t i o n a l levels, t h e Bible has e m e r g e d as t h e c o m m o n g r o u n d for C a t h o l i c s a n d P r o t e s t a n t s . B o t h g r o u p s h a v e b e c o m e sensitive t o t h e i r s h a r e d h e r i t a g e in S c r i p t u r e a n d h a v e r e c o g n i z e d t h a t m a n y o f t h e i r s h a r p e s t differences

come

f r o m p o s t b i b l i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t s . These differences are real a n d t o u c h o n g e n u i n e issues b u t m u s t n o t o b s c u r e w h a t C a t h o l i c s a n d P r o t e s t a n t s h o l d in c o m m o n . W i t h i n C a t h o l i c circles t h e r e is g r e a t e n t h u s i a s m for c o u r s e s a n d lectures o n t h e Bible. B o o k s a b o u t t h e Bible a n d t r a n s l a t i o n s of t h e Bible are b i g sellers. A w h o l e i n d u s t r y o f lectures o n t h e Bible t h a t are available in t h e f o r m of cassettes h a s s p r u n g u p . All t h e s e develo p m e n t s s h o w t h a t C a t h o l i c s n o w l o o k u p o n t h e Bible as " t h e i r " b o o k t o o , see it as a m e a n s t o w a r d C h r i s t i a n u n i t y , a n d w a n t to k n o w as m u c h a b o u t it as t h e y c a n . A very c o n c r e t e i n s t a n c e o f t h e e c u m e n i c a l possibility a n d p o w e r of t h e Bible is t h e fact t h a t w h e n t h e n e w C a t h o l i c l e c t i o n a r y was p r e p a r e d in r e s p o n s e to Vatican II, it was a d o p t e d (with m i n o r m o d i fications)

b y several m a i n l i n e P r o t e s t a n t c h u r c h e s — L u t h e r a n , E p i s -

c o p a l , M e t h o d i s t , a n d P r e s b y t e r i a n . 'This m e a n s t h a t o n a l m o s t every S u n d a y t h e s a m e set of S c r i p t u r e r e a d i n g s is read a n d p r e a c h e d u p o n in all t h e s e C h r i s t i a n c o m m u n i t i e s . The historical a n d t h e o l o g i c a l differences b e t w e e n t h e s e g r o u p s r e m a i n , b u t at least t h e y are d e a l i n g w i t h t h e s a m e basic texts o f t h e Bible. I I . VATICAN I I ' S CONSTITUTION O N DIVINE REVELATION

The m o s t c o m p a c t a n d a u t h o r i t a t i v e s t a t e m e n t o n t h e t h e o r y a n d t h e o l o g y o f t h e Bible's place in t h e C a t h o l i c C h u r c h is V a t i c a n II's C o n s t i t u t i o n o n D i v i n e R e v e l a t i o n ( k n o w n also b y its L a t i n title Dei Verbum. All q u o t a t i o n s are from A . F l a n n e r y , ed., Vatican

Council

32

CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

//: The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, 7 5 0 - 6 5 ) . That d o c u m e n t was issued in N o v e m b e r 1 9 6 5 , b u t t h e w a y h a d b e e n p r e p a r e d for it by P o p e Pius XII's 1 9 4 3 encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu a n d by several o t h e r official s t a t e m e n t s t h r o u g h t h e years. The conciliar d o c u m e n t s u m m a r i z e d t h e i m p o r t a n t p o i n t s in t h o s e earlier s t a t e m e n t s a n d p u s h e d C a t h o l i c biblical s t u d y o u t o f s o m e o l d r u t s a n d onto better paths. The first c h a p t e r o f t h e six c h a p t e r s in t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n deals w i t h " d i v i n e revelation itself." Before t h e C o u n c i l a n d even in t h e early stages of t h e d r a f t i n g o f t h e d o c u m e n t , t h e r e h a d b e e n a lively debate a b o u t the nature of divine revelation, with m a n y theologians (in t h e w a k e o f Vatican I's insistence o n t h e c o n t e n t of faith) stressi n g t h e p r i m a c y of t h e t h e o l o g i c a l p r o p o s i t i o n s revealed in t h e Bible. W i t h o u t d e n y i n g t h e c o n t e n t o f revelation a n d its p r o p o s i t i o n a l d i m e n s i o n , t h e final draft of t h e C o u n c i l ' s C o n s t i t u t i o n stresses t h e p r i m a c y o f G o d ' s revelation of h i m s e l f as a p e r s o n in r e l a t i o n s h i p to his p e o p l e . The p e r s o n a l d i m e n s i o n o f revelation m a k e s possible t h e p r o p o s i t i o n a l d i m e n s i o n : " B y d i v i n e revelation G o d w i s h e d t o m a n i fest a n d c o m m u n i c a t e b o t h h i m s e l f a n d t h e eternal decrees of his will c o n c e r n i n g t h e salvation of m a n k i n d " ( § 6 ) . B o t h d i m e n s i o n s are clearly affirmed, b u t t h e p e r s o n a l aspect o f revelation is given first place. T h e s e c o n d c h a p t e r , w h i c h c o n c e r n s t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n of d i v i n e revelation, takes u p t h e p r o b l e m of t h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n S c r i p t u r e a n d t r a d i t i o n . R e j e c t i n g t h e idea t h a t S c r i p t u r e a n d t r a d i t i o n c o n s t i t u t e t w o d i s t i n c t sources o f r e v e l a t i o n , t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n insisted t h a t t h e y flow from "the s a m e d i v i n e w e l l - s p r i n g " ( § 9 ) . It w e n t o n t o state t h a t "sacred t r a d i t i o n a n d sacred S c r i p t u r e m a k e u p a single sacred d e p o s i t o f t h e W o r d o f G o d , w h i c h is e n t r u s t e d t o t h e c h u r c h " ( § 1 0 ) . This e m p h a s i s o n t h e u n i t y o f S c r i p t u r e a n d t r a d i t i o n does n o t s i m ply a b s o r b t h e latter i n t o t h e f o r m e r : " T h e c h u r c h d o e s n o t d r a w h e r c e r t a i n t y a b o u t all revealed t r u t h s from t h e h o l y S c r i p t u r e s a l o n e " ( § 9 ) . A n d t h e task of "giving an a u t h e n t i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n " of b o t h S c r i p t u r e a n d t r a d i t i o n is e n t r u s t e d t o " t h e living t e a c h i n g office of t h e c h u r c h a l o n e " ( § 1 0 ) , t h o u g h it is clearly s t a t e d t h a t t h e ecclesiastical m a g i s t e r i u m is " n o t s u p e r i o r t o t h e W o r d o f G o d , b u t is its servant" (§10). Thus the Constitution presents Scripture and tradit i o n as o n e s o u r c e o f d i v i n e revelation w h i l e affirming t h e existence of t r a d i t i o n a n d m a k i n g t h e ecclesiastical m a g i s t e r i u m (the P o p e a n d t h e b i s h o p s ) t h e u l t i m a t e arbiter. The t h i r d c h a p t e r is d e v o t e d t o d i v i n e i n s p i r a t i o n a n d its i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . The fact of i n s p i r a t i o n is s t a t e d at t h e o u t s e t : " T h e d i -

D A N I K I . J . HARRINGTON, S.J.

33

vincly revealed realities, w h i c h are c o n t a i n e d a n d p r e s e n t e d in t h e text o f sacred S c r i p t u r e , h a v e b e e n w r i t t e n d o w n u n d e r t h e inspirat i o n o f t h e H o l y Spirit" ( § 1 1 ) . The s a m e s e c t i o n p r e s e n t s a d o c t r i n e of t h e i n e r r a n c y of S c r i p t u r e : " T h e b o o k s of S c r i p t u r e , firmly, faithfully, a n d w i t h o u t error, t e a c h t h a t t r u t h w h i c h G o d , for t h e sake of o u r salvation, w i s h e d t o see c o n f i d e d t o t h e sacred S c r i p t u r e s . " This m a y s o u n d like a s t a t e m e n t of l i m i t e d i n e r r a n c y ; t h a t is, o n l y w h a t p e r t a i n s t o o u r s a l v a t i o n , a n d n o t historical o r scientific m a t t e r s , in t h e Bible is free from error. B u t , in fact, t h e t h e o l o g i a n s w h o w r o t e this d o c u m e n t a n d t h e C o u n c i l F a t h e r s w h o v o t e d t h e i r a p p r o v a l d e l i b e r a t e l y s o u g h t t o a v o i d a p p r o v i n g e i t h e r c o m p l e t e i n e r r a n c y or l i m i t e d i n e r r a n c y as t h e church's t e a c h i n g . Since t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n w a s n o t a t h e o l o g i c a l treatise a n d since t h e C o u n c i l Fathers d i d n o t w a n t t o a b s o l u t i z e o r give official s a n c t i o n to o n e t h e o l o g i a n o r o n e s c h o o l , t h e r e is n o a t t e m p t t o e x p l a i n in detail how i n s p i r a t i o n a n d i n e r r a n c y f u n c t i o n o r w h a t s c o p e these t e r m s m i g h t have. It was m o r e a m a t t e r o f reaffirming v e n e r a b l e theological t e a c h i n g s w i t h o u t specifying w h i c h i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e m is best. T h e s e c t i o n o n t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f S c r i p t u r e ( § 1 2 ) is t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t p a r t for biblical s c h o l a r s . T a k i n g its c u e f r o m Divino Afflante Spiritu, t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n u r g e d biblical scholars a n d i n d e e d all C a t h o l i c s (1) t o p a y a t t e n t i o n t o t h e literary f o r m s in w h i c h d i v i n e revelation is expressed, (2) to l o o k t o t h e m e a n i n g t h a t t h e b i b lical a u t h o r i n t e n d e d in his o w n historical s i t u a t i o n a n d c u l t u r e , a n d (3) to c o n s i d e r t h e c u s t o m a r y a n d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c p a t t e r n s of p e r c e p t i o n , s p e e c h , a n d n a r r a t i v e p r e v a i l i n g at t h a t t i m e . Since this p a r t o f t h e d o c u m e n t s u m m a r i z e s so well t h e tasks u n d e r t a k e n by C a t h o l i c biblical s c h o l a r s , it deserves t o be q u o t e d in full: In determining the intention of the sacred writers, attention must be paid, inter alia, to "literary forms, for the fact is that ttuth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts," and in other forms of literary expression. Hence the exegete must look for that meaning which the sacred writer, in a determined situation and given the circumstances of his time and cultute, intended to express and did in fact express, through the m e d i u m of a contemporary literary form. Rightly to understand what the sacred author wanted to affirm in his work, due attention must be paid both to the customary and characteristic patterns of perception, speech and narrative which prevailed at the age of the sacred writer, and to the conventions which the people of his time followed in their dealings with one another.

34

CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

The f r e e d o m o f research expressed in this p a r a g r a p h is s o m e w h a t t e m p e r e d b y a r e m i n d e r t h a t biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is "ultim a t e l y s u b j e c t t o t h e j u d g m e n t of t h e c h u r c h w h i c h exercises t h e divinely c o n f e r r e d c o m m i s s i o n a n d m i n i s t r y of w a t c h i n g over a n d i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e w o r d of G o d " ( § 1 2 ) . T h e c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e d o c t r i n e of t h e d i v i n e i n s p i r a t i o n of S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e task of i n t e r p r e t i n g S c r i p t u r e in its historical c o n t e x t is d r a w n by u s i n g t h e form u l a "the w o r d s o f G o d , expressed in t h e w o r d s of m e n " ( § 1 3 ) . In t h e f o u r t h c h a p t e r , t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n d e f e n d s t h e divinely ins p i r e d c h a r a c t e r a n d l a s t i n g value o f t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t ( § 1 4 ) . It does so b y a l l u d i n g t o s o m e of t h e ways in w h i c h t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t has b e e n v i e w e d in C h r i s t i a n t h e o l o g y : p r e p a r a t i o n for a n d p r o p h ecy of t h e c o m i n g o f C h r i s t , a s o u r c e for u n d e r s t a n d i n g G o d a n d his dealings w i t h his p e o p l e , a n d a s t o r e h o u s e o f s u b l i m e t e a c h i n g o n G o d a n d o f s o u n d w i s d o m o n h u m a n life ( § 1 5 ) . It also m e n t i o n s t h a t t h e b o o k s o f t h e O l d Testament c o n t a i n " m a t t e r s i m p e r f e c t a n d p r o v i s i o n a l , " w i t h o u t specifying w h a t these are (cultic rules, calls for v e n g e a n c e , ethically q u e s t i o n a b l e actions?) a n d w h a t C a t h o l i c s are t o d o w i t h t h e m . A g a i n it is i m p o r t a n t t o r e m e m b e r t h a t t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n is n o t a t h e o l o g y t e x t b o o k b u t r a t h e r a s t a t e m e n t o f d i r e c t i o n s agreed u p o n a n d a p p r o v e d b y t h e C a t h o l i c b i s h o p s of t h e w o r l d . 'The c h a p t e r o n t h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t strikes a c a u t i o u s b a l a n c e b e t w e e n r e c o g n i t i o n of t h e c o m p l e x process b y w h i c h t h e four G o s pels c a m e i n t o b e i n g a n d a f f i r m a t i o n of t h e basic t r u t h o f t h e i r p o r traits o f Jesus: H o l y M o t h e r C h u r c h has firmly and with absolute constancy maintained and continues to maintain, that the four Gospels just named, whose historicity she unhesitatingly affirms, faithfully hand on what Jesus, the Son of God, while he lived among men, really did and taught for their eternal salvation, until the day when he was taken up (see Acts 1:1-2). For, after the ascension of the Lord, the apostles handed on to their hearers what he had said and done, but with that fuller understanding which they, instructed by the glorious events of Christ and enlightened by the Spirit of truth, now enjoyed. T h e sacred authors, in writing the four Gospels, selected certain of the many elements which had been handed on, either orally or already in written form, others they synthesi?.ed or explained with an eye to the situation of the churches, the while sustaining the form of preaching, but always in such a fashion that they have told us the honest truth about Jesus. W h e t h e r they relied on their own memory and recollections or on the testimony of those who "from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word," their purpose in writing was that we might know

D A N I K I . J . HARRINGTON, S.J.

35

the "truth" concerning the things of which we have been informed (see Luke 1:2-4). This s t a t e m e n t in s e c t i o n 19 leaves r o o m a n d i n d e e d e n c o u r a g e s biblical scholars t o d o research o n t h e literary f o r m s , s o u r c e s , a n d final e d i t i n g o f t h e G o s p e l s . B u t it d e m a n d s t h a t t h e y n o t lose s i g h t of t h e historical p e r s o n o f Jesus of N a z a r e t h — t h e o n e t o w h o m t h e G o s p e l s bear w i t n e s s . The P a u l i n e epistles a n d t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t w r i t i n g s are said t o f o r m u l a t e m o r e precisely t h e a u t h e n t i c t e a c h i n g of C h r i s t , p r e a c h t h e s a v i n g p o w e r of his d i v i n e w o r k , a n d foretell its glorious c o n s u m m a t i o n (§20). T h e sixth c h a p t e r , w h i c h deals w i t h sacred S c r i p t u r e in t h e life of t h e C h u r c h , p r o v i d e s t h e d i r e c t i o n s t h a t h a v e b r o u g h t a b o u t t h e biblical r e n e w a l o f r e c e n t years. T h e o p e n i n g s t a t e m e n t in s e c t i o n 21 stresses t h e link b e t w e e n t h e S c r i p t u r e s a n d t h e e u c h a r i s t i e b o d y o f C h r i s t . Far from s e p a r a t i n g t h e t w o , t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n s p e a k s o f " t h e o n e t a b l e o f t h e w o r d of G o d a n d t h e b o d y of C h r i s t . " It insists t h a t "all t h e p r e a c h i n g o f t h e c h u r c h . . . s h o u l d b e n o u r i s h e d a n d r u l e d by sacred S c r i p t u r e " ( § 2 1 ) , t h a t access t o S c r i p t u r e " o u g h t t o be w i d e o p e n to t h e C h r i s t i a n faithful" ( § 2 2 ) , a n d t h a t s t u d y of t h e "sacred p a g e s h o u l d b e t h e very soul of sacred t h e o l o g y " ( § 2 4 ) . T h u s t h e p o s t - V a t i c a n II d e v e l o p m e n t s w i t h respect t o t h e Bible's place in t h e life of t h e C h u r c h are best seen as faithful responses to t h e s p i r i t of t h e C o u n c i l , n o t as d e v i a t i o n s from it or as a n e w m o v e m e n t a p a r t from it. If a n y d o u b t r e m a i n e d a b o u t t h e central role o f biblical s t u d ies in t h e s e m i n a r y c u r r i c u l u m a n d t h e p i e t y of t h e C h u r c h ' s m i n i s ters, t h e n e x t - t o - l a s t s e c t i o n of t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n speaks very clearly: "All clerics, p a r t i c u l a r l y priests o f C h r i s t a n d o t h e r s w h o , as d e a c o n s or catechists, are officially e n g a g e d in t h e m i n i s t r y of t h e w o r d , s h o u l d i m m e r s e t h e m s e l v e s in t h e S c r i p t u r e s by c o n s t a n t sacred r e a d i n g a n d diligent study" (§25). Vatican IPs C o n s t i t u t i o n o n D i v i n e R e v e l a t i o n has given i m p o r t a n t a n d fruitful d i r e c t i o n s t o t h e biblical m o v e m e n t in t h e C a t h o l i c C h u r c h . The m o s t significant d i r e c t i o n s are s u m m a r i z e d by t h e foll o w i n g list: t h e e m p h a s i s o n G o d ' s p e r s o n a l revelation as t h e basis for w h a t e v e r p r o p o s i t i o n a l revelation m a y b e c o n t a i n e d in S c r i p t u r e , t h e insistence t h a t S c r i p t u r e a n d t r a d i t i o n flow from " t h e s a m e d i v i n e w e l l - s p r i n g , " t h e f o r t h r i g h t a c c e p t a n c e o f t h e historical a n d literary s t u d y of t h e S c r i p t u r e s , t h e respect for t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t , t h e c a u tious b a l a n c e b e t w e e n t h e c o m p l e x i t y of o u r G o s p e l s a n d their essential t r u t h a b o u t Jesus, a n d t h e e n c o u r a g e m e n t for Bible r e a d i n g a n d s t u d y in every p h a s e o f t h e C h u r c h ' s life.

CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

36

There is m u c h o n this list w i t h w h i c h evangelical a n d L u t h e r a n C h r i s t i a n s c a n agree, t h o u g h t h e i r e m p h a s e s m a y b e slightly differe n t . B u t s o m e evangelicals m i g h t t a k e e x c e p t i o n t o w h a t m i g h t a p p e a r t o b e a d o c t r i n e o f l i m i t e d i n e r r a n c y expressed in t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n : " t h a t t r u t h w h i c h G o d , for t h e sake o f o u r s a l v a t i o n , w i s h e d t o see c o n f i d e d t o t h e s a c r e d S c r i p t u r e s " ( § 1 1 ) . B o t h evangelicals a n d L u t h e r a n s will n o d o u b t t a k e s t r o n g e x c e p t i o n t o t h e idea o f t h e ecclesiastical m a g i s t e r i u m as t h e final a r b i t e r of biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ( § § 1 0 , 12). 'They m a y also b e s k e p t i c a l a b o u t h o w well C a t h o lics can m a n a g e t o k e e p t o g e t h e r S c r i p t u r e a n d t r a d i t i o n o n t h e o n e h a n d , a n d w o r d a n d s a c r a m e n t o n t h e o t h e r h a n d . B u t h o w e v e r valid t h e i r o b j e c t i o n s m a y b e , P r o t e s t a n t s w h o t a k e t h e t r o u b l e t o read V a t i c a n l i s C o n s t i t u t i o n o n D i v i n e R e v e l a t i o n c a n n o t fail t o recognize t h e " b i b l i c a l " c h a r a c t e r o f m u c h of t h e l a n g u a g e u s e d in t h e d o c u m e n t a n d t h e m a n y d i r e c t references t o S c r i p t u r e t h r o u g h o u t it. The C o u n c i l F a t h e r s o p t e d for t h e l a n g u a g e o f t h e Bible r a t h e r t h a n for t h e l a n g u a g e o f s c h o l a s t i c theology. III. T H E WAYS OE CURRENT BIBLICAL SCHOIARSHIP

U p t o t h i s p o i n t w e h a v e c o n s i d e r e d t h e practical i m p a c t o f b i b lical s t u d y o n C h u r c h life a n d a n official s t a t e m e n t a b o u t t h e place of t h e Bible in t h e C h u r c h . N o w is t h e t i m e t o focus o n t h e m e t h o d s used b y C a t h o l i c biblical scholars; t h a t is, w h a t t h o s e m e n a n d w o m e n w h o d e v o t e t h e m s e l v e s t o research o n t h e S c r i p t u r e s d o w h e n t h e y c o n f r o n t t h e biblical t e x t s . " C a t h o l i c biblical research" is o b v i o u s l y research d o n e b y C a t h o l i c scholars. U n t i l recently, m o s t biblical professionals w e r e also o r d a i n e d priests w h o t a u g h t in s e m i n a r i e s o r o n o n e of t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l b i b l i cal faculties in R o m e (Pontifical Biblical I n s t i t u t e ) o r J e r u s a l e m (Lcole B i b l i q u e , S t u d i u m B i b l i c u m F r a n c i s c a n u m ) . S i n c e V a t i c a n II, a n i n c r e a s i n g n u m b e r of C a t h o l i c l a y m e n a n d l a y w o m e n (as well as w o m e n religious) h a v e o b t a i n e d d o c t o r a l degrees in biblical s t u d i e s a n d are n o w t e a c h i n g at C a t h o l i c ( a n d o t h e r ) u n i v e r s i t i e s a n d p u b l i s h i n g b o o k s a n d articles. These lay professors are n o t as i m m e d i ately u n d e r ecclesiastical a u t h o r i t y as priests are, b u t u p t o t h i s p o i n t n o g r e a t conflict h a s arisen r e g a r d i n g this m a t t e r . C a t h o l i c biblical s c h o l a r s b r i n g t o t h e text of S c r i p t u r e t h e set of c o n c e r n s a n d p r o c e d u r e s t h a t h a s b e e n d e v e l o p e d over t h e c e n t u r i e s a m o n g s e r i o u s s t u d e n t s of t h e Bible. In m o d e r n t i m e s this set of c o n c e r n s is often called t h e historical-critical m e t h o d . This a p p r o a c h takes as its p r i m a r y t a s k t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e biblical text in its

D A N I K I . J . HARRINGTON, S.J.

37

o w n t i m e a n d o n its o w n t e r m s . It applies t h e p o w e r s of t h e m i n d to t h e text in o r d e r t o u n d e r s t a n d it b e t t e r a n d t o a p p r e c i a t e it for itself. T h e m a j o r c o n c e r n s o f C a t h o l i c biblical s c h o l a r s h i p can b e p r e s e n t e d under ten headings. A. Literary C r i t i c i s m The Bible is basically an a n t h o l o g y of w r i t i n g s t h a t b e a r w i t n e s s to G o d ' s dealings w i t h his p e o p l e . In t h e O l d Testament t h e r e are narratives, law c o d e s , p r o p h e t i c oracles, p s a l m s , a n d w i s d o m b o o k s . In t h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t t h e r e are stories of Jesus (the four G o s p e l s ) a n d t h e early c h u r c h (Acts) as well as epistles b y Paul a n d o t h e r figures a n d an a p o c a l y p s e ( R e v e l a t i o n ) . W i t h i n these large literary types, t h e r e are also s m a l l e r f o r m s s u c h as sayings, p a r a b l e s , a n d e x h o r t a tions. The Bible is m o s t obviously a collection of pieces of literature, a n d so t h e obvious starting p o i n t for any biblical scholar is literary criticism. L i t e r a r y criticism m e a n s a p p l y i n g t o S c r i p t u r e t h e q u e s t i o n s a n d c o n c e r n s u s e d in t h e s t u d y of a n y l i t e r a t u r e . The a i m b e h i n d t h e literary-critical a p p r o a c h t o t h e Bible is n o t t o r e d u c e it t o t h e level of o t h e r b o o k s , b u t r a t h e r t o h e l p us a p p r e c i a t e t h e ways in w h i c h t h e biblical writers c o m m u n i c a t e d t o t h e i r original a u d i e n c e s a n d still c o m m u n i c a t e t o us today. The first c o n c e r n o f literary criticism is t h e w o r d s a n d images of t h e t e x t s — t h e raw m a t e r i a l s o u t of w h i c h a n y w r i t t e n c o m m u n i c a t i o n is c o n s t r u c t e d . W h a t d o e s this o r t h a t w o r d m e a n ? Is t h e w o r d b e i n g u s e d literally or m e t a p h o r i c a l l y ? W h a t s y m b o l i s m is p r e s e n t in t h e passage? T h e n in a n a r r a t i v e text w e w a n t t o k n o w h o w t h e w o r d s are p u t t o g e t h e r to f o r m a s t o r y a n d h o w t h e c h a r a c t e r s in t h e s t o r y are related t o o n e a n o t h e r . In a d i s c o u r s e or an epistle t h e literary critic focuses o n t h e p r o g r e s s o f t h o u g h t — h o w t h e w o r d s a n d i m ages are p u t t o g e t h e r t o f o r m a n a r g u m e n t o r m o v e p e o p l e t o g o o d a c t i o n . O b v i o u s l y t h e literary critic p r o c e e d s from i n d i v i d u a l w o r d s a n d i m a g e s t o t h e c o h e r e n c e o f t h e w h o l e passage a n d t h e n b a c k to t h e w o r d s a n d images in light o f t h e w h o l e . The c i r c u l a r i t y i n h e r e n t in t h e s t u d y o f l i t e r a t u r e suggests t h a t a t e x t is always c a p a b l e o f r e c e i v i n g b e t t e r a n d m o r e a d e q u a t e r e a d i n g s a t v a r i o u s levels o f understanding. L i t e r a r y critics are also c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e literary f o r m o f a text. The larger f o r m s , or g e n r e s , in t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t are familiar: G o s p e l s , Acts, Epistles, a n d A p o c a l y p s e . B u t w i t h i n these larger forms t h e i n d i v i d u a l p a r t s use vehicles like p a r a b l e s o r p r o v e r b s or blessings a n d curses. The n o w familiar s a y i n g t h a t " t h e m e d i u m is t h e m e s -

38

CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

sage" m a k e s t h e p o i n t t h a t t h e c h o i c e o f a specific literary m o d e o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n already b e g i n s t h e process o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n . T h e c h o i c e of t h e literary form of t h e p e r s o n a l r e s u m e in t h e U n i t e d States t o d a y c o m m u n i c a t e s t h a t t h e p e r s o n is s e e k i n g a j o b . If t h e j o b a p p l i cant were t o present the personnel manager with a p o e m or a video, t h e o n l y h o p e for g e t t i n g t h e j o b w o u l d be t h e d i s p l a y o f i n g e n u i t y . T h e r e f o r e , t h o s e w h o s t u d y S c r i p t u r e from t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o f literary criticism m u s t a t t e n d t o t h e literary f o r m s used in t h e text a n d h o w the literary forms c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e expression of t h e message or c o n t e n t . In o n e sense, literary criticism is t h e m o s t basic a p p r o a c h t o t h e biblical t e x t a n d all t h e o t h e r m e t h o d s are really specialized o p e r a t i o n s w i t h i n this general m e t h o d . B u t literary criticism in t h e n a r r o w sense c o n c e n t r a t e s o n t h e a e s t h e t i c a p p r e c i a t i o n of t h e biblical t e x t as l i t e r a t u r e . C a t h o l i c biblical scholars generally have g o o d literary e d u c a t i o n s a n d are n a t u r a l l y a t t r a c t e d t o relating d e v e l o p m e n t s in literary criticism a n d literary t h e o r y t o S c r i p t u r e . The t o p i c of m a n y r e c e n t d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n s a n d j o u r n a l articles b y C a t h o l i c s has b e e n t h e literary o u t l i n e o r s t r u c t u r e of a p a r t i c u l a r passage o r b i b l i cal b o o k . The d y n a m i c s a n d rhetorical t e c h n i q u e s of narratives a n d t h e a r g u m e n t s t r u c t u r e of t h e epistles have also b e e n i n v e s t i g a t e d b y C a t h o l i c ( a n d o t h e r ) scholars. In p a r t s o f E u r o p e a n d to s o m e e x t e n t in t h e U n i t e d States, C a t h o l i c scholars h a v e tried t o use s t r u c t u r a l i s t analysis t o u n d e r s t a n d biblical t e x t s — t h a t is, t o g o b e n e a t h t h e s u r face s t r u c t u r e s o f t h e text a n d arrive at t h e d e e p s t r u c t u r e s of m i n d a n d reality. O t h e r s use t h e a p p r o a c h o f d e c o n s t r u c t i o n , w h i c h l o o k s o n t h e text as m a i n l y an o c c a s i o n for creative i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . The literary-critical w o r k o f C a t h o l i c biblical scholars is p a r t o f a larger m o v e m e n t in biblical s c h o l a r s h i p t h a t seeks a b e t t e r a p p r e c i a t i o n o f t h e Bible as story. T h i s m o v e m e n t has also g e n e r a t e d a b r o a d e r t h e o l o g i c a l a p p r o a c h — t h e so-called n a r r a t i v e t h e o l o g y or t h e o l o g y o f story. T h e chief p r o b l e m c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e literary a p p r o a c h is its t e n d e n c y t o r e d u c e e v e r y t h i n g t o textual aesthetics. Since t h e m e t h o d s for i n t e r p r e t i n g fiction or p o e t r y w o r k well o n various s e c t i o n s o f S c r i p t u r e , s o m e c o n c l u d e t h a t e v e r y t h i n g in S c r i p t u r e is fiction or p o e t r y a n d t h u s w i t h o u t historical significance. S u c h a c o n c l u s i o n clearly goes b e y o n d t h e b o u n d a r i e s of t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o n D i v i n e R e v e l a t i o n a n d o f C a t h o l i c t h e o l o g y in g e n e r a l . B u t it also raises an i n t e r e s t i n g q u e s t i o n : If o n e a d m i t s t h e O l d ' I e s t a m e n t b o o k s of J o n a h , T o b i t , Esther, a n d J u d i t h are literary fictions ( a n d m o s t C a t h o l i c biblical scholars t a k e this a p p r o a c h — a c o r r e c t a p p r o a c h , in m y o p i n i o n ) , w h e r e does o n e d r a w t h e line b e t w e e n literary fiction a n d b i b -

D A N I K I . J . HARRINGTON, S.J.

39

lical history? This is a s e r i o u s p r o b l e m , b u t it s h o u l d n o t o b s c u r e or d e t r a c t f r o m t h e very positive results t h a t e m e r g e from b r i n g i n g t o t h e text of S c r i p t u r e t h e c o n c e r n s a n d m e t h o d s o f literary criticism a n d a p p r e c i a t i n g t h e Bible as l i t e r a t u r e . B. Textual Criticism S i n c e w o r d s are t h e materials o u t of w h i c h literary texts are c o n s t r u c t e d , it is essential t o be as sure as possible a b o u t t h e a c c u r a c y o f t h e w o r d s in t h e texts. The biblical texts have b e e n h a n d e d o n t h r o u g h t h e c e n t u r i e s a n d t h u s have b e e n s u b j e c t t o d i s t o r t i o n a n d h u m a n error. T h e goal o f t e x t u a l criticism is t o g e t b a c k as close as possible t o w h a t t h e biblical writers set d o w n in t h e i r original m a n u s c r i p t s . R e a c h i n g t h a t goal is n o t easy. Textual critics m u s t w o r k w i t h t h e H e b r e w , A r a m a i c , a n d G r e e k m a n u s c r i p t s of t h e Bible. They m u s t also m a k e use o f t h e earliest t r a n s l a t i o n s i n t o A r a m a i c , G r e e k , L a t i n , Syriac, E t h i o p i c , A r m e n i a n , etc. P r i o r t o t h e d i s c o v e r y o f biblical m a n u s c r i p t s a m o n g t h e D e a d Sea Scrolls at Q u m r a n , t h e earliest available H e b r e w m a n u s c r i p t s o f t h e O l d Testament were from t h e t e n t h a n d e l e v e n t h c e n t u r i e s A . D . 'The m o s t i m p o r t a n t m a n u s c r i p t s of t h e N e w Testament c a m e from t h e f o u r t h a n d fifth c e n t u r i e s A . D . , t h o u g h t h e r e are s o m e f r a g m e n t a r y m a n u s c r i p t s ( t h e so-called p a pyri) from t h e s e c o n d a n d t h i r d c e n t u r i e s . So textual critics m u s t learn m a n y a n c i e n t l a n g u a g e s a n d p r e p a r e t h e m s e l v e s to w o r k w i t h m a n u s c r i p t s far r e m o v e d in t i m e from t h e o r i g i n a l s . H a v i n g a s s e m b l e d t h e m a n u s c r i p t e v i d e n c e , textual critics c o m p a r e t h e texts to u n c o v e r textual v a r i a n t s . These variants are t h e n w e i g h e d in o r d e r t o d e t e r m i n e o n rational g r o u n d s w h a t was t h e r e a d i n g of t h e original text a n d w h a t c r e p t i n t o t h e t r a d i t i o n as t h e result o f c o n s c i o u s o r u n c o n s c i o u s a l t e r a t i o n . In m a k i n g s u c h d e c i s i o n s , textual critics m u s t take i n t o a c c o u n t t h e q u a n t i t y a n d qualify of t h e m a n u s c r i p t e v i d e n c e (external evidence) as well as t h e c o n t e x t , l a n g u a g e , a n d style o f t h e d o c u m e n t ( i n t e r n a l e v i d e n c e ) . 'The task o f t h e textual critic of t h e Bible is l i g h t e n e d s o m e w h a t b y t h e general reliability o f t h e process o f t r a n s m i s s i o n a n d t h e a b u n d a n c e o f m a n u script evidence. A large a m o u n t of t h a t m a n u s c r i p t e v i d e n c e is p r e s e r v e d at t h e Vatican L i b r a r y in R o m e a n d in o t h e r libraries a n d m o n a s t e r i e s o f t h e C a t h o l i c C h u r c h . These m a n u s c r i p t s are accessible t o all scholars e i t h e r for d i r e c t i n s p e c t i o n or by p h o t o g r a p h i c r e p r o d u c t i o n s . I n d e e d t h e i n s t i t u t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e s of t h e C a t h o l i c C h u r c h t h r o u g h o u t t h e ages have m a d e possible t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n o f t h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t

40

CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

text from g e n e r a t i o n t o g e n e r a t i o n , a n d o u r k n o w l e d g e of t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t t r a d i t i o n w o u l d be far p o o r e r w i t h o u t t h e s e i n s t i t u t i o n s . M o d e r n C a t h o l i c biblical scholars are well p r e p a r e d for textual criticism t h r o u g h a g o o d g r o u n d i n g in a n c i e n t l a n g u a g e s . N e v e r t h e less, few are p r o m i n e n t in this d i s c i p l i n e . A n i m p o r t a n t e x c e p t i o n was C a r l o M . M a r t i n i , a n Italian J e s u i t w h o was a m e m b e r of an international a n d interconfessional panel charged with preparing a n e w s t a n d a r d e d i t i o n o f t h e G r e e k N e w Testament. B u t he is n o w t h e C a r d i n a l A r c h b i s h o p o f M i l a n , a n d his p a s t o r a l d u t i e s leave h i m n o t i m e for textual c r i t i c i s m . In a similar p r o j e c t for p r e p a r i n g a n e w e d i t i o n o f t h e H e b r e w O l d Testament, t h e D o m i n i c a n s c h o l a r D o m i n i q u e B a r t h é l é m y is a m a j o r figure. Several A m e r i c a n Jesuits have w o r k e d w i t h F r a n k M . C r o s s o f H a r v a r d in his r é é v a l u a t i o n o f O l d T e s t a m e n t textual criticism in l i g h t o f t h e Q u m r a n discoveries. The q u e s t i o n r e m a i n s : W h y are so few C a t h o l i c scholars p r o m i n e n t in this discipline? The reason is clearly n o t lack o f e d u c a t i o n , especially in t h e l a n g u a g e s . O n e c a n o n l y s p e c u l a t e o n this m a t t e r , b u t p e r h a p s o n e factor is a lack of t h e P r o t e s t a n t passion for d i s c o v e r i n g t h e exact w o r d i n g of t h e original m a n u s c r i p t as it c a m e from t h e h a n d o f t h e biblical writer. M a n y evangelicals l i m i t biblical ins p i r a t i o n t o t h e so-called a u t o g r a p h s ( t h e m a n u s c r i p t s w r i t t e n by t h e biblical w r i t e r ) , a n d so t h e r e is a p o w e r f u l religious m o t i v e t o g e t b a c k t o t h e original texts. The C a t h o l i c d o c t r i n e of i n s p i r a t i o n is n o t so n a r r o w a n d places m o r e t r u s t in t h e process o f t r a n s m i s s i o n . 'Thus t h e d i v e r g e n t u n d e r s t a n d i n g s o f biblical i n s p i r a t i o n m a y well b e a factor, h e r e , t h o u g h t h e r e are surely o t h e r factors: t h e p a s t o r a l d e m a n d s m a d e o n C a t h o l i c clerics, t h e so-called " t w e n t i e t h - c e n t u r y i n t e r l u d e " in N e w ' T e s t a m e n t textual criticism, a n d t h e intrinsically difficult a n d often t e d i o u s n a t u r e o f t h e research. C . T h e W o r l d o f t h e Bible 'The h e a v y e m p h a s i s o n biblical l a n g u a g e s in t h e t r a i n i n g o f C a t h o l i c scholars finds expression m o s t d r a m a t i c a l l y in research o n t h e w o r l d o f t h e Bible, especially o n t h e texts discovered in t h e M i d d l e East d u r i n g t h e p a s t t w o h u n d r e d years. These texts h a v e a l l o w e d us t o l e a p b a c k over t h e c e n t u r i e s a n d t o see w h a t t e r m s , ideas, a n d c u s t o m s were in t h e b a c k g r o u n d of t h e biblical w r i t i n g s . For t h e O l d Testament, t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t extrabiblical texts are in S e m i t i c l a n g u a g e s s u c h as A k k a d i a n , A r a m a i c , a n d U g a r i t i c , as well as S u m e r i a n a n d E g y p t i a n . These texts h a v e i l l u m i n e d o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e c r e a t i o n stories in G e n e s i s , t h e historical s e t t i n g

D A N I K I . J . HARRINGTON, S.J.

41

of t h e biblical narratives from earliest t i m e s t o t h e postexilic p e r i o d , a n d t h e l a n g u a g e a n d literary f o r m o f t h e P s a l m s . For t h e N e w Testam e n t , t h e m o s t significant a n c i e n t texts are in H e b r e w , A r a m a i c , G r e e k , L a t i n , a n d C o p t i c ( N a g H a m m a d i d o c u m e n t s ) . These texts have s h e d light o n t h e eschatological c o n s c i o u s n e s s o f t h e early C h r i s tians a n d t h e e m e r g e n c e o f t h e early c h u r c h , t h e c u l t u r a l milieu(s) in w h i c h C h r i s t i a n i t y d e v e l o p e d , a n d s o m e of t h e p r o b l e m s a n d t h r e a t s t h a t it faced. M a n y o f these discoveries are so r e c e n t t h a t t h e y have still n o t b e e n a s s i m i l a t e d i n t o biblical c o m m e n t a r i e s . W h e n t h e y are, it is crucial for t h e exegete t o m a k e clear w h a t e l e m e n t s t h e biblical a n d extrabiblical texts share a n d w h e r e t h e y differ. It is also i m p o r t a n t t o specify t h e historical r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n t h e t w o texts. O b v i o u s l y t h e best parallels are t h o s e b e t w e e n texts from r o u g h l y t h e s a m e t i m e a n d p l a c e , for t h e n we have a b e t t e r c h a n c e of k n o w i n g w h a t was "in t h e air." The Biblical I n s t i t u t e Press o f t h e Pontifical Biblical I n s t i t u t e in R o m e has p l a y e d a l e a d i n g role in t h e e d i t i n g a n d p u b l i s h i n g of text u a l m a t e r i a l f r o m t h e a n c i e n t N e a r East. M a n y d i s s e r t a t i o n s b y C a t h o l i c scholars in R o m e a n d elsewhere h a v e b e e n e x p l o r a t i o n s of biblical texts in light o f extrabiblical m a t e r i a l . The professors at t h e D o m i n i c a n Ecole B i b l i q u e in J e r u s a l e m have b e e n active p a r t i c i p a n t s in p u b l i s h i n g t h e Q u m r a n scrolls a n d in t h e archaeological excavat i o n s at Q u m r a n a n d e l s e w h e r e . The faculty a n d s t u d e n t s o f t h e S t u d i u m B i b l i c u m F r a n c i s c a n u m have m a d e m a n y c o n t r i b u t i o n s in t h e a r c h a e o l o g y o f early C h r i s t i a n i t y a n d in e x p l o r i n g t h e p h e n o m e n o n of J e w i s h C h r i s t i a n i t y . C a t h o l i c scholars have b e e n p r o m i n e n t in e d i t i n g t h e texts from U g a r i t , Q u m r a n , a n d N a g H a m m a d i . 'The fact t h a t m a n y o l d e r C a t h o l i c scholars w e r e well versed in t h e G r e e k a n d L a t i n classics has m e a n t t h a t t h e G r e c o - R o m a n s e t t i n g of early C h r i s t i a n i t y has r e m a i n e d a lively field o f research. The great interest of C a t h o l i c scholars in t h e w o r l d o f t h e Bible a n d in texts from a n t i q u i t y in p a r t i c u l a r m a y s t e m in p a r t f r o m t h e p e r e n n i a l C a t h o l i c fascination w i t h t h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n religion a n d c u l t u r e . C a t h o l i c t h e o l o g y e m p h a s i z e s t h e idea t h a t G o d expresses h i m s e l f in t h e m i d s t o f c r e a t e d realities a n d h u m a n c u l t u r e . If this is so in t h e p r e s e n t , it m u s t also h a v e b e e n so in a n t i q u i t y w h e n t h e b o o k s of t h e Bible w e r e b e i n g c o m p o s e d . Therefore, t h e m o r e t h a t s c h o l a r s h i p can reveal a b o u t t h e realities a n d c u l t u r e o f t h e biblical world, the richer a n d deeper will o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e Bible be. M y h u n c h is t h a t this theological emphasis underlies m u c h of the scientific research d o n e by C a t h o l i c scholars o n the w o r l d of the Bible.

42

CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

D . Word Study The serious t r a i n i n g in biblical l a n g u a g e s t h a t is d e m a n d e d of C a t h o l i c scholars also s h o w s itself in their research o n t h e w o r d s a n d ideas in S c r i p t u r e . The a r c h a e o l o g i c a l discoveries of r e c e n t years have b r o u g h t forth m a n y a n c i e n t texts, a n d t h o s e texts have greatly illum i n e d o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e languages of t h e Bible ( H e b r e w , A r a m a i c , a n d G r e e k ) . In O l d T e s t a m e n t research, t h e U g a r i t i c texts from R a s - S h a m r a have r e v o l u t i o n i z e d t h e s t u d y of H e b r e w p o e t r y , a n d t h e legal a n d m y t h i c texts in A k k a d i a n h a v e m a d e m o r e intelligible v a r i o u s c u s t o m s a n d t e r m s in t h e P e n t a t e u c h . N e w T e s t a m e n t scholars have l e a r n e d m u c h a b o u t t h e k i n d of G r e e k u s e d in Jesus' t i m e from the E g y p t i a n papyri a n d a b o u t t h e t e r m i n o l o g y a n d t h o u g h t of J e w i s h a p o c a l y p t i c i s m from t h e D e a d Sea Scrolls. The m o s t c o m m o n k i n d of w o r d s t u d y in t h e biblical field u s u ally b e g i n s w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r l y i m p o r t a n t o r p r o b l e m a t i c passage. In o r d e r t o g e t a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a difficult w o r d o r idea in t h e target passage, t h e s c h o l a r m a k e s a s u r v e y o f t h e i n s t a n c e s of t h e t e r m in o t h e r d o c u m e n t s . If a N e w Testament w o r d is u n d e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n , t h e n o n e looks at t h e G r e e k w r i t i n g s o f t h e classical a u t h o r s , t h e G r e e k t r a n s l a t i o n o f t h e O l d 'Testament ( S e p t u a g i n t ) , a n d t h e J e w i s h a u t h o r s P h i l o a n d J o s e p h u s . N a t u r a l l y o n e also searches o u t t h e H e b r e w O l d Testament, t h e D e a d Sea Scrolls, a n d o t h e r relevant d o c u m e n t s . In each o c c u r r e n c e of t h e w o r d , t h e focus of research is w h a t it m e a n s in its c o n t e x t in t h e h o p e o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g b e t t e r t h e target passage. In a d d i t i o n t o t h e extrabiblical e v i d e n c e , w o r d s t u d y m u s t also t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t parallels w i t h i n t h e Bible itself. In this s t e p an i m p o r t a n t c h a n g e has t a k e n place in C a t h o l i c biblical s c h o l a r s h i p in r e c e n t years. I n t h e p a s t t h e r e w a s a t e n d e n c y t o j o i n t o g e t h e r all t h e biblical instances of a t e r m or idea as if t h e Bible w e r e m a d e o u t o f w h o l e c l o t h . The t h e o l o g i c a l a s s u m p t i o n was t h a t t h e Bible is a u n i t y a n d t h a t its l a n g u a g e is a special t y p e of H e b r e w or G r e e k ( " H o l y G h o s t G r e e k " ) . N o w t h e m a j o r c o n c e r n a m o n g C a t h o l i c scholars is to let t h e d i s t i n c t accents w i t h i n t h e Bible be h e a r d . Their e m p h a s i s is o n p l u r a l i t y of views w i t h i n S c r i p t u r e a n d o n t h e p a r t i c u l a r c o n t r i b u t i o n s of t h e i n d i v i d u a l w r i t e r s . The p h r a s e "biblical t h e o l o g y " is p o p u l a r in C a t h o l i c circles, a n d a very c o m m o n w a y o f d o i n g biblical t h e o l o g y is t o trace t h e h i s t o r y of a w o r d or idea from earliest O l d Testament t i m e s , t h r o u g h i n t e r t e s t a m e n t a l J e w i s h w r i t i n g s a n d classic w o r k s , to t h e N e w 'Testam e n t . The a i m is to see b o t h c o n t i n u i t y a n d decisive shifts in m e a n -

DANTKI.J. HARRINGTON, S.J.

43

ing; t h e c o n c l u s i o n t o s u c h s t u d i e s usually involves a synthesis a n d an a s s e s s m e n t of challenges for t h e C h u r c h today. This k i n d o f s t u d y places detailed philological research o n individual biblical a n d extrabiblical texts in the broader f r a m e w o r k of t h e history of biblical ideas. Part of t h e p o p u l a r i t y of this a p p r o a c h t o biblical t h e o l o g y a m o n g C a t h o l i c scholars is d u e t o t h e C a t h o l i c c o n c e r n a n d f o n d n e s s for t r a d i t i o n . T h i s a p p r o a c h is really a c h a r t i n g o u t of t h e t r a d i t i o n o f a biblical w o r d o r idea. For a c h u r c h t h a t is i m m e r s i n g itself m o r e a n d m o r e in l a n g u a g e a n d ideas o f S c r i p t u r e , a n d t h a t is so eager t o h a n d o n t h e t r a d i t i o n o f faith, t h e c o n c e n t r a t i o n o n key c o n c e p t s a n d their d e v e l o p m e n t in biblical t i m e s a n d a g a i n s t t h e b a c k g r o u n d of t h e biblical w o r l d is a s o u n d a p p r o a c h a n d is s u r e t o p a y rich r e w a r d s . E. Source C r i t i c i s m T h e task o f d e t e c t i n g w h e r e a s o u r c e was u s e d in a biblical b o o k is called "source c r i t i c i s m . " S o m e t i m e s w e are t o l d explicitly b y t h e biblical a u t h o r t h a t h e was u s i n g a s o u r c e , a n d so t h e p r o c e d u r e is q u i t e s i m p l e . T h e m o r e difficult i n s t a n c e s are t h o s e in w h i c h t h e use of a s o u r c e is s u s p e c t e d b u t n e e d s t o be p r o v e d b y rational analysis. T h e i n t e r n a l criteria for d e t e r m i n i n g t h e p r e s e n c e o f a s o u r c e in t h e Bible (or in a n y o t h e r text) i n c l u d e t h e following: v o c a b u l a r y in a passage different from e v e r y t h i n g else in t h e b o o k , a shift in t o n e or literary style, an u n e x p e c t e d i n t e r r u p t i o n in t h e c o n t e x t a n d an a w k w a r d r e s u m p t i o n of it later, t h e p r e s e n c e of t h e s a m e s t o r y twice in slightly different f o r m s , a n d theological or ideological c o n t r a d i c t i o n s within the same book. T h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t areas of s o u r c e criticism in biblical research c o n c e r n t h e P e n t a t e u c h a n d t h e s y n o p t i c G o s p e l s . T h e classic fourd o c u m e n t h y p o t h e s i s used in e x p l a i n i n g t h e o r i g i n o f t h e first five b o o k s of t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t claims t h a t P e n t a t e u c h is t h e fusion of f o u r s o u r c e s : Yahwist (J), Elohist (E), Priestly (P), a n d D e u t e r o n o m i s t ( D ) . T h e t i m e s p a n from t h e earliest d o c u m e n t (J) t o t h e latest (P) is a b o u t four h u n d r e d years ( 9 5 0 B . C . t o 5 5 0 B . C . ) . The classic t w o source hypothesis of the synoptic Gospels maintains t h a t M a r k was t h e earliest G o s p e l (ca. A . D . 7 0 ) a n d t h a t M a t t h e w a n d L u k e (ca. A . D . 8 0 - 9 0 ) u s e d b o t h M a r k a n d a c o l l e c t i o n o f Jesus' sayings k n o w n a m o n g m o d e r n scholars as Q (ca. A . D . 5 0 ) . T h e s e h y p o t h e s e s were p o p u l a r i z e d in liberal P r o t e s t a n t circles in n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y G e r m a n y . T h e initial C a t h o l i c r e s p o n s e s were generally s u s p i c i o u s a n d n e g a t i v e . B u t as t h e a r g u m e n t s a n d their p r o p o n e n t s w e r e g r a d u a l l y s e p a r a t e d , t h e r e was i n c r e a s i n g a c c e p -

44

CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

t a n c c — t o t h e p o i n t t h a t b o t h of these h y p o t h e s e s are n o w p a r t of "scholarly o r t h o d o x y " a m o n g C a t h o l i c biblical scholars. In t h e b r o a d e r c o n t e x t of biblical s c h o l a r s h i p , b o t h s o u r c e - h y p o t h e s e s are u n d e r attack, a n d C a t h o l i c s c a n b e f o u n d o n t h e v a r i o u s sides of t h e d e b a t e . B u t t h e r e is s o m e i r o n y in t h e fact t h a t t h e m o d e r n s t r o n g h o l d of t h e classic t w o - s o u r c e h y p o t h e s i s o f t h e s y n o p t i c G o s p e l s is t h e C a t h o l i c U n i v e r s i t y of L o u v a i n in B e l g i u m . F. R e d a c t i o n C r i t i c i s m W h e r e it has b e e n possible t o isolate sources o n external or internal g r o u n d s , t h e w a y is cleared for r e d a c t i o n c r i t i c i s m — t h e exegetical m e t h o d t h a t focuses o n t h e p a r t i c u l a r e m p h a s e s o r views t h a t t h e biblical w r i t e r s have i m p o s e d o n t h e i r sources. Besides t h e literary task o f d e t e r m i n i n g t h e final w r i t e r o r redactor's d i s t i n c t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n s , r e d a c t i o n criticism also involves a historical task since t h e redactor's e m p h a s e s a n d views c a n s h e d light o n his s i t u a t i o n w i t h i n t h e early c h u r c h a n d o n t h e p r o b l e m s t h a t t h e r e d a c t o r a n d his c o m m u n i t y w e r e facing. It is possible t o a p p l y t h e t e c h n i q u e s of r e d a c t i o n criticism t o a n y p a r t o f S c r i p t u r e , b u t t h e m o s t fertile g r o u n d for r e d a c t i o n criticism has b e e n t h e s y n o p t i c G o s p e l s . The p i o n e e r s of t h e r e d a c t i o n critical a p p r o a c h t o G o s p e l s t u d y ( G u n t h e r B o r n k a m m , H a n s C o n / x l m a n n , W i l l i M a r x s e n ) w e r e G e r m a n P r o t e s t a n t scholars b u t their w o r k in t h e late 1940s a n d 1 9 5 0 s was t a k e n u p w i t h great e n t h u s i a s m b y C a t h o l i c scholars in t h e 1960s a n d 1 9 7 0 s . In o n e sense, t h e a p p r o a c h has b e e n "played o u t , " since practically every G o s p e l text has b e e n t h e object o f close r e d a c t i o n - c r i t i c a l analysis. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e c o n c e r n w i t h t h e final r e d a c t i o n of biblical b o o k s has b e c o m e so integral a p a r t of t h e exegetical task t h a t n o c o m m e n t a t o r can d i s r e g a r d it. As I have a l r e a d y o b s e r v e d , r e d a c t i o n criticism is p o p u l a r a m o n g C a t h o l i c biblical scholars. This is so in p a r t b e c a u s e C a t h o l i c s c h o l ars are p a r t o f t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l a n d i n t e r c o n f e s s i o n a l d i a l o g u e of biblical research today. B u t r e d a c t i o n c r i t i c i s m also has h a d a special attractiveness for C a t h o l i c s . T h e approach's u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e b i b lical w r i t e r s as t r a n s m i t t e r s a n d i n t e r p r e t e r s o f t r a d i t i o n strikes a res p o n s i v e c h o r d a m o n g t r a d i t i o n - c o n s c i o u s C a t h o l i c s . Its interest in early c h u r c h life a n d its view of t h e biblical a u t h o r s as w r i t i n g in a n d for p a r t i c u l a r c o m m u n i t i e s of faith parallel t h e p e r e n n i a l C a t h o l i c concerns with the C h u r c h .

D A N I K I . J . HARRINGTON, S.J.

45

G. Form C r i t i c i s m U n d e r t h e h e a d i n g o f literary criticism, t h e r e was s o m e d i s c u s s i o n a b o u t t h e literary f o r m s in w h i c h t h e biblical w r i t e r s expressed t h e m s e l v e s a n d t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h t h e c h o i c e o f a p a r t i c u l a r literary form a l r e a d y c o m m u n i c a t e s s o m e o f t h e writer's message. T h u s f o r m criticism is really an a s p e c t o f t h e general literary-critical task, a n d t h e first c o n c e r n o f t h e f o r m critic is t o d e t e r m i n e t h e literary f o r m of t h e b o o k ( n a r r a t i v e , letter, etc.) or of t h e passages w i t h i n a b o o k ( p r o v e r b , p a r a b l e , t h a n k s g i v i n g , etc.). B u t t h e r e is also a historical task in f o r m criticism just as t h e r e is in r e d a c t i o n c r i t i c i s m . T h e ass u m p t i o n is t h a t t h e p a r t i c u l a r literary f o r m can tell us s o m e t h i n g a b o u t t h e c o m m u n i t y in w h i c h t h e t r a d i t i o n was u s e d a n d a b o u t t h e p r o b l e m s t h a t t h e c o m m u n i t y faced. C a t h o l i c r e a c t i o n s t o f o r m criticism h a v e b e e n a m b i v a l e n t . N o o n e q u a r r e l s a b o u t t h e a t t e n t i o n p a i d t o literary f o r m s . I n d e e d t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h e literary f o r m s has b e e n s t r o n g l y e n c o u r a g e d since Divino Afflante Spiritu ( 1 9 4 3 ) a n d e n d o r s e d e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y in Vatican U s C o n s t i t u t i o n o n D i v i n e R e v e l a t i o n ( 1 9 6 5 ) . T h e a m bivalence involves t h e historical d i m e n s i o n . C a t h o l i c s are generally positive t o w a r d t h e effort to get b e h i n d t h e texts i n t o t h e life o f t h e c o m m u n i t y . In fact, t h e historical p r o g r a m o f f o r m criticism has s o m e t i m e s even b e e n u s e d apologetically to c o n f i r m t h e C a t h o l i c a p p r o a c h t o t h e Bible as t h e C h u r c h ' s b o o k . T h e C a t h o l i c p r o b l e m w i t h f o r m criticism arises from t h e feeli n g t h a t it is a p o o r historical t o o l . The a t t e m p t to c o n s t r u c t t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e early c h u r c h o n f o r m - c r i t i c a l g r o u n d s has never b e e n very successful. W h e r e it has b e e n tried, t h e r e has u s u a l l y b e e n a r a t h e r u n d i s c i p l i n e d m i x i n g of f o r m a n d c o n t e n t t o arrive at t e n d e n t i o u s ( M a r t i n Dibelius's p h r a s e "in t h e b e g i n n i n g was t h e s e r m o n " ) or skeptical c o n c l u s i o n s a b o u t t h e relation o f t h e t r a d i t i o n t o Jesus of N a z a r e t h ( R u d o l f B u l t m a n n ' s h i s t o r y o f t h e S y n o p t i c t r a d i t i o n ) . T h e t e n d e n c y of the form-critical p i o n e e r s to o v e r e m p h a s i z e t h e creativity of t h e c o m m u n i t y at t h e expense of historical f o u n d a tions w e n t b e y o n d the b o u n d a r i e s of C a t h o l i c theology a n d was sharply criticized. H . Historical C r i t i c i s m The task of r e l a t i n g t h e texts of S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e events b e h i n d t h e m is c a l l e d h i s t o r i c a l c r i t i c i s m . T h e t e r m " h i s t o r i c a l - c r i t i c a l m e t h o d " is generally t a k e n t o refer t o t h e w h o l e p r o j e c t o f i n t e r p r e t -

46

CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

i n g t h e biblical text in its historical s e t t i n g a n d o n its o w n t e r m s . B u t "historical criticism" is also u s e d in a m o r e n a r r o w sense t o describe t h e a t t e m p t to d e t e r m i n e w h a t really h a p p e n e d , for e x a m p l e , at Israel's escape from E g y p t o r o n Easter S u n d a y m o r n i n g . It was t h e h o p e of "scientific" h i s t o r i a n s in t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y t o peel a w a y t h e e n c r u s t a t i o n s o f t r a d i t i o n a n d arrive at t h e s o l i d c o r e o f g e n u i n e h i s tory. In liberal P r o t e s t a n t circles in G e r m a n y t h e r e s e e m s t o have b e e n an a s s u m p t i o n t h a t t h e g o o d n e s s o f Jesus h a d b e e n o b s c u r e d a n d d i s t o r t e d b y C h u r c h t r a d i t i o n ( i n c l u d i n g t h e c h u r c h of N e w Testament t i m e s ) . In his 1 8 9 8 essay o n historical a n d d o g m a t i c m e t h o d in t h e o l ogy, t h e G e r m a n P r o t e s t a n t t h e o l o g i a n E r n s t Troeltsch e n u n c i a t e d t h e t h r e e p r i n c i p l e s of historical criticism. The first w a s t h e p r i n c i p l e o f criticism o r methodological doubt. H i s t o r y o n l y achieves p r o b ability, a n d t h e religious t r a d i t i o n m u s t be s u b j e c t e d t o historical criticism. This first p r i n c i p l e presents few p r o b l e m s for C a t h o l i c t h e o logians; b u t t h e s e c o n d p r i n c i p l e d o e s . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e p r i n c i p l e o f anabgy, p r e s e n t experiences a n d o c c u r r e n c e s are t h e criteria o f p r o b ability in t h e past. That s o u n d s a c c e p t a b l e u n t i l o n e reflects t h a t since d e a d p e o p l e d o n o t rise at p r e s e n t , a n o t h e r e x p l a n a t i o n t h a n w h a t is in t h e G o s p e l s m u s t b e f o u n d for t h e events after Jesus' d e a t h . 'The p r i n c i p l e of correlation also causes p r o b l e m s for C a t h o l i c t h e o l o g y : All historical p h e n o m e n a are so i n t e r r e l a t e d t h a t a c h a n g e in o n e p h e n o m e n o n necessitates a c h a n g e in t h e causes l e a d i n g t o it a n d in t h e effects it h a s . S u c h a view o f cause a n d effect again s o u n d s initially a c c e p t a b l e , b u t a rigid view o f it rules o u t miracles a n d salvat i o n h i s t o r y (since t h e o l o g i c a l o r t r a n s c e n d e n t a l causes are n o t to be i n v o l v e d in historical c r i t i c i s m ) . 'The p r o b l e m s p o s e d by t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f a n a l o g y a n d correlat i o n are chiefly p h i l o s o p h i c a l , for t h e y p r e s u p p o s e a very different k i n d of u n i v e r s e from t h e o n e a s s u m e d in t h e Bible a n d t h e C h r i s t i a n t r a d i t i o n . 'This is n o t t o say t h a t t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l a n d t h e o l o g i cal issues raised by t h e s e p r i n c i p l e s are i n s i g n i f i c a n t or can be w a v e d aside b y a p p e a l t o S c r i p t u r e . B u t it is i m p o r t a n t t o r e c o g n i z e t h a t these p r i n c i p l e s rest o n d e b a t a b l e p h i l o s o p h i c a l p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s a n d t h e n are elevated t o t h e status o f criteria for j u d g i n g w h a t really h a p p e n e d in biblical t i m e s . It is i m p o r t a n t also t o recognize t h a t C a t h o lic t h e o l o g i a n s s h o u l d have n o q u a r r e l w i t h historical criticism p r o v i d e d t h a t it d o e s n o t involve t h e n a r r o w u n d e r s t a n d i n g a s s u m e d in Troeltsch's t h r e e p r i n c i p l e s . T h u s t h e C a t h o l i c p r o b l e m w i t h historical criticism is t w o f o l d : (1) H i s t o r i c a l criticism has f r e q u e n t l y t a k e n a negative view of t r a d i -

D A N I K I . J . HARRINGTON, S.J.

47

t i o n a n d C h u r c h ; (2) historical criticism has f r e q u e n t l y b e e n b a s e d o n u n a c c e p t a b l e p h i l o s o p h i c a l a s s u m p t i o n s . These p r o b l e m s , h o w ever, d o n o t absolve C a t h o l i c exegetes from t r y i n g t o d e t e r m i n e w h a t really h a p p e n e d w h e r e this m i g h t be possible. The t h e o l o g i c a l aberr a t i o n s of s o m e historical critics d o n o t d e s t r o y t h e validity of t h e e n t i r e historical-critical e n t e r p r i s e . I. Translations O n e very c o n c r e t e w a y in w h i c h t h e exegetical labors o f C a t h o lic biblical scholars reach t h e w i d e r c h u r c h m e m b e r s h i p is t h r o u g h t r a n s l a t i o n s o f t h e Bible. S i n c e Vatican II, it is a s s u m e d t h a t C a t h o l i c t r a n s l a t i o n s will be b a s e d o n t h e original l a n g u a g e s ( H e b r e w , Aram a i c , G r e e k ) r a t h e r t h a n o n t h e Latin V u l g a t e . The t w o m a j o r E n glish t r a n s l a t i o n s p r e p a r e d u n d e r C a t h o l i c a u s p i c e s are t h e J e r u s a l e m Bible a n d t h e N e w A m e r i c a n Bible. They are w i d e l y u s e d in l i t u r g i cal activity a n d in p r i v a t e r e a d i n g by E n g l i s h - s p e a k i n g C a t h o l i c s . The English J e r u s a l e m Bible was first p u b l i s h e d in 1 9 6 6 . In m a n y respects (especially in t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n s a n d notes) it is d e p e n d e n t o n t h e F r e n c h Bible de Jerusalem ( 1 9 5 6 ) . 'The British t e a m of t r a n s lators w o r k e d w i t h t h e original l a n g u a g e s b u t generally followed t h e F r e n c h t r a n s l a t o r s w h e n q u e s t i o n s a b o u t v a r i a n t r e a d i n g s or i n t e r p r e t a t i o n arose. The N e w A m e r i c a n Bible ( 1 9 7 0 ) is basically t h e w o r k of m e m b e r s o f t h e C a t h o l i c Biblical A s s o c i a t i o n of A m e r i c a , t h o u g h n o t all t h e c o l l a b o r a t o r s w e r e C a t h o l i c s . The fact t h a t these t w o E n glish t r a n s l a t i o n s a p p e a r e d s h o r t l y after Vatican II s h o u l d n o t d i s guise t h e fact t h a t t h e y w e r e already in p r e p a r a t i o n for m a n y years a n d c o n s t i t u t e an e l o q u e n t w i t n e s s t o C a t h o l i c biblical s c h o l a r s h i p b e t w e e n Divino Afflante Spiritu ( 1 9 4 3 ) a n d Vatican II. B o t h versions were t h o r o u g h l y revised in t h e 1 9 8 0 s — t h e e n t i r e J e r u s a l e m Bible a n d t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t a n d Psalms o f t h e N e w A m e r i c a n B i b l e — t o r e f l e c t d e v e l o p m e n t s in s c h o l a r s h i p , c h a n g e s in t h e English language (especially g e n d e r inclusiveness), a n d the c o n t i n u i n g s e a r c h for a c c u r a c y . There are t w o p h i l o s o p h i e s o f t r a n s l a t i o n o p e r a t i v e in biblical circles these days. A formal e q u i v a l e n c e t r a n s l a t i o n (like t h e Revised S t a n d a r d Version) a i m s t o b e intelligible t o p e o p l e t o d a y w h i l e m i r r o r i n g t h e v o c a b u l a r y , imagery, a n d s y n t a x of t h e original text. A d y n a m i c e q u i v a l e n c e t r a n s l a t i o n (like t h e G o o d N e w s Bible) is c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e total process of c o m m u n i c a t i o n a n d seeks t o p r o d u c e t h e s a m e effect in p e o p l e t o d a y as t h e biblical a u t h o r s d i d a m o n g their c o n t e m p o r a r i e s . T a k i n g t h e s e t w o p h i l o s o p h i e s as t h e far e n d s

48

CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

of a s p e c t r u m , w c can say t h a t t h e N e w A m e r i c a n Bible t e n d s t o w a r d f o r m a l e q u i v a l e n c e a n d t h e J e r u s a l e m Bible leans t o w a r d d y n a m i c e q u i v a l e n c e . N e i t h e r t r a n s l a t i o n is a " p u r e " r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f a strict p h i l o s o p h y ; b o t h m a n a g e t o e m b o d y a g o o d deal o f t e c h n i c a l b i b l i cal s c h o l a r s h i p in a m o d e s t fashion. J. H e r m e n e u t i c s The t e r m " h e r m e n e u t i c s " covers t h e e n t i r e process of biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n t h a t has b e e n e x p l a i n e d so far in this p a r t of t h e essay. B u t it is s o m e t i m e s also reserved for t h e s t e p t h a t takes place after t h e exegesis has b e e n d o n e a n d t h e s t u d e n t o f S c r i p t u r e tries t o a r t i c u l a t e w h a t t h e text m e a n s . The p r o d u c t m a y be a scholarly article, a h o m ily, or a p o p u l a r lecture. S i n c e n o o n e c o m e s t o t h e h e r m e n e u t i c a l task w i t h o u t special interests o r intellectual history, at this p o i n t I w o u l d like t o call a t t e n t i o n t o f o u r general characteristics o f C a t h o lic b i b l i c a l s c h o l a r s h i p t o d a y : its c o m m i t m e n t t o e c u m e n i s m , its s e n s e o f t r a d i t i o n , its r e l a t i o n t o t h e C h u r c h , a n d its i n t e r n a t i o n a l dimension. Biblical s c h o l a r s h i p has b r o u g h t C a t h o l i c scholars i n t o c o n t a c t w i t h p e o p l e of o t h e r religious c o m m i t m e n t s . M a n y A m e r i c a n C a t h o lic scholars h a v e b e e n t r a i n e d in l a n g u a g e s , history, archaeology, a n d exegesis at J o h n s H o p k i n s , H a r v a r d , Yale, C h i c a g o , a n d o t h e r s u c h i n s t i t u t i o n s . C a t h o l i c scholars play i m p o r t a n t a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a n d e d i torial roles in t h e Society of Biblical L i t e r a t u r e in t h e U n i t e d States, t h e Society of N e w Testament S t u d i e s , a n d t h e Society o f O l d Testam e n t S t u d i e s . F o r m a n y years, C a t h o l i c s h a v e w o r k e d t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e i r colleagues, t h u s c o n t r i b u t i n g t o w h a t has b e c o m e an i n t e r n a tional a n d i n t e r c o n f e s s i o n a l d i a l o g u e . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , C a t h o l i c s have m a d e available t h e i r t e c h n i c a l biblical j o u r n a l s (Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Revue Biblique, Biblische Zeitschrift, Biblica, Estudios Biblicos, Rivista Biblica) t o all c o m p e t e n t s c h o l a r s . For m a n y years also, P r o t e s t a n t scholars have given p a p e r s a t t h e m e e t i n g s of t h e C a t h o l i c Biblical A s s o c i a t i o n . T h i s r e m a r k a b l e level of e c u m e n i c a l c o o p e r a t i o n has b e e n carefully fostered b y biblical scholars repres e n t i n g t h e various confessions precisely b e c a u s e t h e y have seen h o w fruitful a n d h e a l t h y it can be for t h e C h u r c h at large. Yet t h e s t r o n g c o m m i t m e n t t o e c u m e n i s m b y C a t h o l i c biblical scholars does n o t m e a n a desire to d o a w a y w i t h a sense of C a t h o l i c t r a d i t i o n . 'The C a t h o l i c C h u r c h is very m u c h an i n s t i t u t i o n of t r a d i t i o n s , a n d this feature o f C a t h o l i c i s m leaves its m a r k o n C a t h o l i c biblical scholarship. 'This t e n d e n c y shows itself first in typically C a t h o -

D A N I K I . J . HARRINGTON, S.J.

49

lie a p p r o a c h e s t o t h e relation b e t w e e n t h e e a r t h l y J e s u s , t h e early c h u r c h , a n d t h e N e w Testament w r i t i n g s . W h i l e a c k n o w l e d g i n g t h e c o m p l e x i t y of t h e G o s p e l t r a d i t i o n a n d even d e l i g h t i n g in it, t h e C a t h o l i c a p p r o a c h a s s u m e s a c o n t i n u i t y a n d rejects t h e idea o f an u n b r i d g e a b l e gulf. The a g e n t in this c o n t i n u i t y is t h e C h u r c h u n d e r t h e g u i d a n c e o f t h e H o l y Spirit. The C a t h o l i c c o n c e r n w i t h t r a d i t i o n also m a n i f e s t s itself in a lively i n t e r e s t in p h i l o s o p h y a n d general h e r m e n e u t i c a l theory. There is a s t r o n g awareness o f t h e c o m p l e x i t y i n v o l v e d in b r i n g i n g S c r i p t u r e t o bear o n c h u r c h life t o d a y a n d a c o n s c i o u s n e s s t h a t S c r i p t u r e has b e e n i n t e r p r e t e d in v a r i o u s w a y s at v a r i o u s p o i n t s in history. T h i r d l y , t h e r e is a s t r o n g sense o f C h u r c h in C a t h o l i c biblical s c h o l a r s h i p . The locus for m o s t C a t h o l i c biblical s c h o l a r s h i p is t h e C h u r c h r a t h e r t h a n t h e a c a d e m y . 'The a s s u m p t i o n is t h a t biblical exegesis is m o r e t h a n historical research a n d o u g h t t o c o n t r i b u t e positively t o t h e church's life. M a n y issues s t u d i e d by C a t h o l i c s — t h e N e w Testament d i v o r c e texts, m i n i s t r y in t h e early c h u r c h , t h e role of w o m e n — r e f l e c t t h e a g e n d a of c h u r c h p r o b l e m s today. This s t r o n g i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of biblical s c h o l a r s h i p w i t h t h e C h u r c h o c c a s i o n a l l y leads t o s i t u a t i o n s in w h i c h t h e results o f exegesis a n d c u r r e n t c h u r c h p o l i c y a p p e a r to collide. A n e x a m p l e is t h e o r d i n a t i o n o f w o m e n t o t h e ministerial p r i e s t h o o d . The c o n c l u s i o n o f a g r o u p of biblical scholars t h a t S c r i p t u r e p r e s e n t s n o obstacle to w o m e n ' s o r d i n a t i o n was d e e m e d insufficient t o justify d e p a r t u r e from t r a d i t i o n b y h i g h e r R o m a n a u t h o r i t i e s . W h e n s u c h a collision o c c u r s , " p u r e " exegesis s o m e t i m e s loses o u t a n d is s u b o r d i n a t e d t o t r a d i t i o n a n d t h e j u d g m e n t of t h e ecclesiastical m a g i s t e r i u m (the P o p e a n d t h e b i s h o p s ) . Finally, t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l c h a r a c t e r o f t h e C a t h o l i c C h u r c h is h e r m e n e u t i c a l l y significant. The n e t w o r k o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n t h a t exists in t h e C a t h o l i c C h u r c h will n o t allow N o r t h A m e r i c a n o r W e s t e r n E u r o p e a n biblical scholars t o avoid for l o n g t h e challenges p o s e d by Third W o r l d exegetes. I n d i a n C a t h o l i c scholars h a v e b e e n e x p l o r i n g t h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e historical-critical a p p r o a c h t o exegesis a n d t h e t r a d i t i o n a l I n d i a n m e t h o d s of i n t e r p r e t i n g religious texts. Latin A m e r i c a n biblical t h e o l o g i a n s have e m p h a s i z e d t h e c e n t r a l i t y of t h e t h e m e o f l i b e r a t i o n , t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f b e i n g c o n s c i o u s o f t h e life-setting of Bible study, a n d t h e political significance of t h e b i b l i cal message in t h e past a n d today. Africans have d i s c e r n e d an affinity b e t w e e n t h e biblical w o r l d a n d t h e i r o w n a n d reject t h e idea t h a t they m u s t interpret Scripture t h r o u g h the m e d i u m of Western cult u r e . F e m i n i s t s in t h e U n i t e d States h a v e q u e s t i o n e d t h e usual r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f early C h r i s t i a n h i s t o r y a n d f o u n d i n d i c a t i o n s o f a sig-

50

CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

nificant role for w o m e n in early c h u r c h life. Their f e m i n i s t c o n c e r n s a n d m e t h o d s are b e i n g t a k e n u p in t u r n by E u r o p e a n a n d African scholars. By w a y o f c o n t r a s t h e r e , t h e m e t h o d e m p l o y e d by t h e L a t i n A m e r i c a n t h e o l o g i a n s of l i b e r a t i o n deserves an e x p l a n a t i o n , for its p r i n c i p l e s differ from a n d c h a l l e n g e t h e historical-critical a p p r o a c h o u t l i n e d in t h e p r e c e d i n g pages. The s t a r t i n g p o i n t for t h e l i b e r a t i o n t h e o l o g i a n s is t h e analysis o f c o n t e m p o r a r y sociopolitical e x p e r i e n c e , n o t t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e a n c i e n t historical c o n t e x t . The life-sett i n g for this k i n d o f biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is t h e so-called base c o m m u n i t y , w h i c h arose as a p o p u l a r m o v e m e n t in C a t h o l i c i s m . 'The biblical i n t e r p r e t e r s , w h e t h e r t h e y are p e a s a n t s or professors, p e r ceive clear parallels b e t w e e n t h e s i t u a t i o n o f p e o p l e in Latin A m e r i c a t o d a y a n d t h a t o f G o d ' s p e o p l e in biblical t i m e s . This parallelism leads b a c k logically t o t h e biblical texts as sources of e n l i g h t e n m e n t a n d e n c o u r a g e m e n t today. The l i b e r a t i o n t h e o l o g i a n s also c h a l l e n g e t h e ideal o f t h e h i s t o r i cal critic as t h e objective s p e c t a t o r o r t h e u n i n v o l v e d r e p o r t e r . A b o u t t h i r t y years ago t h e r e was a lively d e b a t e a m o n g E u r o p e a n a n d N o r t h A m e r i c a n exegetes a n d t h e o l o g i a n s a b o u t w h e t h e r it is possible t o have p r e s u p p o s i t i o n l e s s exegesis. The answer, o f c o u r s e , is n o . B u t nevertheless t h e a i m o f historical criticism is to p u t aside one's o w n p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s as m u c h as possible a n d take t h e text o n its o w n t e r m s . The l i b e r a t i o n t h e o l o g i a n s a r g u e t h a t this p s e u d o - o b j e c t i v e s t a n c e m e r e l y m a s k s a w h o l e set of h i d d e n a n d p o t e n t i a l l y d e s t r u c tive a s s u m p t i o n s a b o u t G o d , h u m a n i t y , a n d t h e w o r l d . Therefore t h e y call for t h e i n t e r p r e t e r ' s f o r t h r i g h t a d m i s s i o n of a political, s o ciological, o r theological p o s i t i o n . 'They criticize bitterly t h o s e l e a r n e d biblical c o m m e n t a r i e s t h a t issue from professors' desks, a p p a r e n t l y u n t o u c h e d b y social e x p e r i e n c e a n d d e v o i d o f h u m a n c o m m i t m e n t . 'The t h i r d c h a l l e n g e t o historical criticism raised b y t h e liberat i o n t h e o l o g i a n s involves w h a t c o n s t i t u t e s t h e a d e q u a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f S c r i p t u r e . The l i b e r a t i o n t h e o l o g i a n s a r g u e t h a t intellectual a p p r o p r i a t i o n is n o t e n o u g h . N e i t h e r is p r a y e r e n o u g h . Rather, t h e biblical texts n a t u r a l l y lead t o c o n c r e t e social a c t i o n s issuing from intellectual reflection a n d m e d i t a t i o n . F o r these l i b e r a t i o n t h e o l o g i a n s , biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n necessarily d e m a n d s sociopolitical a c tivity. G u i d e d b y t h e s o p h i s t i c a t e d h e r m e n e u t i c a l t h e o r i e s of Paul R i c o e u r , these l i b e r a t i o n t h e o l o g i a n s s p e a k of a h e r m e n e u t i c a l circle t h a t m o v e s from s u s p i c i o n a b o u t p r e s e n t - d a y e x p e r i e n c e ( " s o m e t h i n g is w r o n g " ) , t h r o u g h s u s p i c i o n a b o u t t h e ideologies a n d t h e o l o g i e s ( a n d exegesis) t h a t s u p p o r t t h e p r e s e n t - d a y political s t r u c t u r e s , t o

DANTKI.J. HARRINGTON, S.J.

51

t h e Bible as a s o u r c e of faith a n d of i n s p i r a t i o n for a c t i o n , to a c t i o n in t h e p r e s e n t t i m e . T h u s t h e Latin A m e r i c a n l i b e r a t i o n t h e o l o g i a n s differ f r o m t h e historical critics in t h e i r i n s i s t e n c e o n t h e p r e s e n t - d a y political s i t u a t i o n as t h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t for biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e i r a d m i s s i o n of p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s , a n d t h e i r e m p h a s i s o n a c t i o n as p a r t o f t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i v e process. T h e i r a p p r o a c h is clearly o p e n t o a b u s e s . B u t it d o e s i l l u m i n a t e b y c o n t r a s t s o m e o f t h e m a j o r features o f t h e h i s t o r i cal-critical m e t h o d . A l s o , t h e r e is still a place for historical c r i t i c i s m in l i b e r a t i o n t h e o l o g y . The l i b e r a t i o n t h e o l o g i a n s s i m p l y d e m a n d t h a t o t h e r aspects o f t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i v e p r o c e s s — p r e s e n t - d a y e x p e r i e n c e , t h e i n t e r p r e t e r ' s p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s , a n d political a c t i o n — b e ack n o w l e d g e d a n d celebrated. IV. FROM DEATH T O LIEE ( E P H . 2 : 1 - 1 0 )

T h e Epistle t o t h e E p h e s i a n s p u r p o r t s t o b e a letter w r i t t e n by Paul from p r i s o n . It is often classed w i t h t h e epistles to t h e P h i l i p p i a n s , C o l o s s i a n s , a n d P h i l e m o n as o n e of t h e C a p t i v i t y Epistles. B u t m o s t critical C a t h o l i c s c h o l a r s n o w agree w i t h t h e i r P r o t e s t a n t colleagues t h a t FLphesians is a n essay w r i t t e n b y an a d m i r e r o f Paul in t h e late first c e n t u r y A . D . (ca. A . D . 8 0 - 9 0 ) in o r d e r t o e m p h a s i z e t h e u n i t y in C h r i s t b e t w e e n J e w i s h C h r i s t i a n s a n d G e n t i l e C h r i s t i a n s . T h e case a g a i n s t P a u l i n e a u t h o r s h i p involves t h e m o r e S e m i t i c l a n g u a g e a n d style of FLphesians, its different use of c e r t a i n t h e m e s a n d m o t i f s , a n d its d i v e r g e n t o r m o r e d e v e l o p e d theology. T h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f c h u r c h s t r u c t u r e s a s s u m e d in t h e epistle a n d t h e p r o b l e m s facing t h e c o m m u n i t y are m o r e easily l i n k e d w i t h t h e late first c e n t u r y t h a n t h e late 50s o r early 6 0 s . T h e h y p o t h e s i s of n o n - P a u l i n e a u t h o r s h i p n o l o n g e r p r e s e n t s a s e r i o u s p r o b l e m a m o n g C a t h o l i c exegetes ( t h o u g h a few still a r g u e t h a t Paul w a s t h e a u t h o r ) . E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 deals w i t h t h e r e c o n c i l i a t i o n of sinful h u m a n i t y t o G o d . It p r e p a r e s for t h e d i s c u s s i o n of h o w n o n - J e w s c a n b e c o m e p a r t o f t h e p e o p l e o f G o d ( E p h . 2 : 1 1 - 2 2 ) . T h e Revised N e w A m e r i c a n Bible translates t h e passage as follows: 'You were dead in your transgressions and sins in which you once lived following the age of this world, following the ruler of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the disobedient. 'All of us once lived a m o n g them in the desires of our flesh, following the wishes of the flesh a n d the impulses, and we were by nature children of wrath, like the rest. 'But God, w h o is rich in

CATHOLIC INTKRPRKTATION OF SCRIPTURK

52

s

mercy, because of the great love he had for us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, brought us to life with Christ (by grace you have been saved), ''raised us up with him, and seated us with him in the heavens in Christ Jesus, 'that in the ages to come he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. T o r by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not from you; it is the gift of God; 'it is not from works, so no one may boast. "Tor we are his handiwork, created in Christ Jesus for the good works that G o d has prepared in advance, that we should live in them. T h e N e w J e r u s a l e m Bible r e n d e r s E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 in this w a y : 'And you were dead, through the crimes and the sins V h i c h used to make up your way of life when you were living by the principles of this world, obeying the ruler w h o dominates the air, the spirit who is at work in those who rebel. We too were all among them once, living only by our natural inclinations, obeying the demands of h u m a n self-indulgence and our own whim; our nature made us no less liable to God's retribution than the rest of the world. 'But G o d , being rich in faithful love, through the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our sins, brought us to life with Christ—it is through grace that you have been saved— 'and raised us up with him and gave us a place with him in heaven, in Christ Jesus. T h i s was to show for all ages to come, through his goodness towards us in Christ Jesus, how extraordinarily rich he is in grace. "Because it is by grace that you have been saved, through faith; not by anything of your own, but by a gift from God; 'not by anyt h i n g that you have d o n e , so that n o b o d y can claim the credit. W e are God's w o r k of art, created in Christ Jesus for the good works w h i c h G o d has already designated to m a k e u p o u r way of life. 3

s

f

l0

This s u m m a r y of Paul's G o s p e l first explains t h e state o f sin a n d s p i r i t u a l d e a t h in w h i c h t h e G e n t i l e C h r i s t i a n s lived before C h r i s t (vv. 1-3). By t h e i r i m m o r a l a c t i o n s t h e y s h o w e d t h e i r allegiance t o t h e p o w e r s of evil a n d t h u s d e s e r v e d G o d ' s anger. T h e i r l o r d was t h e " p r i n c e of t h e air," their w a y o f life w a s g u i d e d b y t h e "flesh," a n d t h e i r activities were sins a n d offenses. H a v i n g d e s c r i b e d t h e negative p e r i o d of t h e i r lives, t h e a u t h o r o f E p h e s i a n s develops t h e positive side in verses 4 - 1 0 . T h r o u g h his m o s t p o w e r f u l display o f mercy, love, a n d grace (vv. 4 - 5 ) , G o d in C h r i s t saved these G e n t i l e s from t h e i r s p i r i t u a l d e a t h a n d allowed t h e m to share in t h e g l o r y of t h e risen L o r d (v. 6 ) . The p r e s e n t a s p e c t o r

DANTKI.J. HARRINGTON, S.J.

53

realized a s p e c t o f e s c h a t o l o g y is s t r o n g l y e m p h a s i z e d : "you h a v e b e e n saved . . . he raised us u p w i t h h i m a n d s e a t e d us w i t h h i m in t h e h e a v e n s . " N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e f u t u r e a s p e c t o f e s c h a t o l o g y ("in t h e ages t o c o m e " ) is n o t i g n o r e d (v. 7 ) . T h e r e is so m u c h e m p h a s i s o n G o d in C h r i s t as t h e s o u r c e o f salvation a n d t h e u n m e r i t e d c h a r a c t e r of salvation (vv. 8-9) t h a t o n e can s u s p e c t s o m e c o n t r o v e r s y a b o u t this in t h e b a c k g r o u n d of t h e letter. 'The passage closes in verse 10 w i t h an e x h o r t a t i o n t o live t h e life t h a t befits t h o s e w h o m G o d in C h r i s t has saved. 'The s e c o n d half of E p h e s i a n s (chs. 4 - 6 ) spells o u t w h a t s u c h a life in c o n f o r m i t y w i t h salvation m e a n s . I w o u l d like to c o m m e n t o n t h r e e m a t t e r s a r i s i n g from this ext r a o r d i n a r i l y rich text: its theology, its r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e g e n u i n e P a u l i n e w r i t i n g s , a n d its transfer value. The passage d r a w s a c o n t r a s t b e t w e e n w h a t life for t h e G e n t i l e C h r i s t i a n s was before C h r i s t (vv. 1-3) a n d w h a t it is n o w ( w . 4 - 1 0 ) . 'The m o s t s t r i k i n g t h e o l o g i c a l feature is t h e e m p h a s i s o n salvation as already p r e s e n t (vv. 5 - 6 ) , t h o u g h t h e future d i m e n s i o n o f salvation is also m e n t i o n e d (v. 7 ) . In this respect t h e l a n g u a g e o f E p h e s i a n s is s t r o n g e r t h a n t h a t o f Paul in R o m a n s a n d G a l a t i a n s . A n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t feature is t h e stress o n t h e u n m e r i t e d n a t u r e of salvation (vv. 89) a n d t h e idea o f g o o d d e e d s flowing from G o d ' s gift of salvation (v. 10). Even t h o u g h s o m e P r o t e s t a n t s m i g h t t h i n k t h a t C a t h o l i c s seek salvation t h r o u g h w o r k s , t h e p o s i t i o n of C a t h o l i c t h e o l o g y is p e r fectly c o n s i s t e n t w i t h E p h e s i a n s o n this m a t t e r . 'These t w o t h e m e s — t h e p r e s e n t d i m e n s i o n of salvation a n d G o d ' s grace as t h e s o u r c e of g o o d d e e d s — w o u l d have great appeal to C a t h o l i c readers o f t h e Bible. H o w w o u l d C a t h o l i c s assess t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f this passage t o Paul's g e n u i n e letters? H o w w o u l d t h e y evaluate t h e E p h e s i a n e m phasis o n t h e p r e s e n c e of salvation in c o m p a r i s o n t o Paul's stress o n t h e f u t u r e d i m e n s i o n ? D e f e n d e r s of P a u l i n e a u t h o r s h i p o f E p h e s i a n s w o u l d see it as t h e m a t u r e s t a t e m e n t o f ideas t h a t w e r e g e r m i n a t i n g in G a l a t i a n s a n d R o m a n s . P r o p o n e n t s o f p s e u d o n y m o u s a u t h o r s h i p w o u l d h o l d t h a t it is an a u t h e n t i c d e v e l o p m e n t of Paul's t h o u g h t for a n e w s i t u a t i o n a n d t i m e . The idea of u s i n g G a l a t i a n s a n d R o m a n s as a c a n o n t o criticize a n d j u d g e o t h e r c a n o n i c a l w r i t i n g s w o u l d n o t be t h e usual a p p r o a c h for C a t h o l i c s . I n s t e a d o f seizing u p o n t h e c o n t r a d i c t i o n s a n d differences, t h e first i n s t i n c t of C a t h o l i c s w o u l d be t o focus o n c o n t i n u i t y a n d d e v e l o p m e n t . The a i m b e h i n d c h a r t i n g t h e course of a Pauline t h e m e like eschatology w o u l d be t o illustrate g r o w t h in i n s i g h t a n d a b i l i t y t o a d a p t t h e G o s p e l t o c h a n g e d c i r c u m s t a n c e s , n o t t o let t h e p o w e r a n d m a j e s t y o f t h e g e n u i n e Paul shine forth.

54

CATHOLIC INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

M y final c o m m e n t involves t h e h e r m e n e u t i c a l transfer value o f E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 . The t e x t was clearly a d d r e s s e d t o n o n - J e w s w h o h a d t u r n e d from p a g a n i s m t o C h r i s t i a n faith. It deals w i t h t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f c o n v e r s i o n ("once . . . b u t n o w " ) . The k i n d of c o n v e r s i o n described implies that the converts were adults w h e n they t u r n e d from p a g a n i s m t o C h r i s t i a n i t y , a n d in t h a t t u r n i n g e x p e r i e n c e d w h a t is called "salvation." If o n e were t o p r e a c h o n this t e x t today, t h e a u d i e n c e t o w h o m it w o u l d m e a n m o s t w o u l d be a d u l t s w h o h a d c o n v e r t e d f r o m p a g a n i s m t o C h r i s t i a n i t y . For C a t h o l i c s a n d o t h e r s b a p t i z e d at infancy, this k i n d o f c o n v e r s i o n l a n g u a g e is o n l y partially a p p r o p r i a t e . Even C h r i s t i a n s b a p t i z e d as a d u l t s b u t h a v i n g been raised in C h r i s t i a n families a n d a C h r i s t i a n a t m o s p h e r e will have n o t u n d e r g o n e t h e k i n d of e x p e r i e n c e s k e t c h e d in E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 . T h e p r o b l e m of transfer is p o s e d b y t h e l a n g u a g e o f c o n v e r s i o n l e a d i n g t o b a p t i s m f o u n d in this a n d o t h e r P a u l i n e texts. Very often t h i s c o n v e r s i o n l a n g u a g e is t a k e n b y c o m m i t t e d C h r i s t i a n s as s o m e t h i n g t o be e x p e r i e n c e d a n e w everyday, as d e l i n e a t i n g t h e daily life o f every C h r i s t i a n . This h e r m e n e u t i c a l m o v e t r a n s f o r m s c o n v e r s i o n lang u a g e i n t o m a i n t e n a n c e l a n g u a g e . I h e s i t a t e t o use t h e w o r d " d i s t o r t i o n " b e c a u s e it is so s t r o n g . B u t a t least C h r i s t i a n s w h o use this text t o d a y s h o u l d be aware o f its original c o n v e r s i o n s e t t i n g in E p h e s i a n s a n d t h e o n l y partly justified m a i n t e n a n c e application they m a k e of it. B u t h o w t h e n m i g h t serious, l o n g - t i m e C h r i s t i a n s a p p r o a c h E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 in m a i n t a i n i n g a n d e n r i c h i n g t h e i r faith today? T h e task o f t r y i n g t o m a k e t h e S c r i p t u r e s c o m e alive a n d s p e a k t o o u r s i t u a t i o n is s o m e t i m e s called " a c t u a l i z a t i o n . " T h e m o s t familiar f o r m o f a c t u alization is t h e s e r m o n o r h o m i l y in w h i c h a p r e a c h e r tries t o b r i n g a biblical passage t o b e a r o n t h e life o f a c o n g r e g a t i o n today. O t h e r forms o f a c t u a l i z a t i o n i n c l u d e Bible d i s c u s s i o n g r o u p s , d r a m a t i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s (a "passion p l a y " ) , w o r k s of a r t (a s c u l p t u r e or p a i n t i n g of a biblical s c e n e ) , a n d d a n c e ( e n a c t i n g o r r e s p o n d i n g t o a biblical text). Each f o r m a t takes as its s t a r t i n g p o i n t a biblical passage a n d "actualizes" it in a d i s t i n c t i v e way. H o w e v e r , t h e m o s t c o m m o n a n d accessible f o r m o f actualizat i o n is p r a y e r b a s e d o n biblical texts. This c a n t a k e place o n a c o m m u n a l o r i n d i v i d u a l basis. O n e very o l d a n d still fresh m e t h o d o f a c t u a l i z i n g biblical texts in p r a y e r is called lectio divina ("spiritual [or, divine] r e a d i n g " ) . T h e m e t h o d has a l o n g h i s t o r y w i t h i n t h e c o n text o f C h r i s t i a n m o n a s t i c i s m . It has b e e n revived r e c e n t l y a n d m a d e accessible t o all t h e p e o p l e of G o d especially b y C a r d i n a l C a r l o M a r tini o f M i l a n , o n c e a d i s t i n g u i s h e d N e w 'I e s t a m e n t textual critic. It consists o f four steps: reverent r e a d i n g of t h e biblical text, m e d i t a -

D A N I K I . J . HARRINGTON, S.J.

55

t i o n , prayer, a n d c o n t e m p l a t i o n a n d / o r a c t i o n . I will illustrate this a p p r o a c h w i t h reference t o E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 . Lectio. A r e v e r e n t r e a d i n g {lectio) a t t e n d s t o t h e c o n t e x t , w o r d s a n d i m a g e s , c h a r a c t e r s , progress o f t h o u g h t , a n d t h e m e s a l o n g t h e lines d e s c r i b e d i m m e d i a t e l y after t h e t w o t r a n s l a t i o n s o f E p h . 2 : 1 10. The goal o f this step is t o u n d e r s t a n d w h a t t h e text says o n its o w n g r o u n d s . W h i l e t h e critical Bible s t u d y d e s c r i b e d t h u s far can h e l p o n e t o read t h e text i n t e l l i g e n t l y a n d is f u n d a m e n t a l , t h e r e also n e e d s t o be a s a v o r i n g a n d p e r s o n a l a s s i m i l a t i o n of t h e t e x t o n b o t h t h e intellectual a n d t h e e m o t i o n a l levels. A s l o w a n d d e l i b e r a t e oral r e a d i n g can facilitate t h e a p p r o p r i a t e k i n d of p e r s o n a l e n g a g e m e n t . Meditatio. M e d i t a t i o n o n a biblical text c o n s i d e r s w h a t t h e text says t o m e (or us). B e g i n n i n g w i t h t h e biblical passage in E p h . 2 : 1 10, o n e m i g h t focus o n a t h e m e or t w o s u c h as t h e p r e s e n t d i m e n s i o n o f salvation o r o n g o o d w o r k s flowing from G o d ' s gift of salvat i o n . O r o n e m i g h t focus o n a certain p h r a s e s u c h as " G o d , w h o is rich in m e r c y " (2:4) or "we are his h a n d i w o r k " ( 2 : 1 0 ) , a n d r e p e a t it a n d m a k e it one's o w n . O r o n e m i g h t a p p l y t h e i m a g i n a t i o n a n d t r y t o visualize s o m e o f t h e p h r a s e s ("raised us u p w i t h h i m , " 2 : 6 ) . O r o n e m i g h t s i n g t h e h y m n " A m a z i n g G r a c e " a n d l u x u r i a t e in t h e m a n y parallels to (or influences from) E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 . H e r e t h e goal is to m a k e c o n n e c t i o n s b e t w e e n t h e passage a n d one's p r e s e n t s i t u a t i o n . Oratio. T h e s t e p k n o w n as oratio ("prayer") c o n c e r n s w h a t I w a n t t o say t o G o d o n t h e basis of m y r e a d i n g o f a n d m e d i t a t i o n o n a biblical text. O n t h e basis o f E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 , o n e m i g h t w a n t t o praise, t h a n k , a n d a d o r e G o d for G o d ' s m e r c y s h o w n in Jesus, o r for t h e gift of Jesus C h r i s t a n d his s a v i n g p o w e r . O r o n e m i g h t w a n t t o ask G o d for h e l p in u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e C h r i s t - e v e n t , in e x p e r i e n c i n g it p e r s o n a l l y a n d c o m m u n a l l y , in t r a n s l a t i n g G o d ' s gift i n t o a p p r o p r i a t e b e h a v i o r , o r in c o n t i n u i n g a l o n g t h e w a y o f C h r i s t i a n faith a n d practice. ContemplatiolActio. A final r e s p o n s e t o t h e process of r e a d i n g , m e d i t a t i n g , a n d p r a y i n g w i t h E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 m i g h t s i m p l y be to relish the experience a n d to c o n t e m p l a t e the mystery of G o d reconciling t h e w o r l d t h r o u g h C h r i s t . A n o t h e r possible r e s p o n s e m i g h t be t o use t h e o c c a s i o n t o c o n f r o n t s o m e t h i n g in one's life t h a t m i g h t n e e d d e l i b e r a t i o n , d i s c e r n m e n t , a n d d e c i s i o n . D o e s t h e lectio divina p r o cess reveal a n e e d for c h a n g e in s o m e area? W h a t are t h e o p t i o n s , a n d t h e reasons for t h e m ? W h a t d e c i s i o n d o 1 n e e d t o m a k e a n d t o act u p o n in o r d e r to find peace a n d t o b r i n g m y life a n d a c t i o n i n t o line w i t h m y beliefs a n d p u b l i c profession as a C h r i s t i a n ? D e a l i n g w i t h s u c h q u e s t i o n s m a y t h e n result in a c t i o n .

CATHOLIC INTKRPRKTATION OF SCRIPTURK

56

V. SUMMARY

Since the Second Vatican C o u n c i l , Catholics have been reading t h e Bible w i t h e n t h u s i a s m a n d m a k i n g it t h e i r o w n b o o k . This develo p m e n t is especially d r a m a t i c in liturgy, religious e d u c a t i o n , a n d e c u m e n i s m . Vatican l i s C o n s t i t u t i o n o n D i v i n e R e v e l a t i o n p r o v i d e d s o m e helpful d i r e c t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r of d i v i n e r e v e l a t i o n , S c r i p t u r e a n d t r a d i t i o n , t h e n e e d for i n t e r p r e t i n g S c r i p t u r e in its h i s t o r i c a l s e t t i n g , r e s p e c t for t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t , r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e c o m p l e x i t y o f t h e G o s p e l s , a n d t h e Bible's p l a c e in c h u r c h life. C a t h o l i c biblical s c h o l a r s b r i n g t o t h e S c r i p t u r e s t h e q u e s t i o n s a n d c o n c e r n s t h a t c o n s t i t u t e t h e historical-critical m e t h o d . They w o r k in t h e areas o f literary c r i t i c i s m , textual c r i t i c i s m , t h e w o r l d o f t h e Bible, w o r d study, s o u r c e c r i t i c i s m , r e d a c t i o n c r i t i c i s m , f o r m critic i s m , historical c r i t i c i s m , a n d t r a n s l a t i o n . In i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e Bible, t h e y are c o m m i t t e d t o e c u m e n i s m , m a i n t a i n a s t r o n g sense of C a t h o l i c t r a d i t i o n , d o t h e i r research in t h e c o n t e x t o f today's C h u r c h , a n d are p a r t i c i p a n t s in a n i n t e r n a t i o n a l d i a l o g u e . A " C a t h o l i c " r e a d i n g o f E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 e m p h a s i z e s t h e p r e s e n t d i m e n s i o n o f salvation a n d G o d ' s grace as t h e s o u r c e o f g o o d a c t i o n s , sees t h e passage as a n a u t h e n t i c d e v e l o p m e n t o f Paul's theology, a n d recognizes t h e l i m i t a t i o n s i m p o s e d b y its o r i g i n a l c o n t e x t as a d u l t c o n v e r s i o n l e a d i n g to b a p t i s m . A C a t h o l i c a c t u a l i z a t i o n o f t h i s biblical text m i g h t p r o c e e d a c c o r d i n g to t h e m e t h o d o f lectio divina: contemplation and/or action.

r e a d i n g , m e d i t a t i o n , prayer, a n d

DANTKI.J.

57

H A R R I N G T O N , S.J.

RECOMMENDED

READINGS

B c r g a n t , D i a n e a n d R o b e r t J. Karris, eds. 'The Collegeville Bible Commentary. Collegeville, M i n n . : The Liturgical Press, 1 9 8 9 . This o n e v o l u m e c o m m e n t a r y o n b o t h Testaments b y C a t h o l i c scholars transm i t s t h e best o f m o d e r n s c h o l a r s h i p t o a w i d e a u d i e n c e . B r o w n , R a y m o n d E. Biblical Exegesis and Church Doctrine. New Y o r k / M a h w a h , N . J . : Paulist Press, 1 9 8 5 . In a series o f essays B r o w n s h o w s t h a t C a t h o l i c N e w T e s t a m e n t exegesis is centrist ( r a t h e r t h a n liberal or conservative) a n d n o t d e s t r u c t i v e o f C a t h o l i c d o c t r i n e . . Responses to 101 Questions on the Bible. N e w Y o r k / M a h w a h , N . J . : Paulist, 1 9 9 0 . W r i t t e n b y o n e o f t h e best C a t h o l i c biblical scholars o f t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y , this v o l u m e r e s p o n d s t o frequently asked q u e s t i o n s o n such topics as f u n d a m e n t a l i s m , Mary, s a c r a m e n t s , a n d Peter. B r o w n , R a y m o n d E., J o s e p h A . Fitzmyer, a n d R o l a n d E. M u r p h y , eds. The New Jerome Biblical Commentary. FLnglewood Cliffs, N . J . : P r e n t i c e H a l l , 1 9 9 0 . This o n e - v o l u m e c o m m e n t a r y o n t h e e n t i r e Bible i n c l u d e s topical articles o n s u c h topics as i n s p i r a t i o n , h e r m e n e u t i c s , Jesus, a n d P a u l i n e theology. W r i t t e n b y C a t h o l i c s c h o l a r s , it is full o f reliable a n d u p - t o - d a t e i n f o r m a t i o n a n d is t h e best exa m p l e of m o d e r n C a t h o l i c s c h o l a r s h i p . C o l l i n s , J o h n J. a n d D o m i n i c C r o s s a n , eds. The Biblical Heritage in Modern Catholic Scholarship. W i l m i n g t o n , D e l . : Glazier, 1 9 8 6 . The essays in this v o l u m e deal p r i n c i p a l l y w i t h t h e e c u m e n i c a l reality of c o n t e m p o r a r y biblical s c h o l a r s h i p a n d locate w o r k s b y C a t h o l i c s in this f r a m e w o r k . F i t z m y e r , J o s e p h A . Scripture, the Soul of Theology. N e w York: Paulist, 1 9 9 4 . W r i t t e n b y o n e of t h e very best C a t h o l i c biblical s c h o l a r s , t h e essays in this c o l l e c t i o n c o n c e r n t h e historical-critical a p p r o a c h t o S c r i p t u r e , o t h e r a p p r o a c h e s , S c r i p t u r e as t h e soul of theology, a n d biblical s t u d y a n d e c u m e n i s m . Fogarty, G e r a l d P. American Catholic Biblical Scholarship: A History from the Early Republic to Vatican II. S a n F r a n c i s c o : H a r p e r

58

CATHOLIC INTKRPRKTATION OF

SCRIPTURK

& R o w , 1 9 8 9 . In t r a c i n g t h e s t o r y o f A m e r i c a n C a t h o l i c biblical s c h o l a r s h i p from J o h n C a r r o l l t o Vatican II, a d i s t i n g u i s h e d c h u r c h h i s t o r i a n focuses o n t h e struggles r e v o l v i n g a r o u n d a c c e p t a n c e of a critical a n d historical a p p r o a c h to t h e Bible. H a r r i n g t o n , D a n i e l J. Interpreting the New Testament. Rev. e d . W i l m i n g t o n , D e l . : Glazier, 1 9 8 8 . This i n t r o d u c t i o n t o N e w Test a m e n t exegesis e x p l a i n s t h e m e t h o d s d e s c r i b e d in t h e p r e s e n t essay a n d p r o v i d e s e x a m p l e s h o w t h e y can be used in s t u d y i n g s p e cific biblical texts. Interpreting the Old Testament (Wilmington, D e l . : Glazier, 1 9 8 1 ) is s i m i l a r in s c o p e a n d c o n t e n t . The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church. B o s t o n : St. Paul P u b l i s h i n g , 1 9 9 4 . T o m a r k t h e anniversaries o f t h e encyclicals o n b i b lical studies b y P o p e Leo X I I I ( 1 8 9 3 ) a n d P o p e Pius X I I ( 1 9 4 3 ) , t h e Pontifical Biblical C o m m i s s i o n in 1 9 9 3 issued a m a r v e l o u s d o c u m e n t o n biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . It deals w i t h m e t h o d s a n d a p p r o a c h e s , h e r m e n e u t i c a l q u e s t i o n s , C a t h o l i c biblical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , a n d t h e Bible in c h u r c h life. L i e n h a r d , J o s e p h T . The Bible, the Church, and Authority. Collegeville, M i n n . : The Liturgical Press, 1 9 9 5 . This b o o k explains from a C a t h o l i c p e r s p e c t i v e t h e origins of t h e C h r i s t i a n Bible a n d its m e a n i n g for t h e c h u r c h t o d a y , a n d e l a b o r a t e s a C a t h o l i c u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the relations a m o n g the Bible, the c h u r c h , a n d authority. M e g i v e r n , J a m e s J., ed. Bible Interpretation. Official C a t h o l i c ' T e a c h ings. W i l m i n g t o n , N . C . : C o n s o r t i u m B o o k s / M c G r a t h P u b l i s h ing C o . , 1 9 7 8 . English t r a n s l a t i o n o f s i x t y - t w o d o c u m e n t s , i n c l u d i n g Vatican ITs C o n s t i t u t i o n o n D i v i n e R e v e l a t i o n , d e a l i n g w i t h t h e place o f t h e Bible in t h e C h u r c h . N e u h a u s , R i c h a r d J o h n , e d . Biblical Interpretation in Crisis. The Ratzinger Conference on Bible and Church. Grand Rapids: E e r d m a n s , 1 9 8 9 . P r e s e n t e d at a c o n f e r e n c e in 1 9 8 8 , t h e four p a pers by Joseph Ratzinger, R a y m o n d Brown, William Lazareth, a n d G e o r g e L i n d b e c k explore t h e value o f historical criticism a n d t h e role o f t h e Bible in t h e C h u r c h . S c h n e i d e r s , S a n d r a M . The Revelatory Text. Interpreting the New Testament as Sacred Scripture. San F r a n c i s c o : H a r p e r C o l l i n s , 1 9 9 1 .

DANTKI.J.

H A R R I N G T O N , S.J.

59

This r e a d a b l e a n d c o m p r e h e n s i v e i n t r o d u c t i o n t o biblical h e r m e n e u t i c s takes a c c o u n t o f n e w ways of r e a d i n g texts a n d s h o w s h o w s o m e t r a d i t i o n a l theological t o p i c s t a k e o n fresh significance w h e n set in a different c o n t e x t . Senior, D o n a l d , ed. The Catholic Study Bible. N e w York: O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1 9 9 0 . The first p a r t ( a l m o s t 6 0 0 pages) consists o f general a n d i n t r o d u c t o r y articles, as well as r e a d i n g g u i d e s for t h e v a r i o u s p a r t s o f t h e Bible. The s e c o n d p a r t p r o v i d e s t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n s , t r a n s l a t i o n s , a n d n o t e s for t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t a c c o r d i n g t o t h e 1 9 7 0 e d i t i o n o f t h e N e w A m e r i c a n Bible a n d t h e t h o r o u g h l y revised N e w ' T e s t a m e n t ( 1 9 8 8 ) . S t u h l m u e l l e r , C a r r o l l , e d . The Collegeville Pastoral Dictionary of Biblical'Theology. Collegeville, M i n n . : 'The Liturgical Press, 1 9 9 6 . W r i t t e n b y C a t h o l i c biblical scholars k n o w n for t h e i r p a s t o r a l c o n c e r n , this Bible d i c t i o n a r y covers t h e o l o g i c a l topics s u c h as a t o n e m e n t , c h u r c h , eschatology, a n d f r i e n d s h i p w i t h reference t o O l d a n d N e w Testaments a n d to t h e o l o g y a n d c h u r c h life.

ORTHODOX INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE by

MICHAEL PROKURAT

I. INTRODUCTION

T

h e t o p i c , t h e Bible a n d its i n t e r p r e t a t i o n in t h e E a s t e r n O r t h o d o x C h u r c h , is i m m e n s e a n d will be i n v e s t i g a t e d f r o m a p a r t i c u l a r p e r s p e c t i v e — f r o m w i t h i n t h e Tradition o f t h e O r -

t h o d o x C h u r c h a n d w i t h an eye t o w a r d c o n t e m p o r a r y q u e s t i o n s in

t h e W e s t r e l a t i n g t o " B i b l e . " ' W e d o n o t i n t e n d t o review p a t r i s t i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h o u g h an a p p r o p r i a t e o p t i o n , b u t c h o o s e a b r o a d e r historical o v e r v i e w o f t h e c a n o n . Similarly, n o e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e h i s torical-critical m e t h o d in t h e O r t h o d o x C h u r c h is c o n t a i n e d h e r e i n , since it has b e e n t w i c e r e v i e w e d in r e c e n t p u b l i c a t i o n s .

1

limit the topic by treating only the G r e e k / B y z a n t i n e a n d

We further Slavic/Rus-

sian c h u r c h e s , n o t o u t o f a sense o f exclusivity b u t s i m p l y b e c a u s e t h e y are m o s t accessible t o us liturgically, historically, linguistically, sociologically, etc. A fuller t r e a t m e n t i n c l u d i n g all e t h n i c (or " n a -

:

For m a n y O r t h o d o x Christians the Tradition of the O r t h o d o x C h u r c h is ultimately inseparable from that of the West a n d the whole of Christian history. Two of my teachers, rhe late Professor Georges Barrois and Professor Vicror R. Gold, b o t h of w h o m are probably best k n o w n for rheir c o n t r i b u t i o n s to the O x ford annotared Revised Standard Version (much of which was used again, with or w i t h o u t appropriate accrediring, in rhe N e w Revised Standard Version), have c o n tributed greatly to the approach taken in this chapter. Although they w o u l d b o t h identify themselves first with the Western C h u r c h — a n d each has a formidable k n o w l e d g e of t h e Eastern C h u r c h as w e l l — t h e a p p r o a c h itself goes b e y o n d geography. ' Veselin Kesich, The Gospel Image of Christ, rev. ed., (Cresrwood, N.Y.: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1992) chs. 2 - 3 ; and J o h n Breck, The Power of the Word in the Worshiping Church (Cresrwood, N.Y.: Sr. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1986) ch. 1.

62

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

tional") O r t h o d o x c h u r c h e s is d e s i r a b l e b u t n o t w i t h i n t h e s c o p e o f this c h a p t e r . O u r p o i n t o f d e p a r t u r e takes as a p r e s u p p o s i t i o n — w h i c h s o m e m i g h t prefer t o view as a h y p o t h e s i s — t h a t S c r i p t u r e is, a n d ever has b e e n , liturgical. S e c o n d , O r t h o d o x C h r i s t i a n s e x p e r i e n c e S c r i p t u r e a n d its i n t e r p r e t a t i o n p r i m a r i l y as a liturgical c e l e b r a t i o n , o t h e r t h a n in t h e i r p r i v a t e r e a d i n g a n d study. O n t h e first p o i n t , S c r i p t u r e is liturgical, t h e s t a t e m e n t is m a d e in t h e s t r o n g e s t possible sense. T o say it in s i m p l e t e r m s , S c r i p t u r e o r i g i n a t e d as t h e l i t u r g y o f t h e p e o p l e of G o d . For t h e specialist, t h e Sitz im Leben o f S c r i p t u r e is t h e T e m p l e l i t u r g y o f J e r u s a l e m a n d t h e l i t u r g y o f t h e C h u r c h — a l o n g w i t h their respective h i e r a r c h i e s . ' In p o p u l a r t e r m s o n e m i g h t e x p a n d t h e l o n g u s e d a x i o m t h a t t h e Psalms are "the p r a y e r b o o k " o f t h e T e m p l e a n d C h u r c h t o i n c l u d e all t h e b o o k s o f t h e Bible in t h i s " p r a y e r b o o k . " In s a y i n g S c r i p t u r e is liturgical, w e d o n o t m e a n to say m e r e l y t h a t liturgy is s c r i p t u r a l ; b u t m o r e o v e r t h a t w h a t was originally liturgy b e c a m e S c r i p t u r e . S c r i p t u r e h a d its e m e r g e n c e a n d c o n t i n u e d existe n c e in t h e liturgy, t h e liturgical life o f t h e Temple a n d C h u r c h , t h e c o m m u n a l prayers of t h e p e o p l e of G o d . 3

The s e c o n d p o i n t , t h a t O r t h o d o x e x p e r i e n c e S c r i p t u r e a n d its i n t e r p r e t a t i o n p r i m a r i l y as a liturgical c e l e b r a t i o n , is p r o b a b l y less controversial b u t is offered in d i r e c t c o n t i n u i t y w i t h t h e first. As a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d d e s c r i p t i o n , O r t h o d o x C h r i s t i a n s — s c h o l a r s , clergy, a n d l a i t y — r e c o g n i z e t h e p o i n t as t r u e . Even s o , o n e still m i g h t chal5

1

D u e to the rarity of English language materials o n the Bible in the O r t h o d o x C h u r c h , especially regarding questions on history and c a n o n , incredible statements can be found even in recent scholarly publications. For example, H a r r y M . Orlinsky and Robert G. Bratcher in A History of Bible Translation and the North American Contribution (Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1991) 9, date the origins of the Slavic version of the Bible to the fifth c e n t u r y — 4 0 0 years before any historian would claim that a Slavic alphabet was invented! Similarly, R. F. Collins in t h e New Jerome Biblical Commentary (F.nglewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1990) 1043, makes the extraordinary statement that, "Since the n i n e t e e n t h century, however, Russian O r t h o d o x theologians generally have not accepted the deuterocanonical b o o k s . " T h e claim is erroneous o n g r o u n d s of liturgical and intellectual history. [It should be noted that in other regards both A History of Bible Translation and the NJBC are accurate and r e c o m m e n d e d books.] T h i s is nor to say that exceptions c a n n o t be found. For example, the imperial edict in Ezra does n o t lend itself to the same interpretation. ' See Breck, Power of the Word, " I n t r o d u c t i o n , " wherein this and the unity between "Word and Sacrament" are explained from an O r t h o d o x perspective. For a good recent survey of the c a n o n with similar conclusions regarding the Bible in the C h u r c h in worship, see Joseph T. I.ienhard, The Bible, the Church, and Authority (Collegeville, Minn.: T h e Liturgical Press, 1995). For an insightful comparsion of Orthodoxy and evangelical Protestantism o n Scripture, see Grant R. O s b o r n e , " T h e M a n y 4

MlCHAKI. P R O K U ' R A T

63

lenge t h e s t a t e m e n t , t o ask if this is as it s h o u l d b e . G i v e n t h e first p o i n t a n d t h e s e l f - u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e O r t h o d o x as b e i n g t h e p e o p l e of G o d p a r excellence w h e n p a r t i c i p a t i n g in d i v i n e service, t h e a n swer t o t h e c h a l l e n g e q u e s t i o n is yes. A liturgical u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e W o r d o f G o d involves m a n y difficulties a n d d a n g e r s , t w o of w h i c h are discussed below. First, t h e liturgical c e l e b r a t i o n gives revelatory a n d historical, salvific events by G o d a mysteriological o r " p o e t i c - m y t h i c " e x p r e s s i o n — a n d this is n o t easily u n d e r s t o o d . T o t h e s y m p a t h e t i c , it l o o k s as if t h e l i t u r g y a t t e m p t s t o "recreate" events from t h e Bible b y r e p e a t i n g t h e s c r i p tural a c c o u n t , e l a b o r a t e d as a c o m p l e t e story. T o t h e less t h a n s y m p a t h e t i c , it looks as if t h e s c r i p t u r a l a c c o u n t has b e e n e x p a n d e d t o s u c h a degree in t h e liturgical c e l e b r a t i o n t h a t it has g o n e far b e y o n d available e v i d e n c e a n d i n f o r m a t i o n , it is " o u t o f b o u n d s . " T o t h e O r t h o d o x , t h e liturgical c e l e b r a t i o n is u n d e r s t o o d as a participation in the event itself, i.e., every Easter is a d i r e c t p a r t i c i p a t i o n in t h e resurrect i o n o f C h r i s t , every E u c h a r i s t is a p a r t i c i p a t i o n in t h e o r i g i n a l Last S u p p e r , etc. T h e liturgy is n o t m e a n t t o b e a r e - c r e a t i o n o r r e p e t i t i o n , n o r is it m e a n t to b e a " r e w r i t e " of t h e s c r i p t u r a l a c c o u n t , b u t a d i r e c t p a r t i c i p a t i o n in t h e (scriptural) s a v i n g acts o f G o d . For R u s sian p h i l o s o p h e r s a n d t h e o l o g i a n s early in t h i s c e n t u r y , like N . Berdyaev a n d S. Bulgakov, t h e c a t e g o r y " t r a n s - h i s t o r i c a l " — a c a t e g o r y c a p a b l e of c a p t u r i n g h e r m e n e u t i c s a n d theology, o r t h e larger m e a n ings o f h i s t o r y — i n c l u d e s t h o s e timeless e v e n t s c e l e b r a t e d b y t h e m y s t e r i o l o g i c a l o r " p o e t i c - m y t h i c " l i t u r g y . T h i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e living, liturgical W o r d is q u i t e different from a c o m m e n t a r y a p p r o a c h o r confessional d e f i n i t i o n b a s e d u p o n a list of " T h e B o o k s of S c r i p t u r e " — t h o u g h it n e e d n o t b e s o . 6

T h e s e c o n d difficulty in a liturgical u n d e r s t a n d i n g of S c r i p t u r e is t h e historical q u e s t i o n — w h a t t h e text m e a n t w i t h i n its o w n c o n t e x t . Clearly, h i s t o r i c a l facticity is i m p o r t a n t . W e agree w i t h t h e A p o s t l e Paul t h a t if C h r i s t was n o t raised from t h e d e a d , t h e n o u r faith is in v a i n . T h e N i c e n e - C o n s t a n t i n o p o l i t a n C r e e d also m a i n tains a historical p e r s p e c t i v e , as does t h e general m a i n s t r e a m of t h e and rhe O n e : T h e Interface Between O r t h o d o x and Evangelical Protestant H e r m e neutics," St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly, XXIX, 3 (1995) 2 8 1 - 3 0 4 . For us in the West, schooled in logical positivism, such a category simply could n o t exist. O n l y a "primitive religion" w o u l d repeat a cyclical liturgical celebration within linear time. Fortunately, the explanations of religion a n d m y t h by Mircea Eliade (sensitive to his O r t h o d o x b a c k g r o u n d ) , and recent recognition of the inadequacies of ratio rationaiis in describing the wholeness of the h u m a n being and society, have both further sensitized us to the validity of liturgical expression. 6

64

O R T H O D O X INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

J u d e o - C h r i s t i a n t r a d i t i o n . Still, it m i g h t b e o b j e c t e d t h a t s u c h a liturgical u n d e r s t a n d i n g of S c r i p t u r e b e t t e r p r e s e n t s t h o s e t r a n s - h i s torical e v e n t s t h a n it d o e s t h e h i s t o r i c a l . The o b j e c t i o n largely m i s construes the character of w h a t trans-historical means: Historical facticity is n o t t o b e e x c l u d e d , b u t i n c l u d e d . Besides t h i s , t h e Bible is t h e b o o k o f t h e p e o p l e o f G o d , a n d n o t vice versa; a n d it was n o t w r i t t e n t o satisfy m o d e r n p r e c o n c e p t i o n s s t e m m i n g from t h e p h i l o s o p h y o f logical p o s i t i v i s m . II. ORAL AND W R I I T E N

The first historical i n d i c a t i o n s of t h e w r i t t e n biblical t e x t t h a t w e h a v e f r o m w i t h i n t h e Bible itself are t h e f a m o u s e p i s o d e s of t h e f i n d i n g o f a b o o k in t h e Temple ( p r o b a b l y p a r t o f D e u t e r o n o m y ) d u r i n g Josiah's reign, a n d of t h e d i c t a t i o n b y t h e p r o p h e t J e r e m i a h t o B a r u c h in t h e sixth c e n t u r y B . C . The earliest scrolls a n d m a n u s c r i p t s of t h e biblical text ( Q u m r a n ) are from a t i m e m u c h later t h a n t h i s , closer to t h e b i r t h o f Jesus. D u e t o t h e fragility of w r i t i n g m a t e r i a l s , it is u n l i k e l y t h a t a n y s i g n i f i c a n t q u a n t i t y of earlier m a t e r i a l s will b e f o u n d , u n l e s s t h e y are i n s c r i b e d o n m e t a l or s t o n e . O u r c u l t u r a l p r e o c c u p a t i o n w i t h t h e w r i t t e n text s h o u l d n o t o b s c u r e o u r vision in s e e i n g a reality t h a t is foreign t o us: The Bible in its o w n t i m e was a p r o d u c t o f a n d existed w i t h i n oral c u l t u r e ( s ) . Even t h e w r i t t e n T o r a h or P e n t a t e u c h text, b r o u g h t f r o m B a b y l o n b y Ezra in t h e fifth c e n t u r y a n d c e r e m o n i a l l y read (i.e., r e a d a l o u d ) in its e n t i r e t y from a p l a t f o r m c o n s t r u c t e d n e a r t h e W a t e r G a t e ,

7

was

a c c o m p a n i e d b y a n oral t r a n s l a t i o n a n d / o r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ( N e h . 8 ) . M a n y examples p o i n t toward the primacy of the spoken word: "Hear, O Israel: 'The L O R D is o u r G o d , t h e L O R D a l o n e . . . . R e c i t e t h e m t o y o u r c h i l d r e n a n d talk a b o u t t h e m w h e n y o u are at h o m e a n d w h e n y o u are away, w h e n y o u lie d o w n a n d w h e n y o u rise" ( D e u t . 6 : 4 f ) . For t h o s e needful o f m o r e e x a m p l e s , suffice it t o say t h a t s c h o l ars r e c o g n i z e t h a t t h e v e r b " t o r e a d " in t h e a n c i e n t w o r l d p r i m a r i l y m e a n t "to r e a d a l o u d . " T h u s , w e are o b l i g a t e d t o d o b u s i n e s s w i t h t h e fact t h a t t h e Bible w i t h i n its o w n t i m e was n o t e x p e r i e n c e d as a b o o k or scroll, b u t as t h e s p o k e n a n d p r o c l a i m e d w o r d . W h a t d o e s t h i s m e a n t o us t o d a y a n d w h a t difference d o e s it m a k e ? W h a t d o e s it m e a n ? ' T h e first c o n s e q u e n c e of "orality" in t h i s sense is t h a t t h e w o r d s h a v e a " l i v i n g " aspect. They are especially

•' T h e Water Gate is identified as the "east gate of the T e m p l e " in 1 Esd. 9:38, which connects Ezras reading with the T e m p l e area or thereabouts.

MlCHAKI, P R O K U ' R A T

65

"alive" w h e n e x p e r i e n c e d a n d s p o k e n , a n d t h e y are e n t r u s t e d t o a c o m m u n i t y of faith, often t e r m e d t h e p e o p l e of G o d . For A m e r i c a n s w h o b e l o n g t o "liturgical c h u r c h e s , " this s h o u l d n o t be a difficult c o n c e p t . The " h o l y w o r d s " are p a r t of t h e c o m m u n a l expression o f w o r s h i p , t h e n as n o w : "Assemble t h e p e o p l e — m e n , w o m e n , a n d c h i l d r e n , as well as t h e aliens r e s i d i n g in y o u r t o w n s — s o t h a t t h e y m a y h e a r a n d learn t o fear t h e L O R D y o u r G o d a n d t o o b s e r v e dilig e n t l y all t h e w o r d s o f this law . . ." ( D e u t . 3 1 : 1 2 f ) . W h e n c o d i f i e d these " h o l y w o r d s " (or W o r d of G o d ) are u n d e r s t o o d as t h e " B o o k of t h e P e o p l e . " F o r t h e O r t h o d o x C h r i s t i a n all of these e l e m e n t s — t h e salvific e v e n t s , t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e c o m m u n i t y of t h e p e o p l e of G o d , a n d t h e liturgical expression o f this experience (the "holy words") in p r o c l a m a t i o n a n d p r e a c h i n g — a r e c o n s t i t u t i v e t o t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f S c r i p t u r e . For e x a m p l e , t h e d e l i v e r a n c e f r o m E g y p t , t h e form a t i o n of t h e p e o p l e delivered, as well as t h e S o n g o f M i r i a m cele b r a t i n g t h e e v e n t s , are all p a r t o f T r a d i t i o n — e v e n i n c l u d i n g t h e liturgical c e l e b r a t i o n of t h e e v e n t t h r o u g h t h e ages a n d t o d a y o n Pascha ( E a s t e r ) . T h e original oral t r a d i t i o n is intrinsically c o n n e c t e d to p r e s e n t - d a y liturgical usage, t h r o u g h the m e d i a t i o n of H o l y S c r i p t u r e a n d its i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , all a p a r t o f a l i v i n g , u n i n t e r rupted continuum. 8

W h a t difference d o e s it m a k e ? A n o r m a t i v e w a y o n e m a y p a r ticipate in H o l y T r a d i t i o n , especially t h e s a v i n g acts o f G o d , is in t h e liturgy, m e d i a t e d b y S c r i p t u r e . T h e r e f o r e , S c r i p t u r e a n d p r e a c h i n g have a s a c r a m e n t a l q u a l i t y in t h e b r o a d e r sense o f t h e w o r d . T h e Bible is n o t so m u c h history, l i t e r a t u r e , o r t h e o l o g y in t h e a b s t r a c t , as it is t h e liturgical b o o k of t h e C h u r c h . W h e n w e r e a d o u r privately o w n e d E n g l i s h - l a n g u a g e Bibles in o u r h o m e s , it is easy to forget t h a t t h a t literary m i l e s t o n e , t h e K i n g J a m e s V e r s i o n , was actually a t r a n s l a t i o n from B y z a n t i n e liturgical texts. T h e codices f r o m w h i c h m o d e r n English p r i n t e d texts are t r a n s l a t e d m i g h t best b e d e s c r i b e d as t h e liturgical b o o k s of t h e C h u r c h . W h y is t h e o r a l — a n d t h e l i t u r g i c a l — a s p e c t o f t h e Bible so diffic u l t for us t o grasp? First o f all, it is b e c a u s e all m o d e r n W e s t e r n c u l t u r e s are " w r i t t e n " ( a n d possibly " v i d e o " a n d " c o m p u t e r " ) before t h e y are "oral." As Fr. A. S c h m e m a n n was f o n d of p o i n t i n g o u t , m o r e w o r d s are p r i n t e d every w e e k in t h e S u n d a y e d i t i o n o f t h e New York Times t h a n t h e r e are in t h e w h o l e of t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t . W h a t w e 8

Conrrasr rhis u n d e r s t a n d i n g with the accurare Moslem self-identification, "People of the Book," since the Koran is primarily a literary work. Christians ignorant of Islam and their o w n history somerimes identify themselves as the "People of the B o o k " — a n u n f o r t u n a t e misrepresenration.

66

O R T H O D O X INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

h a v e e l s e w h e r e called t h e " p o s t - G u t e n b e r g i a n " B i b l e — a n i n d i v i d u ally affordable p r i n t e d c o l l e c t i o n o f all t h e b o o k s from G e n e s i s t o R e v e l a t i o n b o u n d u n d e r o n e c o v e r — h a s b e e n t h e n o r m for so m a n y c e n t u r i e s (in a c u l t u r e focused o n t h e i n d i v i d u a l ) t h a t w e h a v e forg o t t e n h o w e x c e p t i o n a l a n d rare a p r o d u c t i o n , in historical t e r m s , a p r i v a t e c o p y o f t h e B i b l e is. S i n c e i n d i v i d u a l s r e a d t h e

post-

G u t e n b e r g i a n Bible p r i v a t e l y a t will, a n d f r e q u e n t l y d e v o i d o f c o m m u n i t y c o n t e x t , t h e y risk b e i n g insensitive t o t h e c o m m u n a l mation

procla-

o f t h e W o r d . Even t h e classical m e m o r i z a t i o n o f biblical p a s -

sages has b e c o m e i n d i v i d u a l i z e d r a t h e r t h a n c o m m u n i t y - f o c u s e d in o u r A m e r i c a n c u l t u r e . The q u e s t for i n d i v i d u a l salvation h a s eclipsed t h e reality t h a t G o d usually saves t h e p e o p l e o f G o d first, a n d t h e n saves i n d i v i d u a l s b y i n c o r p o r a t i n g t h e m i n t o his p e o p l e . Private readings a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s — w h i c h h a v e t h e i r place in T r a d i t i o n t o o — h a v e all b u t s u p p l a n t e d liturgical p r o c l a m a t i o n a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . S e c o n d , it is difficult t o g r a s p t h e oral a n d liturgical c h a r a c t e r of t h e W o r d o f G o d b e c a u s e e v e n t h e n a m e s w e use p r e j u d i c e us in a d v a n c e . The w o r d " s c r i p t u r e " c o m e s f r o m t h e L a t i n scriptum

and

i n d i c a t e s s o m e t h i n g w r i t t e n . Similarly, t h e w o r d " B i b l e " c o m e s f r o m t h e p l u r a l G r e e k w o r d biblia

(related t o Byblos) a n d c o n n o t e s b o o k s

or a c o l l e c t i o n o f b o o k s . As a result, t h e p r i m a r y E n g l i s h t e r m s w e use for t h e W o r d o f G o d b o t h h a v e t o d o w i t h w r i t t e n b o o k s . O t h e r c u l t u r e s (e.g., G r e e k a n d R u s s i a n ) d o n o t always follow suit w i t h this usage. This o b s e r v a t i o n is n o t m a d e w i t h t h e i n t e n t o f c h a n g i n g t h e English language terminology, b u t rather with the aim of s h e d d i n g s o m e light o n o u r o w n American cultural p r e d i l e c t i o n s — o n e of the m o s t difficult tasks of exegesis. I I I . HEBREW AND GREEK

T h e history of the H e b r e w b o o k s a n d language from

the

B a b y l o n i a n Exile d o w n t h r o u g h t h e H e l l e n i s t i c a n d R o m a n p e r i o d s is a c o m p l e x a n d s h a d o w y o n e , a b o u t w h i c h s c h o l a r s c o n t i n u e to d e b a t e — n o r is it o u r p u r p o s e t o b r o a c h all t h e s e q u e s t i o n s . A few general observations s h o u l d suffice. A consensus exists a m o n g scholars t h a t t h e sixth c e n t u r y B . C . , a n d m o r e especially t h e time a n d place of t h e Babylonian Exile, was t h e matrix from w h i c h the T o r a h a n d m o s t of t h e p r o p h e t i c b o o k s e m e r g e d in their final w r i t t e n f o r m .

y

9

The reasons for

A m o r e radical position, e.g., van Scters' and others, holds that most o f these books were n o t only redacted, b u t moreover created, d u r i n g the Exile. I find this position t e n d e n t i o u s .

MlCHAKI. P R O K U ' R A T

67

this h a d to d o largely w i t h t h e cessation of social institutions, including liturgy, a n d t h e crises of the exiled c o m m u n i t y . P r i m a r y social i n s t i t u t i o n s for t h e s m a l l , pre-exilic J u d a h i t e state i n c l u d e d t h e m o n a r c h y a n d t h e J e r u s a l e m T e m p l e , b o t h of w h i c h b e c a m e m o r i b u n d d u r i n g t h e Exile. W i t h t h e e n d o f t h e Temple c a m e also t h e d e m i s e o f its l i t u r g y a n d liturgical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , i.e., p r o p h e c y , all p a r t o f t h e fabric of life for c e n t u r i e s before t h e invasion. The cessation o f t h e Temple liturgy, defeat b y a foreign p o w e r ( a n d g o d ! ) , a n d t h e t e m p t a t i o n s o f c o s m o p o l i t a n B a b y l o n i a n life crea t e d a w e l l - r e c o g n i z e d religious crisis of g r e a t d e p t h . A m o n g t h e m e m o r a b l e responses t o this c r i s i s — a p o c a l y p t i c i s m , a h o p e for ret u r n , t h e " S e c o n d Isaiah," e t c . — w e r e t h e c o d i f i c a t i o n of t h e H e b r e w b o o k s a n d , q u i t e p o s s i b l y , t h e c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h e l i t u r g y in B a b y l o n ( w i t h o u t sacrifice) in a s e t t i n g w h i c h e v e n t u a l l y b e c a m e the synagogue. Even after t h e (partial) r e t u r n of t h e Jews from B a b y l o n in 5 3 8 B . C . a n d following, t h e w o r k d o n e t h e r e ( B a b y l o n ) o n w h a t is n o w c o n s i d e r e d S c r i p t u r e m a i n t a i n e d a certain p r i m a c y . The B a b y l o n i a n J e w i s h c o m m u n i t y was n o t o n l y w e a l t h i e r a n d m o r e p o w e r f u l t h a n t h e J e r u s a l e m c o m m u n i t y , b u t it h a d l e a r n e d to t r a n s p o r t physically t h e liturgy a n d its b o o k s , b o t h o f w h i c h expressed t h e i d e n t i t y o f t h e p e o p l e o f G o d . Sacrifice r e m a i n e d t h e sole p r e r o g a t i v e o f t h e revivified J e r u s a l e m c o m m u n i t y in t h e r e b u i l t Temple, a fact m a d e plain by t h e A r a m a i c c o r r e s p o n d e n c e b e t w e e n t h e J e r u s a l e m T e m p l e c o m m u n i t y a n d t h e J e w i s h c o m m u n i t i e s at E l e p h a n t i n e in E g y p t a n d in B a b y l o n . O n l y t h e Temple a n d t h e p r i e s t h o o d w o u l d survive as i n s t i t u t i o n s in J e r u s a l e m , w h i l e t h e m o n a r c h y a n d its a c c o m p a n y i n g prophecy became silent—virtually non-extant. 10

'The intellectual p r e c e d e n c e o f t h e B a b y l o n i a n Jews is i l l u s t r a t e d in E z r a s r e t u r n a n d in t h e liturgical r e a d i n g of t h e b o o k s o f t h e T o rah o r P e n t a t e u c h . W h a t e v e r t h e d e g r e e of H e b r e w c o m p r e h e n s i o n , w h e n Ezra read t h e 'Torah in H e b r e w , it was necessary for t h e Levites (or Ezra h i m s e l f ) t o explain t h e i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e w o r d s t o his list e n e r s ( N e h . 8) in J e r u s a l e m . Ezra's " B i b l e " (Torah) w a s a m a n i f e s t a tion of a religious a n d political alliance b e t w e e n Jerusalem a n d B a b y l o n ; a n d it was t h e liturgical b o o k o f t h e places w h e r e t h e h o p e s for liturgy h a d never ceased, w h e r e t h e p r i e s t h o o d w a s a u t h o r i t a tively r e p r e s e n t e d . These c o n s t i t u t e d Ezra's claims t o a u t h o r i t y , a l o n g w i t h t h e p o w e r o f Persian s u p p o r t . ° Michael P r o k u r a t , llaggai and Z.echariah 1-8: A Form Critical (University Microfilms International: Dissertation Abstracts International. J u n e 15, 1989) 121f., 173f., 360f.

Analysis 4912A,

68

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

N o t e v e r y o n e was t o a c c e p t Ezra's a u t h o r i t y — o r his " B i b l e " — a n d t h e exclusivistic a u t h e n t i c i t y h e c l a i m e d for it. O n o n e h a n d , b y t h e first c e n t u r y B . C . t h e S a m a r i t a n s w o u l d codify their o w n s c r i p t u r e s a n d give p r e c e d e n c e t o t h e S h e c h e m i t e t r a d i t i o n o v e r t h e J e r u s a l e m i t e , p r e s e r v i n g a text in H e b r e w w i t h s o m e different spellings, b u t s u b s t a n t i a l l y t h e s a m e as t h e H e b r e w o f t h e later M a s o r e t e s . Historical questions relating to the Samaritans a n d the Samaritan P e n t a t e u c h are a p p r o p r i a t e to an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e Bible in t h e Persian, H e l l e n i s t i c , a n d R o m a n p e r i o d s , b u t are c o m p l e x . " O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e J e w i s h c o l o n i e s in E g y p t a p p e a r to have an u n i n t e r r u p t e d p r e s e n c e in t h a t c o u n t r y from t h e t i m e o f t h e Exile ( J e r e m i a h , E l e p h a n t i n e c o m m u n i t y , etc.) t h r o u g h t h e R o m a n d e s t r u c t i o n o f A l e x a n d r i a in t h e early s e c o n d c e n t u r y A . D . A l t h o u g h w e d o n o t k n o w as m u c h as w e m i g h t like a b o u t t h e i r liturgical p r a c tices a n d s c r i p t u r e s , t h e fact t h a t t h e y s e e m e d t o a p p e a l t o J e r u s a l e m from t i m e t o t i m e , a n d J e r u s a l e m a c c u s e d t h e m o f h e t e r o d o x y , w o u l d lead o n e t o d o u b t t h e i r full c o m p l i a n c e w i t h J e r u s a l e m liturgical a n d religious policy. ( I n d e e d , w h e n A l e x a n d r i a b e c a m e a l e a d i n g city of t h e M e d i t e r r a n e a n , t h e J e w s t h e r e m i g h t have e n t e r t a i n e d an a t t i t u d e of c o s m o p o l i t a n s u p e r i o r i t y over t h e i r " s u b u r b a n " n e i g h b o r s in J e r u s a l e m . ) In this fluid c o n t e x t t r a n s l a t i o n s w e r e m a d e i n t o G r e e k and Aramaic. A c o m m o n l y voiced opinion regarding the H e b r e w a n d Greek Bibles, especially r e g a r d i n g t h e b o o k s of t h e First C o v e n a n t (i.e., O l d T e s t a m e n t ) , was a n d is t h a t t h e H e b r e w Bible was t h e J e w i s h Bible, w h i l e t h e G r e e k was t h a t o f t h e C h u r c h . This r a t h e r s i m p l e view is at best m i s l e a d i n g , if n o t o n e t o be entirely rejected. A b e t t e r d e s c r i p t i o n m i g h t be t h a t t h e H e b r e w a n d G r e e k S c r i p t u r e s were b o t h legitimate synagogue traditions, a n d the C h u r c h a d o p t e d the tradit i o n o f t h e G r e e k - s p e a k i n g s y n a g o g u e s — a l t h o u g h even as late as t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y w i t h St. G r e g o r y N a z i a n z e n (leader o f t h e S e c o n d E c u m e n i c a l C o u n c i l ) a n d his c o n t e m p o r a r y , St. J e r o m e , we find s o m e C h r i s t i a n s e x p r e s s i n g a preference for t h e H e b r e w listing of b o o k s . H i s t o r i c a l i t e m s t h a t alert us t o a p a r i t y c l a i m e d for t h e t w o c o n t e m p o r a r y t r a d i t i o n s are t h e Letter o f Aristeas (ca. 1 0 0 B . C . ) , referring t o t h e G r e e k t r a n s l a t i o n of t h e H e b r e w , a n d Ben Sirach or Ecclesiasticus. The Letter of Aristeas resorts t o e x a g g e r a t e d m e a n s t o c o n v i n c e s u b s e q u e n t g e n e r a t i o n s t h a t t h e J e w i s h t r a n s l a t o r s were n o t o n l y qualified a n d w o r k i n g u n d e r E g y p t i a n i m p e r i a l t u t e l a g e , b u t :l

T h i s is largely d u e ro a terminological difficulty. All people living in the region of Samaria t h r o u g h o u t the three periods are n o t to be identified as Samaritan religious sectarians w h o advanced M r . Gerizim as a rival to M t . Z i o n .

MlC.HAKI. P R O K U ' R A T

69

t h a t t h e i r p r o d u c t was c r e a t e d b y a fantastic u n a n i m i t y . B e n Sirach's g r a n d s o n in t h e P r o l o g u e t o his g r a n d f a t h e r s w o r k finds it necessary t o w a r n t h e reader t h a t t h e G r e e k d o e s n o t always t r a n s l a t e t h e exact sense of t h e H e b r e w — a n e x p l a n a t i o n necessary b e c a u s e m a n y p e o p l e a s s u m e d it d i d . N e v e r t h e l e s s , t r a n s l a t i o n a l difficulties d i d n o t p r e v e n t h i m f r o m p r e s e n t i n g t h e G r e e k o f his g r a n d f a t h e r s w o r k "for t h o s e living a b r o a d w h o w i s h e d t o g a i n l e a r n i n g , b e i n g p r e p a r e d in c h a r a c t e r to live a c c o r d i n g t o t h e Law." If t h e a b o v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e e v i d e n c e is insufficient t o illustrate t h e p a r i t y c l a i m e d for t h e Greek translation with the H e b r e w original, one could a d d the witnesses of t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t w r i t e r s , a n d t o t h a t t h e voices o f P h i l o of A l e x a n d r i a a n d Flavius J o s e p h u s . G r e e k was h e r e t o stay. A t t h e s a m e t i m e as B e n Sirach t r a n s l a t e d w r i t i n g s from H e b r e w t o G r e e k ( a n d possibly before), o t h e r s t r a n s l a t e d biblical b o o k s , inc l u d i n g t h e P e n t a t e u c h , from H e b r e w i n t o A r a m a i c . K n o w n p r i m a rily from t h e medieval era as t h e A r a m a i c T a r g u m s ( T a r g u m i m ) , s o m e o f these w o r k s o r i g i n a t e d even before t h e t i m e o f t h e Talmud a n d t h e classical rabbis. Several d o c u m e n t s from Q u m r a n testify t o t h e early p r e - C h r i s t i a n d a t e o f A r a m a i c t r a n s l a t i o n efforts. A l s o , gospel q u o t e s of Jesus' w o r d s o n t h e cross are an A r a m a i c e q u i v a l e n t t o a H e b r e w p s a l m verse. A l t h o u g h t h e T a r g u m s h a v e a l o n g h i s t o r y o f t r a n s m i s sion, developing t h r o u g h the Byzantine period a n d beyond, the general p h e n o m e n o n r e p r e s e n t s a g o o d parallel t o t h e t r a n s l a t i o n s from H e b r e w to G r e e k a n d t h e w i d e s p r e a d interest in t h e t r a n s l a t i o n a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e H e b r e w text in t h e a n c i e n t w o r l d t h r o u g h late antiquity. The political u n i t y o f t h e a n c i e n t w o r l d a c h i e v e d b y A l e x a n d e r , a n d again b y t h e R o m a n s , gave G r e e k an u n p r e c e d e n t e d e c u m e n i c a l s t a t u s a m o n g l a n g u a g e s . O n e c o u l d say t h a t R o m a n m i l i t a r y m i g h t , G r e e k c u l t u r e a n d l a n g u a g e , a n d J e w i s h religion fascinated t h e w o r l d for c e n t u r i e s . 'The G r e e k l a n g u a g e was c l a i m e d by t h e a n c i e n t s t o have s u p e r i o r i t y over t h e H e b r e w o n p u r e l y l i n g u i s t i c g r o u n d s : spelli n g in G r e e k was m o r e exact t h a n t h e u n p o i n t e d H e b r e w text; a n d v e r b tenses a n d forms in G r e e k w e r e m o r e specific t h a n t h e i r H e b r e w c o u n t e r p a r t s , n o t t o m e n t i o n t h e accessibility o f G r e e k t o a worldwide population. The t r a n s l a t i o n of t h e H e b r e w b o o k s i n t o G r e e k a c c o m p l i s h e d an u n a n t i c i p a t e d e q u i v o c a t i o n o f c u l t u r a l s t r u c t u r e s b e t w e e n t h e S e m i t i c a n d G r e e k w o r l d s , t h e c u r i o u s results o f w h i c h w e live w i t h today. T h a t is t o say, t h e " t r a n s c u l t u r a l " i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of T o r a h w i t h Law, t h e F o r m e r P r o p h e t s w i t h H i s t o r y , C o v e n a n t w i t h W i l l o r Test a m e n t , e t c . — h o w e v e r necessary a n d inevitable from t h e t r a n s l a t o r s '

70

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

p o i n t of v i e w — h a v e given difficulty t o readers a n d scholars from medieval t i m e s until t h e p r e s e n t . For e x a m p l e , it is generally a c k n o w l e d g e d t h a t t h e H e b r e w w o r d " t o r a h " in m o s t c o n t e x t s is b e t t e r u n d e r s t o o d as " i n s t r u c t i o n " o r " t e a c h i n g " ; b u t w h e n given t h e sense o f R o m a n (or A m e r i c a n ) "law," it b e c o m e s s o m e t h i n g different. A g a i n , w h e n t h e T o r a h a n d F o r m e r P r o p h e t s were e n t i t l e d "writings a n d h i s t o r y " in t h e S e p t u a g i n t , in m e d i e v a l t i m e s t h e y s o o n b e c a m e "all t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e u n i v e r s e , " even t h o u g h t h a t m e a n i n g was never i m p l i e d by t h e H e b r e w t i t l e s — n o r d i d scholars t h r o u g h late a n t i q u i t y force t h a t u n d e r s t a n d i n g o n t h e m . Finally, a n d p r o b a b l y m o s t significantly, " c o v e n a n t " was c o n s i s t e n t l y r e n d e r e d " t e s t a m e n t " b y t h e S e p t u a g i n t translators, t h e Q u m r a n t r a n s l a t o r s , a n d t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t a u t h o r s — p o s s i b l y t h e result o f t h e lack of i n t e r n a t i o n a l (or s u z e r a i n t y ) c o v e n a n t s , m a d e o b s o l e t e in t h e H e l l e n i s t i c a n d R o m a n Periods b y t h e c o n q u e s t s o f A l e x a n d e r a n d R o m e . As t h e o l o g i a n s h a v e b e e n l e a r n i n g t h r o u g h o u t t h e t w e n tieth century, covenant n o t only had a millennium's w o r t h o f history b e h i n d it at the time of the Babylonian Exile, b u t r e p r e s e n t e d a significant, living r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n a k i n g a n d v a s s a l — m u c h m o r e t h a n a t e s t a m e n t o r d e a t h b e q u e s t . B o t h Jesus a n d Paul d o u b t l e s s h a d "berith" o r " c o v e n a n t " o n their lips a n d in their m i n d s for t h e "words of institution" a n d at other times, b u t the Greek translation does n o t readily c o n v e y this to u s . For c o n t e m p o r a r y q u e s t i o n s r e g a r d i n g H e b r e w a n d G r e e k Bibles in w h i c h O r t h o d o x p a r t i c i p a t e , a few r e m a r k s are in order. S i n c e b o t h t h e G r e e k a n d Russian c h u r c h e s use t h e L u c i a n i c S e p t u a g i n t , t h e r e is a t e n d e n c y a m o n g t h e faithful t o r o m a n t i c i z e t h e u n a n i m i t y of t h e liturgical w i t n e s s a n d b e a u t y o f l a n g u a g e , d e p i c t i n g t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e G r e e k S c r i p t u r e s as d e v o i d o f c o n t r o v e r s y a n d i n d e p e n d e n t of t h e H e b r e w . H i s t o r y reveals flaws in this a t t i t u d e . For example, d u r i n g the fourth century (considered by some O r t h o d o x to be a t h e o l o g i c a l a p o g e e ) t h e r e w e r e t h r e e different S e p t u a g i n t s in use in t h e m a j o r C h r i s t i a n c e n t e r s of t h e eastern M e d i t e r r a n e a n : (1) T h e c h u r c h e s in A n t i o c h a n d C o n s t a n t i n o p l e u s e d t h e L u c i a n i c r e c e n sion. (2) C a e s a r e a in Palestine utilized a t r a n s l a t i o n b y O r i g e n t h a t was u p d a t e d b y P a m p h i l u s a n d E u s e b i u s . (3) A l e x a n d r i a h a d a t h i r d r e c e n s i o n b y a c e r t a i n H e s y c h i u s a b o u t w h i c h little else is k n o w n . T h e C o n s t a n t i n o p o l i t a n p r a c t i c e , b a s e d o n a t r a n s l a t i o n d o n e by t h e P r e s b y t e r L u c i a n ( w h o preferred A t t i c forms) in t h a t s a m e c e n t u r y , finally w o n o u t . A n o t h e r e x a m p l e of t h e H e b r e w - G r e e k issue can b e f o u n d in t h e m a j o r w o r k s o f t h a t i n s t r u c t o r o f t h e C a p p a d o c i a n Fathers, O r i g e n .

MlCHAEI. P R O K U R A T

71

P r o b a b l y d u e t o his extensive influence in m a t t e r s christological, these c o n c e r n s eclipsed his p r i m a r y effort a n d t h a t of t h e e n t i r e A l e x a n d r i a n S c h o o l : S c r i p t u r e . It s h o u l d b e r e m e m b e r e d t h a t his g r e a t e s t research effort was a c o m p a r i s o n o f t h e H e b r e w o r i g i n a l , o c c u p y i n g t h e first c o l u m n of his S c r i p t u r e listings, w i t h t h e v a r i o u s G r e e k r e n d e r i n g s ; a n d his w o r k m a y b e c i t e d as a d i r e c t p r e d e c e s s o r t o t h e S e p t u a g i n t t r a n s l a t i o n w o r k of t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y , m e n t i o n e d a b o v e . The p o i n t h e r e is t h a t O r i g e n b e g a n w i t h t h e H e b r e w o r i g i n a l , t r a n s l i t e r a t e d it i n t o G r e e k , a n d p r o c e e d e d t o list t h e v a r i o u s G r e e k t r a n s l a t i o n s as c o m p a r e d t o t h e H e b r e w . For O r i g e n , t h e H e b r e w text was t h e c o n t r o l l i n g factor t o w h i c h t h e G r e e k h a d t o b e c o m p a r e d . Today, the relationships between the various H e b r e w a n d Greek textual t r a d i t i o n s have t o b e t a k e n very seriously, as seriously as O r i g e n t o o k t h e m , especially in regard t o t h e m a n y n e w resources a n d t o o l s w e n o w h a v e a t o u r d i s p o s a l . T h i s was i l l u s t r a t e d in t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y by Patriarch Philaret of M o s c o w w h o oversaw the Russian Bible t r a n s l a t i o n (see b e l o w ) , w h i c h is n o w p u b l i s h e d a n d u s e d by t h e R u s s i a n c h u r c h . In a d d i t i o n , o n e of t h e g r e a t e s t resources i l l u m i n a t i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e H e b r e w a n d G r e e k textual t r a d i t i o n s has b e e n given t o us this c e n t u r y b y t h e discoveries a t Q u m r a n . Q u m r a n has p r o v e d t h a t b o t h t h e H e b r e w M a s o r e t i c t e x t a n d t h e G r e e k S e p t u a g i n t are faithful a n d c r e d i b l e witnesses t o t h e a n c i e n t t r a d i t i o n s a n d m a n u s c r i p t s . In m a n y w a y s , c e r t a i n l y b e c a u s e of t h e d i s c o v e r y a n d availability o f n e w i n f o r m a t i o n , w e are p r e s e n t l y in a p o s i t i o n t o d o w o r k w i t h S c r i p t u r e t h a t was i m p o s s i b l e even a h a l f c e n t u r y ago. I V . T H E LANGUAGE OE THE COUNCILS

All ( " C h a l c e d o n i a n " ) O r t h o d o x c h u r c h e s l o o k t o t h e Seven E c u m e n i c a l C o u n c i l s , a n d related local c o u n c i l s , as definitive of H o l y Tradition, as a s t a t e m e n t o f faith over t i m e , as a n o r m o f " o r t h o p r axy," e t c . ; a n d t h e t r a d i t i o n s a n d d e c i s i o n s of these C o u n c i l s are very m u c h alive today, f r o m t h e N i c e n e - C o n s t a n t i n o p o l i t a n C r e e d t o icon o g r a p h y . Issues r e l a t i n g t o S c r i p t u r e existed at each o f t h e s e v e n , '

2

t h o u g h w e shall l i m i t o u r i n v e s t i g a t i o n t o s o m e g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e t o p i c of t h e c a n o n o r list o f b o o k s t o b e r e a d — b o t h in c h u r c h a n d o t h e r w i s e . H e n r y C h a d w i c k , " T h e Status of E c u m e n i c a l C o u n c i l s in A n g l i c a n T h o u g h t , " The Heritage of the Early Church, David N e i m a n a n d Margaret Schatkin, eds., Orientalia Christiana Analecta 195 ( R o m a : P o n t . I n s t i t u t u m S t u d i o r u m O r i e n t a l i u m , 1973) 39.3-408.

72

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

Even t h o u g h h i s t o r y has n o t given us t h e m i n u t e s o f t h e First C o u n c i l in A . D . 3 2 5 , w e d o k n o w from o t h e r w r i t i n g s a n d s u b s e q u e n t councils that questions a b o u t Scripture were on the agenda. T h e p r i m a r y t h e o l o g i c a l d e b a t e over S c r i p t u r e at t h e First C o u n c i l h a d t o d o w i t h its use w i t h i n a c o m m o n creed, a c r e e d w i t h r o o t s in C a e s a r e a , later called t h e N i c e n e C r e e d . O n e g r o u p insisted t h a t a creed c o u l d o n l y use w o r d s f o u n d in S c r i p t u r e , w h i l e t h e p r e v a i l i n g c o n s e n s u s c l a i m e d t h a t t h e w o r d s of S c r i p t u r e d o n o t e x h a u s t d i v i n e revelation a n d h u m a n e x p e r i e n c e ; a n d t h e h i s t o r y o f intellect a n d passage o f t i m e h a d raised n e w q u e s t i o n s w h i c h w o u l d best be a n swered by " c o n t e m p o r a r y language." Gnosticism a n d Arianism h a d c r e a t e d a crisis t h a t o n l y t h e G r e e k w o r d " h o m o o u s i o s " o r " c o n s u b s t a n t i a l " — a n o n b i b l i c a l w o r d — c o u l d address. T h e s a m e g r o u p m a i n t a i n e d t h a t t h e d e s c r i p t i o n of Jesus C h r i s t as " h o m o o u s i o s " or "of o n e essence w i t h t h e F a t h e r " was in fact " b i b l i c a l , " t h o u g h t h e w o r d itself d o e s n o t a p p e a r in t h e Bible. Briefly, t h e y a r g u e d t h a t t h e w o r d was n o t a new d e f i n i t i o n o r n e w revelation o f G o d , b u t m e r e l y a r e s t a t e m e n t of H o l y T r a d i t i o n u s i n g c o n t e m p o r a r y ( f o u r t h - c e n t u r y ) l a n g u a g e ; p a r a p h r a s i n g St. Paul in 1 C o r i n t h i a n s 11 a n d 1 5 , w h a t has b e e n received is b e i n g passed o n . St. A t h a n a s i u s of A l e x a n d r i a , r e c o g n i z e d as a m o t i v a t i n g t h e o logical force at N i c a e a a n d a u t h o r o f t h e "Life o f St. A n t h o n y , " iss u e d his 3 9 t h Festal Letter (Easter, A . D . 3 6 7 ) listing t h e b o o k s to be r e a d in his d i o c e s a n c h u r c h e s . A l t h o u g h t h e first definitive b o o k list c a m e from a h i e r a r c h as a n e d i c t , it was u n d e r s t o o d as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f c h u r c h p r a c t i c e h a n d e d d o w n from t h e a p o s t l e s — t h e " C a n o n of T r u t h . " This was t h e first d o c u m e n t t o list t h e t w e n t y - s e v e n b o o k s of t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t w h i c h w e r e c o g n i z e today. T h e list h a d n o official a u t h o r i t y o u t s i d e A t h a n a s i u s ' s diocese b u t was p r o b a b l y given special r e c o g n i t i o n b e c a u s e o f h i s s t a t u s w i t h i n t h e c h u r c h a n d Alexandria's p o s i t i o n as a l e a d i n g city o f t h e E m p i r e . It is also p o s sible t h a t A t h a n a s i u s was r e s p o n s i b l e for p r e p a r a t i o n o f C o d e x V a t i c a n u s w h i l e exiled in R o m e , since t h e b o o k lists in t h e Easter letter a n d V a t i c a n u s are i d e n t i c a l . W e p r o c e e d t o an e x a m i n a t i o n of select c a n o n s from t h e c o n c i l i a r p e r i o d . A p o s t o l i c C a n o n 8 5 : T h i s earliest c a n o n i c a l reference t o a list of t h e b o o k s o f S c r i p t u r e is difficult t o d a t e , j u s t as a n y o n e o f t h e A p o s t o l i c C a n o n s is difficult t o d a t e i n d i v i d u a l l y ; b u t w e have d i s covered t h a t t h e b o d y o f eighty-five c a n o n s was c o m p i l e d b y t h e first h a l f o f t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y , p r o b a b l y s h o r t l y after t h e First E c u m e n i cal C o u n c i l . It is u n n e c e s s a r y t o assert t h a t C a n o n 8 5 was w r i t t e n b y

MlC.HAKI. P R O K U ' R A T

73

an a p o s t l e , b u t it has always b e e n given "apostolic a u t h o r i t y " w i t h i n t h e O r t h o d o x C h u r c h (even before t h e C o u n c i l o f T r u l l o ) . W e k n o w t h a t t h e A p o s t o l i c C a n o n s d o r e p r e s e n t t h e earliest c a n o n law o f t h e C h u r c h a n d p r o b a b l y o r i g i n a t e before t h e year 3 0 0 . It is t r a d i t i o n a l t o ascribe t h e greatest a u t h o r i t y t o this p a r t i c u l a r c a n o n w h e n e x a m i n i n g all t h o s e ecclesiastical rules t h a t p e r t a i n t o a d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f the books of Scripture. " L e t t h e f o l l o w i n g b o o k s b e c o u n t e d v e n e r a b l e a n d sacred b y all of y o u . . . ." S u c h a forceful b e g i n n i n g clause clearly s h o w s t h e h i g h s t a t u s of S c r i p t u r e . T h e first g r o u p w h i c h t h e c a n o n lists are t h o s e b o o k s o f t h e First C o v e n a n t ( O l d Testament). A m o n g these are c o n t a i n e d m a n y " d e u t e r o c a n o n i c a l b o o k s , " i.e., W i s d o m o f S o l o m o n , t h r e e B o o k s o f M a c c a b e e s , etc.' Besides these t h e C h u r c h r e c o m m e n d s t o t e a c h t h e y o u n g p e o p l e Ecclesiasticus ( W i s d o m of S i r a c h ) . W i t h this a d m o n i t i o n t h e C h u r c h recognizes t h e value of a c e r t a i n b o o k , a l t h o u g h o n e n o t r e c o m m e n d e d for liturgical usage. S u c h a p o s i t i o n is an i m p o r t a n t a t t i t u d e t o o b s e r v e : A n o n l i t u r g i c a l b o o k has a m a r k e d , r e c o g n i z e d value. 3

The s e c o n d list in t h e c a n o n e n u m e r a t e s b o o k s o f t h e N e w Test a m e n t . In a d d i t i o n to t h e G o s p e l s a n d Epistles o n e w o u l d e x p e c t , R e v e l a t i o n is m o s t n o t a b l y o m i t t e d , w h i l e t w o Epistles of C l e m e n t a n d t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n s of C l e m e n t are a p p e n d e d . The C o n s t i t u t i o n s are a d d r e s s e d t o t h e b i s h o p s a n d are n o t t o be read b y all, "on acc o u n t o f t h e mystical t h i n g s in t h e m , " p r o b a b l y r e f e r r i n g t o t h e disciplina arcani, i.e., r e t i c e n c e in revealing details of C h r i s t i a n m y s teries ( s a c r a m e n t s ) . W i t h this brief advice we can sense a p r i n c i p l e o f d i s c e r n m e n t a n d d i s c r e t i o n . N o t e v e r y o n e is able t o read a b s o l u t e l y everything a n d u n d e r s t a n d it properly. Both Scripture a n d liturgy bear a certain "gnosis," o r k n o w l e d g e , t h a t needs to be interpreted correcdy. T h e Metered P o e m s o f St. Gregory the T h e o l o g i a n : D a t i n g from t h e m i d d l e o f t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y , this piece gives advice as to w h i c h are t h e " g e n u i n e b o o k s " o f S c r i p t u r e , a n d was later given t h e a u t h o r :1

Pace H a r o l d S c a n l i n , " T h e O l d T e s r a m e n r C a n o n in t h e O r t h o d o x C h u r c h e s , " New Perspectives on Historical Theology, ed. Bradley Nassif ( G r a n d Rapids, M i c h . : William B. F.erdmans Publishing C o m p a n y , 1996) 3 0 6 : "Virtually every k n o w n statement o n the canon from the East u p to the closing of the fourth c e n t u r y limits the O l d T e s t a m e n t canon to the H e b r e w c a n o n . . . ." Even w i t h o u t Apostolic C a n o n 8 5 , the s t a t e m e n t could n o t stand in the face of fourth-century translation efforts (e.g., the I.ucianic Septuagint et al.) and liturgical practice. Scanlin also appears to be unaware of the use of Hebrew in Slavic and Russian Bible translation (p. 311), for which see below, 'Slavic and Russian." (The Russian and Slavic churches comprise approximately two-thirds of the worlds Orthodox population.)

74

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

ity o f a c a n o n . St. G r e g o r y r e m a r k s t h a t m a n y m a l i g n a n t b o o k s have b e e n c i r c u l a t e d a n d c a u t i o n s h o u l d b e s h o w n in c h o o s i n g s c r i p t u r a l r e a d i n g s . H e lists t w e n t y - t w o b o o k s of t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t . Those t h a t h e o m i t s are Esther, 1 Esdras, a n d all t h e d e u t e r o c a n o n i c a l b o o k s . 'This is t h e s h o r t e s t O l d ' T e s t a m e n t c a n o n ( a c c e p t e d a n d a p p r o v e d ) a n d is closest in c o n t e n t t o t h e " H e b r e w Bible." O f t h e b o o k s of t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t St. G r e g o r y m e n t i o n s t w e n t y - s i x . H e o m i t s t h e Reve l a t i o n . O f n o t e , t h e A p o s t l e J o h n is referred t o as " t h e e n t e r e r o f h e a v e n " ; a n d t h u s t h e r e s e e m s to be an i n d i r e c t reference t o Revelat i o n . It is i n t e r e s t i n g t h a t G r e g o r y has i n d i c a t e d a k n o w l e d g e of Reve l a t i o n a n d has n o t i n c l u d e d it in his c a n o n . I a m b i c s o f St. A m p h i l o c i u s , B i s h o p o f Seleucus: Later in t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y Gregory's c o u s i n , St. A m p h i l o c i u s , w r o t e " t h e m o s t t r u e c a n o n of t h e d i v i n e l y g i v e n S c r i p t u r e s . " In t h e w o r d i n g o f this c a n o n w e find s o m e helpful a n d revealing i n f o r m a t i o n : " W e s h o u l d k n o w t h a t n o t every b o o k w h i c h is called S c r i p t u r e is to be received as a safe g u i d e . For s o m e are tolerably s o u n d a n d o t h e r s are m o r e t h a n d o u b t f u l . " O b v i o u s l y , t h e r e m u s t h a v e b e e n m a n y different a n d v a r i a n t b o o k s of S c r i p t u r e d i s s e m i n a t e d , possibly t h o s e o f t h e G n o s tic c o r p u s , w h i c h were labeled u n d e p e n d a b l e b y t h e m a j o r i t y o p i n i o n . It is n o t e w o r t h y t h a t A m p h i l o c i u s uses t h e t e r m i n o l o g y "tolerably s o u n d " in referring t o s o m e of t h e b o o k s . It s e e m s t h a t t h e r e was a very fine line t h a t d i v i d e d t h o s e b o o k s w h i c h were a c c e p t a b l e , yet d o u b t f u l , f r o m t h e o t h e r b o o k s t h a t w e r e u n a c c e p t a b l e , b u t still w o r t h y o f c o n s i d e r a t i o n . A d d i t i o n a l l y , h e e n u m e r a t e s t h e b o o k s as t h o s e " w h i c h t h e i n s p i r a t i o n of G o d h a t h given." In t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t c a n o n h e lists all o f t h e p r o t o c a n o n i c a l b o o k s b u t o m i t s t h e d e u t e r o c a n o n i c a l o n e s . A t t h e e n d o f this first list he c o n t i n u e s , "to these s o m e a d d E s t h e r . " In his list of b o o k s o f t h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t c a n o n all t h e usual o n e s are i n c l u d e d e x c e p t R e v e l a t i o n . 'The c o m m e n t c o n c e r n i n g t h e R e v e l a t i o n o f J o h n is t h a t s o m e a c c e p t it, " b u t by far t h e m a j o r i t y say it is s p u r i o u s . " It s e e m s t h a t A m p h i l o c i u s c o n s i d e r s it in t h e c a t e g o r y of "very d o u b t f u l , b u t a c c e p t e d b y economiaT S u c h hazy d i s t i n c t i o n s a n d a willingness to m a k e plausible c o n c e s s i o n s s h o w t h a t t h e F a t h e r s of t h e C h u r c h u s e d a m e t h o d o l o g y t h a t was b o t h flexible a n d o p e n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n s o f rational d i s c o u r s e . S y n o d o f Laodicea, C a n o n 5 9 : D a t i n g f r o m t h e s e c o n d h a l f of t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y , t h e text p r o p e r d o e s n o t h a v e t o d o d i r e c t l y w i t h e s t a b l i s h i n g a b o d y o f S c r i p t u r e , b u t r a t h e r w i t h c o n t r o l l i n g t h e texts

MlCHAKI, P R O K U ' R A T

75

t h a t arc r e a d in c h u r c h : " N o p s a l m s c o m p o s e d by p r i v a t e i n d i v i d u a l s n o r a n y u n c a n o n i c a l b o o k s m a y b e r e a d in c h u r c h . " A n e s t a b l i s h e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f this c a n o n reveals t h a t t h e rule a p p r o v e s o n l y t h o s e h y m n s a n d a n t i p h o n s w h i c h are s a n c t i o n e d . All r e a d i n g o f n o n s a n c t i o n e d p r i v a t e c o m p o s i t i o n s is p r o h i b i t e d . The c a n o n is n o t m e a n t to restrict h y m n s a n d r e a d i n g s solely t o t h a t of s c r i p t u r a l o r i g i n . T h e relevance this p o s i t i o n has t o o u r s t u d y is t h a t t h e C h u r c h herself exercised a u t h o r i t y t o j u d g e t h a t w h i c h was t o be r e a d w i t h i n h e r "ecclesia." She d i d n o t close t h e possibility o f f u r t h e r e x p a n s i o n o f t h e b o d y o f m a t e r i a l read, b u t t o o k t h e p o w e r t o d i s c e r n w h a t t h a t b o d y w o u l d be. W e well k n o w t h a t s h e later a p p r o v e d m a n y h y m n s of private composition a n d incorporated t h e m into the liturgical cycle. S y n o d o f L a o d i c e a , C a n o n 6 0 : The g e n u i n e n e s s o f this c a n o n is v i g o r o u s l y q u e s t i o n e d . Briefly, its text is a d e t a i l e d list of t h o s e b o o k s t h a t are t o be i n c l u d e d in t h e S c r i p t u r e s . T h e r e are significant o m i s sions o f s o m e of t h e m o r e controversial b o o k s , i.e., R e v e l a t i o n , all t h e B o o k s o f M a c c a b e e s , a n d W i s d o m o f S o l o m o n . As a result o f these i m p o r t a n t o m i s s i o n s a n d t h e q u e s t i o n a b l e a u t h o r s h i p of t h e text, m a n y c o m m e n t a t o r s ascribe little i m p o r t a n c e t o it. H i p p o ( 3 9 3 ) , C a n o n 3 6 : Briefly, this is t h e a n c i e n t e p i t o m e o f C a n o n 2 4 of t h e African C o d e ( b e l o w ) , e x c e p t t h a t H i p p o a l l o w e d t h e readings o f t h e "Passions o f t h e M a r t y r s " o n t h e anniversaries o f t h e m a r t y r s ' d e a t h s . It seems t h a t n o t h i n g aside from S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e " P a s s i o n s " was r e a d in t h e African C h u r c h before t h e African C o d e , w h i l e a n t i p h o n a l a n d n o n s c r i p t u r a l c o m p o s i t i o n s were s u n g r a t h e r t h a n read. In a n y case, w e can o n l y s p e c u l a t e as t o t h e reason t h a t t h e "Passions o f t h e M a r t y r s " was d r o p p e d from liturgical use in t h e African C h u r c h b e t w e e n A . D . 3 9 3 a n d 4 1 9 . A f r i c a n C o d e , C a n o n 2 4 : In this c a n o n o f t h e early fifth c e n t u r y w e find a d e t a i l e d list o f t h e c a n o n i c a l S c r i p t u r e s w h i c h t h e m e m b e r s o f t h e African c h u r c h " h a v e received from o u r fathers t o be r e a d in t h e c h u r c h . " It is t h e m o s t c o m p l e t e a n d l e n g t h y c o m p i l a t i o n o f b o o k s o t h e r t h a n A p o s t o l i c C a n o n 8 5 , a n d actually c o n f o r m s t h e closest t o t h e Bible p r i n t e d today, w i t h t h e d e u t e r o c a n o n i c a l b o o k s ( o m i t t i n g 3 M a c c a b e e s a n d t h e Prayer of M a n a s s e h ) a n d all t h e b o o k s of t h e N e w Testament. This list differs from t h e A p o s t o l i c C a n o n in its o m i s s i o n o f t h e C l e m e n t i n e w r i t i n g s a n d B e n Sirach, a n d its i n c l u sion of Revelation.

76

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

The w o r d i n g o f t h e i n t r o d u c t o r y clause, " t h a t besides t h e can o n i c a l S c r i p t u r e s n o t h i n g b e r e a d in c h u r c h u n d e r t h e n a m e o f d i v i n e S c r i p t u r e , " gives i n d i c a t i o n o f p r o b l e m a t i c factors in t h e ecclesiastical s i t u a t i o n . Clearly, o t h e r texts were read o r s u n g besides S c r i p t u r e . O f these t h e African c o u n c i l h a d n o fear. R a t h e r , t h e y were d e a l i n g w i t h t h e p r o b l e m of heretical o r s p u r i o u s b o o k s b e i n g r e a d in t h e c h u r c h w i t h t h e a u t h o r i t y , sanctity, a n d v e n e r a t i o n t h a t t h e y a c c o r d e d o n l y t o t h e d i v i n e S c r i p t u r e . A g a i n s t these p s e u d e p i g r a p h i c w r i t i n g s t h e C h u r c h of Africa w a n t e d t o p r o t e c t its m e m b e r s . Q u i n i s e x t , C a n o n 2: A t e n d o f t h e s e v e n t h c e n t u r y t h e C o u n c i l of T r u l l o ( Q u i n i s e x t ) gave b l a n k e t a p p r o v a l t o all c a n o n s previously r e c o g n i / x d in t h e C h u r c h , i n c l u d i n g t h e b u l k o f t h e a b o v e c a n o n s . Specific m e n t i o n is m a d e of t h e A p o s t o l i c C a n o n s in relation t o a d e t e r m i n a t i o n of a list of biblical b o o k s . Q u i n i s e x t c h o s e to o m i t t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n s of t h e H o l y A p o s t l e s w r i t t e n b y C l e m e n t b e c a u s e err o n e o u s teachers h a d i n t r o d u c e d heretical d o c t r i n e s i n t o t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n s , a n d t h e y were rejected "so as t h e b e t t e r t o m a k e sure o f t h e edification a n d s e c u r i t y o f t h e m o s t C h r i s t i a n flock." As a result o f this Q u i n i s e x t c a n o n , o n e is led t o c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e a p p r o v a l of t h e c a n o n o f S c r i p t u r e given was n o t specific, b u t g e n e r a l . This c o n c l u s i o n is t r u e in p a r t b e c a u s e t h e v a r i o u s c a n o n s c i t e d conflict as to t h e i r c o n t e n t . N e v e r t h e l e s s , a t t e n t i o n s h o u l d focus o n this s e c o n d c a n o n of T r u l l o , w i t h its e m p h a s i s o n A p o s t o l i c C a n o n 8 5 . W h e r e a s later c a n o n s are o n l y m e n t i o n e d b y n a m e , t h e r e are n o less t h a n ten lines o f d i s c u s s i o n a n d c o m m e n t a r y o n A p o s t o l i c C a n o n 8 5 . G i v e n t h e a u t h o r i t y o f a p o s t o l i c a u t h o r s h i p , it was also t h e first a n d m o s t d e t a i l e d c o m m e n t a r y f o u n d in ecclesiastical law c o n c e r n i n g t h e c a n o n of S c r i p t u r e . N o set criticism existed at this t i m e c l a i m i n g t h a t later c a n o n s s u p e r s e d e d t h e i r p r e d e c e s s o r s ; a n d in t h i s case it m i g h t b e a r g u e d t h a t t h e o p p o s i t e is t r u e , t h e earliest c a n o n was seen as t h e m o s t a u t h o r i t a t i v e . T h e r e f o r e , w e are left w i t h t h e conclusion t h a t Apostolic C a n o n 8 5 was accepted at Trullo as t h e principal c a n o n of Scripture, t h o u g h a "first a m o n g equals." ( O t h e r later c a n o n s a t Trullo reflected o n t h e character of individual books.) S e v e n t h E c u m e n i c a l C o u n c i l , C a n o n 1: This c a n o n accepted all the canons of the Sixth Ecumenical and the Quinisext Councils. As w e have seen, t h e s e c o n d c a n o n o f Q u i n i s e x t gave b l a n k e t a p p r o v a l t o m a n y differing t r a d i t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e c o n t e n t of t h e Bible, a n d this a p p r o v a l was c o n f i r m e d b y t h e S e v e n t h C o u n c i l . W h e r e does t h a t leave us w h e n w e a t t e m p t t o describe t h e a t t i t u d e t o w a r d

MlCHAKI, P R O K U ' R A T

77

t h e listing of biblical b o o k s at Q u i n i s c x t a n d t h e S e v e n t h C o u n c i l ? T h e r e s e e m t o b e t h r e e t e n a b l e possibilities ( e n u m e r a t e d in a n asc e n d i n g o r d e r of preference): 1. T h e fathers a t t h e s e c o u n c i l s a c c e p t e d A p o s t o l i c C a n o n 8 5 as h a v i n g t h e greatest a u t h o r i t y a n d o m i t t e d t h e Constitutions b e c a u s e t h e y h a d b e e n heretically c o r r u p t e d . This c o m p r i s e d t h e c o n t e n t of t h e Bible t h e y used. 2 . E i t h e r t h e y d i d n o t c o n s i d e r t h e differences in t h e v a r i o u s c a n o n s o f S c r i p t u r e as i m p o r t a n t , o r t h e y s a w t h e m as c o n s t r u c t i v e criticism of t h e diverse b o o k s . 3 . T h e y were heir t o a liturgical cycle t h a t d e t e r m i n e d t h e readings in t h e c h u r c h e s , a n d this cycle m a d e t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e c a n o n of S c r i p t u r e a n " e m p t y p r o b l e m " : Lex orandi est lex credendi. T h e several liturgical practices a d e q u a t e l y a n d a c c u r a t e l y r e p r e s e n t e d t h e faith of t h e C h u r c h . Based o n t h e t r a d i t i o n o f t h e Seven E c u m e n i c a l C o u n c i l s , it is l e g i t i m a t e t o assert t h a t t h e C h u r c h has c o n t i n u a l l y used d i s c e r n m e n t in h e r selection of scriptural readings. S h e has e n c o u r a g e d m e m bers t o utilize d i s c r e t i o n a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g in t h e i r use o f a u t h o rized a n d u n a u t h o r i z e d b o o k s . A l s o , positive s p i r i t u a l value was oft e n a s c r i b e d t o n o n s c r i p t u r a l , a p o c r y p h a l , o r p s e u d e p i g r a p h i c texts t h a t w e r e ( a n d are) beneficial t o C h r i s t i a n readers, in s p i t e o f ecclesiastical p r o h i b i t i o n of liturgical r e c i t a t i o n . I m p o r t a n t t o m o d e r n scholarly historical p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s , it is i n a p p r o p r i a t e t o take late d e f i n i t i o n s o f t h e s c r i p t u r a l c a n o n (e.g., the W e s t m i n s t e r C o n f e s s i o n o r t h e C o u n c i l o f Trent) a n d a n a c h r o n i s t i c a l l y retroject m o d e r n a s s u m p t i o n s b a c k o n t o a n y p r e v i o u s era, as w i t h t h e " C o u n c i l " o f J a m n i a . ' The C h u r c h seems t o have a c c e p t e d regional differences in t h e listing o f b o o k s , as in t h e i n c l u s i o n o f t h e B o o k of R e v e l a t i o n in t h e W e s t a n d its exclusion elsewhere. It is u n d e r s t a n d a b l e h o w a n i n d i v i d u a l w h o s e p e r s p e c t i v e was l i m i t e d t o o n l y o n e M e d i t e r r a n e a n region w o u l d a s s u m e t h a t t h e regional list of b o o k s w a s n o r m a t i v e for all o t h e r places a n d for all t i m e , t h o u g h t h e a t t i t u d e a n d c o n c l u s i o n , u p o n e x a m i n a t i o n , are improper a n d inaccurate. 1

'•* Daniel J. H a r r i n g t o n , " I n t r o d u c t i o n to the Canon,™ The New Interpreter's Bible, ed. I.eander E. Keck, et al. (Nashville: A b i n g d o n Press, 1994) 7 - 2 1 . Both H a r r i n g t o n a n d I.ienhard, The Bible, simply dismiss a late date for t h e M u r a t o r i a n C a n o n . Cf. Lee M . M c D o n a l d , The Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon (Peabody, Mass.: H e n d r i c k s o n Publishers, Inc., 1995) 2 0 9 - 2 0 . M c D o n a l d s u p ports the view of canon established by Albert Sundberg, u p o n whose w o r k m u c h of c o n t e m p o r a r y canonical studies is based.

78

O R T H O D O X INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

V . LATIN

The g l o r i o u s h i s t o r y of t h e t r a n s l a t i o n of t h e Bible i n t o L a t i n is well k n o w n from t h e w r i t i n g s of St. J e r o m e . As w e shall see below, o n e o f t h e first t r a n s l a t i o n s of t h e e n t i r e Bible i n t o C h u r c h Slavic was m a d e f r o m a L a t i n e d i t i o n s h o r t l y before t h e R e f o r m a t i o n . T h e w h o l e of t h i s t r a n s l a t i o n p r o j e c t f r o m L a t i n to Slavic h a d a p r o f o u n d affect o n R u s s i a n c u l t u r e in t h e f o l l o w i n g c e n t u r i e s . D u r i n g t h i s t i m e t h e o l o g i c a l e d u c a t i o n in Russia was c o n d u c t e d exclusively in L a t i n , b o t h s p o k e n a n d w r i t t e n . R u s s i a n t e x t b o o k s a n d t h e o l o g i c a l treatises d i d n o t exist. In s p i t e o f t h e fact t h a t L a t i n o c c u p i e s a special place as t h e l a n g u a g e o f t h e V u l g a t e a n d as t h e m e d i e v a l t h e o l o g i c a l l a n g u a g e of E u r o p e , t h e f o c u s o f O r t h o d o x a t t e n t i o n o n t h e L a t i n B i b l e lies e l s e w h e r e . O r t h o d o x c o m m e n t a r y o n t h e L a t i n o f St. A u g u s t i n e , especially in r e g a r d t o his a n t h r o p o l o g y , s p a n s o v e r fifteen h u n d r e d years, f r o m t h e t i m e o f his c o n t e m p o r a r i e s (see T h e o d o r e o f M o p s u e s t i a a n d J o h n Cassian) to the present.

15

The c o m m e n t a r y is q u i t e c o n s i s t e n t ,

b u t is negatively critical; a n d it has g o n e relatively u n h e e d e d b e c a u s e it u n d e r m i n e s A u g u s t i n e ' s t e a c h i n g o n o r i g i n a l s i n — f o u n d a t i o n a l t o W e s t e r n a n t h r o p o l o g y a n d soteriology, if n o t t o W e s t e r n c u l t u r e as a w h o l e . The a t t i t u d e of E a s t e r n t h e o l o g i a n s t o w a r d A u g u s t i n e a n d his p r e - V u l g a t e L a t i n Bible (or t o w a r d his 'Trinitarian t h e o l o g y ) p r o b ably a p p e a r s c u r i o u s t o W e s t e r n e r s , s i n c e t h e O r t h o d o x are h a p p y to recognize t h e man's sanctity, l e a r n e d a c h i e v e m e n t s , p r o f o u n d insights, etc., b u t t h e y t a k e e x c e p t i o n to p a r t i c u l a r t h e o l o g i c a l f o r m u l a t i o n s , l a b e l i n g t h e m e r r o n e o u s — f o r w h i c h t h e O r t h o d o x in t u r n are acc u s e d of b e i n g s e m i - P e l a g i a n . Reciprocally, t h e O r t h o d o x are s u r p r i s e d at t h e c o m p l e t e a c c e p t a n c e o f all o f A u g u s t i n e ' s t h e o l o g y b y W e s t e r n t h e o l o g i a n s . As V l a d i m i r Lossky h a s p o i n t e d o u t , t h e reasons for this m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g lie in t h e s t a t u s a c c o r d e d " D o c t o r s of t h e W e s t e r n C h u r c h " in m e d i e v a l t i m e s , i.e., if o n e s u b s c r i b e s t o all t h e t e a c h i n g s of a recogn i z e d d o c t o r , o n e will b e w i t h o u t t h e o l o g i c a l e r r o r ; a n d A u g u s t i n e enjoys this s t a t u s . The East c o n s i d e r s t h i s m e d i e v a l a t t i t u d e n o t o n l y u n c r i t i c a l f r o m a s c h o l a r l y p o i n t o f view, b u t also o u t s i d e o f C h r i s t i a n Tradition: D o c t r i n a l "infallibility" is a very specialized c o n c e p t :s

David Weaver, " P r o m Paul to Augustine: R o m a n s 5:12 in Early Christian Exegesis," St. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly, XXVII, 3 (1983) 187-206; XXIX, 2 (1985) 133- 59; XXIX, 3 (1985) 2 3 1 - 5 7 . Stanislas I.yonnet, S.J., 'T.e sens de ¿ 6 to en R o m . 5,12 et l'exegese des Peres Grecs," Biblica, 3 6 (1955) 4 3 6 - 5 6 and 'T.e Peche Originel en R o m . 5,12," RiblicaA\ (1960) 3 2 5 - 5 5 .

MlCHAKI. P R O K U ' R A T

79

t h a t is n o t a t t r i b u t e d t o i n d i v i d u a l s , b u t is m o s t often u s e d in h i s torical retrospect t o describe conciliar decisions of t h e w h o l e C h u r c h . ' F u r t h e r , lest o n e g e t t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t this a p p r o a c h is solely a c r i t i q u e of m e d i e v a l R o m a n C a t h o l i c theology, t h e O r t h o d o x see a s i m i l a r a t t i t u d e t o w a r d a u t h o r i t y in t h e c h u r c h e s o f t h e R e f o r m a t i o n . F o r e x a m p l e , if n o t t h e w r i t i n g s o f A u g u s t i n e , t h e n t h o s e of Luther, Calvin, or other of t h e Reformers are frequently accorded a d e facto—if n o t d e jure—"infallible status" by m a n y Protestants today. 6

A u g u s t i n e ' s a n t h r o p o l o g y , especially r e g a r d i n g c r e a t i o n , original sin, b a p t i s m , a n d g r a c e , is a n i n t e g r a t e d s y s t e m a n d is b a s e d t o a large e x t e n t o n his close exegesis o f R o m . 5 : 1 2 . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , t h e pre-Vulgate N o r t h African Latin Bible h e used ( a n d t h a t A m b r o s i a s t e r u s e d before h i m ) m i s t r a n s l a t e d St. P a u l ' a n d read, "Sin c a m e i n t o t h e w o r l d , a n d d e a t h t h r o u g h sin, a n d so d e a t h s p r e a d t o all m e n , t h r o u g h o n e m a n , in whom all m e n s i n n e d {in quo omnes peccaverunt)." T h e G r e e k p r e p o s i t i o n a l p h r a s e s h o u l d be t r a n s l a t e d , " b y which (death) all m e n s i n n e d . " [ H o w e v e r o n e translates t h e p h r a s e , t h e q u e s t i o n lies in t h e p r o p e r a n t e c e d e n t t o t h e p r o n o u n . G r e e k , like E n g l i s h , accepts t h e last o c c u r r i n g n o u n as t h e a n t e c e d e n t t o t h e p r o n o u n , w h i c h in this case is " d e a t h . " ] A u g u s t i n e ' s S c r i p t u r e t o l d h i m t h a t e v e r y o n e s i n n e d in A d a m , ergo original sin. Paul actually s a i d t h a t d e a t h c a m e i n t o t h e w o r l d b e c a u s e of A d a m ' s s i n , a n d resultingly all p e o p l e sin b e c a u s e of t h e i r fear o f d e a t h , s o m e t h i n g q u i t e different from the above, a n d also m o r e judicious for t h e rest of humanity.' 7

8

Nevertheless, the East a d m i t s of n o guarantees for conciliar doctrinal infallibility (which are c o n r e m p o r a n e o u s with the council being held). M a n y councils were convened which proclaimed themselves "Ecumenical" and were n o t so recognized. T h a t is to say, the classical question of authority is handled quite differently in the East from the way it is handled in the West. See also C h a d w i c k , " T h e Status of Ecumenical Councils." Remarkably, a translational a m b i g u i t y is maintained in English language Bibles at this p o i n t today: the Greek preposition is rendered "because" rather t h a n "by which (death)." H o w d o the O r t h o d o x u n d e r s t a n d R o m . 5:12? Since Paul's t h o u g h t can be schematized as typological parallelism in R o m . 5 : 1 2 - 2 1 , repeated in 6 : 1 5 - 2 3 , and a n o t h e r in 1 Cor. 1 5:40-49, there should be lirtle d o u b t as ro what he m e a n t . For example, for type-prototype read: A d a m - C h r i s t , sin-grace, dearh-life, etc., all of which are causally connected and run parallel. Again, the essence of R o m . 5:12-21 is summarized in 6 : 2 3 , "For the wages of sin is death, b u t the free gift of G o d is erernal life in Chrisr Jesus o u r Lord." T h i s typological parallelism, sometimes studied under the rubric of chiasm, compares favorably with the "descending and ascending" parrern long recognized in Phil. 2:5f, which is usually categorized as a pre-Pauline h y m n . :

ORTHODOX

80

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

1

As J. Pclikan has s h o w n , ' A u g u s t i n e e x p a n d s this idea o f o r i g i nal sin, f o l l o w i n g A m b r o s i a s t e r at first ( w h o m A u g u s t i n e q u o t e s ) , t h e n r o o t i n g it in p r o c r e a t i o n ; b u t s u c h a view of sin a n d p r o c r e a t i o n is d a n g e r o u s l y c l o s e t o — i f n o t i d e n t i c a l w i t h — t h e s t a n d a r d M a n i c h a e a n v i e w A u g u s t i n e h e l d for n i n e years before his a d u l t c o n version t o C h r i s t i a n i t y , a n d for w h i c h his c o n t e m p o r a r i e s criticized h i m . Paul's view of t h e m a t t e r — w e r e m e m b e r Paul was t r a i n e d as a r a b b i — h a d n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h sexuality p e r se, o r i g i n a l sin, or original guilt. It m i g h t b e t t e r be c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y 2 Bar. 5 4 : 1 5 , 19: " F o r t h o u g h A d a m first s i n n e d a n d b r o u g h t u n t i m e l y d e a t h u p o n all, yet of t h o s e w h o w e r e b o r n from h i m each o n e o f t h e m has p r e p a r e d for his o w n soul t o r m e n t t o c o m e , a n d , again each o n e o f t h e m has c h o s e n for h i m s e l f glories t o c o m e . . . . A d a m is t h e r e f o r e n o t t h e cause, save o n l y o f his o w n s o u l , b u t each o f us has b e e n t h e A d a m of his o w n s o u l . " T h e g n o s t i c d o c t r i n e A u g u s t i n e read i n t o his Latin Bible i n c l u d e d n o t o n l y t h e sexually t r a n s m i t t e d sin a n d g u i l t o f o r i g i n a l sin, b u t also t h e d o c t r i n e of t h e " d i s t o r t e d h u m a n i m a g e , " w h i c h r e n d e r e d t h e i m a g e o f G o d in h u m a n b e i n g s " d e s t r o y e d . " T h i s m a y be c o n t r a s t e d w i t h a general insistence in t h e East o n t h e " u n d i s t o r t e d i m age of G o d " in m e n a n d w o m e n , w h e r e i n o n l y t h e likeness n e e d s to be recovered, w h i l e t h e i m a g e is l a t e n t l y p r e s e r v e d . N o n e t h e l e s s , A u g u s t i n e p u t t h e " n e w " C h r i s t i a n d o c t r i n e to w o r k w i t h great results, b u t w i t h a focus t h a t further s e p a r a t e d h i m from classical Pauline theology. 20

21

A u g u s t i n e used t h e revised d o c t r i n e p r i m a r i l y as a foil against t h e Pelagians w h o c l a i m e d t h a t b a p t i s m was u n n e c e s s a r y . H i s res p o n s e was t h a t b a p t i s m was a b s o l u t e l y necessary d u e to t h e h u m a n being's " d e s t r o y e d n a t u r e " w h i c h was in n e e d o f b a p t i s m a n d grace. T h i s a l m o s t m e t a p h y s i c a l a r g u m e n t m a y be c o n t r a s t e d w i t h Paul's e m p h a s i s o n b a p t i s m as a r e t u r n from i d o l a t r y a n d a false c r e a t u r e l y i n d e p e n d e n c e . Similarly, in d e a l i n g w i t h t h e b a p t i s m o f i n f a n t s A u g u s t i n e ' s focus is o n d e l i v e r a n c e from "original sin." For Paul b a p t i s m is c e r t a i n l y c h a r a c t e r i z e d as b e i n g for " r e m i s s i o n o f s i n s , " b u t

19

See Jaroslav Pelikan, The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (¡00-600), Vol. I: The Christian Tradition (Chicago: T h e University of Chicago Press, 1971) 2 9 9 301. Ibid. ' It shotdd be sobering for theologians to recognize that w h a t was originally a H e b r e w parallelism, "image and likeness," has been dissected, been given distinct meanings, been passed through a gnostic filter, been served u p repeatedly d u r i n g the Reformation, and is still an object of ongoing debate in Christian anthropology. :

MlCHAKI. P R O K U R A T

81

t h e m a j o r i t y o f references deal w i t h b a p t i s m " i n t o C h r i s t . "

2 1

In b o t h

i n s t a n c e s r e g a r d i n g b a p t i s m A u g u s t i n e favors a m e t a p h y s i c a l , p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g a p p r o a c h a i m e d at i n d i v i d u a l salvation, w h i l e Paul speaks primarily a b o u t an imitation of the death a n d resurrection of Christ, w h i c h addresses a sinful w o r l d , b u t m o r e t h a n a n y t h i n g , i n c o r p o rates all m e m b e r s i n t o a life in C h r i s t a n d t h e C h u r c h . U l t i m a t e l y , for A u g u s t i n e this d o c t r i n e b e c a m e t h e e n t i r e p r o v i d e n t i a l r e a s o n i n g b e h i n d t h e i n c a r n a t i o n : s o m e o n e h a d t o b e b o r n virginally, w i t h o u t o r i g i n a l sin a n d w i t h an u n d i s t o r t e d n a t u r e , in o r d e r t o r e t u r n h u m a n i t y t o t h e s a m e "sinless" (asexual?) s t a t e . T h i s p o s i t i o n is a far cry f r o m Paul's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e r o a d t o D a m a s c u s e p i s o d e , J o h n ' s r e p o r t i n g o f J e s u s ' first m i r a c l e at C a n a , o r A t h a n a s i u s ' s On the carnation,

In-

all of w h o m u n d e r s t o o d G o d as self-revealing by n a t u r e ,

a n d n o t p r o v i d e n t i a l l y c o n s t r a i n e d t o r e s p o n d t o a difficulty c a u s e d by h u m a n sexual b e h a v i o r . A l t h o u g h J e r o m e ' s V u l g a t e cleared u p difficulties w i t h differing O l d L a t i n e d i t i o n s t h a t c i r c u l a t e d in R o m e a n d N o r t h

Africa,

A u g u s t i n e ' s (forgivable) eisegesis r e m a i n s w i t h u s . T o d a y , if o n e asks a n y W e s t e r n e r w h a t A d a m a n d Eve's sin w a s , t h e a n s w e r "sex" is given unhesitatingly and u n a n i m o u s l y — t h e gnostic myth remains, the G r e e k s c r i p t u r a l text n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g . T h i s a t t i t u d e is n o t o n l y a p o p u l a r m i s c o n c e p t i o n , b u t f u n c t i o n s at " h i g h " t h e o l o g i c a l levels: w i t n e s s t h e r e c e n t N e w Revised S t a n d a r d Version r e n d e r i n g of Ps. 5 1 : 5 , " I n d e e d , I was b o r n guilty, a s i n n e r w h e n m y m o t h e r c o n ceived m e , " i n c o r p o r a t i n g A u g u s t i n i a n "original sin" a n d "original g u i l t " i n t o o n e line ( w h e r e i n t h e Revised S t a n d a r d Version h a d b e e n m o r e careful). The O r t h o d o x u n d e r s t a n d t h i s f o r m o f g n o s t i c i s m t o b e n o t o n l y m i s o g y n o u s , b u t m i s a n t h r o p i c , d e n y i n g a positive value 2

to h u m a n s e x u a l i t y — w h i c h is n o t d e n i e d in a n y biblical t e x t . ' V I . SLAVIC AND RUSSIAN

T h e t r a d i t i o n a l b e g i n n i n g s o f t h e t r a n s l a t i o n of t h e Bible i n t o Slavic are w i t h t h o s e fathers of Slavic literary c u l t u r e , Cyril ( + 8 6 9 ) , " From the available evidence ir does nor seem rhar infant baptism was an issue in Paul's time, since the baptism of households probably would have included all rhe d e p e n d e n t m e m b e r s , slaves, children, etc., just as the celebration o f Passover in Jewish households would have been inclusive of all household m e m b e r s . " This rheological affirmation is shared by some Wesrern biblical exegeres. See Erhard S. Gerstenberger, Psalms, Part I with an Introduction to Cultic Poetry, Vol. XIV: The Forms of the Old Testament Literature (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988) 214, and other references cired rhere.

82

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

b a p t i z e d C o n s r a n t i n c , a n d his o l d e r b r o t h e r M e t h o d i u s ( + 8 8 4 ) . Cyril, k n o w n as " C o n s t a n t i n e t h e P h i l o s o p h e r " for his a c a d e m i c skills, a n d M e t h o d i u s , w h o w o u l d c o n t i n u e t r a n s l a t i o n w o r k w i t h disciples in Bulgaria after his b r o t h e r ' s d e a t h , w e r e m e m b e r s of t h e Slavic-speaki n g c o m m u n i t y in T h e s s a l o n i k a , p a r t of a "Slavic p r e s e n c e " t h e r e d a t i n g b a c k at least t o t h e sixth c e n t u r y A . D . T h e b r o t h e r s were acc o m p l i s h e d l i n g u i s t s , a n d Cyril r e m a r k a b l y s o , m a s t e r i n g G r e e k , Slavic, L a t i n , H e b r e w , a n d Syriac. They were b o t h e m p l o y e d b y t h e B y z a n t i n e E m p e r o r M i c h a e l III a n d t h e g r e a t P a t r i a r c h P h o t i u s as emissaries t o t h e A r a b s a n d K h a z a r s , a n d p r i m a r i l y as m i s s i o n a r i e s to S l a v i c - s p e a k i n g l a n d s o n t h e D a n u b e a n d in t h e B a l k a n s . By t h e t i m e P r i n c e Rostislav of M o r a v i a r e q u e s t e d missionaries from C o n s t a n t i n o p l e t o t e a c h his p e o p l e t h e i r o w n l a n g u a g e ( 8 6 2 ) — i n o r d e r t o foil G e r m a n political a m b i t i o n s — i t is p r o b a b l e t h e b r o t h e r s h a d already begun w o r k i n g o n s o m e type of alphabet. T h e early h i s t o r y of t h e Slavic Bible is t o o c o m p l e x t o r e p e a t in full, b u t s o m e o f t h e m o r e n o t a b l e p o i n t s b e a r m e n t i o n i n g , m a n y o f w h i c h are historical ironies. T h e first q u i r k of h i s t o r y is t h a t t h e Slavic a l p h a b e t a t t r i b u t e d t o C o n s t a n t i n e - C y r i l ' s inventiveness (Cyrillic) was p r o b a b l y c r e a t e d later b y M e t h o d i u s ' s disciples in Bulgaria in t h e last d e c a d e of the n i n t h c e n t u r y . ' M a n y scholars n o w believe t h a t C o n s t a n t i n e - C y r i l d e v i s e d a n o t h e r a l p h a b e t , G l a g o l i t i c , w h i c h was utilized b y t h e M o r a v i a n s b u t s o o n fell i n t o disuse; a n d his h a d n o t b e e n t h e first a t t e m p t . Earlier in t h e s a m e c e n t u r y t w o B y z a n t i n e e m p e r o r s t r i e d unsuccessfully t o synthesize a Slavic a l p h a b e t ; a n d t h e F r a n k s t r a n s l a t e d a small liturgical selection o f C h r i s t i a n texts from Latin i n t o Slavic w i t h t h e use o f L a t i n letters. 2

A s e c o n d i r o n y is t h a t t h e p r e l i t e r a r y Slavic l a n g u a g e h a d n o theological o r religious v o c a b u l a r y , n o r a v o c a b u l a r y o f p h i l o s o p h y or social i n s t i t u t i o n s , w h i c h c o u l d serve as a basis for t r a n s l a t i o n . C o m p o s i t e G r e e k w o r d s , like o u r English "theo-logy" a n d "tris-agion," b e c a m e n e w Slavic w o r d s w i t h identical c o m p o s i t i o n from G r e e k r o o t s . T h e i n f l u e n c e o f t h e G r e e k Bible was so f o r m a t i v e in t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of t h e Slavic Bible over t h e next century, o r r a t h e r o f Slavic literary l a n g u a g e in g e n e r a l , t h a t t h e w o r d c o u n t a n d w o r d o r d e r M

R o m a n Jakobson, "Sr. Consrantine's Prologue ro the Gospel," St. Vladimir's Seminary Quarterly, VII, 1 (1963) 14-19, and o t h e r articles in the same n u m b e r . Special thanks to Dr. T h o m a s Klocek of DePaul University for an updated bibliography on the O h r i d literary school, including the following m o r e accessible irems: Radmila Ugrinova-Skalovska, " C l e m e n t of O h r i d a n d the F o u n d i n g of the O h r i d Literary School," Macedonian Review, XVI, 3 (1986) 2 5 8 - 6 2 ; N . L. Tunirsii, Sv. Kliment (Tipografiia Sv. TV. Sergiivoii I.avry, 1913) 2 2 4 - 6 0 [in Russian].

MlC.HAKI. P R O K U ' R A T

83

often b e c a m e t h e s a m e in b o t h Bibles. This was t r u e to a s u r p r i s i n g d e g r e e : W h e n particles existed in G r e e k w h i c h h a d n o Slavic c o u n t e r p a r t , a p a r t i c l e was i n v e n t e d a n d i n s e r t e d i n t o t h e Slavic biblical text a t t h e a p p r o p r i a t e p o i n t ! (Cf. A q u i l a s G r e e k t r a n s l a t i o n o f H e b r e w a little over o n e - h a l f m i l l e n n i u m earlier.) N o o t h e r literary l a n g u a g e , w i t h t h e possible e x c e p t i o n of H e b r e w , was so p r o f o u n d l y i n f l u e n c e d by t h e biblical text. The Slavic l a n g u a g e b e c a m e " l i t e r a t e " in c o n f o r m i t y t o t h e G r e e k Bible w h i c h gave it its v o c a b u l a r y a n d s y n t a x , as well as its theological o r i e n t a t i o n . A t h i r d historical r i d d l e b e g i n s w i t h t h e M o r a v i a n s , w h o originally r e q u e s t e d B y z a n t i n e m i s s i o n a r i e s a n d received t h e h e l p . The m i s s i o n a r i e s m a d e use o f t h e Slavic v e r n a c u l a r liturgically a n d in p r e a c h i n g , b u t t h e M o r a v i a n s d i d n o t b e c o m e t h e p r i m a r y vehicle of t h e B y z a n t i n e - S l a v i c m i s s i o n . This lot fell t o Boris of Bulgaria w h o , w i t h i n a few years o f t h e o r i g i n a l m i s s i o n , a c c e p t e d C h r i s t i a n i t y from C o n s t a n t i n o p l e in o r d e r t o be delivered from t h e M o r a v i a n s ! The Slavic v e r n a c u l a r was successfully salvaged b y t h e B u l g a r i a n s w h e n t h e y g r a n t e d a s y l u m to M e t h o d i u s ' s circle of disciples, e.g., C l e m e n t of O h r i d ( O c h r i d a ) a n d o t h e r s . The f o u r t h a n d last e q u i v o c a t i o n falls t o t h e B y z a n t i n e s . W h e n C o n s t a n t i n e - C y r i l a n d M e t h o d i u s first b e g a n t o read t h e Bible a n d p r a y in Slavic, t h e y were a c c u s e d of heresy b y t h e Latin C h r i s t i a n s . T h e " t h r e e - l a n g u a g e s heresy" was a belief t h a t t h e Bible c o u l d o n l y be r e a d in o n e of t h e t h r e e l a n g u a g e s i n s c r i b e d o n t h e cross o f J e s u s — H e b r e w , G r e e k , o r L a t i n . In s p i t e of t h e Latin c h a r g e t h e b r o t h e r s r e m a i n e d firm in t h e i r resolve to c o n t i n u e u s i n g Slavic, o s t e n s i b l y d e f e n d e d b y C o n s t a n t i n o p l e . The B y z a n t i n e e q u i v o c a t i o n lies in t h e fact t h a t n o t all t h e G r e e k s w e r e c o n v i n c e d o f t h e l e g i t i m a c y of t h e use of Slavic: t h e E m p e r o r t h o u g h t t h a t t r a n s l a t i o n was a d e p a r t u r e from t r a d i t i o n ; C o n s t a n t i n e - C y r i l was afraid of an accusation of heresy from t h e G r e e k s w h e n h e p r a y e d in Slavic; a n d i n d e e d , t h e s a m e r e c r i m i n a t i o n s r e a p p e a r e d w i t h t h e arrival o f G r e e k m i s s i o n a r i e s in Bulgaria w i t h i n t h e c e n t u r y . A l t h o u g h C o n s t a n t i n o p l e theoretically a c k n o w l e d g e d t h e t h e o l o g i c a l validity o f t h e use of o t h e r l a n g u a g e s , in p r a c t i c e t h e y d i s p l a y e d a b i t o f " B y z a n t i n e c h a u v i n i s m . " 25

As w i t h t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e t r a n s l a t i o n o f t h e S e p t u a g i n t from H e b r e w , so t o o t h e t r a n s l a t i o n o f t h e L u c i a n i c r e c e n s i o n a n d t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t from G r e e k i n t o Slavic is c l o u d e d b y h a l f - t r u t h s . T h e p o p u l a r version o f t h e h i s t o r y says t h a t t h e o l d e r M e t h o d i u s a n d

" D i m i t r i Obolensky, The Byzantine Commonwealth: Eastern Europe (Crestwood, N.Y.: Sr. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1971) 2 0 2 - 3 .

500-1453

84

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

t w o o f his disciples finished t r a n s l a t i n g all t h e b o o k s o f t h e Bible from G r e e k after t h e d e a t h o f b r o t h e r C y r i l , t h a t is b e t w e e n 8 6 9 a n d 8 8 4 . This d e s c r i p t i o n is p r o b a b l y b a s e d o n a n o v e r s i m p l i f i c a t i o n or t h e desire t o h a v e t h e s a i n t e d b r o t h e r s finish t h e m o n u m e n t a l task w i t h i n t h e i r lifetimes. A d e c a d e o r so later t h e exarch J o h n o f B u l garia said t h a t Cyril h a d translated t h e G o s p e l B o o k a n d Epistle B o o k , w h i l e M e t h o d i u s h a d t r a n s l a t e d sixty o t h e r b o o k s from G r e e k i n t o Slavic. Even if w e e m p l o y a s h o r t c a n o n , w h i c h n e i t h e r t h e G r e e k s n o r t h e Slavs ever d i d , t h e n u m b e r s c i t e d are insufficient for a w h o l e Bible o f a n y t y p e . T h e early n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y R u s s i a n h i s t o r i a n M e t r o p o l i t a n Evgenii ( B o l h o v i t i n o v ) s t a t e d t h a t a full t r a n s l a t i o n w a s never m a d e b y t h e s a i n t e d b r o t h e r s . In a d d i t i o n , s i n c e n o c o m p l e t e m a n u s c r i p t o f t h e Slavic Bible exists from t h e w h o l e of t h e Kievan P e r i o d ( X - X I I I ) , we m a y d o u b t w h e t h e r t h e e n t i r e t r a n s l a t i o n was e x e c u t e d d u r i n g this t i m e . N o n e t h e l e s s , t h e K i e v a n P e r i o d w a s n o t d e v o i d of t h o s e intere s t e d in t h e Bible, especially in c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e p o p u l a r p o w e r of l i t u r g y a n d t h e p e r s o n a l p i e t y o f t h e p e o p l e o f Kievan R u s ' . Since t h e O l d Testament e n j o y e d l i m i t e d liturgical use, o n l y t h e p r e s c r i b e d O l d Testament l e c t i o n a r y was collected i n t o o n e liturgical b o o k , in p r a c t i c e r e n d e r i n g a c o m p l e t e c o l l e c t i o n unnecessary. F o r b o t h l i t u r gical a n d private use, t h e available biblical b o o k s c i r c u l a t e d in s m a l l e r c o l l e c t e d e d i t i o n s . The Psalter was t h e m o s t p o p u l a r o n e , o u t p a c i n g even t h e G o s p e l s , a n d was u s e d n o t o n l y as t h e " p r a y e r b o o k of t h e C h u r c h " b u t also as t h e o n l y r e a d i n g p r i m e r . After t h e Psalter a n d G o s p e l s c a m e t h e P r o p h e t s a n d W i s d o m literature, especially S i r a c h . The Palaea, a "Reader's D i g e s t version" o f t h e H i s t o r i c a l B o o k s of t h e O l d ' T e s t a m e n t dressed u p w i t h a p o c r y p h a l l e g e n d s , c o m p l e t e d t h e list. G . F e d o t o v characterizes t h e era as follows: 26

In Russia [Kievan Rus'] the notion of the Biblical canon, distinguishing strongly between the inspired Holy Scripture and the words of the fathers, never existed. All religious writings were called sacred and divine insofar as they were not heretical. T h e Russian people had a particular predilection for the apocrypha [i.e., n o n Biblical rather than deuterocanonical] because of its fabulous content which appealed to their imagination. " 2

George P. Fedorov, The Russian Religious Mind, Vol. I: Kievan Christianity: The Tenth to the Thirteenth Century, ed. J o h n Meyendorff ( C a m b r i d g e , Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1966) 4 2 - 4 3 . ' I b i d . , 43.

MlC.HAKI. P R O K U ' R A T

85

W h i l e r e a d i n g was a v i r t u e o f t h e elite, a n d liturgy a p p e a l e d to b o t h elite a n d c o m m o n , H o l y S c r i p t u r e a n d a p o c r y p h a l w o r k s were rivaled in p o p u l a r i t y o n l y by t r a n s l a t i o n s o f t h e lives o f s a i n t s . These w e r e followed in t h e m a n u s c r i p t s by s e r m o n s a n d p a t r i s t i c exegeses. T h u s , t h r e e of t h e largest a n d m o s t p o p u l a r literary c o r p o r a o f Kieven R u s ' h a d H o l y S c r i p t u r e as t h e i r c e n t e r p i e c e . After a h i a t u s in biblical t r a n s l a t i o n effort o f n o t a few h u n d r e d years, w e r e s u m e o u r i n v e s t i g a t i o n in N o v g o r o d a t t h e e n d o f t h e fifteenth c e n t u r y , h a v i n g w i t n e s s e d t h e p a s s i n g of t h e e n t i r e A p p a nage P e r i o d ( M o n g o l s ) a n d t h e fall of C o n s t a n t i n o p l e ( T u r k s ) ; a n d w e s t a n d o n t h e b r i n k of t h e coalescence o f t h e k i n g d o m of M u s c o vite R u s ' , o r G r e a t Russia. A t this t i m e t h e so-called "Judaizer h e r esy" arose, a m o v e m e n t t h a t i n c l u d e d t r a n s l a t i o n s o f biblical b o o k s o n l y f r o m t h e H e b r e w . 'The "Judaizers" w e r e led by Z e c h a r i a h (Slavic: Skharia), w h o was p r o b a b l y a C r i m e a n Karaite Jew; a n d h e t a u g h t t h a t C h r i s t w a s a p r o p h e t , t h e m e s s i a n i c p r o p h e c i e s were unfulfilled a n d still a w a i t e d fulfillment, t h e C h u r c h is u n n e c e s s a r y , e t c . Besides t h e O l d Testament, t h e g r o u p t r a n s l a t e d t h e m e d i c a l treatises, ethics, a n d logic of M a i m o n i d e s a n d al-Gazzali, as well as astrological b o o k s . W h e n t w o N o v g o r o d i a n priests i n f l u e n c e d b y t h e m o v e m e n t t r a n s ferred t o M o s c o w , t h e "Judaizer heresy" b e c a m e m a r g i n a l l y i n f l u e n tial in t h e c a p i t a l . 28

'The m a i n o p p o n e n t of t h e J u d a i z e r s was J o s e p h o f V o l o k (Iosif Volotskii), an a b b o t o f t h e V o l o k o l a m s k M o n a s t e r y . H e successfully p u r s u e d t h e m u n t i l t h e y were c o n d e m n e d b y a c h u r c h c o u n c i l ( 1 5 0 4 ) a n d e r a d i c a t e d b y Ivan III. J o s e p h is best k n o w n in R u s s i a n h i s t o r y as t h e successful s p o k e s m a n for t h e "possessors," over against N i l u s of Sora (Nil Sorskii) w h o led t h e " n o n - p o s s e s s o r s , " in w h a t b e c a m e a l e g i t i m a t e m i n o r i t y p o s i t i o n theologically, t h o u g h less so politically. S i m p l y p u t , t h e possessors believed in extensive c h u r c h h o l d i n g s a n d close c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h secular a u t h o r i t y in o r d e r t o d o G o d ' s w o r k , while the non-possessors m i n i m i z e d church holdings and preferred a s e p a r a t i o n b e t w e e n C h u r c h a n d state. Is it c o i n c i d e n t a l t h a t S c r i p t u r e figured in Joseph's c o n t r o v e r s i e s w i t h t h e n o n - p o s s e s s o r s n o less t h a n it h a d w i t h t h e Judaizers? The n o n - p o s s e s s o r s , s o m e w h a t in a n t i c i p a t i o n o f w h a t w o u l d o c c u r in 8

' Georges Florovsky, Ways of Russian Theology, Part I, Vol. V: The CollectedWorks of Georges Florovsky, ed. Richard S. H a u g h , tr. Robert L. Nichols (Belmont, Mass.: N o r d l a n d Publishing C o m p a n y , 1979) 15. Francis J. T h o m s o n , " T h e C o r pus of Slavonic Translations Available in Muscovy," Christianity and the Eastern Slavs, Vol. I: Slavic Cultures in the Middle Ages, ed. Boris Gasparov and Olga Raevsky-Hughes (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993) 186.

86

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

t h e W e s t later in t h e s a m e c e n t u r y , "differentiated in t h e t e a c h i n g of the C h u r c h a m o n g H o l y Writ, tradition, a n d h u m a n custom, cons i d e r i n g o n l y H o l y W r i t — t h a t is, G o d ' s c o m m a n d m e n t s — a s c o m pletely b i n d i n g . T h e rest c o u l d b e criticized a n d c h a n g e d . " A l t h o u g h b o t h Joseph a n d Nilus were canonized, Joseph's "establishment" position better a c c o m m o d a t e d t h e rising centralization o f t h e Muscovite state, while s o m e of Nilus's disciples were c o n d e m n e d as heretics. 19

In t h e m i d s t of t h e J u d a i z e r a n d n o n - p o s s e s s o r c o n t r o v e r s i e s , t h e first k n o w n , c o m p l e t e Slavic Bible was c o m p i l e d in N o v g o r o d . The t r a n s l a t i o n effort, w h i c h w e n t b e y o n d solely biblical texts, was s t i m u l a t e d by a n d r e s p o n d e d t o t h e a b o v e - m e n t i o n e d m o v e m e n t s u n d e r t h e a u t h o r i z a t i o n a n d p r o t e c t i o n of A r c h b i s h o p G e n n a d i u s of N o v g o r o d — a n d b e c a m e k n o w n in R u s s i a n as G e n n a d i u s ' s Bible ( 1 4 9 9 a n d following). Political a n d p o l e m i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s u n d e r m i n e d t h e i n t e g r i t y of t h e effort f r o m t h e very b e g i n n i n g . N e i t h e r H e b r e w n o r G r e e k w a s e m p l o y e d as a p r i m a r y text from w h i c h to translate. O n l y t h e Vulgate was used, an i n d i c a t i o n o f Russia's general o r i e n t a t i o n t o w a r d t h e O c c i d e n t after t h e fall o f C o n s t a n t i n o p l e . T h e V u l g a t e was s u p p l i e d by a D o m i n i c a n , Friar B e n j a m i n ( V e n i a m i n ) , a n d J e r o m e ' s prefaces a n d N i c h o l a s o f Lyra's p o s t s c r i p t s were a p p e n d e d to t h e C h u r c h Slavic t r a n s l a t i o n . T h e t r a n s l a t o r s s e e m t o h a v e b e e n u n a w a r e t h a t t h e b o o k s o f t h e Vulgate are n o t identical to t h e E a s t e r n c a n o n . ' Russian e v a l u a t i o n s of t h e t r a n s l a t i o n t h r o u g h m o d e r n t i m e s have b e e n negative, a n d focus o n t h e " i n c u r s i o n a r y " p r e s e n c e o f R o m a n C a t h o l i c politics o n t o Russian soil. O t h e r Latin texts w h i c h p r o d u c e d a " E u r o p e a n r e s o n a n c e " in Russia w e r e also 30

1

"' Nicholas V. Riasanovsky, A History of Russia, 5th ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993) 123. European contacts and ideas were more exciting t h a n a static Byzantium, and they t e m p t e d the Russians away from their o w n traditional roots. " See T h o m s o n , "Corpus of Slavonic Translations," 187. In this well-researched article T h o m s o n describes how intellectual silence engulfed Slavic translation projects and RusVRussia from the t e n t h to the seventeenth century. T h e "why" of it, focusing on the c o n t e n t of translations, is addressed, b u t requires some further examination, in m y o p i n i o n . For example, t h e Byzantines from w h o m the Slavs received texts for translation, b e g i n n i n g at least as early as the eleventh century, formally renounced their o w n Greek philosophical inheritance, which anti-intellectual attitude—preserved as a c h u r c h a n a t h e m a in C o n s t a n t i n o p l e and R u s ! — w a s transm i t t e d to t h e Slavs. (See J o h n M e y e n d o r f f , Rome, Constantinople, Moscow [Cresrwood, N . Y : St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1996] 3 5 , 119-23.) Also, the c o m p a r i s o n of the intellectual history of Rus' with c o n t e m p o r a n e o u s Western intellectual h i s t o r y — t h e rediscovery of Arisrotle and the synthesis within Scholasticism—presupposes that the w o n d r o u s Western model is historically normative, which it may well n o t be.

MlCHAKI. P R O K U ' R A T

87

translated at A r c h b i s h o p G c n n a d i u s ' s residence. T h e s e i n c l u d e d pieces f o c u s i n g o n m e s s i a n i s m in S c r i p t u r e , p o l e m i c s a g a i n s t J e w s , a n d C h u r c h - s t a t e d e b a t e s o n p r o p e r t y . Like it or n o t , L a t i n a t e i n f l u e n c e w o u l d d o m i n a t e m a j o r sectors of Russian ecclesiastical life for c e n turies t o c o m e . ' 2

After t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f t h e first p r i n t e d Epistle B o o k ( " T h e A p o s t l e " ) in 1 5 6 4 , t h e first full text o f t h e Slavic Bible was p u b l i s h e d in 1 5 8 0 , a n d again w i t h e m e n d a t i o n s in 1 5 8 1 . It w a s k n o w n as t h e O s t r o g Bible after its chief p a t r o n , P r i n c e C o n s t a n t i n e o f O s t r o g ( K o n s t a n i n O s t r o z h s k i i ) . The w o r k a p p e a r e d as a p a r t o f a larger p r i v a t e p u b l i s h i n g effort a m o n g t h e O r t h o d o x in L i t h u a n i a a n d P o land, w h i c h i n c l u d e d liturgical b o o k s a n d religious p a m p h l e t s — t r a n s lational r a t h e r t h a n p o l e m i c a l w o r k s . A l t h o u g h all t h e O s t r o g p u b l i c a t i o n s served a p o l o g e t i c p u r p o s e s , t h e i n s p i r a t i o n for this serious t r a n s l a t i o n p r o j e c t c a m e from a greater vision o f S l a v o - H e l l e n i c c u l t u r e , c o m m o n t o t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s in t h e " O s t r o g C i r c l e . " T r a i n e d in G r e e k , L a t i n , a n d Slavic, m e m b e r s o f t h e O s t r o g C i r c l e r o o t e d t h e i r w o r k in t h e i r o w n t r a d i t i o n , w h i l e p a r t i c i p a t i n g in t h e trilingual " G r e e k s c h o o l , " w h i c h lasted o n l y a few d e c a d e s . T h e Prince's s c h o o l s e e m e d to b e a r e s p o n s e t o t h e J e s u i t s p o n s o r e d C o l l e g e of St. A t h a n a s i u s f o u n d e d in R o m e d u r i n g t h e s a m e p e r i o d t o e d u c a t e Slavs a n d G r e e k s in U n i a t e C a t h o l i c i s m ; a n d indeed they responded strongly to Uniatism a n d the calendar reform of P o p e G r e g o r y X I I I . N o n e t h e l e s s , t h e m o s t s t u n n i n g a c c o m p l i s h m e n t o f t h e O s t r o g C i r c l e was t h e i r Bible; a n d t h e q u a l i t y of its Slavic text favorably c o m p a r e d t o c o n t e m p o r a r y t r a n s l a t i o n s in o t h e r l a n g u a g e s , for e x a m p l e t h e Sixtus C l e m e n t i n e version of t h e V u l g a t e (1 5 9 2 ) . " In e v a l u a t i n g t h e t r a n s l a t i o n , Pr. G . F l o r o v s k y w r i t e s , " T h e O s t r o g Bible, as s u c h , r e m a i n s a l a n d m a r k in S l a v o n i c biblical h i s tory. It a b i d e s also as a m a g n i f i c e n t a c h i e v e m e n t in itself, a m o n u m e n t of s c h o l a r s h i p , l i t e r a t u r e , a n d t h e o l o g y . " The m e m b e r s of t h e s h o r t - l i v e d C i r c l e were exceptional for t h e i r t i m e a n d place, a n d m a n y w e n t o n t o o t h e r tasks o f h i s t o r y - m a k i n g significance. Before leaving t h e O s t r o g C i r c l e , let us l o o k briefly at t h e i r m e t h o d o l o g y . E m p l o y i n g classical C h u r c h Slavic, t h e y a t t e m p t e d t o foll o w t h e G r e e k textual t r a d i t i o n u s i n g every available critical r e s o u r c e . S t a r t i n g first w i t h G c n n a d i u s ' s Bible, o t h e r G r e e k a n d Slavic m a n u scripts w e r e o b t a i n e d w i t h difficulty from C o n s t a n t i n o p l e a n d m o n a s t i c c e n t e r s ; b u t t h e m a n u s c r i p t s w e r e d i s a p p o i n t i n g l y p o o r . After " Florovsky, Ways, Parr I, Vol. V, 14-19. " Ibid., 4 2 - 4 5 .

88

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

these, t h e y c o n s u l t e d t h e ( M a s o r e t i c ) H e b r e w text, t h e V u l g a t e , a n d r e c e n t C z e c h a n d Polish versions; a n d finally t h e y c h e c k e d their results against the Aldine S e p t u a g i n t (Venice, 1518) a n d the C o m p l u t e n s i a n Polyglot ( S p a i n , 1 5 2 2 ) w h i c h c o n t a i n e d parallel colu m n s of H e b r e w , A r a m a i c , G r e e k , a n d L a t i n O l d Testaments, as well as G r e e k a n d L a t i n N e w ' T e s t a m e n t s . All s u b s e q u e n t e d i t i o n s o f C h u r c h Slavic Bibles h a v e b e e n d e p e n d e n t o n t h e text of t h e O s t r o g B i b l e . " Clearly, a n y o n e c l a i m i n g an a u t o n o m y for t h e Slavic Bible exclusive of t h e H e b r e w text o r o f W e s t e r n s c h o l a r s h i p k n o w s n e i t h e r this Bible n o r its history. As Prince C o n s t a n t i n e of O s t r o g w e n t o n t o b e c o m e an e c u m e n i s t of sorts, so t o o a n o t h e r o f his C i r c l e , Cyril Lukaris ( 1 5 7 2 - 1 6 3 8 ) , w e n t o n to b e c o m e t h e e c u m e n i c a l l y m i n d e d p a t r i a r c h o f A l e x a n dria, a n d later p a t r i a r c h o f C o n s t a n t i n o p l e . " Aside from his h i g h l y political r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e C h u r c h o f R o m e a n d t h e Turks, Cyril is best k n o w n for his C a l v i n i s t Confession ( s t a t e m e n t of religious belief), p u b l i s h e d at G e n e v a in 1 6 2 9 a n d w r i t t e n in Latin six years earlier. Cyril was possibly t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t intellectual figure in t h e E a s t e r n C h u r c h at t h e t i m e , t h o u g h d o o m e d t o tragic political a n d ecclesiastical c i r c u m s t a n c e s ; a n d his Confession was c o n d e m n e d by n o less t h a n six local c h u r c h c o u n c i l s before t h e e n d o f t h e s e v e n t e e n t h c e n t u r y . ' W i t h t h e r e p u d i a t i o n s o f Cyril's C a l v i n i s t s t a t e m e n t of faith c a m e a tacit, n e g a t i v e a t t i t u d e f r o m t h e c o n d e m n i n g h i e r a r c h y t o w a r d an e n l i g h t e n e d use o f t h e Bible b y t h e faithful. The react i o n s o m e t i m e s t o o k o n an aspect c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of c o n t e m p o r a r y , seventeenth-century R o m a n Catholic polemics. 6

Let us briefly s u m m a r i z e s o m e o f Cyril's a c t i o n s p e r t i n e n t to o u r t o p i c a n d t h e r e a c t i o n s he e l i c i t e d . In " Q u e s t i o n I I I " of t h e Confession C y r i l lists t h e c a n o n o f S c r i p t u r e as t h a t o f t h e S y n o d of L a o d i c e a (see t h e s u s p i c i o u s C a n o n 6 0 a b o v e ) ; b u t h e p r o c e e d s t o c h a n g e it t o 37

14

Ibid., 4 5 . A "child" of the Osrrog Circle, Meletii Smorritsky (whose farher was an ediror of rhe Osrrog Bible and firsr rector of rhe School) used the same critical approach to sacred philology ro create a Polish O r t h o d o x version of Scriprure, w h i c h differed from that of the Polish Prorestants and R o m a n Catholics. See David A. Frick, Melelij Smolryc'kyj ( C a m b r i d g e , Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1995) 1 8 1 - 2 0 5 . " See T i m o r h y Ware, The Orthodox Church, rev. ed. ( H a r m o n d s w o r t h , England: Penguin Books Ltd., 1993) 9 6 - 9 7 . See D o s i t h e u s , The Acts and Decrees of The Synod of Jerusalem, tr. J. N . W. B. Robertson (New York: A M S Press, 1969) for a p o i n t - b y - p o i n t response. '" T h e Lukaris episode has never been fully investigated from the perspective of the history of the Bible in the O r t h o d o x C h u r c h , probably d u e ro a preoccupation with the more i m m e d i a t e and prevalent doctrinal and political issues. 16

MlC.HAKI. P R O K U ' R A T

89

c o r r e s p o n d exactly t o t h e C a l v i n i s t c a n o n , i n v o k i n g t h e c o n c e p t of " a p o c r y p h a " for r e m a i n i n g b o o k s , a n d asserts t h a t this h a d always b e e n t h e c a n o n i c a l r e c k o n i n g o f t h e O r t h o d o x C h u r c h ! This p a r t i c u l a r d e c e p t i o n was u n c o v e r e d a t t h e S y n o d a t Jassy in M o l d a v i a ( 1 6 4 2 ) , t h e s e c o n d s u c h s y n o d c o n d e m n i n g t h e Confession. The first local c o u n c i l in C o n s t a n t i n o p l e against Cyril's s t a t e m e n t ( 1 6 3 8 ) foc u s e d m o r e o n a c r i t i q u e of C h a p t e r II, w h e r e i n h e c l a i m e d S c r i p ture to be of higher authority than the C h u r c h . Cyril argued that the C h u r c h was liable t o err, w h e r e a s S c r i p t u r e was n o t . C e r t a i n l y Cyril h i m s e l f was liable of error, as p r o v e d at t h e S y n o d of J e r u s a l e m ( 1 6 7 2 ) . T h i s local c o u n c i l t o o k p a i n s t o research his s e r m o n s a n d illustrate t h a t h e c o n s i s t e n t l y c o n t r a d i c t e d himself, referencing " a p o c r y p h a l " b o o k s as a u t h o r i t a t i v e S c r i p t u r e a n d c o u n t e r m a n d i n g t h e d o c t r i n a l c o n t e n t of t h e Confession. In general t h e o p p o s e d s y n o d s w e r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h p r o t e c t i n g t h e i n t e g r i t y of t h e t e a c h i n g of t h e C h u r c h a n d t h e c h u r c h fathers, as well as t h e listing of t h e b o o k s ; a n d historically t h e y w e r e c o n s i d e r e d justified a n d c o n s i s t e n t in their a c tions against the brilliant Patriarch. In r e t r o s p e c t t h e difficulty w i t h t h e Lukaris e p i s o d e a n d t h e Bible s e e m s t o lie in o t h e r a d h o m i n e m c o n d e m n a t i o n s , t h o s e d e s i g n e d solely to d e n o u n c e t h e m a n a n d his nefarious t e a c h i n g s ; b u t not everything Cyril t a u g h t was w r o n g , t h o u g h it s e e m s t o have b e e n s u b s e q u e n t l y t r e a t e d as if it w e r e . For e x a m p l e , in t h e Confession Q u e s t i o n I reads: " O u g h t t h e sacred S c r i p t u r e s t o be r e a d in t h e c o m m o n l a n g u a g e b y all C h r i s t i a n s ? " Cyril a n s w e r s , "All faithful C h r i s t i a n s o u g h t t o k n o w , believe, a n d confess, w h a t is in t h e sacred S c r i p t u r e s , " w h i c h w i t h a l m o s t all t h e rest o f t h e a n s w e r is perfectly " O r t h o d o x . " U n f o r t u n a t e l y , at o n e p o i n t h e claims, " F o r n e i t h e r can w e learn from a n y o t h e r s o u r c e t h a n f r o m t h e s a c r e d S c r i p t u r e s , " w h i c h is i n s e n s i t i v e t o O r t h o d o x p n e u m a t o l o g y , e c c l e s i o l o g y , a n d T r a d i t i o n in g e n e r a l . T h e easily r e m e m b e r e d " n o " a n s w e r given t h e s a m e q u e s t i o n b y P a t r i a r c h D o s i t h e u s at t h e S y n o d of J e r u s a l e m ( 1 6 7 2 ) is m i s l e a d i n g for t w o reasons. First, his a n s w e r t h a t S c r i p t u r e o u g h t n o t b e read in t h e c o m m o n l a n g u a g e is i n s u p p o r t a b l e from Tradition a n d is c i t e d w i t h o u t precedent. Both the Synod of C o n s t a n t i n o p l e (1638) a n d t h e S y n o d in M o l d a v i a ( 1 6 4 2 ) i g n o r e d it c o m p l e t e l y . D o s i t h e u s ' s c a n o n i c a l f o r m u l a t i o n — " t o read s o m e p a r t s o f t h e S c r i p t u r e s , a n d especially o f t h e O l d ( T e s t a m e n t ) , is f o r b i d d e n for t h e aforesaid reas o n s a n d o t h e r s o f like s o r t " — r e q u i r e s a clear c a n o n i c a l p r e c e d e n t w h i c h is n o t , o r r a t h e r c a n n o t b e , p r o v i d e d . S e c o n d , his a n s w e r is so h i g h l y qualified a n d n u a n c e d t h a t it a p p e a r s t h a t t h e fashioners of

90

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

this r e s p o n s e s i m p l y w a n t e d t o a n s w e r " n o " w h e n L u k a r i s a n s w e r e d "yes." D o s i t h e u s uses a s i m i l a r t e c h n i q u e in a n s w e r i n g Cyril's Q u e s t i o n II ("Are t h e S c r i p t u r e s plain to C h r i s t i a n s w h o read t h e m ? " ) , w h i c h q u e s t i o n is i g n o r e d by t h e local c o u n c i l s o f C o n s t a n t i n o p l e a n d Jassy. C y r i l gives a qualified "yes" t o t h e q u e s t i o n a n d r e m a i n s w i t h i n t h e Tradition. D o s i t h e u s s e e m s t o c h a n g e t h e q u e s t i o n t o r e a d "all C h r i s t i a n s " ' a n d r e s p o n d s w i t h a qualified " n o . " A t this p o i n t t h e q u a n t i t a t i v e difference in t h e i r a n s w e r s m i g h t be c h a r a c t e r i z e d by Cyril's glass b e i n g "half-full" w h i l e D o s i t h e u s ' s is " h a l f - e m p t y . " N e v e r t h e l e s s , D o s i t h e u s p u s h e s t h e p o i n t t o c o n c l u d e , "it is n o t n e c essary, b u t r a t h e r i m p o s s i b l e , t h a t all s h o u l d k n o w w h a t t h e H o l y Spirit m a n i f e s t s t o t h o s e a l o n e w h o are exercised in w i s d o m a n d h o liness." S u b s e q u e n t to t h e s e v e n t e e n t h c e n t u r y D o s i t h e u s ' s c o u n c i l has b e e n given a u t h o r i t a t i v e s t a t u s , w h i l e Cyril a n d his Confession have b e e n c o n s i s t e n t l y c o n d e m n e d . O n e c a n n o t h e l p b u t t h i n k t h a t in t h e p a r t i c u l a r s a b o v e , D o s i t h e u s ' s o r t h o d o x y was n o t a n y m o r e reliable t h a n Cyril's, a n d in s o m e p o i n t s less so. 8

In Russia t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y b r o u g h t w i t h it a n a v i d interest in t h e H e b r e w t e x t of t h e Bible, especially a m o n g t h e o l o g i a n s , b u t also a m o n g m e m b e r s of t h e n e w l y f o r m e d Russian Bible Society. Translations f r o m H e b r e w i n t o R u s s i a n ( i n s t e a d o f C h u r c h Slavic) d r e w m i x e d r e a c t i o n s from t h e h i e r a r c h y a n d from society at large for a b o u t fifty years, u n t i l t h e last q u a r t e r o f t h e c e n t u r y . N o t a b l e figures p r o d u c e d p e r s o n a l t r a n s l a t i o n s : M a k a r i i G l u k h a r e v ( 1 7 9 2 1 8 4 7 ) , a s e m i n a r y professor a n d S i b e r i a n missionary, t r a n s l a t e d J o b ( 1 8 3 7 ) a n d Isaiah ( 1 8 3 9 ) from H e b r e w as a t e s t i m o n y t o his o p i n i o n t h a t a Russian t r a n s l a t i o n s h o u l d be m a d e from H e b r e w ; b u t h e was officially r e p r i m a n d e d for his efforts t o w a r d t h a t e n d . A r c h p r i e s t G e r a s i m Pavskii ( 1 7 8 7 - 1 8 6 3 ) , an e m i n e n t professor a n d H e b r a i s t in St. P e t e r s b u r g , c o u r t c h a p l a i n a n d t u t o r t o t h e i m p e r i a l family, p r o d u c e d a p e r s o n a l t r a n s l a t i o n o f t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t w h i c h his s t u d e n t s c i r c u l a t e d c l a n d e s t i n e l y u n t i l all copies were confiscated in an i n v e s t i g a t i o n in 1 8 4 2 . A l t h o u g h G l u k h a r e v ' s a n d Pavskii's translat i o n s were e v e n t u a l l y p u b l i s h e d in t h e m i d - 1 8 6 0 s , t h e H e b r e w versus G r e e k d e b a t e c o n t i n u e d — t o an i m p a s s e for s o m e w h o w o u l d a d m i t o n l y o n e t r a d i t i o n (e.g., P. G o r s k i i - P l a t o n o v a c c e p t e d o n l y t h e M a s o r e t i c text, R G o v o r o v o n l y t h e S e p t u a g i n t ) ; b u t for m o s t s c h o l ars a n d c h u r c h m e n of t h e last d e c a d e s o f t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y , t h e w

iS

Dositheus, Acts and Decrees, 1 5 3 . *' Florovsky, Ways, Part II, Vol. VI, 3 4 8 - 4 9 .

MlC.HAKI. P R O K U ' R A T

91

c o m p l e x r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e H e b r e w a n d G r e e k texts was n o t o n l y a c k n o w l e d g e d b u t r e s e a r c h e d in critical literature o n a b o o k by-book basis. 10

O r g a n i z a t i o n a n d e x e c u t i o n o f t h e g r e a t Bible t r a n s l a t i o n p r o j e c t of n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y Russia can be c r e d i t e d t o o n l y o n e i n d i v i d u a l , M e t r o p o l i t a n P h i l a r e t ( D r o z d o v ) of M o s c o w . In 1 8 5 6 h e p e r s o n a l l y u r g e d t h e H o l y S y n o d to u n d e r t a k e a n e w t r a n s l a t i o n w h i c h w o u l d p r o v i d e "the O r t h o d o x p e o p l e w i t h t h e m e a n s t o r e a d H o l y S c r i p t u r e for i n s t r u c t i o n in t h e h o m e a n d w i t h t h e easiest possible c o m p r e h e n s i o n . " ' A n earlier t r a n s l a t i o n h a d b e e n c o m p l e t e d a n d p u b lished in s e g m e n t s : t h e G o s p e l s in 1 8 1 9 , t h e e n t i r e N e w T e s t a m e n t in 1 8 2 0 , t h e Psalter in 1 8 2 2 , a n d t h e rest o f t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t in 1 8 2 5 . Tragically, t h e c o m p l e t e d w o r k d i d n o t fare a n y b e t t e r t h a n its s p o n s o r s , A . G o l i t s y n a n d t h e Bible Society, w h o s e activities w e r e c u r t a i l e d in 1 8 2 5 . W i t h t h e p r i n t i n g c o m p l e t e , t h e w o r k was n o t only suppressed, b u t completely destroyed. 1

2

In t h e early p h a s e of t h e p r o j e c t ( 1 8 1 6 - 1 8 2 5 ) P h i l a r e t h a d set forth g u i d e l i n e s for t r a n s l a t i o n w h i c h w e r e also used in t h e s e c o n d h a l f o f t h e c e n t u r y . The t r a n s l a t i o n was m a d e from t h e M a s o r e t i c H e b r e w as t h e basic text, a n d t h e n f r o m t h e G r e e k w h e n it was t h e original l a n g u a g e , g i v i n g b o t h preference over e x t a n t Slavic translat i o n s . Literary f o r m was a n a l y z e d a n d m a i n t a i n e d : '"The s p i r i t o f a passage m u s t be p a i n s t a k i n g l y o b s e r v e d , so t h a t c o n v e r s a t i o n will be r e n d e r e d in a c o l l o q u i a l style, n a r r a t i o n in a n a r r a t i v e style, a n d so f o r t h . " H e r a n k e d t h e priorities of t r a n s l a t i o n as a c c u r a c y first, clarity s e c o n d , " a n d literary p u r i t y t h i r d . " P h i l a r e t also gave directives 4

" Ibid. See the listing of major individual translarions in e n d n o t e s 4 0 - 5 4 , as well as on pages 124-28. T h e project had originated forty years earlier w h e n Tsar Alexander I ( 1 8 0 1 1825) charged his friend A. N . Golitsyn, the head of n u m e r o u s g o v e r n m e n t religious and educational posts and the president of the newly formed Russian Bible Society, with complete responsibility in words similar to the preceding ones. Alt h o u g h the Holy Synod was not involved at a l l — a n d it was assumed C h u r c h Slavic would c o n t i n u e to be used liturgically—the actual translation project was supervised by the able dean of the St. Petersburg Academy, A r c h i m a n d r i t e Philaret (Drozdov), the future M e t r o p o l i t a n of Moscow. ' For partictdars o n this episode and the ill-fated Bible Society, see Florovsky, Ways, Part I, Vol. V, 1 8 1 - 2 0 1 . O n e m i g h t see in at least the first two items, curiously juxtaposed, the heir of the slavish word-for-word translation from Greek to C h u r c h Slavic completed a m i l l e n n i u m earlier, n o w canonized and taken as n o r m a t i v e . T h i s m i g h t be the reason that the vocabulary and syntax of the Russian Bible is not readily c o m p r e hensible to Russians. Florovsky, Ways, Parr I, Vol. V, 190. 41

4

4<

44

92

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

r e g a r d i n g style; for e x a m p l e , " H o l y S c r i p t u r e derives its majesty from t h e power, n o t t h e glitter, of its w o r d s . " As o n e m i g h t s u r m i s e , Philaret's g u i d e l i n e s for t r a n s l a t i o n o p e n e d n e w q u e s t i o n s w h i c h R u s s i a n society in t h e 1 8 2 0 s c o u l d n o t tolerate. The q u e s t i o n s w e r e difficult, l e g i t i m a t e , a n d c o u l d o n l y be a d dressed t h r o u g h p u b l i c d i s c u s s i o n — w h i c h w o u l d n o t o c c u r u n t i l later in t h e c e n t u r y . For e x a m p l e , for p e o p l e w h o were t r o u b l e d b y t h e d i v e r g e n c e s o f t h e R u s s i a n f r o m t h e Slavic, especially in regard t o preference given t h e H e b r e w , e x p l a n a t i o n h a d t o b e m a d e t o pacify those u n f a m i l i a r w i t h a n c i e n t languages. A n o t h e r e x a m p l e , clear from t h e h i s t o r y already reviewed, is t h a t t h e Slavic Bible itself c o u l d n o t be e q u a t e d w i t h t h e S e p t u a g i n t , as e v e r y o n e h a d s u p p o s e d . It was c o m p o s i t e a n d d i d n o t c o r r e s p o n d in every respect t o t h e G r e e k . Finally, as m e n t i o n e d a b o v e , e v e n t h e H e b r e w a n d G r e e k t e x t s enjoy a c o m p l e x relationship w h i c h needs to be u n d e r s t o o d on a case-by-case basis. 15

A l t h o u g h Philaret's p u r p o s e a p p e a r s t o us clear a n d c o m m e n d able, his efforts w e r e o p p o s e d b y s o m e colleagues, n o t a b l y M e t r o p o l i t a n P h i l a r e t ( A m f i t e a t r o v ) o f Kiev a n d t h e n e w O b e r - P r o c u r a t o r of t h e M i n i s t r y o f Religious Affairs, C o u n t A. Tolstoi. O p p o s i t i o n s t e m m e d from b a d experiences w i t h t r a n s l a t o r s a n d t h e Russian Bible Society earlier in t h e c e n t u r y , as well as from an i n b r e d hierarchical c o n s e r v a t i s m . T h e p r o j e c t h a d b e e n successfully o p p o s e d in 1 8 2 4 a n d 1 8 4 2 ; a n d w h e n it was p r o p o s e d a g a i n in 1 8 5 6 , m a n y reasons a g a i n s t it w e r e a r t i c u l a t e d : T h e r e was a m i s t r u s t o f t h e H e b r e w Bible w h i c h was [falsely] d e s c r i b e d as " u n k n o w n in t h e C h u r c h . " Earlier in t h e c e n t u r y t h e t r a n s l a t i o n s from H e b r e w by Pavskii a n d M a k a r i i c a u s e d h e a t e d controversy. Reference was m a d e t o t h e G r e e k c h u r c h w h i c h d i d n o t allow t r a n s l a t i o n s i n t o v e r n a c u l a r G r e e k . ' T h e R u s sian l a n g u a g e was a c c u s e d of b e i n g less expressive t h a n C h u r c h Slavic, a n d besides, t h e o t h e r liturgical b o o k s h a d n o t b e e n t r a n s l a t e d , a n d so o n . ' In a d d i t i o n o n l y C h u r c h Slavic t r a n s l a t i o n s w e r e u s e d liturgically ( w h i c h r e m a i n e d t h e case t h r o u g h o u t t h e Soviet P e r i o d ) . 6

4:

,!i

To the credit of m i d c e n t u r y Russian s c h o l a r s h i p — a n d of Philaret's J o b - l i k e p e r s e v e r a n c e — t h e m o n u m e n t a l Bible p r o j e c t was 4 i

Ibid. Translation of t h e Bible into m o d e r n Greek was firsr blessed in 1808 by Parriarch Cyril VI of C o n s t a n t i n o p l e ; b u t it was subsequently resisted until the present decade, w h e n the new translation sparked a hot debate. " Florovsky, Ways, Parr II, Vol. VI, 122-24. O n e m i g h t argue rhar Philaret envisioned an eventual evolution to liturgical Russian. 4 6

4

4 8

MlCHAKL P R O K U ' R A T

93

c o m p l e t e d u n d e r the auspices of the H o l y S y n o d a n d u n d e r the M e t r o p o l i t a n ' s watchful eye. The G o s p e l B o o k was p u b l i s h e d in 1 8 6 0 , t h e c o m p l e t e N e w T e s t a m e n t in 1 8 6 2 , a n d fascicles o f t h e O l d Testam e n t b e g a n t o a p p e a r in 1 8 6 8 . The c o m p l e t e e d i t i o n was p u b l i s h e d in 1 8 7 5 . All s u b s e q u e n t s y n o d a l e d i t i o n s b u i l t u p o n this o n e ; a n d revisions were h a n d l e d b y t h e ( n o w familiar) t e c h n i q u e o f c i t i n g t h e c o r r e c t i o n in t h e f o o t n o t e a n d m o v i n g it i n t o t h e t e x t in t h e followi n g p r i n t i n g . N e w e d i t i o n s were revised a n d r e p u b l i s h e d u n t i l t h e d e c a d e before t h e R u s s i a n R e v o l u t i o n . W h e n t h e Russian C h u r c h p u b l i s h e d 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 Bibles t o c o m m e m o r a t e t h e m i l l e n n i u m of C h r i s t i a n i t y in R u s ' in 1 9 8 8 , t h e y r e p u b l i s h e d t h e last p r e r e v o l u t i o n a r y revision of Philaret's Bible. This last fact p r o b a b l y best illustrates h o w biblical s c h o l a r s h i p was forced to a standstill d u r i n g t h e Soviet Period. In t h e c l o s i n g d e c a d e s o f t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y a n d t h e first of t h e t w e n t i e t h o n e can r e c o g n i z e c o m m o n e l e m e n t s in biblical s t u d ies in E u r o p e a n Russia a n d in c o n t i n e n t a l E u r o p e . A l t h o u g h N e w Testament s c h o l a r s h i p in Russia was less a r d e n t l y p u r s u e d t h a n O l d , o n e finds m a n y of t h e s a m e l e a r n e d w r i t i n g s a n d c u l t u r a l fascinat i o n s as are f o u n d in E u r o p e . Keil's G e r m a n Introduction was t r a n s l a t e d i n t o R u s s i a n a n d b e c a m e a basic h a n d b o o k . R e n a n from F r a n c e a n d Strauss from t h e T u b i n g e n s c h o o l w e r e r e a d extensively a n d rep l i e d to in t h e j o u r n a l s as well. 'The W e s t e r n O l d Testament c o m m e n t a r i e s d e v o t e d t o m e s s i a n i s m a n d christological i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s w e r e also well l i k e d . O n t h e t e c h n i c a l a n d p o p u l a r levels a r c h a e o l o g y (e.g., t h e j o u r n a l Orthodox Palestinian Collection, 1881-1914) a n d p i l g r i m a g e s t o Palestine were p u r s u e d so extensively t h a t v a r i o u s tsarist g o v e r n m e n t s b u i l t large c h u r c h e s a n d hostels at p a r t i c u l a r archaeological a n d religious sites to h o u s e t h e i r citizens. F u r t h e r , n o Russian s i t t i n g r o o m was c o m p l e t e w i t h o u t a c o p y of t h e life of Jesus as p o r t r a y e d b y t h e world's masters. After t h e R e v o l u t i o n emigre scholars w h o s u r v i v e d t h e Bolsheviks a n d w e r e able t o m a k e a c u l t u r a l t r a n s i t i o n c o n t r i b u t e d a n e w t o t h e societies t h a t a c c e p t e d t h e m . 19

5 0

Florovsky, Ways, Parr II, Vol. VI, 128. '" Aside from some of the names found in rhe bibliography, one mighr include N . M . Z e r n o v (Oxford), M . I. Rosrovrsev (Yale), A. N . Grabar (France), and N . S. Arseniev ( G e r m a n y and the U.S.), a m o n g others. Although n o n e of t h e m taught and wrote solely on the Bible, all of rhem made c o n t r i b u t i o n s in particular areas of its study.

94

O R T H O D O X INTERPRETATION OE SCRIPTURE

V I I . EI'HESIANS 2 : 1 - 1 0 In d e a l i n g w i t h this p a r t i c u l a r text t h e r e are n o t a b l e differences b e t w e e n t h e w a y it is h a n d l e d in t h e E a s t e r n C h u r c h a n d t h e w a y it is t r e a t e d in t h e W e s t . First, t h e p e r i c o p e d i v i s i o n s u s e d in t h e O r t h o d o x C h u r c h are f r e q u e n t l y different f r o m t h e i r W e s t e r n c o u n t e r p a r t s , a n d this is a typical e x a m p l e . E p h . 1:22-2:3 is t h e 2 1 9 t h e p i s t o l a r y p e r i c o p e d i v i s i o n , a n d E p h . 2 : 4 - 1 0 is t h e 2 2 0 t h . E p h . 1:22-2:3 is t h e p r e s c r i b e d r e a d i n g o n M o n d a y o f t h e s i x t e e n t h w e e k after P e n t e c o s t a n d is read as p a r t of t h e lectio continua

for w e e k d a y s . It d o e s n o t

c o r r e s p o n d t o a p a r t i c u l a r gospel p e r i c o p e . E p h . 2 : 4 - 1 0 is p a r t of t h e S u n d a y cycle o f r e a d i n g s , r e a d o n t h e t w e n t y - t h i r d S u n d a y after P e n tecost. D u r i n g this t i m e o f year t h e S u n d a y gospel l e c t i o n a r y is from L u k e a n d d o e s n o t c o r r e s p o n d t o a c o u n t e d S u n d a y after P e n t e c o s t . A c c o r d i n g l y , E p h . 2 : 4 - 1 0 d o e s n o t always a c c o m p a n y t h e s a m e g o s pel p e r i c o p e f r o m L u k e . W h a t this m e a n s in p o p u l a r t e r m s is t h a t E p h . 2 : 4 - 1 0 is m o r e f a m i l i a r t o t h e a v e r a g e p a r i s h i o n e r b e c a u s e it is r e a d o n S u n d a y , w h e r e a s E p h . 1:22-2:3 is r e a d o n M o n d a y ( a n d t h e n o n l y if t h e r e is a D i v i n e L i t u r g y ) a n d is m o s t p r o b a b l y less familiar. In fairness t o t h e reader u n f a m i l i a r w i t h O r t h o d o x liturgy, a n o t h e r i t e m s h o u l d b e m e n t i o n e d h e r e . A l t h o u g h it is e n t i r e l y in k e e p i n g w i t h t r a d i t i o n for t h e h o m i l i s t t o p r e a c h solely o n t h e l e c t i o n a r y r e a d i n g from t h e epistle, in m o s t i n s t a n c e s — p o s s i b l y 9 0 p e r c e n t o f t h e t i m e — t h e p r e a c h i n g will b e d o n e f r o m t h e g o s p e l lesson, a n d t h e epistle m i g h t o n l y b e m e n t i o n e d secondarily. In a d d i t i o n , a n o t h e r p r e s u p p o s i t i o n a b o u t l e c t i o n a r y r e a d i n g s , East or West, s h o u l d be " d e m y t h o l o g i z e d . " In b o t h

traditions

h o m i l i s t s , a n c i e n t a n d m o d e r n , a l m o s t always treat t h e liturgical l e c t i o n a r y d i v i s i o n s — a n d s o m e t i m e s t h e r e c e n t c h a p t e r a n d verse d i v i s i o n s ! — a s if t h e y are s a c r o s a n c t . T h e y are n o t . F r o m a "scientific" p o i n t o f view, l e c t i o n a r y d i v i s i o n s f r e q u e n t l y d o n o t follow t h e literary s t r u c t u r e of t h e piece b e i n g read, as o n e m i g h t e x p e c t . If o n e checks any l e c t i o n a r y today, n u m e r o u s divergences from literary s t r u c t u r e will b e f o u n d . T h e s e d i v e r g e n c e s are i n t e n t i o n a l l y i n c l u d e d b y t h e fashioners o f e a c h l e c t i o n a r y for a n u m b e r of l e g i t i m a t e r e a s o n s — l e g i t i m a t e f r o m a liturgical r a t h e r t h a n exegetical p o i n t o f view. In l i g h t o f t h i s p h e n o m e n o n t h e k n o w l e d g e a b l e exegete is e n c o u r a g e d t o b e familiar w i t h all t h e s t r u c t u r e s a n d s u b s t r u c t u r e s o f t h e w h o l e l i t e r a r y w o r k u n d e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n , a n d if p o s s i b l e , w i t h t h e ( h y p o t h e s i z e d ) d y n a m i c s of t h e lectionary. In t h e case o f Ephesians o n e has t o m a k e s o m e d e c i s i o n s as t o h o w t h e r e p e a t e d i n t e r c e s s i o n s

MlCHAKI. P R O K U ' R A T

95

a n d d o x o l o g i c s fit t o g e t h e r : t h e first b e g i n s at 1:15 a n d t h e s e c o n d at 3 : 1 , before t h e m a i n parénesis of c h a p t e r four. W h a t m i g h t b e i n ferred from t h e O r t h o d o x l e c t i o n a r y is t h a t c h a p t e r s 1-3 are all i n t r o d u c t o r y to t h e epistle: a g r e e t i n g , a t h a n k s g i v i n g , followed b y t w o similar pairs of c o m p l e x intercessions a n d doxologics ( 1 : 1 5 - 2 : 2 2 ; 3 : 1 2 1 ) , before t h e m a i n b o d y o f t h e epistle in 4 : 1 - 6 : 2 0 . S e c o n d , q u e s t i o n s o f t r a n s l a t i o n a r i s e . W h i c h o n e is r e a d liturgically? W h i c h is t h e best? etc. N o t m e a n t as a t a u t o l o g y , w e m a y say t h a t every t r a n s l a t i o n is o n l y t h a t — a t r a n s l a t i o n . Traduttore traditore, "the t r a n s l a t o r is a t r a i t o r t o his text," is a h a r d j u d g m e n t , b u t p a r t l y justified. In r e s p o n s e t o t h i s , all O r t h o d o x s e m i n a r i e s in t h e U n i t e d States still r e q u i r e G r e e k ( a l t h o u g h n o t H e b r e w a n d A r a m a i c , as in t h e old Russian a c a d e m i e s ) . The p r e a c h e r is e x p e c t e d to be able t o s p e a k w i t h u n d e r s t a n d i n g o n m a t t e r s o f t r a n s l a t i o n , v o cabulary, w o r d study, a n d so o n . Laity s t u d y i n g w i t h o u t a n c i e n t l a n g u a g e s are e n c o u r a g e d t o use a n d c o m p a r e as m a n y m o d e r n English a n d foreign l a n g u a g e e d i t i o n s as possible. Liturgical r e a d i n g in E n glish is frequently d o n e from t h e K i n g J a m e s Version, t h e N e w A m e r i can Bible, o r t h e Revised S t a n d a r d V e r s i o n , t h e last of w h i c h i n c l u d e d scholarly p a r t i c i p a t i o n from t h e O r t h o d o x in its p r e p a r a t i o n a n d received a h i e r a r c h i c a l blessing. ( T h e N e w R e v i s e d S t a n d a r d Version is b e i n g given serious c o n s i d e r a t i o n as a s t u d y text, b u t is n o t yet read liturgically.) Third, o n e c a n e x p e c t t h e preacher's exegesis p r e p a r a t i o n , if n o t t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e s e r m o n itself, t o rely in p a r t o n t h e classical h o m i l i e s o f t h e c h u r c h fathers. ' For E p h e s i a n s , c o m m e n t a r i e s are available from several of t h e favorite O r t h o d o x p a t r i s t i c h o m i l i s t s , i n c l u d i n g St. J o h n C h r y s o s t o m , St. E p h r e m t h e Syrian, St. J o h n of D a m a s c u s , a n d ' T h e o d o r e t o f C y r r h u s , a m o n g o t h e r s . O n e aspect of classical p a t r i s t i c h o m i l i e s , often i g n o r e d in r e c e n t d e c a d e s , is t h a t t h e y a d d r e s s e d particular, s o m e t i m e s r e c u r r e n t , real-life s i t u a t i o n s in t h e C h u r c h . These s e r m o n s w e r e generally n o t w r i t t e n in " i v o r y t o w ers" o r as exercises in m e t h o d or style, t h o u g h s o m e of t h e m were. The b e t t e r ones were edifying t o t h e faithful at a c e r t a i n historical p o i n t in t i m e , a n e x p e c t a t i o n t h a t every h o m i l i s t strives t o fulfill in speaking to contemporaries. 5

A n o t h e r a s p e c t of p a t r i s t i c h o m i l i e s t h a t o n e learns very q u i c k l y is t h a t t h e r e is n o single " O r t h o d o x i n t e r p r e t a t i o n " p e r se, b u t m a n y

!

- A good example of this type of exegesis may be found in D e m e t rois Trakatellis, Authority and Passion, tr. George K. Duvall and H a r r y Vulopas (Brookline, Mass.: H o l y Cross O r t h o d o x Press, 1987).

96

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

g o o d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , all o f w h i c h m a y b e " O r t h o d o x . " It is clear w h e n a c h u r c h father lets t h e text s p e a k o n its o w n , a n d w h e n he takes a p o s i t i o n , d o c t r i n a l or o t h e r w i s e , a n d uses t h e text as a " p r o o f " of t h a t p o s i t i o n . (Significantly, p a t r i s t i c exegeses lack "faith vs. w o r k s " p o l e m i c s . " ) In t h e l a t t e r case this is c o n s i d e r e d eisegesis ( r e a d i n g m e a n i n g s i n t o a text) r a t h e r t h a n exegesis. A l s o , all of t h e holiest, m o s t scholarly saints, are liable t o m a k e m i s t a k e s from t i m e t o t i m e — a h u m b l i n g , b u t also refreshing, fact. F o u r t h , either of o u r two pericopes w o u l d normally be exami n e d as t o s t r u c t u r e a n d f o r m , as w e o b s e r v e d in t h e t r a n s l a t i o n g u i d e lines of Philaret; b u t literary s t r u c t u r e a n d f o r m d o n o t e x h a u s t t h o s e categories, b e c a u s e t h e liturgical year also possesses v a r i o u s s t r u c tures a n d f o r m s w h i c h have an affect o n exegesis. As a result, g o o d s e r m o n p r e p a r a t i o n is n a t u r a l l y sensitive t o t h e liturgical season, t h e festal cycles, t h e m e n a i o n ( i n c l u d i n g h a g i o g r a p h y ) , etc. C o n s i d e r a t i o n s of literary s t r u c t u r e a n d f o r m , n o n e t h e l e s s , h a v e t o b e g i v e n a c e r t a i n p r i m a c y . In o u r e x a m p l e , aside from t h e s t r u c t u r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s m e n t i o n e d a b o v e , o n e w o u l d also n o t e t h a t t h e e p i s t o l a r y f o r m of E p h e s i a n s is different from t h a t o f a p e r s o n a l letter. W h e t h e r or n o t o n e insists o n P a u l i n e a u t h o r s h i p , it is o b v i o u s t h a t t h e f o r m of a general essay o r t r a c t is m o r e a p p l i c a b l e h e r e t h a n o n e of p e r s o n a l direct address. Fifth, it is c o m m o n t o give t h e passage a historical a n c h o r , b o t h c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y a n d culturally. In t h e case of t h e P a u l i n e c o r p u s t h e historical p a r a m e t e r s are r a t h e r closely set t o o n e o r a n o t h e r d e c a d e o f t h e first c e n t u r y , w h e t h e r o r n o t o n e a t t r i b u t e s FLphesians t o Paul h i m s e l f o r t o a " P a u l i n e s c h o o l " (i.e., d e u t e r o - P a u l i n e a u t h o r s h i p ) ; a n d this k n o w l e d g e a b o u t t h e first c e n t u r y is c o m m o n e n o u g h t h a t it d o e s n o t bear r e p e a t i n g in s e r m o n - f o r m very m a n y t i m e s a year. O r t h o d o x N e w T e s t a m e n t scholars o f t h e s e c o n d half of t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y h a v e b e e n c o n s e r v a t i v e in g i v i n g u p t r a d i t i o n a l P a u l i n e a u t h o r s h i p . (To t h e i r c r e d i t h o m i l i s t s , w h a t e v e r t h e i r exegetical l e a n ings, h a v e n o t m a d e P a u l i n e c h r o n o l o g y a focus o f p r e a c h i n g . ) W e find this t e n d e n c y t o d a t e t h e epistles early c u r i o u s . The O r t h o d o x s h o u l d h a v e n o t h e o l o g i c a l c o m p u l s i o n t o establish strict a p o s t o l i c a u t h o r s h i p in o r d e r to validate t h e c a n o n i c i t y of a w o r k — t h e q u e s t i o n is h a r d l y raised; a n d t h e y have h a d little stake in t h e a c a d e m i c r e - f i g h t i n g of t h e F r a n c o - P r u s s i a n W a r (the lines a l o n g w h i c h t h e

"'At least o n e such w o r k does exist, St. M a r k the Ascetic's " 2 2 6 texts entitled: To those who think to be justified by deeds," in E. Kadloubovsky and G. E. H . Palmer, Early Fathers from the Philokalia (London: Faber and Faber Limited, 1969) 86-93.

MlCHAKI. P R O K U ' R A T

97

e a r l y a n d l a t e d a t i n g are u s u a l l y d r a w n ) , w h i c h in a n y case s e e m s t o h a v e s u b s i d e d e v e n a m o n g t h e F r e n c h a n d G e r m a n s in r e c e n t decades. S i x t h , as w e r u n t h e risk of o v e r s i m p l i f y i n g for t h e sake of b r e v ity, t h e c o m p e t e n t O r t h o d o x exegete e m p l o y s o n e o r a n o t h e r critical m e t h o d t o c o m p l e t e his s e r m o n p r e p a r a t i o n . W h e t h e r t h e p a r t i c u lars of t h e m e t h o d o l o g i c a l analysis w o u l d a p p e a r in t h e s e r m o n p r e s e n t a t i o n is d o u b t f u l . A l t h o u g h t h e historical-critical m e t h o d is always i m p o r t a n t for an e x p e r t u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e p e r i c o p e , m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s m a y b e restricted t o s e r m o n p r e p a r a t i o n only, b e c a u s e t h e m e t h o d itself m i g h t n o t p r o d u c e exegetical results t h a t are edifying t o t h e f a i t h f u l — w h i c h is t h e classical raison d ' e t r e for p r e a c h i n g . S e v e n t h a n d last, a n d a p a r t o f t h e historical-critical m e t h o d , is a n analysis of w h a t t h e p e r i c o p e m e a n t in its o w n historical a n d c u l t u r a l c o n t e x t a n d w h a t it m e a n s t o C h r i s t i a n s today. T h e r e is a t r e m e n d o u s a m o u n t o f l a t i t u d e in t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f e a c h o f t h e s e t w o analyses. In t h e case of t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of a l m o s t all critical m e t h o d ( s ) , m o s t O r t h o d o x Scripture scholars have t a u g h t their s e m i n a r y stud e n t s t h a t t h e m e t h o d s are, in t h e m s e l v e s , n e u t r a l a n d t h e y s h o u l d b e u s e d as t o o l s , different t o o l s w o r k i n g b e t t e r for different tasks. R e g a r d i n g w h a t a passage m e a n s today, t h e p r o p h e t i c d e m a n d s of this p r i n c i p l e m i g h t well d i c t a t e t h a t t h e s a m e s e r m o n , g i v e n f r o m a set lectionary, w o u l d n e v e r b e given t w i c e — e v e r y a u d i e n c e a n d t i m e are d e s e r v i n g o f a n e w r e s p o n s e . A l t h o u g h this m i g h t a p p e a r overly d e m a n d i n g to A m e r i c a n t r a d i t i o n s in w h i c h t h e p r e a c h e r w e e k l y selects a p p r o p r i a t e " p r o o f t e x t s " t o b e r e a d in s u p p o r t o f a p r e a r r a n g e d s e r m o n topic, p r e a c h i n g from the l e c t i o n a r y — a n d being o p e n to the H o l y S p i r i t — i n t h e O r t h o d o x C h u r c h has n o t o n l y d i s c o u r a g e d p e r s o n a l t h e o l o g i c a l a g e n d a s , b u t has e x p o s e d t h e faithful to t h e e n t i r e t y of t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t t r a d i t i o n . V I I I . SUMMARY

In c o n c l u s i o n , t h e liturgical ( i n c l u d i n g t h e h o m i l e t i c a l ) use o f t h e W o r d o f G o d in t h e O r t h o d o x C h u r c h m a y b e seen o c c u p y i n g a p r e e m i n e n t place over t h e w r i t t e n w o r d , u s e d for p e r s o n a l d e v o t i o n a n d study. In o r d e r t o enjoy t h e "fullness" o f S c r i p t u r e a n d its refere n t s , t h e average O r t h o d o x C h r i s t i a n will l o o k t o t h e p a r i s h a n d m o n a s t i c liturgical p r a c t i c e for t h e m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f this p a r t o f livi n g T r a d i t i o n . W h a t a biblical t e x t m e a n s t o d a y is p r i m a r i l y b a s e d u p o n c h u r c h liturgical usage a n d p r o c l a m a t i o n in h o m i l i e s , r a t h e r

98

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

t h a n u p o n ecclesiastical p r o n o u n c e m e n t . F o r t h e Bible t o b e "alive" in t h e Tradition, it m u s t be h e a r d a n d e x p e r i e n c e d l i t u r g i c a l l y — i t is t h e W o r d w h i c h dwells in t h e h e a r t of t h e p e o p l e o f G o d . W h e n S c r i p t u r e necessarily exists in a p a r t i c u l a r p r i n t e d form or o c c u p i e s hierarchical a t t e n t i o n in edicts, these types of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s are o n l y relative t o t h e W o r d living a m o n g all t h e p e o p l e , h i e r a r c h y a n d laity, n o w a n d t h r o u g h o u t t h e ages. T o say it differently, t h e living W o r d of G o d is seen m a n i f e s t in t h e First C o v e n a n t , in Jesus C h r i s t a n d his w o r d s , in t h o s e w h o r e p e a t e d Jesus' w o r d s before t h e y w e r e w r i t t e n d o w n , in t h e C h u r c h a n d h e r liturgical use of a w r i t t e n , " c a n o n i c a l " text, in t h e Fathers a n d M o t h e r s of t h e C h u r c h , in c o n t e m p o r a r y congregations, etc.—ever s h o w i n g forth a "present incarnation" of t h e living W o r d .

MlC.HAKI. P R O K U ' R A T

RECOMMENDED

99

READINGS

B a r r o i s , G e o r g e s . The Face of Christ in the Old C r e s t w o o d , N.Y.: St. V l a d i m i r ' s S e m i n a r y Press, 1 9 7 4 . . Scripture Readings in Orthodox St. V l a d i m i r ' s S e m i n a r y Press, 1 9 7 7 .

Worship.

Testament.

C r e s t w o o d , N.Y.:

B r e c k , J o h n . The Power of the Word in the Worshiping C r e s t w o o d , N.Y.: St. V l a d i m i r ' s S e m i n a r y Press, 1 9 8 6 .

Church.

. " O r t h o d o x y a n d t h e Bible Today." I n The Legacy of St. Vladimir, 1 4 1 - 5 7 . E d i t e d b y J. Breck, J. Meyendorff, a n d E. Silk. C r e s t w o o d , N.Y.: St. V l a d i m i r ' s S e m i n a r y Press, 1 9 9 0 . Fedotov, G e o r g e P. The Russian Religious Mind. Vol. I: Kievan Christianity: The Tenth to the Thirteenth Century. Vol. II: The Middle Ages: The Thirteenth to the Fifteenth Centuries. Edited by J o h n M e y e n d o r f f . C a m b r i d g e , M a s s . : H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1 9 6 6 . Florovsky, G e o r g e s . Bible, Church, Tradition: An Eastern View. Vol. I of The Collected Works of Georges Florovsky. Mass.: N o r d l a n d Publishing C o m p a n y , 1972.

Orthodox Belmont,

. Ways of Russian Theology. Part I, Vol. V a n d Part II, Vol. VI of The Collected Works of Georges Florovsky. E d i t e d b y R i c h a r d S. H a u g h ; t r a n s l a t e d b y R o b e r t L. N i c h o l s . B e l m o n t , M a s s . : Nordland Publishing Company, 1979. G a m b l e , H a r r y Y. " C a n o n , N e w T e s t a m e n t . " In Vol. I of The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 8 5 2 - 6 1 . E d i t e d by D a v i d N . F r e e d m a n . N e w York: D o u b l e d a y , 1 9 9 2 . J u g i e , M a r t i n . Histoire du Canon de VAncien Testament dans I'Eglise Grecque et lEglise Russe. Vol. I of Etudes de Theologie Orientale. Paris: G a b r i e l B e a u c h e s n e & C i e , E d i t e u r s , 1 9 0 9 . K e s i c h , Veselin. The Gospel Image of Christ. Rev. e d . C r e s t w o o d , N . Y : St. V l a d i m i r ' s S e m i n a r y Press, 1 9 9 2 . [ T h e first e d i t i o n inc l u d e d t h e s u b t i t l e , The Church and Modern Criticism.]

100

ORTHODOX

INTERPRETATION OE

SCRIPTURE

L o s s k y , V l a d i m i r . The Vision of God. T r a n s l a t e d b y A s h e l e i g h M o o r h o u s e . B e d f o r d s h i r e : The Faith Press, 1 9 7 3 . M e y e n d o r f f , J o h n . The Orthodox Church: Its Past and Its Role in the World Today. Translated b y J o h n C h a p i n . N e w York: P a n t h e o n Books, 1962. O b o l e n s k y , D i m i t r i . The Byzantine Commonwealth: Eastern Europe 500-1453. C r e s t w o o d , N . Y : St. V l a d i m i r ' s S e m i n a r y Press, 1982. P e l i k a n , Jaroslav. The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100600). Vol. I o f The Christian 'Tradition. C h i c a g o : The U n i v e r s i t y o f C h i c a g o Press, 1 9 7 1 . . The Spirit of Eastern Christendom (600-1700). Vol. II o f The Christian Tradition. C h i c a g o : The U n i v e r s i t y o f C h i c a g o Press, 1974. Prokurat, Michael, Alexander Golitzin, a n d Michael D . Peterson. The Historical Dictionary of the Orthodox Church. Vol. 9 o f Historical Dictionaries of Religions, Philosophies, and Movements. L a n h a m , M d . a n d L o n d o n : S c a r e c r o w Press, 1 9 9 6 . R i a s a n o v s k y , N i c h o l a s V. A History O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1 9 9 3 . S a n d e r s , J a m e s A. lbrah&

Canon.

of Russia.

5 t h ed. N e w York:

P h i l a d e l p h i a : Fortress Press, 1 9 7 2 .

S c h m e m a n n , A l e x a n d e r . Introduction to Liturgical C r e s t w o o d , N . Y : St. V l a d i m i r ' s S e m i n a r y Press, 1 9 8 6 . S t y l i a n o p o u l o s , T h e o d o r e . The Good News M a s s . : H o l y C r o s s O r t h o d o x Press, 1 9 9 1 . W a r e , T i m o t h y . 'The Orthodox Church. England: Penguin Books Ltd., 1993.

of Christ.

'Theology.

Brookline,

Rev. ed. H a r m o n d s w o r t h ,

LUTHERAN INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE by

JOSF.PH A . BlJRGF.SS

W

' h a t p r o o f d o y o u have? W h a t e v i d e n c e d o y o u have? W i t h s u c h q u e s t i o n s y o u are raising t h e p r o b l e m of a u thority. A n d u l t i m a t e l y a n y d i s c u s s i o n of the p r o b l e m of a u t h o r i t y leads t o t h e q u e s t i o n of final a u t h o r i t y . W h a t is y o u r final a u t h o r i t y ? A r c h i m e d e s said t h a t if y o u w o u l d give h i m a place t o s t a n d o n a n d a lever l o n g e n o u g h , h e c o u l d m o v e the w o r l d . C h r i s tians will state t h a t t h e i r final a u t h o r i t y is C o d , C h r i s t , t h e H o l y Spirit, or t h e Bible. All C h r i s t i a n s h o l d sola scriptura t o be t h e final a u t h o r i t y , even t h o u g h sola scriptura m a y b e m o d i f i e d by w o r d s s u c h as " a n d C h r i s t , " " a n d t r a d i t i o n , " " a n d e x p e r i e n c e , " o r " a n d r e a s o n . " Sola scriptura is t h e claim, yet w h a t this claim m e a n s n e e d s to be s o r t e d o u t . O n e c a r t o o n s h o w s a p a c k a g e d e s c e n d i n g from t h e sky s u s p e n d e d from a p a r a c h u t e . The label o n t h e p a c k a g e says " H o l y B i b l e . " A n o t h e r c a r t o o n has G o d s i t t i n g o n a c l o u d a n d s p e a k i n g t h r o u g h a m e g a p h o n e ; four t u b e s d e s c e n d from t h e m e g a p h o n e to e a r t h , w h e r e M a t t h e w , M a r k , L u k e , a n d J o h n are s i t t i n g at desks w r i t i n g d o w n w h a t t h e y hear. W e s m i l e a n d d i s m i s s s u c h c a r t o o n s as caricatures. B u t at t h e o p e n i n g lecture o n t h e Bible at a L u t h e r a n s e m i n a r y t h e t e a c h e r p i c k e d u p a Bible, p l a c e d it o n t h e floor, a n d actually s t o o d o n t h e Bible for several m o m e n t s . H e i n t e n d e d t o d r a m a t i z e t h e fact t h a t h e t o o k his s t a n d o n t h e Bible. The s t u d e n t s w e r e horrified for t o t h e m it was sacrilegious t o use t h e Bible like t h i s . After all, t h e Bible is a " h o l y " b o o k , s o m e t i m e s even v e n e r a t e d in w o r s h i p . S o m e h o w this p a p e r a n d i n k is different from all o t h e r p a p e r a n d ink! O r is it? H a s a c o n c e p t of material holiness c r e p t in from t h e O l d Testament, w h e r e c e r t a i n objects m a y n o t be t o u c h e d or even l o o k e d a t b e c a u s e t h e y are h o l y (cf. N u m . 4 : 1 5 , 1 9 - 2 0 ; 1 C h r . 1 3 : 9 - 1 0 ) ? H e r e a u t h o r i t y has b e e n u n d e r s t o o d as raw p o w e r . O n l y G o d , of course, has raw p o w e r in t h e u l t i m a t e sense, for h e is o m n i p o t e n t a n d n o o n e can c o m p e t e w i t h his power.

102

LUTHERAN INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

A t t h e o t h e r e x t r e m e sola scriptura

means no more than that the

Bible is a n i m p o r t a n t d o c u m e n t b u t o n e a m o n g m a n y i m p o r t a n t d o c u m e n t s . T h e r e is n o w o r d f r o m t h e L o r d , f r o m o u t s i d e o f myself. U l t i m a t e l y I h a v e t o d e p e n d o n myself, m y r e a s o n , m y feelings, m y e x p e r i e n c e , o r m y c o n s c i e n c e . A t this p o i n t t h e u n i q u e n e s s of t h e Bible is lost b e c a u s e o f "historical c r i t i c i s m . " H i s t o r i c a l c r i t i c i s m , t o b e s u r e , m u s t b e d e f i n e d . First o f all, w h a t is " h i s t o r i c a l " ? S e c o n d , w h a t is "criticism"? If historical m e a n s t h a t t h e r e is n o w o r d f r o m G o d , t h a t t h e o n l y a u t h o r i t y I have is m y e x p e r i e n c e , t h e n I a m c a u g h t in relativism, for reason, feelings, e x p e r i e n c e , a n d even c o n s c i e n c e vary in m y o w n life a n d in t h e c o u r s e of history. If c r i t i c i s m m e a n s t h a t I a m t h e j u d g e of all t h a t is o r is n o t , t h e n I h a v e m a d e myself t h e final

a u t h o r i t y for all t h i n g s a n d o n c e a g a i n h a v e fallen i n t o rela-

tivism. A c c o r d i n g to this, the most virulent definition of historical c r i t i c i s m , t h e B i b l e h a s a u t h o r i t y o n l y t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t I give it a u t h o r i t y . It is i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e t h a t o t h e r d e f i n i t i o n s o f historical c r i t i cism are possible a n d even a p p r o p r i a t e . W h a t is n e e d e d a t this p o i n t is t h a t y o u a n d I react t o t h e assertion t h a t t h e r e is n o w o r d f r o m t h e L o r d , t h a t t h e Bible is n o t u n i q u e , t h a t I a m t h e final a u t h o r i t y . W e k n o w t h a t w e are m o r e u n c o m f o r t a b l e w i t h t h i s assertion t h a n t h e o t h e r e x t r e m e . L u t h e r a n s take t h e Bible very seriously, h o l d i n g t h a t it is t h e " o n l y rule a n d n o r m a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h all d o c t r i n e s a n d t e a c h e r s alike m u s t b e a p p r a i s e d a n d j u d g e d " {Formula

of

Concord,

FLpitome, 1). L u t h e r a n s differ, o n e m u s t q u i c k l y interject, o n h o w t o a p p l y this p r i n c i p l e ; s o m e L u t h e r a n s even h o l d a v i e w o f t h e Bible w h i c h looks very m u c h like f u n d a m e n t a l i s m , a l t h o u g h t h e vast m a j o r i t y d o n o t b e l o n g in this c a m p . B u t t h e r e c a n b e n o d o u b t a b o u t t h e c e n t r a l i t y of sola scriptura I. H o w

in t h e L u t h e r a n t r a d i t i o n .

is THE BIBLE DIFFERENT?

L u t h e r a n s differ o n h o w t h e Bible is different even w h i l e agreei n g t h a t t h e Bible is t h e sole a u t h o r i t y for all p r o c l a m a t i o n , t e a c h i n g , a n d life in t h e C h u r c h . N o official L u t h e r a n t e a c h i n g o n t h e i n s p i r a t i o n o f t h e Bible exists, even t h o u g h s o m e h a v e t r i e d t o d e r i v e a d o c t r i n e of i n s p i r a t i o n f r o m t h e L u t h e r a n C o n f e s s i o n s . T h e r e is n o official L u t h e r a n list o f t h e b o o k s of t h e Bible, a n d for t h a t reason t h e c a n o n of S c r i p t u r e is in p r i n c i p l e o p e n for L u t h e r a n s ; in fact L u t h e r a n s o p e r a t e w i t h t h e s a m e basic c a n o n t h a t m o s t P r o t e s t a n t s use, a n d it w o u l d b e false t o i m p l y t h a t L u t h e r a n s h a v e h a d a n y d e sire t o a d d t o t h e c a n o n .

J O S K P H A.

BURGESS

103

A. Is t h e Bible Different Because It is Inspired? L u t h e r a n s take t h e Bible very seriously b e c a u s e it is t h e o n l y s o u r c e w e h a v e for G o d ' s w o r d . B u t w h y o n l y t h e Bible? W h a t m a k e s it different? Because t h e difference is n o t in t h e p a p e r a n d i n k a n d b e c a u s e t h e s a m e w o r d s a n d s e q u e n c e s of w o r d s are u s e d as in o t h e r l i t e r a t u r e , w h a t possible c l a i m can b e m a d e t h a t t h e Bible is different? As is well k n o w n , t h e c l a i m is t h a t t h e Bible was w r i t t e n by t h e i n s p i r a t i o n of t h e H o l y Spirit a n d therefore t h e Bible is u n l i k e all o t h e r b o o k s . O t h e r religions also claim t h e i r h o l y b o o k s are i n s p i r e d , b u t C h r i s t i a n s c l a i m t h e Bible is i n s p i r e d b y t h e S p i r i t o f t h e o n e true God. Every C h r i s t i a n h o l d s t h a t t h e Bible is i n s p i r e d . T h e q u e s t i o n is " h o w " ? V a r i o u s t h e o r i e s o f i n s p i r a t i o n exist, a n d each claims t o d e scribe t h e m e t h o d t h e H o l y Spirit used. N o t h e o r y denies t h e H o l y Spirit. For e x a m p l e , b e c a u s e C h r i s t i a n s h o l d t h a t e v e r y o n e received the Holy Spirit t h r o u g h baptism, some w o u l d hold that the Holy Spirit c o n t i n u e s to inspire t h e w r i t i n g s d o n e by C h r i s t i a n s . A t t h e o t h e r e x t r e m e are t h o s e c l a i m i n g t h a t G o d gave t h e w o r d s , i n s p i r e d s o m e o n e to w r i t e , a n d t h a t p e r s o n s i m p l y h e l d t h e p e n . T h e r e is n o o n e biblical t h e o r y of i n s p i r a t i o n ; in fact, t h e Bible c o n t a i n s several theories of i n s p i r a t i o n . ' T h o u s a n d s o f passages state " t h e L o r d s a i d , " " t h u s says t h e L o r d , " " t h e L o r d s p o k e , " "the L o r d s p o k e t o , " a n d t h e like. T h e difficulty is t h a t w h a t is m e a n t is n o t o b v i o u s . W a s t h e L o r d s p e a k i n g in s u c h a w a y t h a t e v e r y o n e s t a n d i n g a b o u t h e a r d ? O r was t h e L o r d s p e a k i n g in s u c h a w a y t h a t t h e p r o p h e t a l o n e h e a r d , a n d in this case w e r e s o u n d s h e a r d or were ideas registered? If ideas, were t h e y filtered t h r o u g h t h e p r o p h e t ' s m i n d , or were t h e y ideas t h e p r o p h e t c o u l d w r i t e d o w n w i t h o u t b e i n g altered b y t h e p r o p h e t ' s historical c o n t e x t ? In all p r o b a b i l i t y m o s t of t h e writers o f t h e Bible d i d n o t a g o n i z e over s u c h q u e s t i o n s b u t s i m p l y a s s u m e d t h a t w h a t t h e y said a n d w r o t e w a s i n s p i r e d b y G o d . A t t i m e s , t o be sure, w h e n it was a q u e s t i o n of t r u e or false p r o p h e c y a n d t e a c h i n g , t h e y d i d a g o n i z e a n d even p r o v i d e d certain k i n d s of a n s w e r s (cf. D e u t . 1 3 : 1 - 5 ; 1 K i n g s 2 2 : 2 8 ; G a l . 1:6-9). In t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e first g i v i n g of t h e T e n C o m m a n d m e n t s o n M o u n t Sinai t h e w r i t e r describes h o w M o s e s w r o t e d o w n t h e w o r d s of t h e L o r d , yet in t h e s a m e c h a p t e r t h e L o r d says h e has d o n e t h e w r i t i n g ( E x o d . 2 4 : 4 , 12). In t h e h i s t o r y of t h e s e c o n d g i v i n g of t h e Fen C o m m a n d m e n t s t h e L o r d w r i t e s o n t h e t w o tables o f s t o n e , yet M o s e s later in t h e c h a p t e r is t h e o n e w h o w r o t e o n t h e t w o tables ( E x o d . 3 4 : 1 , 2 8 ) . H o w does o n e s o r t o u t t h e t h e o r y of i n s p i r a t i o n in

104

LUTHERAN

I N T E R P R E T A T I O N or-

SCRIPTURE

these passages? O n l y w i t h great difficulty can a t h e o r y b e p r o p o s e d unless o n e resorts t o c o m p l e x e x p l a n a t i o n s o r unless editorial i n t e r ference is suggested. In 2 K i n g s 3 : 1 5 t h e p r o p h e t a s k e d for a m i n s t r e l t o be b r o u g h t ; w h e n t h e m i n s t r e l p l a y e d , t h e p r o p h e t was i n s p i r e d . This fits in w i t h t h e m a n t i c t h e o r y of i n s p i r a t i o n in t h e a n c i e n t w o r l d . T h e m u s i c i a n was possessed a n d in this w a y i n s p i r e d by t h e spirit. T h e p r o p h e t in t u r n c o u l d be i n s p i r e d t h r o u g h t h e m u s i c i a n (cf. 1 C h r . 2 5 : 1 ) . In Z e c h . 1 3 : 4 - 6 l a c e r a t i o n s have b e e n u s e d b y t h e false p r o p h e t s t o p r o d u c e p r o p h e t i c ecstasy, b u t t h e p r a c t i c e is f o u n d in official religious life as well 0 " . 4 1 : 5 ; cf. 1 K i n g s 1 8 : 2 8 - 2 9 ) . T h e m o s t f a m o u s N e w T e s t a m e n t passage d e a l i n g w i t h inspirat i o n is 2 Tim. 3 : 1 6 : "All s c r i p t u r e is i n s p i r e d , " a c c o r d i n g t o t h e t r a n s l a t i o n f o u n d in t h e K i n g J a m e s Version. B u t t h e N e w English Bible translates: "Every i n s p i r e d s c r i p t u r e has its use." This is at least a very acceptable version of t h e G r e e k text a n d brings o u t t h e fact t h a t "script u r e " in this c o n t e x t m e a n s t h e O l d Testament. W h e n o n e recalls t h e radical f r e e d o m w i t h w h i c h N e w Testament w r i t e r s m a k e use o f t h e O l d Testament, o n e m u s t b e c a u t i o u s a b o u t a n y t h e o r y o f inspirat i o n w h i c h w o u l d i m p l y t h a t t h e text was t h o u g h t to be so h o l y t h a t it m u s t n o t b e i n t e r p r e t e d except in a very literal fashion. 'The adjective t r a n s l a t e d as " i n s p i r e d " s i m p l y m e a n s " G o d - b r e a t h e d , " a n d n o p a r t i c u l a r t h e o r y of i n s p i r a t i o n is i m p l i e d b y t h e w o r d . In 2 Pet. 1:21 p r o p h e c y is n o t f r o m h u m a n efforts, for p r o p h e t s are t h o s e " m o v e d by t h e H o l y S p i r i t . " O b v i o u s l y this m e a n s t h a t p r o p h e t s are t h o s e g u i d e d b y t h e H o l y Spirit, b u t in w h a t w a y a n d t o w h a t e x t e n t is n o t defined. Paul d i s t i n g u i s h e s b e t w e e n G o d ' s w o r d s a n d his o w n w o r d s (1 C o r . 7 : 6 , 10, 12, 2 5 , 4 0 ) , b u t h e does n o t describe h o w this is d o n e o r w h a t m a k e s G o d ' s w o r d s different. W h a t does Paul m e a n w h e n he writes "we i m p a r t this in w o r d s n o t t a u g h t b y h u m a n w i s d o m b u t t a u g h t b y t h e Spirit" (1 C o r . 2:13)? W h o is t h e " w e " in this passage? Is it Paul, o r is it a n editorial " w e , " o r is it all t r u e C h r i s tians? F u r t h e r m o r e , w h a t " w o r d s " are m e a n t here? Are these Paul's w o r d s in this letter, or t h e w o r d s h e uses in p r e a c h i n g , o r is it t h e w o r d s u s e d b y t r u e C h r i s t i a n s w h e n t h e y testify? S i m i l a r q u e s t i o n s arise w i t h a p h r a s e like "in t h e Spirit" ( M a t t . 2 2 : 4 2 ; Rev. 1:10) a n d t h e assertion t h a t t h e H o l y Spirit "will t e a c h y o u all t h i n g s a n d b r i n g t o y o u r r e m e m b r a n c e all t h a t I have said to y o u " ( J o h n 1 4 : 2 6 ) . H o w does t h e H o l y S p i r i t d o t h i s , a n d t o w h a t extent? "The c o n c l u s i o n from l o o k i n g at t h e Bible o n i n s p i r a t i o n is t h a t since n o m o n o l i t h i c t h e o r y o f i n s p i r a t i o n is f o u n d in t h e Bible, t h e a p p r o a c h t o t h e Bible s h o u l d b e d o x o l o g i c a l , t h a t is, w e can o n l y a p p r o a c h t h e Bible w i t h

J O S K P H A.

BURGESS

105

praise a n d t h a n k s g i v i n g b e c a u s e it b u r s t s every c a t e g o r y a n d t h e o r y we m i g h t have. A brief s u r v e y of t h e t h e o r i e s o f i n s p i r a t i o n in c h u r c h h i s t o r y s h o w s h o w t h e o r i e s d e v e l o p e d a c c o r d i n g to t h e historical c o n t e x t . I n s p i r a t i o n in t h e O l d Testament usually m e a n t t h a t t h e p e r s o n a l i t y of t h e w r i t e r was n o t o v e r p o w e r e d b y t h e S p i r i t b u t r a t h e r i n t e r a c t e d w i t h t h e Spirit. C h r i s t i a n i t y , h o w e v e r , c a m e f r o m t h e s t r a n d o f J u d a ism called H e l l e n i s t i c J u d a i s m , w h i c h h a d a p p r o p r i a t e d t h e H e l l e nistic idea t h a t t h e i n s p i r e d w r i t e r has b e e n u s e d b y G o d t h e w a y a m u s i c i a n uses a lyre or a flute. This m a n t i c view o f i n s p i r a t i o n can be f o u n d in P h i l o , J o s e p h u s , 4 Ezra, a n d t h e Talmud. C h r i s t i a n s u s e d t h e a n a l o g y o f t h e lyre o r flute u p t o a n d i n c l u d i n g I r e n a e u s , b u t b e c a u s e of t h e rise o f M o n t a n i s m , w h i c h also c l a i m e d t h a t its p r o p h ets h a d b e e n m a n t i c a l l y i n s p i r e d , t h e m a n t i c t h e o r y o f i n s p i r a t i o n c a m e t o b e a sign of false p r o p h e c y . The m a n t i c t h e o r y c o n t i n u e d to be u s e d as an a p o l o g e t i c device in battles a g a i n s t heresy, b u t d u r i n g t h e M i d d l e Ages for t h e m o s t p a r t a t h e o r y o f i n s p i r a t i o n was n o t e m p h a s i z e d b e c a u s e t h e t r a d i t i o n of t h e C h u r c h was t h e basis for authority. The c h a n g e at t h e t i m e of t h e R e f o r m a t i o n was n o t a n e w or r e n e w e d t h e o r y of i n s p i r a t i o n . L u t h e r t o o k t h e Bible very seriously, as d i d o t h e r s before h i m , yet h e also c o u l d use t h e Bible very critically, as is well k n o w n , for e x a m p l e , from his s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t t h e Epistle o f J a m e s as an "epistle o f straw." 'The L u t h e r a n Book of Concorddid n o t prescribe a n y formal d o c t r i n e of i n s p i r a t i o n for L u t h e r a n s . In t h e p o l e m i c s o f t h e s e c o n d g e n e r a t i o n o f t h e R e f o r m a t i o n , however, m a n t i c views of i n s p i r a t i o n r e t u r n e d , for e x a m p l e , in Flacius Illyricus, w h o h e l d t h a t even t h e H e b r e w vowels are i n s p i r e d . D u r i n g t h e so-called p e r i o d of O r t h o d o x y in t h e s e v e n t e e n t h c e n t u r y , p o l e m i c fronts h a r d e n e d a n d m a n t i c views of i n s p i r a t i o n b e c a m e very i m p o r t a n t , n o t a b l y in G e r h a r d , Calov, a n d Q u e n s t e d t a m o n g t h e L u t h e r a n s , a n d V o e t i u s , " c o v e n a n t " theology, a n d t h e Formula Consensus Helvetica of 1 6 7 5 a m o n g t h e R e f o r m e d . The s y n t h e s i s w h i c h O r t h o d o x y t r i e d t o establish failed, for t h e m o d e r n w o r l d was b r e a k i n g t h r o u g h . N o t o n l y h a d voyages o f discovery f o u n d t h e r e are s t r o n g religions elsewhere in t h e w o r l d a n d C o p e r n i c u s s h o w n t h a t h u m a n b e i n g s are n o t t h e physical c e n t e r of t h e u n i v e r s e , b u t t h e Age of R e a s o n c u l m i n a t i n g in Kant's p h i l o s o p h y raised q u e s t i o n s a b o u t t h e place of religion in t h e t o t a l s c h e m e of life. The F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n in 1 7 8 9 c h a l l e n g e d t r a d i t i o n a l p o l i t i cal, social, a n d religious a u t h o r i t y . In t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y D a r w i n p r o d u c e d a t h e o r y of e v o l u t i o n , q u e s t i o n i n g t h e u n i q u e n e s s of h u -

106

LUTHERAN

INTERPRETATION OP

SCRIPTURE

m a n b e i n g s . Toward t h e e n d of t h a t c e n t u r y F r e u d d e v e l o p e d m o d e l s of t h e h u m a n m i n d w h i c h c h a l l e n g e d t r a d i t i o n a l views o f h u m a n c o n s c i o u s n e s s a n d drives. In this c e n t u r y Einstein's t h e o r y o f relativity, H e i s e n b e r g ' s p r i n c i p l e of i n d e t e r m i n a c y , n u c l e a r w e a p o n s , l a n d i n g o n t h e m o o n , a n d g e n e t i c e n g i n e e r i n g , t o n a m e b u t a few in a l o n g list, have been further shocks t o traditional authorities a n d beliefs. Traditionalists, faced w i t h w h a t t h e y p e r c e i v e d as r e l a t i v i s m , s c i e n t i s m , h i s t o r i c i s m , s e c u l a r i s m , a n d a t h e i s m , r e a c h e d for t r a d i tional w e a p o n s . R o m a n C a t h o l i c s w o r k e d o u t a n d t h e n finally in 1 8 7 0 d e f i n e d p a p a l p r i m a c y a n d infallibility. A n g l i c a n s p r o d u c e d t h e O x f o r d M o v e m e n t . In t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y s o m e L u t h e r a n s , s u c h as V i l m a r a n d S t a h l , e m p h a s i z e d t h e L u t h e r a n C o n f e s s i o n s a n d a high view of the minister's authority. But the m a n t i c theory of i n s p i r a t i o n also was a m a j o r w e a p o n L u t h e r a n t r a d i t i o n a l i s t s m a d e use of as t h e y d e f e n d e d w h a t t h e y p e r c e i v e d as t h e t r u e faith u n d e r a t t a c k b y error. O t h e r L u t h e r a n s a d o p t e d R e f o r m e d " c o v e n a n t " t h e o l o g y ("salvation h i s t o r y " ) , a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h revelation takes place t h r o u g h t h e historical events t h e m s e l v e s a n d t h e r e f o r e a t t a c k s m a d e o n t h e w r i t t e n text c a n n o t affect t h e " i n s p i r e d " events; already Bengel in t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y w a s f a m o u s for f o l l o w i n g t h i s l i n e o f t h o u g h t , a n d it c o n t i n u e d in t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y in s u c h t h e o l o gians as v o n F i o f m a n n , R o t h e , a n d M e n c k e n . A different t a c k was t a k e n by S c h l e i e r m a c h e r , w h o h e l d t h a t t h e H o l y Spirit is identical w i t h t h e spirit in t h e C h u r c h ; for this reason t h e spirit w h i c h g u i d e d t h e apostles w h e n t h e y w r o t e is n o t essentially different f r o m t h e spirit w h i c h g u i d e s each C h r i s t i a n today. The a p o s t l e s , t o be sure, w o u l d have a s t r o n g e r m e a s u r e of t h e spirit b e c a u s e t h e y were closer t o Christ's spirit. Variations on these theories of inspiration c o n t i n u e today; no o n e t h e o r y d o m i n a t e s . All w o u l d c o n t e n d in s o m e w a y t h a t t h e Bible is b o t h h u m a n a n d d i v i n e , b u t w h e t h e r this w o u l d be by a n a l o g y w i t h C h r i s t ' s h u m a n i t y a n d divinity, an a n a l o g y a l r e a d y s u g g e s t e d by C h r y s o s t o m in t h e early c h u r c h , w o u l d b e a m a t t e r of d i s p u t e b e cause n o t all w o u l d agree t h a t since C h r i s t ' s h u m a n i t y is w i t h o u t sin, therefore t h e Bible m u s t be w i t h o u t error. D o e s t h e fact t h a t Jesus lived w i t h o u t sin m e a n t h a t w h i l e w a l k i n g h e c o u l d n o t s t u b his t o e o n a rock?

B. Is the Bible Different Because It is Canon? The p r o b l e m of t h e Bible as c a n o n is t h e u n e x a m i n e d e c u m e n i cal p r o b l e m , a l a n d m i n e w a i t i n g t o e x p l o d e . The general q u e s t i o n o f

J O S K P H A.

BURGESS

107

t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e Bible a n d t r a d i t i o n , t o be sure, has b e e n discussed, as for e x a m p l e in 1 9 6 3 at t h e w o r l d c o n f e r e n c e of Faith a n d O r d e r of t h e W o r l d C o u n c i l of C h u r c h e s . B u t in s p i t e of basic differences t h a t exist a m o n g c h u r c h e s , e c u m e n i c a l dialogues have s i m ply a s s u m e d a c o n s e n s u s exists o n t h e n a t u r e a n d e x t e n t of t h e c a n o n . A t stake is n o t o n l y t h e fact t h a t s o m e h o l d t h e A p o c r y p h a t o be c a n o n i c a l a n d o t h e r s d o n o t . R a t h e r , t h e n a t u r e of t h e Bible itself is decisive for all o t h e r t h e o l o g i c a l q u e s t i o n s . It can b e said t h a t L u t h erans h o l d t o t h e fact b u t n o t t h e e x t e n t o f t h e c a n o n b e c a u s e L u t h erans are n o t tied t o a specific list o f b o o k s in t h e Bible. Yet w h a t does it m e a n t o h o l d t o t h e fact of t h e c a n o n ? W i t h i n t h e Bible itself t h e w o r d is used (Gal. 6 : 1 6 ; cf. R o m . 6 : 1 7 ) , b u t h o w " c a n o n " applies t o t h e Bible is of c o u r s e n o t spelled o u t . T h e p r o b l e m s are c o m p l e x . H o w d o w e deal w i t h t h e fact t h a t 1 E n o c h 1:9 is q u o t e d as p r o p h e c y in J u d e 1 4 - 1 5 ? In 1 C o r . 2 : 9 , u s i n g t h e t e c h n i c a l f o r m u l a "it is w r i t t e n , " w h i c h i n d i c a t e s a u t h o r i t a t i v e s c r i p t u r e , Paul cites a passage n o t in t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t . T h e letter o f 1 C l e m e n t , w r i t t e n A . D . 9 5 - 9 6 , t h e letters of I g n a t i u s , w r i t t e n a b o u t A . D . 1 1 0 , a n d t h e D i d a c h e , also w r i t t e n a b o u t A . D . 1 1 0 , are n o t i n c l u d e d in t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t c a n o n , b u t 1 a n d 2 T i m o t h y a n d T i t u s , w r i t t e n d u r i n g t h e s a m e p e r i o d , are i n c l u d e d . First C l e m e n t a n d t h e D i d a c h e w e r e , after all, in s o m e early lists a n d c o l l e c t i o n s . W h a t if t h e lost letter t o t h e L a o d i c e a n s ( C o l . 4 : 1 6 ) w e r e f o u n d ? W o u l d w e i n c l u d e it in t h e c a n o n a n d if s o , h o w w o u l d w e decide? W o u l d a n y t h i n g e x c e p t an e c u m e n i c a l c o u n c i l b e able to m a k e s u c h a decision? Lest w e fall i n t o t h e m i s t a k e o f s i m p l y asserting t h a t t h e c a n o n is t h e c a n o n is t h e c a n o n a n d t h e r e f o r e t h e n a t u r e of t h e c a n o n is selfe v i d e n t , it is i m p o r t a n t t o b e c o m e a w a r e of t h e v a r i o u s a t t e m p t s in c h u r c h h i s t o r y t o define t h e c a n o n . 1. W h a t is canonical is d e t e r m i n e d by o r t h o d o x c o n t e n t . W h e r e t h e spirit o f C h r i s t is, t h e r e is t h e c a n o n . B u t w h e r e is t h e spirit? W h e r e d o w e find o r t h o d o x c o n t e n t ? T h e difficulty w i t h this att e m p t is t h a t it is precisely t h e c a n o n w h i c h is s u p p o s e d t o define w h e r e t h e spirit is a n d w h a t is o r t h o d o x . F u r t h e r m o r e , in t h e early c h u r c h , o r t h o d o x y a n d heresy were n o t so easy t o d i s c e r n . In t h a t early p e r i o d lines were fluid. O n l y after l o n g d e b a t e a n d s t r u g g l e d i d o r t h o d o x y e m e r g e a n d heresy b e c o m e e v i d e n t . A n d in fact u n t i l well i n t o t h e s e c o n d c e n t u r y , all t h e b a p t i z e d , h a v i n g received t h e H o l y Spirit in b a p t i s m , w e r e u n d e r s t o o d t o b e i n s p i r e d .

108

LUTHERAN

INTERPRETATION OP

SCRIPTURE

2 . W h a t is canonical is apostolic. B u t w h o arc apostles a c c o r d i n g to t h e N e w Testament? L u k e t h i n k s o f twelve apostles, t h e eleven p l u s M a t t h i a s (Acts 1:26), p l u s t w o , Paul a n d B a r n a b a s (Acts 1 4 : 4 , 14). In R o m . 16:7 Paul writes o f A n d r o n i c u s a n d J u n i a s w h o were apostles before h i m , in Phil. 2 : 2 5 L p a p h r o d i t u s is called an a p o s t l e , a n d in 2 C o r . 8:24 apostles are s i m p l y t h o s e w h o are m i s s i o n a r i e s . 'The N e w T e s t a m e n t b o o k s b y M a r k , L u k e , a n d J u d e are clearly n o t w r i t t e n b y apostles, a n d if t h e c l a i m is m a d e t h a t these m e n were closely a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a p o s t l e s , t h e n already t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g of apostolicity has b e e n greatly w i d e n e d . Very early q u e s t i o n s were raised a b o u t t h e P a u l i n e a u t h o r s h i p of H e b r e w s ; in s p i t e of b e i n g associa t e d w i t h " J o h n , " t h e B o o k of R e v e l a t i o n was t h e last b o o k a c c e p t e d i n t o t h e c a n o n b e c a u s e its f o r m a n d c o n t e n t d i d n o t m a t c h o t h e r J o h a n n i n e l i t e r a t u r e a n d b e c a u s e it s e e m e d t o l e n d s u p p o r t t o Montanism. 3 . W h a t is canonical is early or t h e earliest. To g o b a c k t o t h e s o u r c e s is n o t o n l y an a p p e a l t o t r a d i t i o n , in this case t h e early or earliest t r a d i t i o n , b u t also an appeal t o t h e h u m a n i s t i c p r i n c i p l e t h a t o n e m u s t g o b a c k t o t h e s o u r c e s . W h a t c o m e s f r o m t h e early c h u r c h establishes t h e c a n o n , o r w h a t b e l o n g s t o t h e era of salvation h i s t o r y establishes t h e c a n o n . Yet, as is well k n o w n , n o t all t h e w r i t i n g s from t h e early t r a d i t i o n h a v e b e e n i n c l u d e d in t h e c a n o n . E v e n if t h e earliest w r i t i n g s are m o r e likely t o be a m o r e a c c u r a t e reflection of w h a t was said a n d d o n e , s o m e were n o t selected for t h e c a n o n . 'The early c h u r c h s t r u g g l e d w i t h this p r o b l e m , for s o m e early w r i t i n g s , like B a r n a b a s , w e r e i n c l u d e d a n d t h e n rejected w h i l e o t h e r s , like Revelat i o n , w e r e rejected a n d finally i n c l u d e d . 4 . W h a t is canonical is w h a t the C h u r c h establishes as c a n o n i cal. If this were t h e case, t h e C h u r c h w o u l d be m o r e a u t h o r i t a t i v e t h a n t h e Bible. S o m e w o u l d take this p o i n t of view. As a m a t t e r o f fact, h o w e v e r , f o r m a l r e c o g n i t i o n of t h e c a n o n b y t h e C h u r c h t o o k place r a t h e r late in t h e process. The first t i m e t h a t all t w e n t y - s e v e n b o o k s in t h e N e w Testament w e r e listed was b y A t h a n a s i u s in his Easter letter in A . D . 3 6 7 . The first f o r m a l r e c o g n i t i o n b y t h e C h u r c h of this list o f b o o k s c a m e from a local c o u n c i l — p o s s i b l y at R o m e in A . D . 3 8 2 , c e r t a i n l y at H i p p o in A . D . 3 9 3 ; a n o t h e r local c o u n c i l followed suit at C a r t h a g e in A . D . 3 9 7 . I n n o c e n t I in A . D . 4 0 5 c i t e d this s a m e list. In s o m e p a r t s o f t h e O r t h o d o x C h u r c h t h e B o o k of Revelation was n o t accepted until the t e n t h century. At the Council of F l o r e n c e in A . D . 1 4 4 2 t h e R o m a n C a t h o l i c C h u r c h for t h e first

J O S K P H A.

BURGESS

109

t i m e formally d e f i n e d t h e e x t e n t of t h e biblical c a n o n . As already n o t e d , L u t h e r a n s h a v e n o t formally d e f i n e d t h e e x t e n t of t h e c a n o n . T h e Bible of t h e N e s t o r i a n C h u r c h in Syria, t h e Peschitta, has o n l y t w e n t y - t w o b o o k s in t h e N e w Testament, w h i l e t h e Bible o f t h e E t h i o p i a n C o p t i c C h u r c h has t h i r t y - o n e b o o k s in its N e w ' T e s t a m e n t c a n o n . A l r e a d y in t h e s e c o n d c e n t u r y t h e sayings o f Jesus a n d letters of Paul h a d c a n o n i c a l a u t h o r i t y , b u t it t o o k c e n t u r i e s for t h e c a n o n of t h e N e w Testament as w e n o w k n o w it t o be e s t a b l i s h e d . Even t h e G o s p e l of J o h n was n o t fully a c c e p t e d until t h e e n d of t h e s e c o n d c e n t u r y b e c a u s e it was s u s p e c t e d b y s o m e t o have g n o s t i c t e n d e n c i e s . If t h e c l a i m is m a d e t h a t t h e C h u r c h establishes t h e c a n o n , t h e q u e s t i o n m u s t be asked: W h i c h c h u r c h a n d a t w h a t p o i n t in history? M o s t i m p o r t a n t of all, however, is t h a t t h o s e m a k i n g this c l a i m u n d e r s t a n d t h e C h u r c h t o b e m o r e a u t h o r i t a t i v e t h a n t h e Bible. 5. W h a t is c a n o n i c a l is w h a t h a s b e e n u s e d as c a n o n i c a l . The c a n o n has s i m p l y d e v e l o p e d ; c e r t a i n b o o k s h a v e b e e n used, a n d for this reason t h e y h a v e f o r m e d t h e c a n o n . The difficulty w i t h this att e m p t t o e x p l a i n t h e c a n o n is t h a t t h e r e has b e e n a great deal of variety. A t t i m e s H e r m a s , 2 C l e m e n t , o r t h e A p o c a l y p s e o f Peter was i n c l u d e d . W h y w e r e t h e letters o f I g n a t i u s n o t u s e d as c a n o n i c a l letters? T o claim t h a t usage m a k e s a b o o k c a n o n i c a l d o e s n o t explain w h y c e r t a i n b o o k s w e r e u s e d a n d o t h e r s n o t used. 6. W h a t is c a n o n i c a l is w h a t is f o u n d i n t h e e a r l y c r e e d s . For e x a m p l e , 1 C o r . 8:6 a n d 1 5 : 3 - 5 are creeds o r f r a g m e n t s o f creeds u s e d in t h e early c h u r c h . A c c o r d i n g t o this v i e w p o i n t s u c h creeds are c a n o n i c a l ; t h e y are t h e final a u t h o r i t i e s for t h e C h r i s t i a n faith. 'Thus a certain pattern of preaching developed a n d b e c a m e normative, a p a t t e r n of a u t h e n t i c i t y . Later, in t h e s e c o n d c e n t u r y , Papias w o u l d claim u n i q u e a u t h o r i t y for t h e sayings of Jesus. A b o u t this t i m e t h e creed o f t h e c h u r c h of R o m e also p l a y e d a role in d e f i n i n g t h e C h r i s t i a n faith. B u t from all t h e creeds a n d f r a g m e n t s of creeds, w h e r e d o e s o n e find " t h e " creed, " t h e " p a t t e r n w h i c h is n o r m a t i v e ? In a d d i t i o n , o n e m u s t ask if this a t t e m p t t o establish t h e c a n o n d o e s n o t m a k e t h e t w e n t y - s e v e n b o o k s of t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t s u b o r d i n a t e t o t h e creed. 7 . W h a t is c a n o n i c a l is w h a t t h e i n t e r n a l t e s t i m o n y o f t h e H o l y S p i r i t s h o w s is c a n o n i c a l . A w o m a n t o l d o f t h e great s p i r i t u a l blessing she received f r o m t h e w o r d "selah" in t h e P s a l m s . Yet scholars are n o t c e r t a i n o f t h e m e a n i n g o f "selah"; it p r o b a b l y is s o m e s o r t of

110

LUTHERAN INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

d i r e c t i o n t o t h e c o n d u c t o r for t h e m u s i c . D o e s n o t t h i s a t t e m p t to establish t h e n a t u r e o f t h e c a n o n u l t i m a t e l y m e a n m y i n t e r n a l e x p e r i e n c e b e c o m e s t h e final a u t h o r i t y ? H o w is o n e t o d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n t h e spirits (1 J o h n 4 : 1 - 4 ) ? 8 . W h a t is c a n o n i c a l is t h e c a n o n w i t h i n t h e c a n o n . The c a n o n w i t h i n t h e c a n o n is n o t t h e c a n o n in a w o o d e n sense. In o t h e r w o r d s , t h e c a n o n w i t h i n t h e c a n o n is n o t a c e r t a i n passage f r o m t h e Bible, s u c h as J o h n 3 : 1 6 , o r a certain a u t h o r , s u c h as Paul o r J o h n o r M a t thew, or a c e r t a i n b o o k , s u c h as R e v e l a t i o n . The c a n o n w i t h i n t h e c a n o n is t h a t w h i c h is u s e d t o deal w i t h difficulties f o u n d w i t h i n t h e Bible. T h e Bible c o n t a i n s s u c h difficulties w h e n it is t a k e n literally. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , each t r a d i t i o n uses s o m e k i n d of h e r m e n e u t i c s t o s o r t o u t t h e s e difficulties. E a c h t r a d i t i o n has a t h e o l o g i c a l a p p r o a c h t o t h e Bible, a n a p p r o a c h often d e s c r i b e d as t h e " h e r m e n e u t i c s of t h e g o s p e l " ; w h a t is m e a n t is t h a t b y this process t h e c e n t r a l t r u t h of t h e Bible c a n b e d i s c e r n e d a n d k e p t i n t a c t . In a sense t h e historical c a n o n a n d t h e o l o g i c a l c a n o n s t a n d in t e n s i o n . The c a n o n w i t h i n t h e c a n o n is n o t an a u t h o r i t y b y itself, s e p a r a t e from t h e gospel, t h e t h e o l o g i c a l c a n o n ; a n d t h e c a n o n w i t h i n t h e c a n o n is n o t a n a u t h o r i t y s e p a r a t e from t h e b o o k called t h e Bible, t h e h i s t o r i c a l c a n o n . N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e h e r m e n e u t i c s o f t h e g o s p e l is t h a t w h i c h d e t e r m i n e s t h e c e n t r a l t r u t h called t h e g o s p e l , a n d e a c h C h r i s t i a n t r a d i t i o n h a s its o w n " h e r m e n e u t i c s of t h e g o s p e l , " its c a n o n w i t h i n t h e c a n o n . A L u t h e r a n " h e r m e n e u t i c s of t h e g o s p e l " will b e d e s c r i b e d in S e c t i o n III of this chapter. I I . BASIC QUESTIONS AND PRESUPPOSITIONS

C h r i s t is t h e answer. W h a t is t h e q u e s t i o n ? T h e q u e s t i o n m i g h t be: H o w d o e s o n e d e c i d e t h a t C h r i s t is t h e answer? O r t h e q u e s t i o n m i g h t be: W h a t d o e s it m e a n t h a t C h r i s t is t h e answer? T h e n all sorts of q u e s t i o n s a n d p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s c o m e i n t o play. The p o i n t is t h a t a l t h o u g h all agree t h a t C h r i s t is t h e answer, n o t all agree o n w h a t this m e a n s . N o r d o e s it h e l p t o c l a i m t o h o l d t o S c r i p t u r e s as a b s o l u t e l y i n e r r a n t a n d infallible in every detail or t o claim t o use a m e t h o d of i n t e r p r e t i n g S c r i p t u r e t h a t is literal a n d " h i s t o r i c a l - g r a m m a t i c a l , " ins t e a d of " h i s t o r i c a l - c r i t i c a l , " for t h e r e is clearly n o u n a n i m i t y a m o n g those claiming to hold such positions. B u t t h e r e is n o u n a n i m i t y a m o n g t h o s e c l a i m i n g t o use t h e h i s torical-critical m e t h o d either. Therefore s o m e o t h e r c r i t e r i o n will have to b e f o u n d for d e c i d i n g w h e t h e r t h e historical-critical m e t h o d is

J O S K P H A.

BURGESS

111

a c c e p t a b l e for t h o s e h o l d i n g t o C h r i s t as t h e answer. Those w h o attack t h e historical-critical m e t h o d a p p l y certain tests, a n d these tests are really t h e p r e s u p p o s i t i o n s o f t h o s e o p p o s i n g t h e h i s t o r i c a l - c r i t i cal m e t h o d . A. T h e P r e s u p p o s i t i o n o f t h e U n i t y o f Scripture The historical-critical m e t h o d asks: " W h a t h a p p e n e d ? " W h a t it discovers is n o t o n l y t h a t t h e Bible was w r i t t e n over m a n y h u n d r e d s of years a n d in m a n y different literary f o r m s b u t also t h a t t h e Bible c o n t a i n s a g r e a t variety o f ideas, s o m e o f w h i c h a t least a p p e a r t o o p p o s e each o t h e r . A f a m o u s e x a m p l e is t h e s t o r y o f K i n g D a v i d ' s c e n s u s ; in 2 S a m . 2 4 : 1 it is r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e L o r d i n c i t e d D a v i d to take t h e c e n s u s , w h e r e a s in 1 C h r o n . 2 1 : 1 it says t h a t S a t a n i n c i t e d D a v i d t o n u m b e r Israel. H i s t o r i c a l critics unravel t h e difficulty in these verses b y n o t i n g t h a t t h e y were w r i t t e n b y different a u t h o r s at different t i m e s w i t h different t h e o l o g i e s . O p p o n e n t s of historical criticism p r e s u p p o s e t h e u n i t y of S c r i p t u r e . Is this a u n i t y s u c h as C h r i s t i a n s p o s i t for t h e Trinity, a u n i t y w h i c h is finally a mystery? O r is this a u n i t y w h i c h excludes c o n t r a d i c t i o n s , a u n i t y b u i l t o n logic, so t h a t even if i t e m s s t a n d in c o n t r a d i c t i o n , a c o n t r a d i c t i o n c a n n o t exist b e c a u s e t h e p r e s u p p o s i t i o n of u n i t y does n o t allow for c o n t r a d i c t i o n ? In t h a t case t h e r e a d e r is e x p e c t e d to s u s p e n d j u d g m e n t , t o o p p o s e his intellect, because of t h e s u p r e m e authority of the presupposition of unity. M o s t of the time, t o b e s u r e , t h e u n i t y o f S c r i p t u r e is d e f e n d e d b y m e a n s o f a n o v e r a r c h i n g c o n c e p t s u c h as t h e W o r d , or t h e c o v e n a n t , or salvation history, o r G o d ' s p l a n , or G o d ' s kingly rule, o r G o d ' s grace. The r e j o i n d e r by t h e historical critics is s i m p l e : H o w are difficulties solved b y refusing t o deal w i t h t h e m ? M o r e i m p o r t a n t l y , is it n o t in fact t r u e t h a t i n s t e a d of w o r k i n g o n t h e basis of t h e u n i t y of S c r i p t u r e , each s t r e a m o f C h r i s t i a n t r a d i t i o n uses its o w n theological a p p r o a c h , its o w n c a n o n w i t h i n t h e c a n o n , t o s o r t o u t a n d solve t h e difficulties in S c r i p t u r e ? B. T h e Presupposition that Reason is to be Subordinate to Scripture The basis for this p r e s u p p o s i t i o n is often 2 C o r . 1 0 : 5 : " W e d e stroy a r g u m e n t s a n d every p r o u d obstacle t o t h e k n o w l e d g e o f G o d , a n d t a k e every t h o u g h t captive t o o b e y C h r i s t " (cf. 1 C o r . 1:18-25). A t first g l a n c e n o o n e w o u l d fault this a r g u m e n t . R e a s o n is n o t G o d , a n d reason c a n n o t b e s u p e r i o r t o S c r i p t u r e . S c r i p t u r e tells us w h o w e

112

LUTHERAN

INTERPRETATION OP

SCRIPTURE

arc a n d w h o G o d is, n o t r e a s o n . R e a s o n c a n at b e s t p l a y a s e r v a n t r o l e , as a t o o l w h i c h h e l p s us u n d e r s t a n d m o r e fully w h a t S c r i p ture means. The q u e s t i o n , o f c o u r s e , is w h e t h e r reason for historical critics is necessarily m a d e s u p e r i o r t o S c r i p t u r e or w h e t h e r historical critics d o n o t also use reason as a t o o l . D u r i n g t h e F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n , t o be s u r e , reason was m a d e i n t o a g o d d e s s , a n d n o d o u b t i n d i v i d u a l s have m a d e reason s u p e r i o r t o revelation. B u t for t h e vast m a j o r i t y h i s t o r i cal criticism is a m e t h o d , n o t a p h i l o s o p h y . In o r d e r t o p e n e t r a t e m o r e d e e p l y i n t o t h e m e a n i n g of S c r i p t u r e , it is necessary to t h i n k . T h i n k i n g always i n c l u d e s t h e use of t h e p r i n c i p l e of analogy, for h o w else is it possible t o c o m p r e h e n d at all? Surely n o o n e w o u l d claim t h a t S c r i p t u r e m u s t in p r i n c i p l e be irrational or i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e . N o r d i d Paul in 1 C o r . 1:18-25 a n d 2 C o r . 10:5 i n t e n d t o reject t h i n k i n g or t r y i n g t o c o m p r e h e n d S c r i p t u r e w i t h t h e use of m o d e r n historical t o o l s . F u r t h e r m o r e , m o d e r n t h i n k e r s are well a w a r e o f t h e fact t h a t reason itself is p a r t o f h i s t o r y a n d s u b j e c t t o c h a n g e .

C. The Presupposition that Miracles Happen B u t w h a t is a miracle? The c o m m o n u n d e r s t a n d i n g a m o n g t h o s e raising this q u e s t i o n is t h a t miracles are e v i d e n c e or proof. By this t h e y u n d e r s t a n d c r e a t i o n t o be r u n by n a t u r a l laws, like a clock; a m i r a c l e is t h a t w h i c h breaks i n t o s u c h a w o r l d a n d in d o i n g so p r o vides p r o o f t h a t G o d has i n t e r v e n e d . S o m e w o u l d also p o i n t o u t t h a t t h e m o d e r n scientific view o f t h e w o r l d as an o p e n s y s t e m allows for miracles, a n d o t h e r s w o u l d also c l a i m t h a t t h r o u g h G o d ' s s u s t a i n i n g w o r k e v e r y t h i n g is a m i r a c l e . As a result, t h e C h r i s t i a n faith can be d e f e n d e d as t r u t h because t h e r e is e v i d e n c e to b a c k u p t h e faith; few, t o be s u r e , w o u l d d e n y t h a t faith is also n e e d e d , b u t t h e i m p o r t a n t t h i n g is t h a t t h e p r o o f s are t h e r e for all w h o are w i l l i n g t o see. A n d t h e proofs are t h e r e b e c a u s e t h e Bible records s u c h miracles a n d int e n d s t h e m t o be e v i d e n c e a n d proof. Those using t h e historical-critical m e t h o d d o n o t reject "miracles" in t h e sense d e f i n e d a b o v e , for as d e f i n e d a b o v e " m i r a c l e s " s t a n d o u t side o f h i s t o r y a n d t h e h i s t o r i a n can o n l y state "I d o n ' t k n o w . " B u t t h e h i s t o r i a n is able to ask t h e q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r t h e Bible i n t e n d e d "miracles" t o be u n d e r s t o o d in t h e sense d e f i n e d a b o v e . N o t everyo n e w h o o b s e r v e d a m i r a c l e was c o n v i n c e d , a n d s o m e said t h a t Jesus d i d miracles b y t h e p o w e r o f Beelzebul ( M a r k 3 : 2 2 ) . 'Thus it was well k n o w n t h a t miracles w e r e d o n e b y t h o s e w h o w e r e n o t C h r i s t i a n s . The G o s p e l of J o h n has a very c o m p l e x u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f "signs" o r

JOSKI'H A. PjURGKSS

113

" m i r a c l e s " (cf. 2 : 2 3 - 2 5 ; 3 : 2 ; 6 : 2 6 ; 1 0 : 1 9 - 2 1 ; 1 1 : 4 5 - 4 8 ; 2 0 : 2 9 - 3 1 ) . Paul i n d i c a t e s t h a t d e m a n d i n g "signs" is o n e w a y t h e Jews s h o w their unbelief, for C h r i s t i a n s h o l d to t h e s t u m b l i n g b l o c k o f C h r i s t c r u c i fied (1 C o r . 1:22; cf. 2 C o r . 1 2 : 9 - 1 3 ) . T h e h i s t o r i a n is also aware o f t h e fact t h a t literary f o r m s s o m e t i m e s give t h e reader a clue t o t h e i n t e n t of a m i r a c l e story. T h e i m p o r t a n t p o i n t , h o w e v e r , is t h a t t h e h i s t o r i a n d o e s n o t try t o d e n y o r d e s t r o y w h a t t h e Bible describes; rather, t h e historical critic h e l p s us u n d e r s t a n d t h e text a n d in fact helps us focus o n Jesus C h r i s t alone a n d h i m crucified (cf. 1 Cor. 2:2). D . T h e P r e s u p p o s i t i o n o f Facticity It is a fact t h a t t h e m o d e r n m i n d often a s s u m e s t h a t "facts" exist. W h a t is m e a n t is t h a t a certain k i n d o f i n f o r m a t i o n is d e m o n s t r a b l e , directly accessible t o t h e five senses, a n d available t o all h u m a n b e ings. A p o p u l a r view of science is t h a t science is able t o p r o d u c e facts. S o m e t i m e s it is a s s u m e d t h a t h i s t o r y also is able t o p r o d u c e facts a n d t h a t t h e Bible, a b o o k of history, is full of facts w h i c h C h r i s tians are t o believe in. H i s t o r i c a l criticism, in t u r n , is t h o u g h t b y s o m e t o be very d e s t r u c t i v e b e c a u s e it seems t o q u e s t i o n s o m e of t h e facts in t h e Bible. The t r o u b l e w i t h "facts" is t h a t truly m o d e r n science n o l o n g e r claims t o p r o d u c e facts b u t r a t h e r statistical averages. A n d m o d e r n historical s t u d y n o l o n g e r claims t o p r o d u c e facts b u t r a t h e r a r e c o r d of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s a n d ideas. Even t h e p e r s o n o n t h e street k n o w s t h a t an a c c i d e n t at t h e crossroads will be i n t e r p r e t e d differently by different witnesses. A n d even t h e p e r s o n o n t h e street k n o w s t h a t p e o p l e in o t h e r t i m e s a n d c u l t u r e s p e r c e i v e d a n d t h o u g h t differently. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e p e r s o n o n t h e street still t h i n k s t h a t w o r d s have a specific m e a n i n g , a m e a n i n g w h i c h can be established by m e a n s of a d i c t i o n a r y after d e t e r m i n i n g t h e c o n t e x t . W h a t p e o p l e d o n o t realize is t h a t d i c t i o n a r i e s are h i s t o r y b o o k s , w h i c h is q u i c k l y p e r ceived w h e n s o m e o n e looks i n t o t h e O x f o r d E n g l i s h D i c t i o n a r y , for e x a m p l e . G r a m m a r is t h e s a m e k i n d of p r o b l e m . M o s t s u p p o s e t h a t g r a m m a r is exact, t h a t c o r r e c t usage c a n be e s t a b l i s h e d . S o m e t h i n k t h a t w i t h a " h i s t o r i c a l - g r a m m a t i c a l " m e t h o d it is possible t o a v o i d t h e perils o f t h e historical-critical m e t h o d . Yet g r a m m a r t o o is historical a n d d e p e n d s o n t h e p h i l o s o p h i e s of l a n g u a g e o p e r a t i v e at a specific t i m e . In general it can be said t h a t t h e o l o g i a n s n e e d t o b r i n g t h e historical n a t u r e o f w o r d s a n d "facts" t o t h e a t t e n t i o n o f t h e pers o n o n t h e street.

114

LUTHERAN INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

E. T h e P r e s u p p o s i t i o n o f Propositional Truth C a n t r u t h b e c a p t u r e d in a s t a t e m e n t w h i c h t h e n is " t h e t r u t h " ? After all, t w o p l u s t w o equals four. B u t I h a v e never seen a " t w o " o r a "four." N u m b e r s b e l o n g t o t h e u n r e a l w o r l d of m a t h e m a t i c s . In t h e real w o r l d w e live in, life is historical a n d t r u t h is h i s t o r i c a l . This d o e s n o t m e a n t h a t t r u t h d o e s n o t exist or is n o t t r u t h . It d o e s m e a n t h a t even a p r o p o s i t i o n s u c h as " G o d is o n e " m u s t b e u n d e r s t o o d as a h i s t o r i c a l p r o p o s i t i o n (cf. J a m e s 2 : 1 9 ) . W h o is G o d in this s t a t e m e n t ? W h a t are t h e a c t i o n s of t h i s G o d ? F u r t h e r m o r e , w h a t is " o n e " in this c o n t e x t ? Is it o n e over a g a i n s t t h e m a n y ? H o w d o e s t h i s fit in w i t h C h r i s t i a n l a n g u a g e a b o u t G o d b e i n g t r i u n e ? W h a t is at s t a k e h e r e is n o t a k i n d of n e w m a t h , b u t w h a t it m e a n s t o b e h u m a n , t o b e historical. In t i m e s p a s t t h e o l o g i a n s d i d h o l d t h a t t r u t h in religion c o u l d b e s t a t e d in p r o p o s i t i o n s a n d t h a t t h e Bible c o n t a i n e d p r o p o s i t i o n s w h i c h C h r i s t i a n s s h o u l d h o l d to as t h e t r u t h . T h a t was b e c a u s e o f t h e p r e v a i l i n g p h i l o s o p h y o f t h e t i m e , a p h i l o s o p h y b u i l t o n a s t a t i c , logical view of t r u t h . B u t t h e Bible is n o t t i e d t o a n y p a r t i c u l a r p h i l o s o p h y or a n y p a r t i c u l a r p h i l o s o p h i c a l view o f t r u t h . F o r C h r i s t i a n s t r u t h is a p e r s o n (cf. J o h n 14:6) w h o m w e k n o w b y faith. T r u t h is t h e r e f o r e d y n a m i c , personal, relational, historical. Today the presupposition of p r o p o s i t i o n a l t r u t h b e l o n g s largely to a b y g o n e era. Even s e n t e n c e s t h a t are p r o p o s i t i o n s often c o m m u n i c a t e m o r e b y w h a t t h e y e v o k e t h a n by w h a t t h e y d e n o t e logically. T h u s t h e historical-critical m e t h o d w i t h its d y n a m i c , h i s t o r i c a l view o f t r u t h a n d p r o p o s i t i o n s is n o t a threat b u t a help in u n d e r s t a n d i n g w h a t the Bible m e a n s for y o u a n d m e . III. A LUTHERAN APPROACH

F o r t u n a t e l y n o o n e is saved by t h e correct i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of S c r i p t u r e , or n o n e of us w o u l d b e saved. W e are saved b y Jesus C h r i s t . N e v e r t h e l e s s , w e n e e d t o d i s c e r n w h o it is w e believe in. H o w c a n w e discern? W h a t is t h e final a u t h o r i t y ? T h e Bible is t h e final a u t h o r i t y , o f c o u r s e . T h e p r o b l e m is t h a t t h e Bible m u s t b e i n t e r p r e t e d , for it m u s t s p e a k to all t i m e as well as t o its t i m e . W h o can a u t h o r i t a t i v e l y i n t e r p r e t t h e Bible? Is it satisfactory t o say t h a t t h e Bible is s i m p l y t o b e t a k e n as it is b e c a u s e it is i n e r r a n t ? B u t t h o s e w h o d o this disagree w i d e l y a m o n g t h e m s e l v e s . Is it satisfactory t o say t h a t t h e C h u r c h is t o i n t e r p r e t t h e Bible? B u t t h e r e is n o " c h u r c h " t o w h i c h all c h u r c h e s g r a n t s u c h a u t h o r i t y . N o r c a n t h e m a t t e r b e left t o i n d i v i d u a l s , for t h e y g o t h e i r o w n w a y s . L u t h e r a n s p r o p o s e a t h e o l o g i c a l answer. Ba-

J O S K I ' H A.

BURGKS

115

sic t o L u t h e r a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g is t h a t t h e w o r d o f G o d is t o b e u n d e r s t o o d in t h r e e senses, in d e s c e n d i n g o r d e r to i m p o r t a n c e . First o f all, t h e W o r d of G o d is Jesus C h r i s t (cf. J o h n 1:1-14). S e c o n d , t h e w o r d o f G o d is t h e p r e a c h e d w o r d , t h e living voice of t h e g o s p e l . T h i r d , t h e w o r d o f G o d is t h e w r i t t e n w o r d , t h e text of S c r i p t u r e . A . Five L u t h e r a n p r i n c i p l e s for i n t e r p r e t i n g S c r i p t u r e : 1. T h e N e w T e s t a m e n t i n t e r p r e t s t h e O l d . In o t h e r w o r d s , t h e t w o t e s t a m e n t s are n o t e q u a l . N o t o n l y is t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t t h a t w h i c h c a m e later a n d therefore i n t e r p r e t s t h e O l d , b u t also t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t b r i n g s s o m e t h i n g new, Jesus C h r i s t . N o t o n l y d o e s t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t fulfill t h e O l d , a n d therefore t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t is to be t a k e n very seriously, b u t t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t b r i n g s t h a t w h i c h t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t d o e s n o t h a v e , t h e cross a n d r e s u r r e c t i o n . T h e O l d T e s t a m e n t , t o be sure, describes t h e sufferings o f J o b , t h e suffering s e r v a n t o f Isaiah 5 3 , a n d t h e l a m e n t s o f J e r e m i a h , b u t these are n o t to be c o m p a r e d w i t h G o d ' s s o n d y i n g o n t h e cross in t h e N e w Testam e n t . For this reason t h o s e w h o s e faith is c e n t e r e d in t h e d e a t h a n d r e s u r r e c t i o n o f Jesus C h r i s t i n t e r p r e t t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t t h r o u g h t h e New. 2 . T h e c l e a r i n t e r p r e t s t h e u n c l e a r . T h e c o n v e r s e is n o t t r u e ; t h e u n c l e a r d o e s n o t i n t e r p r e t t h e clear. First o f all, t h e i n t e r p r e t e r is n o t to b e g i n w i t h difficult passages, s u c h as 1 S a m . 2 : 6 : " T h e L o r d kills a n d b r i n g s t o life," o r 1 C o r . 1 5 : 2 9 : " W h a t d o p e o p l e m e a n b y b e i n g baptized on behalf of the dead?" Instead, the interpreter m u s t begin w i t h clear passages d e s c r i b i n g t h e h u m a n p r e d i c a m e n t a n d h o w G o d has a c t e d ; it is p o s s i b l e to place difficult passages in t h e i r p r o p e r c o n t e x t . B u t a n o t h e r s t e p is i n v o l v e d b e y o n d historical a n d intellectual clarity, for in t h e s e c o n d place, clarity is t h a t w h i c h p o i n t s t o C h r i s t a n d w h a t e v e r d o e s n o t p o i n t t o C h r i s t is u n c l e a r ; final a u t h o r i t y is t h e clarity f o u n d in C h r i s t . In o t h e r w o r d s , clarity is i n t e r nal, t h e o l o g i c a l , a n d n o t historical o r intellectual. A t t i m e s L u t h e r d i d , t o b e s u r e , a r g u e for t h e external clarity o f S c r i p t u r e ; t h a t was in order to defend himself against "enthusiastic" o p p o n e n t s {Schwärmer). T r u e clarity, however, is f o u n d o n l y in C h r i s t . 3 . S c r i p t u r e i n t e r p r e t s itself. B u t d o e s this n o t m e a n t h a t o n e is a r g u i n g in a circle? D o e s this m e a n t h a t o n e c a n n o t use o t h e r m a t e rial t o h e l p u n d e r s t a n d S c r i p t u r e ? T o t h e c o n t r a r y ! F>ery possible tool n e e d s to be u s e d in o r d e r t o u n d e r s t a n d w h a t S c r i p t u r e has t o

116

LUTHERAN

INTERPRETATION OP

SCRIPTURE

say. N o r is S c r i p t u r e u n d e r s t o o d t h e r e f o r e t o be a perfect s y s t e m , c o n t a i n i n g all k n o w l e d g e a n d t r u t h . W h a t is m e a n t is t h a t S c r i p t u r e is t h e final a u t h o r i t y a n d c a n n o t be s u b s u m e d u n d e r or j u d g e d by a n y o t h e r a u t h o r i t y . Yet s u c h finality is n o t finality in a w o o d e n sense. S c r i p t u r e is t h e final a u t h o r i t y b e c a u s e it p o i n t s t o C h r i s t , a n d n o t h i n g can be a l l o w e d t o b e a h i g h e r a u t h o r i t y . C h r i s t is t h e o n e w h o gives S c r i p t u r e w h a t e v e r a u t h o r i t y it h a s . 4 . " W a s C h r i s t u m t r e i b e t . " N o satisfactory t r a n s l a t i o n i n t o E n glish exists. Literally t h e w o r d s m e a n : " W h a t drives C h r i s t . " W h a t is m e a n t is t h a t w h a t " p r o m o t e s " C h r i s t is t h e t r u t h , t h a t w h e r e o n e finds C h r i s t , t h e r e is t h e t r u t h . This m a y s e e m t o b e s i m p l y a n o t h e r s l o g a n , like " C h r i s t a l o n e , " yet it expresses in a p r o f o u n d sense t h e h e a r t of t h e L u t h e r a n a p p r o a c h to S c r i p t u r e . 5. I n t e r p r e t i n g S c r i p t u r e c a n o n l y b e d o n e w i t h i n t h e C h u r c h . T h i s m a y s o u n d i n t o l e r a n t . A n d it does n o t solve t h e q u e s t i o n w h e r e " t h e " C h u r c h is. A g a i n , w h a t is m e a n t is t h a t C h r i s t is f o u n d in a n d t h r o u g h his C h u r c h a n d t h a t it is in his C h u r c h t h a t his Spirit is w o r k i n g . A p e r s o n m i g h t s p e c u l a t e a b o u t w h e t h e r C h r i s t a n d his Spirit are p r e s e n t o u t s i d e of t h e C h u r c h , a n d if so, t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e C h u r c h w o u l d n e e d t o b e b r o a d e n e d o r w h a t it m e a n s for C h r i s t a n d his Spirit to be p r e s e n t m i g h t n e e d to be redefined. All s u c h s p e c u l a t i o n r e m a i n s p u r e s p e c u l a t i o n . W h a t t h e C h r i s t i a n k n o w s for sure is t h a t C h r i s t a n d his Spirit are p r e s e n t w i t h i n his C h u r c h a n d t h a t t h o s e w h o are o u t s i d e o f C h r i s t are, because t h e y lack his Spirit, u n a b l e t o i n t e r p r e t C h r i s t correctly a n d t h e r e f o r e u n a b l e t o i n t e r p r e t S c r i p t u r e correctly. It is o b v i o u s t h a t all five L u t h e r a n p r i n c i p l e s really state t h e s a m e t h i n g , t h a t w h e r e o n e finds C h r i s t , t h e r e o n e finds t h e t r u t h a n d t h a t t h i s is h o w S c r i p t u r e is t o be i n t e r p r e t e d . Finally this is a theological j u d g m e n t . As a c o n s e q u e n c e , L u t h e r a n s n o t o n l y have n o p r o b l e m w i t h t h e historical-critical m e t h o d b u t use it gladly w h e n it helps p o i n t t o C h r i s t a n d q u e s t i o n t h e m e t h o d a n d its results w h e n it does not point to Christ. T h e reader will object. Is it n o t impossible to believe in t h e " w h o , " Jesus C h r i s t , w i t h o u t also b e l i e v i n g in t h e " w h a t " a b o u t w h a t h e d i d a n d w h a t h e m e a n s for y o u a n d me? Is n o t t h e r e f o r e t h e historicalcritical m e t h o d t o be rejected b e c a u s e it calls i n t o q u e s t i o n o r m a y s e e m t o call i n t o q u e s t i o n s o m e or all o f t h e " w h a t " ? L u t h e r a n s take t h e " w h a t " v e r y seriously. As is well k n o w n , L u t h erans take S c r i p t u r e very seriously. They also take C h r i s t i a n t r a d i t i o n

J O S K P H A.

BURGESS

117

v e r y seriously. T h r e e e c u m e n i c a l creeds, t h e A p o s d e s ' C r e e d , t h e N i c e n e C r e e d , a n d t h e A t h a n a s i a n C r e e d , are all p a r t of t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h e L u t h e r a n confessional b o o k , t h e Book of Concord. 'The Book of Concord is very specific a b o u t t h e " w h a t " of t h e C h r i s t i a n faith a n d is, f u r t h e r m o r e , full of references t o t h e so-called c h u r c h fathers o f t h e C h r i s t i a n t r a d i t i o n . Finally, h o w e v e r , for L u t h e r a n s t h e q u e s t i o n is " h o w " t h e " w h a t " is used. C o m m i t m e n t t o t h e " w h a t " b y itself c o u l d be a historical faith t h a t has n o t h i n g to d o w i t h s a l v a t i o n . C h r i s t i a n f a i t h is n o t o n l y o r p r i m a r i l y p h i l o s o p h i c a l o r h i s t o r i cal t r u t h . T h e i m p o r t a n t q u e s t i o n is " h o w " s u c h faith is p a r t o f a p e r s o n ' s life. B. W h e n L u t h e r a n s spell o u t this s t a n c e , t h e y n o r m a l l y use five s l o g a n s . Each of these slogans is like a m i n i a t u r e creedal statement. 1. C h r i s t a l o n e . C h r i s t is t h e sole f o u n d a t i o n , "the way, t h e t r u t h , a n d t h e life" ( J o h n 14:6). Thus "the t r u t h " is a historical p e r s o n o f a p a r t i c u l a r t i m e a n d place, w h o d i d c e r t a i n t h i n g s a n d said c e r t a i n t h i n g s . Yet h e is " t h e t r u t h " w h o d e t e r m i n e s w h a t all o t h e r t r u t h is. The difficulty is t h a t a l t h o u g h e v e r y o n e agrees t h a t C h r i s t is "the t r u t h , " very different views o f C h r i s t r e m a i n . " C h r i s t a l o n e " r e m a i n s a h o l l o w f o r m u l a . N o r is a n y t h i n g c h a n g e d by h o l d i n g t h a t " t h e g o s p e l " is t h e t r u t h , for "the g o s p e l , " like " C h r i s t a l o n e , " r e m a i n s a h o l l o w f o r m u l a t h a t has b e e n filled w i t h v a r y i n g c o n t e n t . Therefore t h e alternatives are e i t h e r to identify t r u t h a n d gospel w i t h t h e w h o l e b o o k called t h e Bible or t o t r y t o find s o m e w a y t o s o r t o u t t h e different views o f C h r i s t a n d g o s p e l . N o m a t t e r h o w m u c h s o m e claim t o take t h e first a l t e r n a t i v e , e v e r y o n e in fact o p e r a t e s o n t h e basis o f t h e s e c o n d . 2 . G r a c e a l o n e . N o o n e d e n i e s t h a t salvation is b y "grace a l o n e . " B u t w h a t d o e s this m e a n ? Is grace t r u l y " a l o n e " o r d o e s it i n c l u d e works? W h a t a b o u t t h e law? Is grace t o be c a t e g o r i z e d variously, as n a t u r a l grace, actual grace, p r e v e n i e n t grace, a n d t h e like? Because of these difficulties, L u t h e r a n s m a k e use o f t h e P a u l i n e p h r a s e "justific a t i o n of t h e u n g o d l y " ( R o m . 4 : 5 ) so t h a t grace t r u l y r e m a i n s grace a n d sin t r u l y r e m a i n s sin. A r g u m e n t s r e m a i n , t o b e s u r e , a b o u t t h e "law" a n d " w o r k s " a n d " r e w a r d s , " b u t t h e basic t h r u s t o f t h e L u t h e r a n s t a n c e is m a d e clear b y t h e P a u l i n e p h r a s e "justification of t h e u n godly." Yet m o r e m u s t be said.

118

LUTHERAN

INTERPRETATION OP

SCRIPTURE

3 . F a i t h a l o n e . All m a y agree o n "grace a l o n e , " b u t few agree o n "faith a l o n e . " Is t h e r e n o t h i n g else e x c e p t "faith alone"? D o n o w o r k s apply? Yes, t h e C h r i s t i a n has n o g u a r a n t e e s as t h e w o r l d r e c k o n s g u a r a n t e e s , for all e x p e r i e n c e , i n c l u d i n g t h e e x p e r i e n c e of faith itself, is a m b i g u o u s . Faith is b a s e d u p o n G o d ' s faithfulness t o his p r o m i s e in Jesus C h r i s t , n o t o n a n y s e c u r i t y a p e r s o n m i g h t find in t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f faith o r a n y o t h e r e x p e r i e n c e . Since t h r o u g h t h e p r o m i s e a p e r s o n is free from all d e m a n d s o f t h e law, a n e w w o r l d b e g i n s , a joyful life freely d o i n g w h a t o t h e r s n e e d . 4 . C r o s s a l o n e . L u t h e r a n t h e o l o g y is c r o s s - c e n t e r e d . T h e cross, s y m b o l o f t o r t u r e a n d defeat, is t h e p o w e r o f G o d for salvation (cf. 1 C o r . 1 : 2 2 - 2 4 ) . T h e cross w i t h o u t t h e r e s u r r e c t i o n is s i m p l y a tragedy. Conversely, t h e r e s u r r e c t i o n w i t h o u t t h e cross is s i m p l y a fantasy. B o t h cross a n d r e s u r r e c t i o n m u s t b e h e l d as a unity. Yet as l o n g as C h r i s t i a n s c o n t i n u e in this w o r l d , t h e i r lives c o n t i n u e t o be lives u n d e r t h e cross, b r o k e n b y sin, sickness, w e a k n e s s , a n d d e a t h . 5. S c r i p t u r e a l o n e . W o u l d this b e t h e place w h e r e L u t h e r a n s finally establish t h e " w h a t " in s o m e o t h e r w a y t h a n b y m e a n s o f " t h e ology"? N o t at all. " S c r i p t u r e a l o n e " d o e s n o t m e a n t h a t S c r i p t u r e in all its p a r t s is equally valid. Precisely because L u t h e r a n s take S c r i p t u r e seriously a n d in its literal sense, t h e y take t h e difficulties in S c r i p t u r e seriously, w h e t h e r b r o u g h t t o t h e i r a t t e n t i o n b y t h e historicalcritical m e t h o d o r by a n y o t h e r m e a n s . B u t C h r i s t is t h e t r u t h , n o t t h e difficulties. W h y s h o u l d these five L u t h e r a n s l o g a n s , all s t a t i n g " C h r i s t is t h e t r u t h , " be t h o u g h t t o b e a u t h o r i t a t i v e for t h e C h r i s t i a n faith? C o u l d n o t o t h e r slogans s u c h as "the c h u r c h a l o n e " or " i n e r r a n c y a l o n e " b e u s e d just as well? A n d h a v e n o t L u t h e r a n s w i t h t h e s e five slogans t i e d t h e m s e l v e s t o " w h a t " i n s t e a d of " h o w " after all? B u t w h e n L u t h e r a n s spell o u t t h e i r s t a n c e , t h e y take o n e final s t e p . Final a u t h o r i t y lies in t h e p r o c l a m a t i o n o f t h e p r o m i s e . T o p u t it a n o t h e r way, w h e n L u t h e r a n s are asked a b o u t t h e " w h a t , " t h e i r p r o p e r a n s w e r is t o p r o c l a i m t h e p r o m i s e t h a t for Christ's sake all y o u r sins are forgiven. T h e reason for d o i n g t h i s is t h a t t h e q u e s t i o n of a u t h o r ity is b u t t h e s y m p t o m of a d e e p e r q u e s t i o n , sin, a n d t h e a n s w e r is t o proclaim the promise to you, not to present you with the "what" that s u p e r s e d e s all o t h e r " w h a t s . " A n d if y o u ask w h y this p r o m i s e , t h e L u t h e r a n will p r o c l a i m t h e p r o m i s e t o y o u o n c e again. It is in t h e p r o p e r use o f t h e p r o m i s e t h a t final a u t h o r i t y lies; this is t h e " h o w . "

119

JOSKI'H A. PjURGKSS

Final a u t h o r i t y lies in t h e fact t h a t t h r o u g h t h e H o l y S p i r i t t h e p r o m ises are s e l f - a u t h e n t i c a t i n g . As c h i l d r e n L u t h e r a n s u s e d t o m e m o r i z e L u t h e r ' s e x p l a n a t i o n t o t h e t h i r d article o f t h e A p o s t l e s ' C r e e d : "I believe t h a t I c a n n o t b y m y o w n reason or u n d e r s t a n d i n g believe in Jesus C h r i s t m y L o r d o r c o m e t o h i m , b u t t h e H o l y S p i r i t has called m e t h r o u g h t h e gospel For all of t h e s e reasons L u t h e r a n s d o n o t reject t h e h i s t o r i c a l critical m e t h o d . M o r e o v e r , a p e r s o n c a n n o t escape t h i s m e t h o d b e cause it b e l o n g s t o t h e very air w e b r e a t h e in this c e n t u r y . It c a n h e l p us b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d ourselves a n d S c r i p t u r e . A t t h e s a m e t i m e L u t h erans are a w a r e o f t h e fact t h a t t h e historical-critical m e t h o d is itself historical a n d m u s t b e e x a m i n e d critically (just as each m e t h o d is historical a n d m u s t b e e x a m i n e d critically). Finally w h a t e v e r p o i n t s to C h r i s t is t h e t r u t h , a n d w h a t is n e e d e d is t h a t t h e p r o m i s e of s a l v a t i o n in Jesus C h r i s t b e p r o c l a i m e d . IV. EPHESIANS

A l m o s t n o t h i n g h i n t s at a c o n c r e t e s e t t i n g for t h e letter. M o s t satisfactory is t h e thesis t h a t t h e o r i g i n a l actually s t a t e d "in FLphesus" a n d t h a t t h e copyists for s o m e of t h e o l d e s t a n d w e i g h t i e s t m a n u s c r i p t s , k n o w i n g t h a t t h e c o n t e n t s o f t h e letter d o n o t m a t c h w h a t t h e B o o k o f A c t s says a b o u t Paul a n d p e r h a p s h o p i n g t o t r a n s f o r m t h e letter i n t o a letter for t h e w h o l e C h u r c h , s i m p l y o m i t t e d t h e destination. D i d Paul w r i t e t h e letter t o t h e E p h e s i a n s ? The first a n d m o s t t e l l i n g reason for h o l d i n g t h a t Paul d i d n o t w r i t e E p h e s i a n s is t h e close r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n E p h e s i a n s a n d C o l o s s i a n s . Larger p a t t e r n s w i t h i n t h e t w o letters are c o n s p i c u o u s l y similar. M o s t decisive is t h e use of s i m i l a r t e r m i n o l o g y b u t in a different sense. W h i c h letter was w r i t t e n first? C o l o s s i a n s h a s t o h a v e b e e n first b e c a u s e it deals w i t h a c o n c r e t e s i t u a t i o n . T h e a u t h o r o f E p h e s i a n s a b s t r a c t e d from t h a t situa t i o n . It is difficult to i m a g i n e h o w t h e o p p o s i t e s e q u e n c e m i g h t have occurred. T h e s e c o n d reason for h o l d i n g t h a t Paul d i d n o t w r i t e E p h e s i a n s is t h e o l o g i c a l . M o r e specifically, t h e C h u r c h for Paul can b e e i t h e r t h e local c o n g r e g a t i o n o r t h e universal C h u r c h . H e d o e s , t o b e s u r e , t h i n k it i m p o r t a n t t o agree w i t h t h e m o t h e r c h u r c h in J e r u s a l e m a n d t w i c e w r i t e s of t h e C h u r c h as a w h o l e (1 C o r . 1 5 : 9 ; G a l . 1:13). Yet in E p h e s i a n s t h e C h u r c h always is t h e universal C h u r c h . A c c o r d i n g t o Paul it is b e t t e r n o t t o m a r r y b e c a u s e t h e e n d is near, a l t h o u g h t h o s e w h o are m a r r i e d s h o u l d stay as t h e y are a n d t h o s e w h o lack self-

LUTHERAN INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

120

c o n t r o l o u g h t to m a r r y (1 C o r . 7 ) . E p h c s i a n s p a i n t s an e n t i r e l y different p i c t u r e o f m a r r i a g e . It is t o be a reflection o f t h e perfect u n i t y w h i c h exists b e t w e e n C h r i s t a n d his b r i d e , t h e C h u r c h ( 5 : 2 2 - 3 3 ) . T h e final reason for h o l d i n g t h a t Paul d i d n o t w r i t e E p h c s i a n s is stylistic. W h a t s t a n d s o u t m o s t o f all is t h e lavish use of w o r d s ; a f r e s h m a n E n g l i s h t e a c h e r w o u l d say t h e style is r e d u n d a n t . Taken i n d i v i d u a l l y n o n e o f t h e reasons a g a i n s t P a u l i n e a u t h o r s h i p m a y s e e m o v e r p o w e r i n g , b u t t h e c u m u l a t i v e w e i g h t of e v i d e n c e b e c o m e s c o n c l u s i v e . W h o t h e n w r o t e t h e l e t t e r t o t h e Ephcsians? H e was s o m e o n e well a c q u a i n t e d w i t h Paul's t e a c h i n g a n d p r o b a b l y , b e cause of his literary style a n d k n o w l e d g e o f J e w i s h t r a d i t i o n , a J e w i s h - C h r i s t i a n . M o r e t h a n t h a t o n e c a n n o t say. W h e n was t h e letter w r i t t e n ? Since E p h c s i a n s is d e p e n d e n t o n C o l o s s i a n s a n d familiar w i t h m o s t of Paul's o t h e r letters, t h e earliest d a t e is p r o b a b l y A T ) . 8 0 . I g n a t i u s o f A n t i o c h , m a r t y r e d s h o r t l y after A . D . 1 1 0 , s e e m s to be familiar w i t h E p h c s i a n s ( E p h . 1 2 : 2 ; cf. P o l y c a r p 5:1), w h i c h w o u l d set t h e u p p e r l i m i t . E x t e r n a l l y E p h c s i a n s has t h e f o r m o f a letter, w i t h a p r o p e r o p e n i n g , t h a n k s g i v i n g / b l e s s i n g , i n t e r c e s s i o n , b o d y , a n d closing. In a c t u a l fact E p h c s i a n s is h a r d l y a letter at all, for it is t o o g e n e r a l a n d t h e o logical. A t t h e s a m e t i m e it is q u i t e specific, a i m e d at m a t u r e C h r i s tians w h o are b e i n g a s k e d to r e m e m b e r w h a t t h e i r b a p t i s m m e a n s for t h e C h u r c h a n d t h e i r life in C h r i s t .

The b e s t w a y to c a t e g o r i z e

E p h c s i a n s is t o call it a liturgical d i s c o u r s e w h i c h has b e e n p u t in t h e f o r m o f a letter. V. El'HKSIANS 2 : 1 - 1 0 A t first g l a n c e this s e c t i o n m i g h t s e e m t o b e a b r e a k in t h e t h a n k s g i v i n g / i n t e r c e s s i o n w h i c h b e g a n in 1:15 a n d c o n t i n u e s in 3 : 1 , 14. Yet t h e o v e r r i d i n g t h e m e of G o d ' s a c t i o n in C h r i s t c o n t i n u e s , as c a n be seen b y t h e w a y w h a t is s t a t e d in 1:20 is a p p l i e d t o t h e C h r i s t i a n in 2 : 5 - 6 . R e d e m p t i o n a n d forgiveness, m e n t i o n e d in 1:7, is t h e t h e m e of t h e first s e c t i o n of t h e s e c o n d c h a p t e r , w h i l e r e u n i t i n g all t h i n g s ( 1 : 1 0 ; cf. 1:23) is t h e t h e m e o f t h e s e c o n d s e c t i o n , a n d 2 : 1 9 - 2 2 p i c k s u p t h e t h e m e of t h e C h u r c h in 1:23. The s t r u c t u r e o f this s e c t i o n , a n d for t h a t m a t t e r t h e w h o l e c h a p ter, is also b a s e d o n t h e p a t t e r n " o n c e — b u t n o w , " f o u n d in s u c c i n c t f o r m in 5:8 b u t h e r e s p a n n i n g m a n y verses. I n m o d e r n A m e r i c a this p a t t e r n exists as well. W e find it, for e x a m p l e , in t h e line "I o n c e was lost b u t n o w a m f o u n d " f r o m t h e h y m n " A m a z i n g G r a c e . " In N e w T e s t a m e n t t i m e s it is u s e d in R o m . 6 : 1 7 - 2 2 , G a l . 4 : 8 - 9 , C o l . 1:21-

121

JOSKI'H A. PjURGKSS

2 2 , a n d 1 Pet. 2 : 1 0 , t o cite b u t a few places. Its p u r p o s e is to b r i n g o u t t h e c o n t r a s t b e t w e e n past a n d p r e s e n t , b e t w e e n b e i n g w i t h o u t C h r i s t a n d b e i n g in C h r i s t , a n d as a c o n s e q u e n c e it is often c o n n e c t e d w i t h b a p t i s m . W i t h t h a n k f u l n e s s t h e C h r i s t i a n reflects o n t h e evils o f t h e p a s t a n d t h e g l o r i o u s c e r t a i n t y o f his n e w s t a t u s ; at t i m e s an a p p r o p r i a t e life in C h r i s t is also m e n t i o n e d . The w o r d s " o n c e — b u t n o w " are n o t r e q u i r e d for t h e p a t t e r n , for t h e c o n t r a s t b y itself is all t h a t is n e e d e d . In verses 2 a n d 3 t h e w o r d " o n c e " a p p e a r s as a clue to t h e c o n t r a s t i n t r o d u c e d b y " b u t " in verse 4 . In verse 5 t h e c o n t r a s t lies in t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e verse. O n l y in verse 1 3 , after "at o n e t i m e " (v. 11) a n d "at t h a t t i m e " (v. 12) have a p p e a r e d again as clues, d o t h e w o r d s " b u t n o w " actually a p p e a r a l o n g w i t h a n o t h e r " o n c e . " In verse 19 t h e c o n t r a s t again lies in t h e c o n t e n t of t h e verse. N o w h e r e else in t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t is this p a t t e r n used m o r e frequently. The Revised S t a n d a r d V e r s i o n of t h e Bible ( R S V ) , a t r a n s l a t i o n originally p r e p a r e d u n d e r A m e r i c a n P r o t e s t a n t auspices a n d w i d e l y u s e d in P r o t e s t a n t ( a n d s o m e C a t h o l i c ) c h u r c h e s , c o n t a i n s t h e following translation of Eph. 2:1-10: 'And you he made alive, when you were dead through the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is n o w at work in the sons of disobedience. 'Among these we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, following the desires of body and mind, and so we were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. 'But God, w h o is rich in mercy, out of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), ''and raised us up with him, and made us sit with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. T o r by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God—''not because of works, lest any man should boast. '"For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which G o d prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. !

s

T h e first seven verses are o n e l o n g s e n t e n c e , a n d t h e v e r b " m a d e alive" does n o t o c c u r u n t i l verse 5. " W a l k i n g " a c c o r d i n g t o t h e flesh (vv. 2 - 3 ) is t h e first h a l f o f a p a r e n t h e s i s t h a t is closed b y t h e "walk" a c c o r d i n g t o g o o d w o r k s in verse 10. T h e first seven verses state t h e p r o b l e m , w h i c h is sin, a n d t h e s o l u t i o n , w h i c h is G o d ' s a c t i o n . The final t h r e e verses s u m u p w h a t salvation b y grace m e a n s , a l t h o u g h a p a r e n t h e t i c a l slogan in verse 5 a n t i c i p a t e s t h e s u m m a r y .

122

LUTHERAN INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

V. 1. " A n d " is s i m p l y a c o n n e c t i v e . " D e a d " refers, o f c o u r s e , to s p i r i t u a l d e a t h , w h i c h is t h e m o s t s e r i o u s k i n d o f d e a t h possible b e cause it m e a n s b e i n g c u t off from G o d . T h e cause o f d e a t h is "trespasses a n d s i n s . " N o d i s t i n c t i o n s h o u l d be d r a w n b e t w e e n these t w o t e r m s , w h i c h b o t h b y t h e fact t h a t t w o are u s e d a n d t h a t t h e y are plural express t h e t o t a l i t y o f sin. A c c o r d i n g t o Paul's theology, sin b r i n g s a b o u t d e a t h ( R o m . 5 : 1 2 , 2 1 ; 6 : 2 3 ; 1 C o r . 1 5 : 5 6 ) ; he is referring, however, first of all t o physical d e a t h . N o t h i n g i n d i c a t e s t h a t "you" is a reference t o G e n t i l e C h r i s t i a n s . R a t h e r , this is a d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e p r e d i c a m e n t w h i c h i n c l u d e s all, a n d "you" w o u l d n o r m a l l y be u s e d in a letter a t this p o i n t . The R S V has s u p p l i e d t h e verb " h e m a d e alive" from verse 5. V. 2 . Three n a m e s , w h i c h are really t h e s a m e n a m e , are given for t h e evil force w h i c h o p p o s e s G o d . The first has b e e n t r a n s l a t e d as " t h e c o u r s e of this w o r l d " b y t h e RSV. 'The p h r a s e actually describes A i o n , t h e g o d of this age, w h o a c c o r d i n g t o t h e syncretistic t h o u g h t o f t h e H e l l e n i s t i c w o r l d r u l e d all o f space a n d t i m e . " T h i s w o r l d " s t a n d s in o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e " c o m i n g w o r l d " t h a t G o d will rule. A n o t h e r n a m e for t h e evil o n e is " t h e p r i n c e o f t h e p o w e r of t h e air." As in C o l . 1:13, " p o w e r " d o e s n o t m e a n a q u a l i t y b u t t h e s p h e r e t h a t t h e " p r i n c e " rules. 'The "air" is t h e lowest level o f t h e h e a v e n s ; h u m a n beings reach u p i n t o this level, for t h e y e i t h e r b a t t l e against evil ( 6 : 1 1 12) or are s u b j e c t t o it, as in this verse. The "spirit" is s i m p l y a g e n eral n a m e for t h e s a m e evil force. E a c h of t h e t h r e e n a m e s describes t h e t o t a l i t y o f evil (cf. 1:21; 6 : 1 1 , 16). This is t h e evil force t h a t is "now" at w o r k a m o n g the disobedient ones, leading t h e m t h r o u g h sin t o d e a t h (v. 1). ' T h u s b y i m p l i c a t i o n evil is n o t " n o w " at w o r k a m o n g C h r i s t i a n s a n d c o n s e q u e n t l y t h e y are free from its rule. V. 3 . A c h a n g e is m a d e t o " w e . " N o t h i n g i n d i c a t e s t h a t J e w i s h C h r i s t i a n s are m e a n t , as s o m e h a v e c l a i m e d in o r d e r t o s u p p o r t t h e thesis t h a t in verse 1 "you" refers t o G e n t i l e C h r i s t i a n s . " W e all" is a shift t o t h e inclusive style u s e d in confession; w e all confess t h a t w e are s u b j e c t t o sin, d e a t h , a n d evil. In a d d i t i o n , " w e " a n t i c i p a t e s t h e use o f " w e " a n d "us" in t h e f o l l o w i n g verses a n d m a y reflect C o l . 2 : 1 3 . " L i v e d " m o r e c o n s c i o u s l y describes life t o g e t h e r (2 C o r . 1:12; 1 'Tim. 3 : 1 5 ) , w h i l e " w a l k e d " (v. 2) t e n d s t o be m o r e i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c (cf. 5:2, 8, 1 5). O n l y h e r e in E p h e s i a n s d o e s "flesh" have t h e negative sense it d o e s in Paul. "Passions" a n d "desires" p o i n t t o t h e a b u n d a n c e a n d c o m p l e t e n e s s o f sin, just as " b o d y a n d m i n d , " w h i c h c o u l d be t r a n s l a t e d as "flesh a n d evil t h o u g h t , " is t h e w h o l e m a n in o p p o s i t i o n t o G o d . Radical sin in verse 3 p r o d u c e s an effective c o n t r a s t to radical grace in verse 4 . 'The c o n c l u d i n g p a r t of this verse has b e e n

JOSKI'H A. PjURGKSS

123

o n e o f t h e classical p r o o f texts for t h e d o c t r i n e o f original sin. U n f o r t u n a t e l y t h e R S V has a d d e d " s o , " as if a c o n c l u s i o n w e r e b e i n g d r a w n w h i c h c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d a general p r i n c i p l e , w h e n in m a t t e r of fact this clause is parallel t o t h e earlier p a r t of t h e verse. W h a t is m e a n t is t h a t since w e t o o w e r e d e a d in o u r trespasses a n d sins a n d enslaved t o t h e p r i n c e o f this w o r l d , w e t o o w e r e c h i l d r e n of w r a t h like t h e s o n s o f d i s o b e d i e n c e . " B y n a t u r e " s h o u l d t h e r e f o r e be t r a n s l a t e d as "really" o r "totally" (cf. G a l . 4 : 8 ; W i s . 1 3 : 1 ) . " W r a t h " s t a n d s in c o n t r a s t t o m e r c y in verse 4 (cf. 5:6). V. 4 . " B u t n o w G o d has a c t e d " is w h a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f this verse i n t e n d s , for t h e " o n c e — b u t n o w " p a t t e r n a p p l i e s h e r e . The basis of G o d ' s a c t i o n is his mercy, w h i c h is m e n t i o n e d in 1 Pet. 1:3 a n d Titus 3:5 in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h b a p t i s m . ' T h u s h e r e also b a p t i s m p r o b a b l y s h o u l d be u n d e r s t o o d . G o d ' s p r e d e s t i n i n g love has already b e e n set forth in 1:5 a n d Christ's v e r y c o n c r e t e love for t h e C h u r c h will b e d e s c r i b e d later (cf. 5:2, 2 5 ) . In verse 5 t h e w o r d s "were d e a d t h r o u g h t h e trespasses" are r e p e a t e d from verse 1 in o r d e r to b r i n g o u t o n c e again t h e c o n t r a s t b e t w e e n o u r p r o b l e m a n d G o d ' s s o l u t i o n . The shift b a c k a n d forth b e t w e e n "we" a n d " y o u " in this verse a n d in verses 8 - 1 0 d e m o n s t r a t e s t h a t t h e a u t h o r d i d n o t w r i t e at o n e p o i n t t o G e n t i l e C h r i s t i a n s a n d at a n o t h e r t o J e w i s h C h r i s t i a n s . S u c h a h y p o t h e s i s w o u l d b e c o m e e x t r e m e l y c o m p l i c a t e d in this section! I n s t e a d t h e a u t h o r m a d e use of t r a d i t i o n a l slogans a n d materials w h i c h h e d i d n o t follow slavishly, m a k i n g it difficult for us t o d a y t o d e t e r m i n e exactly w h a t is t r a d i t i o n a l a n d w h a t is a d a p t a t i o n . Vv. 5 - 6 . That w e w e r e " m a d e alive t o g e t h e r w i t h C h r i s t " b e g i n s t o a p p l y 1:20 t o us. C o l . 2 : 1 3 is clearly parallel t o this passage. W h e n w e r e w e m a d e alive? 'The aorist tense p o i n t s t o a specific t i m e in t h e past, w h i c h t h e parallel in C o l . 2 : 1 1 - 1 3 s h o w s t o be b a p t i s m . Paul w o u l d h a v e w r i t t e n t h a t w e have b e e n b u r i e d w i t h C h r i s t a n d t h a t w e shall be m a d e alive a n d raised a n d m a d e t o sit a t t h e r i g h t h a n d , b u t h e r e n o t h i n g has b e e n reserved for t h e future (cf. R o m . 6 : 8 ; 8 : 1 1 ; 1 C o r . 1 5 : 2 2 , 5 2 ; P h i l . 3 : 9 - 1 1 ) . This is v e r y c l o s e t o r e a l i z e d eschatology. It c a n n o t be lightly d i s m i s s e d as m e r e r h e t o r i c occas i o n e d b y t h e e n t h u s i a s t i c joy t h a t b a p t i s m evokes o r as s i m p l y t h e d e s c r i p t i o n of C h r i s t , t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e n e w h u m a n i t y , already s i t t i n g in t h e h e a v e n l y places. T h e a u t h o r fully i n t e n d e d t o state t h a t salvation is c o m p l e t e , even t h o u g h , as in 1:14, he qualified his p o s i t i o n a n d d i d n o t fall i n t o t h e heresy c o n d e m n e d in 2 Tim. 2 : 1 8 or i n t o G n o s t i c i s m . In t h e m i d d l e o f t h i n g s t h e a u t h o r a d d s a p a r e n t h e s i s t h a t a n t i c i pates verse 8: " b y grace y o u h a v e b e e n saved." The verb is in t h e

124

LUTHERAN INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

p e r f e c t tense, i n d i c a t i n g t h a t salvation t o o k place in t h e p a s t a n d c o n t i n u e s i n t o t h e p r e s e n t . Paul d i d n o t use t h e v e r b "to save" in t h e p a s t t e n s e e x c e p t for R o m . 3 : 2 4 , w h e r e t h e aorist i n d i c a t i n g a n e v e n t in t h e past is k e p t in b a l a n c e b y t h e future reference of t h e p h r a s e "in this h o p e ; " for h i m "to save" refers t o t h o s e w h o are in t h e process of b e i n g saved y e t will be saved at t h e last j u d g m e n t (1 C o r . 1 5 : 2 ; 2 C o r . 6:2) a n d t o f u t u r e salvation ( R o m . 5 : 9 - 1 0 ; 1 3 : 1 1 ; 1 T h e s s . 5 : 8 9 ) . U n d e r s t a n d i n g grace as t h e p r i n c i p l e o f salvation is very s i m i l a r to w h a t is s t a t e d in R o m . 3 : 2 4 , w h e r e Paul a d a p t e d earlier m a t e r i a l s w i t h a liturgical b a c k g r o u n d , j u s t as t h e a u t h o r of L p h e s i a n s at this p o i n t a d a p t e d liturgical m a t e r i a l s . T h a t w e "sit w i t h h i m in t h e h e a v e n l y places" is o n e o f several very s t r i k i n g e x a m p l e s o f h o w t h e a u t h o r of E p h e s i a n s t e n d s t o t h i n k in t e r m s of s p a c e i n s t e a d o f t i m e . Even t h e p a t t e r n " o n c e — b u t n o w " is really a d e s c r i p t i o n of t w o o p p o s i n g s p h e r e s r a t h e r t h a n progress across t i m e . A t t i m e s Paul d i d , t o be sure, use s p a c e categories (for e x a m p l e , R o m . 10:6; 1 C o r . 1 5 : 4 7 ; Phil. 3 : 2 0 ; 1 T h e s s . 4 : 1 6 ) , alt h o u g h he p r e f e r r e d t i m e categories a n d o c c a s i o n a l l y a s p a c e cate g o r y will also have a future reference (cf. 1 Thess. 4 : 1 6 ) . B u t in t h e letter to t h e E p h e s i a n s s p a c e categories have a decisive place, as in 1:3, 2 0 - 2 2 ; 3 : 1 9 ; 4 : 9 - 1 0 , 1 5 - 1 6 , a n d this passage. V. 7 . In spite of his preference t h e a u t h o r of E p h e s i a n s , like Paul, u s e d b o t h categories. " I n t h e c o m i n g ages" refers t o t h e future. Tempti n g as it m i g h t be t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e "ages" as p e r s o n a l evil forces in a n a l o g y to t h e "Aion o f this w o r l d " in verse 2 , elsewhere in this letter t h e plural has a p u r e l y t e m p o r a l m e a n i n g ( 3 : 9 , 1 1 , 2 1 ) . 'The p l u r a l f o r m by this t i m e h a d b e c o m e c u s t o m a r y t h r o u g h use in d o x o l o g i e s a n d s i m p l y m e a n t "all t i m e s . " 'Thus verse 7 m e a n s t h a t in all future t i m e s G o d will effectively " s h o w " (cf. 1:9) t h e "riches o f his g r a c e " (cf. 1:7) to us in C h r i s t . Yet this verse m u s t n o t be u n d e r s t o o d a p a r t from 1:21 a n d t h e fact t h a t C h r i s t already rules t h e " c o m i n g ages." Vv. 8 - 9 . The p a r e n t h e s i s from verse 5 n o w d e v e l o p s i n t o a s h o r t s u m m a r y o f P a u l i n e theology. The s u m m a r y is m a d e u p o f P a u l i n e slogans a n d as in verse 5 seems t o e c h o t h e s a m e s o r t of m a t e r i a l s Paul u s e d in R o m . 3 : 2 4 . The s o v e r e i g n t y o f G o d ' s grace c o u l d h a r d l y be confessed w i t h greater clarity. B u t even t h o u g h "grace a l o n e " a n d "faith a l o n e " are p r e s e n t , "saved" is o n c e a g a i n , as in verse 5, in t h e perfect t e n s e . Paul's eschatological dialectic o f justification is a b s e n t w h e r e it is h a r d t o i m a g i n e Paul h i m s e l f w o u l d h a v e o m i t t e d it. I w o " n o t " p h r a s e s define w h a t grace is: " n o t of ourselves," " n o t o f w o r k s . " Paul's p o l e m i c against t h e w o r k s of t h e law is n o w h e r e i m p l i e d . W h e r e Paul s p o k e o n l y o f " w o r k s , " his p o l e m i c was always i m p l i e d (cf. R o m .

JOSKI'H A. PjURGKSS

125

4 : 2 , 6; 9 : 3 2 ; 11:6). E p h . 2 : 9 , however, s i m p l y c o u n t e r p o s e s grace a n d every h u m a n w o r k . Paul f r e q u e n t l y w a r n e d a g a i n s t " b o a s t i n g " (cf. R o m . 4 : 2 ; 1 C o r . 1 : 2 8 - 3 1 ; 4 : 7 ; P h i l . 3 : 3 ) , w h i c h in its m o s t i n s i d i o u s f o r m is t h e c l a i m t o be b e t t e r t h a n o t h e r s , so t h a t grace is still n o t sovereign. V. 1 0 . In this c o n t e x t t o b e "created" is t h e s a m e as w h a t Paul m e a n t by b e c o m i n g G o d ' s " n e w c r e a t i o n " (2 C o r . 5 : 1 7 ; G a l . 6 : 1 5 ; cf. E p h . 4 : 2 4 ) . W h e n d i d this n e w c r e a t i o n t a k e place? B a p t i s m c o u l d be m e a n t (cf. C o l . 3 : 9 - 1 0 ; E p h . 4 : 2 4 ) , y e t in a d d i t i o n before t h e f o u n d a t i o n o f t h e w o r l d G o d " d e s t i n e d us to be his s o n s " a n d t o be " h o l y a n d blameless" ( 1 : 4 - 5 , 1 1 - 1 2 ) . In n o w a y d o e s this passage m e a n t h a t C h r i s t i a n s h a v e b e e n p r e p a r e d t o d o g o o d w o r k s , for it is t h e " g o o d w o r k s " t h a t have b e e n p r e p a r e d b e f o r e h a n d . B u t C h r i s tians will "walk" t h e w a y o f g o o d w o r k s b e c a u s e of f r e e d o m a n d g r a t i t u d e , n o t b e c a u s e o f an a t t e m p t t o save t h e m s e l v e s (cf. R o m . 1:5; 6 : 1 6 - 1 8 ; P h i l . 2 : 1 2 - 1 3 ) . T h a t C h r i s t i a n s " s h o u l d " w a l k t h e w a y o f g o o d w o r k s is also i n t e n d e d b y t h e a u t h o r .

Conclusion H a s a n y t h i n g i m p o r t a n t b e e n lost in t h e t r a n s l a t i o n o f Paul's a p o c a l y p t i c t h e o l o g y o f justification by faith i n t o ecclesiological u n i versalism in t h e letter t o t h e E p h e s i a n s ? In E p h e s i a n s C h r i s t clearly is central, as is grace. B u t Paul's eschatalogical t e n s i o n b e t w e e n "already" a n d " n o t yet" has b e e n greatly lessened. A l r e a d y "we have r e d e m p t i o n " ( 1 : 7 ) , already "we sit w i t h h i m in t h e h e a v e n l y places" ( 2 : 6 ) . T h e r e f o r e t h e n e e d for ethics a n d b a t t l i n g t h e evil o n e ( 4 : 2 7 ; 5:6; 6:11 - 1 7 ) has b e e n greatly d i m i n i s h e d , in s p i t e o f t h e space these t o p ics are given. The role of t h e law has b e c o m e m u c h s m a l l e r ( 2 : 1 5 ) . For Paul t h e law is n o t exclusively a J e w i s h issue, b u t plays a decisive role in e v a l u a t i n g w h o o n e really is before G o d . T h e law, in fact, is a key t o t h e p o l e m i c f u n c t i o n of justification b y faith. E p h e s i a n s is, of c o u r s e , w r i t t e n in a different t i m e a n d s i t u a t i o n . T h e q u e s t i o n is w h e t h e r a n y t h i n g essential for Paul's t h e o l o g y has b e e n lost w h e n j u d g m e n t a n d t h e law have lost m u c h o f t h e i r significance. T o p u t it a n o t h e r way: S o m e t h i n g has c h a n g e d in E p h e s i a n s . The C h u r c h has b e c o m e d e t e r m i n a t i v e , a n d justification b y faith takes s e c o n d place. Is it i m p o r t a n t if t h e basic christological e m p h a sis of justification b y faith a l o n e is l e s s e n e d o r even lost? L u t h e r a n s a n d t h o s e in t h e R e f o r m a t i o n t r a d i t i o n have c l a i m e d t h a t justificat i o n b y faith a l o n e is c e n t r a l a n d h a v e b e e n u n w i l l i n g t o a l l o w ecclesiology to d e t e r m i n e C h r i s t o l o g y .

LI;THKRAN INTERPRETATION o r SCRIPTURE

126

V I . SUMMARY

L u t h e r a n s u n d e r s t a n d t h e W o r d o f G o d as Jesus C h r i s t , t h e p r e a c h e d w o r d of t h e g o s p e l , a n d t h e w r i t t e n w o r d of S c r i p t u r e . The five L u t h e r a n p r i n c i p l e s for i n t e r p r e t i n g S c r i p t u r e are t h e following: the N e w T e s t a m e n t interprets the O l d ; t h e clear i n t r p r e t s t h e u n c l e a r ; S c r i p t u r e i n t e r p r e t s itself; w h a t " p r o m o t e s " C h r i s t is t h e t r u t h ; i n t e r p r e t i n g S c r i p t u r e can o n l y b e d o n e w i t h i n t h e C h u r c h . The L u t h e r a n s t a n c e is c a p t u r e d in t h e five " a l o n e s " — C h r i s t , g r a c e , faith, t h e cross, a n d S c r i p t u r e .

JOSKPH A. BURGESS

RECOMMENDED

127

READINGS

Barr, J a m e s . The Bible in the Modern World. N e w Y o r k / E v a n s t o n / S a n F r a n c i s c o / L o n d o n : H a r p e r & Row, 1 9 7 3 . A c h a l l e n g e b y a c o m p e t e n t O l d T e s t a m e n t s c h o l a r t o all t h o s e w h o w a n t t o t a k e t h e Bible seriously. T h e basic q u e s t i o n s are raised. B o r n k a m m , H e i n r i c h . Luther and the Old Testament. T r a n s l a t e d b y E. a n d R. G r i t s c h . P h i l a d e l p h i a : Fortress Press, 1 9 6 9 . T e c h n i c a l a n d already an o l d e r b o o k , this is an i m p o r t a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e d i s c u s s i o n o f L u t h e r ' s use of S c r i p t u r e . F l e s s e m a n - v a n Leer, Ellen. 'The Bible. Its Authority and Interpretation in the Ecumenical Movement. Faith a n d O r d e r Paper N o . 9 9 ; G e n e v a : W o r l d C o u n c i l o f C h u r c h e s , 1 9 7 9 . A c o l l e c t i o n of t h e d o c u m e n t s a n d as s u c h very helpful. K r e n t z , E d g a r . 'The Historical-Critical Method. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1 9 7 5 . T h e best s h o r t s u m m a r y o f w h a t t h e historicalcritical m e t h o d is really a b o u t . K u m m e l , W e r n e r G e o r g . 'The New Testament: 'The History of the Investigation of Its Problems. T r a n s l a t e d b y S. G i l m o u r a n d H . K e e . N a s h v i l l e / N e w York: A b i n g d o n Press, 1 9 7 2 . T h e classic h i s t o r y a n d s u m m a r y of w h a t has h a p p e n e d t o t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t in t h e last c e n t u r i e s . Neill, S t e p h e n . 'The Interpretation of the New 'Testament, 1861-1961. L o n d o n : O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1 9 6 4 . Available in p a p e r b a c k a n d often r e p r i n t e d , this b o o k is a very r e a d a b l e i n t r o d u c t i o n to o u r p r e s e n t - d a y d e b a t e a b o u t i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e Bible. R e u m a n n , J o h n , ed., in c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h S a m u e l H . Nafzger a n d H a r o l d H . D i t m a n s o n , Studies in Lutheran Hermeneutics. Philad e l p h i a : Fortress Press, 1 9 7 9 . A m o d e r n d e b a t e a m o n g L u t h e r a n s about interpretation and Scripture. S t u h l m a c h e r , Peter. Historical Criticism and Theological Interpretation of Scripture. T r a n s l a t e d b y R. Harrisville. P h i l a d e l p h i a : Fortress Press, 1 9 7 7 . A r e c e n t a t t e m p t b y a L u t h e r a n t o establish a m o r e m o d e r a t i n g discussion in historical criticism.

128

LI;THKRAN INTERPRETATION OP S C R I M U R E

T h e o l o g i c a l Professors o f t h e A m e r i c a n L u t h e r a n C h u r c h . The Bible: Book of Faith. M i n n e a p o l i s : A u g s b u r g P u b l i s h i n g H o u s e , 1 9 6 4 . A p o p u l a r v o l u m e a n d still very useful for t h o s e w h o are facing h i s torical criticism for t h e first t i m e . 'The Word of God: Scripture and 'Tradition. L u t h e r a n s a n d C a t h o lics in D i a l o g u e IX. M i n n e a p o l i s : A u g s b u r g F o r t r e s s , 1 9 9 5 .

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE The B a c k g r o u n d t o C o n t e m p o r a r y Evangelical E x p o s i t i o n by

GRANT R. OSBORNE

I

t is c o m m o n l y believed a m o n g m a n y n o n e v a n g e l i c a l s t h a t f u n d a m e n t a l i s m - e v a n g e l i c a l i s m is a u n i f o r m t r a d i t i o n , c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y a rigid, a t o m i s t i c , a n d static view o f S c r i p t u r e . S o m e have g o n e so far as to c a r i c a t u r e t h e m o v e m e n t as a " n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y heresy" w h i c h has n o r o o t s in t h e C h u r c h before t h a t t i m e . For this reason it is i m p o r t a n t t o realize t h a t w i d e diversity exists w i t h i n t h e c a m p a n d t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e historical reasons w h y this s h o u l d be so. A t t h e o u t s e t , I w o u l d assert t h a t t h e r e are i n d e e d historical roots for t h e evangelical d o c t r i n e of inerrancy, w h i c h m e a n s t h a t t h e Bible is w i t h o u t e r r o r in its original a u t o g r a p h s . S o m e a m o n g t h e e v a n gelical t r a d i t i o n follow t h e c o m m o n l y h e l d view t h a t i n e r r a n c y d e v e l o p e d o u t o f t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of S c o t t i s h C o m m o n Sense Realism to S c r i p t u r e in t h e latter p a r t of t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y . T h i s p h i l o s o p h y s t e m m e d from t h e i n d u c t i v e m e t h o d p r o p o u n d e d b y Francis B a c o n ( 1 5 6 1 - 1 6 2 6 ) . It e n t a i l e d an o p t i m i s t i c e p i s t e m o l o g y w h i c h a s s u m e d t h a t definite a p p r e h e n s i o n of t r u t h c o u l d be d e r i v e d from an objective o b s e r v a t i o n o f facts. T h e r e f o r e , o n e c o u l d ascertain w i t h c e r t a i n t y t h e exact m e a n i n g o f t h e Bible, w h i c h as d i v i n e revelation m u s t b e free f r o m e r r o r . G e o r g e M a r s d e n a r g u e s t h a t t h e O l d P r i n c e t o n i a n s of t h e late n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y ( C h a r l e s H o d g e , A r c h i b a l d A. H o d g e , B e n j a m i n B. Warfield) forged their s t r o n g views o n t h e basis of C o m m o n Sense R e a l i s m , " t h a t t h e S c r i p t u r e s n o t o n l y c o n t a i n , b u t A R E T H E W O R D O F G O D , a n d h e n c e t h a t all their e l e m e n t s a n d all their a f f i r m a t i o n s are a b s o l u t e l y errorless." 1

:

George B. Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture: The Shaping of Twentieth Century Evangelicalism, 1870-1925 (New York: Oxford Universiry

130

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

H o w e v e r , J o h n W o o d b r i d g e argues in r e s p o n s e t h a t C o m m o n Sense Realism was a f o r m a t i v e factor b u t n o t t h e s o u r c e o f t h e d o c t r i n e . H e states t h a t w h i l e t h e P r i n c e t o n i a n s ' s view o f i n e r r a n c y was r e i n f o r c e d b y B a c o n i a n i s m (see a b o v e ) , t h e i r d o c t r i n e of c o m p l e t e infallibility w a s n o t " p a r a d i g m d e p e n d e n t " u p o n (i.e., it d i d n o t have its o r i g i n in) t h a t p e r s p e c t i v e . I n d e e d W o o d b r i d g e ' s w o r k is a l e n g t h y compilation of attitudes held by the C h u r c h t h r o u g h o u t church hist o r y t o w a r d S c r i p t u r e . H e asserts, validly I believe, t h a t w h i l e t h e exact f o r m u l a t i o n o f i n e r r a n c y or c o m p l e t e infallibility h a d n o t o c c u r r e d earlier, t h e actual details were t o be f o u n d earlier. R o g e r s a n d M c K i m (see n. 1) a n d o t h e r s h a d s o u g h t to d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t t h e c e n t r a l p o s i t i o n of t h e C h u r c h h a d always b e e n t h a t infallibility was restricted o n l y t o religious or salvific c o n c e r n s a n d t h a t it was n o t e x t e n d e d t o p a r t i c u l a r details s u c h as historical o r scientific s t a t e m e n t s . W o o d b r i d g e traces carefully t h e v i e w p o i n t of t h e c h u r c h fat h e r s , t h e r e f o r m e r s , a n d o t h e r s , a r g u i n g t h a t t h e y p r i m a r i l y followed a view of c o m p l e t e infallibility. O n this basis I w o u l d assert likewise t h a t t h e f u n d a m e n t a l i s t / e v a n g e l i c a l view of S c r i p t u r e follows t h e c e n tral p o s i t i o n w h i c h t h e C h u r c h has h e l d since t h e first c e n t u r y . N o t e carefully t h a t I a m n o t h e r e a r g u i n g t h a t this d o c t r i n e is c o r r e c t , r a t h e r t h a t it has historical p r e c e d e n t . The c o r r e c t n e s s of t h e p o s i t i o n is y e t t o b e discussed. 2

M o d e r n f u n d a m e n t a l i s m / e v a n g e l i c a l i s m , however, d o e s have its p r i m a r y roots in t h e late n i n e t e e n t h a n d early t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r i e s . T h r o u g h o u t m o s t o f t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y , A m e r i c a was basically c o n s e r v a t i v e . In t h e p o s t - C i v i l W a r era, in fact, it s e e m e d t h a t t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e cause h a d i n d e e d t r i u m p h e d . Yet d i s q u i e t i n g r u m o r s c o n t i n u e d t o surface, p r i m a r i l y t h e pessimistic c o n c l u s i o n s o f h i g h e r c r i t i c i s m from G e r m a n y . 'These critical s c h o o l s greatly i n f l u e n c e d A m e r i c a n s c h o l a r s h i p . Ideas like D a r w i n i a n e v o l u t i o n a n d p o p u l a r p r e a c h e r s like H e n r y W a r d B e e c h e r w e r e h a r b i n g e r s in t h e 1 8 7 0 s o f a m o v e m e n t w h i c h w o u l d s o o n cause a crisis a n d an intellectual revol u t i o n . It b e g a n in t h e universities a n d t h e n s p r e a d t o t h e p u l p i t s . As conservative scholars retired t h e y w o u l d be replaced b y y o u n g e r , m o r e

Press, 1980) 113 (cf. 111-15), q u o t e from A. A. H o d g e and B. B. Warfield, "Inspiration," The Presbyterian Review II (April 1881) 2 3 4 . See also F.rnesr Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism (Chicago: University of C h i c a g o Press, 1970) 1 0 3 3 1 , and Jack Rogers and D o n a l d M c K i m , The Authority and Interpretation of the Bible: An Historical Approach ( N e w York: H a r p e r a n d Row, 1979) 2 6 5 - 3 4 7 . -' J o h n W o o d b r i d g e , Biblical Authority: A Critique of the RogerslMcKim Proposal (Grand Rapids: Z o n d e r v a n Publishing H o u s e , 1982) 2 1 9 (n. 88).

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

131

liberal t h i n k e r s , often e d u c a t e d o n t h e C o n t i n e n t . M o r e o v e r , A m e r i can conservatives w e r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d m o r e b y practical piety t h a n by a p o l o g e t i c c o n c e r n s . The liberal p r e a c h e r s c o n t i n u e d these pietistic e m p h a s e s u p o n e x p e r i e n c e a n d m o r a l i t y as t h e y s o u g h t t o reconcile t r a d i t i o n a l views of S c r i p t u r e w i t h scientific views of reality. P r e a c h ers like B e e c h e r a n d L y m a n A b b o t t b e c a m e e x c e e d i n g l y p o p u l a r , a n d broader issues like t h e a u t h o r i t y of Scripture were n o t truly u n d e r s t o o d . The Evangelical A l l i a n c e , f o r m e d in 1 8 4 6 , b e c a m e a m a j o r for u m for d e b a t e . It c e n t e r e d u p o n revivalism, social c o n c e r n (social j u s t i c e , a i d for t h e p o o r ) , S a b b a t a r i a n i s m (the sacred n a t u r e of S u n d a y as t h e "Lord's d a y " ) , free e n t e r p r i s e , a n d a h i g h view of biblical infallibility. In 1 8 7 3 J a m e s M c C o s h , p r e s i d e n t o f P r i n c e t o n , a t t e m p t e d t o m a k e D a r w i n i s m a n d S c r i p t u r e c o m p a t i b l e a n d o c c a s i o n e d a vigoro u s d e b a t e . F o r t h e n e x t t h r e e d e c a d e s t h e e m p h a s i s shifted t o h i g h e r c r i t i c i s m . In 1 9 0 8 t h e A l l i a n c e b e c a m e t h e F e d e r a l C o u n c i l o f C h u r c h e s , still p r i m a r i l y c o n s e r v a t i v e b u t m o v i n g steadily t o t h e left. T h e evangelical r e s p o n s e t o t h e t h r e a t was q u i t e diverse. S o m e retreated i n t o p i e t y a n d refused t o g e t i n v o l v e d in s u c h issues. D w i g h t L. M o o d y , for i n s t a n c e , refused t o address controversial q u e s t i o n s a n d simply preached personal repentance a n d the gospel. H e believed t h a t if o n e ignores e r r o r it will pass away. H e r e h e a l l u d e d t o G a m a l i e l ' s advice in Acts 5 : 3 8 - 3 9 : " T h e r e f o r e , in t h e p r e s e n t case I advise y o u : Leave t h e s e m e n a l o n e ! Let t h e m go! F o r if their p u r p o s e or activity is o f h u m a n o r i g i n , it will fail. B u t if it is from G o d , y o u will n o t be able t o s t o p these m e n ; y o u will o n l y find yourselves fighting G o d . " M a n y o t h e r s , h o w e v e r ( i n c l u d i n g d i r e c t associates of M o o d y ' s like R e u b e n T o r r e y ) , b e l i e v e d in d i r e c t c o n f r o n t a t i o n . T h e t e r m " f u n d a m e n t a l i s t " arose from a series of twelve v o l u m e s p u b lished b e t w e e n 1 9 1 0 a n d 1 9 1 5 , The Fundamentals, t h o u g h t h e title was first u s e d by C u r t i s Lawes in 1 9 2 0 . T h e s e w e r e w r i t t e n b y c o n servative scholars t o u p h o l d t h e t r a d i t i o n a l views r e g a r d i n g t h e Bible a n d t h e c a r d i n a l t e n e t s of t h e faith against t h e e n c r o a c h i n g c o n c l u sions of " h i g h e r criticism" (e.g., d e n y i n g t h e t r a d i t i o n a l a u t h o r s h i p a n d dates o f biblical b o o k s , q u e s t i o n i n g t h a t Jesus actually u t t e r e d t h e "sayings" a t t r i b u t e d t o h i m in t h e G o s p e l s ) a n d e v o l u t i o n . T h e s e v o l u m e s dispel t h e c o m m o n l y h e l d view t h a t f u n d a m e n t a l i s m arose o u t o f an a n t i - i n t e l l e c t u a l m i l i e u . I n d e e d t h e y a t t e m p t e d t o " b e a t t h e h i g h e r critics at t h e i r o w n g a m e , " a s s e r t i n g t h a t " h i g h e r c r i t i c i s m was n o t critical e n o u g h . " 3

' T i m o r h y P. Weber, " T h e Two-Edged Sword: T h e Fundamentalist Use of the Bible," The Bible in America: Essays in Cultural History, ed. N a t h a n O . H a t c h and M a r k A. Noll (New York: Oxford University Press, 1982) 109 (cf. 102-10).

132

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

O n e of the basic debates b e t w e e n f u n d a m e n t a l i s m a n d n o n f u n d a m e n t a l i s m c o n c e r n e d Bible s t u d y m e t h o d s . The results of C o m m o n Sense Realism o n t h e g r o w i n g c o n s e r v a t i v e m o v e m e n t lay in t h e d e n i a l of critical t o o l s a n d t h e assertion t h a t k n o w l e d g e o f biblical t r u t h w a s o p e n t o t h e average p e r s o n u t i l i z i n g o n l y his Bible w i t h t h e a i d o f t h e H o l y Spirit. P r o o f - t e x t i n g , t h e p r a c t i c e of p r o v i n g a d o c t r i n a l p o i n t b y a l l u d i n g t o a s c r i p t u r a l text, was d e e m e d suffic i e n t t o establish a p a r t i c u l a r v i e w p o i n t . O n e o f t h e m o s t p o p u l a r w o r k s in this regard was R e u b e n Torrey's What The Bible Teaches ( 1 8 9 8 ) , w h i c h c l a i m e d t o b e b o t h " u n b i a s e d " a n d "scientific" as it d o c u m e n t e d (in five h u n d r e d pages) theological s t a t e m e n t s w i t h b i b lical p r o o f - t e x t s . The i n d u c t i v e m e t h o d o f Bible study, p r o c e e d i n g synthetically from the whole t o the parts a n d seeking to elucidate m a j o r t h e m e s , c a m e i n t o p r o m i n e n c e d u r i n g this p e r i o d . The t e r m " i n d u c t i v e s t u d y " in f u n d a m e n t a l i s m c a m e t o be u s e d for t h a t m e t h o d w h i c h s t u d i e d t h e t e x t b y itself r a t h e r t h a n critical tools o r c o m m e n taries t o e l u c i d a t e its m e a n i n g . Yet it w o u l d be s h a l l o w t o h i n t t h a t this was t h e o n l y m e t h o d . C o n s e r v a t i v e s like J. G r e s h a m M a c h e n a n d N e d S t o n e h o u s e c o n t i n u e d t o i n t e r a c t w i t h t h e h i g h e s t levels of s c h o l a r s h i p t h r o u g h o u t this era. H o w e v e r , t h e s y n t h e t i c m e t h o d d i d predominate. Two f u r t h e r aspects s h o u l d be n o t e d . First, f u n d a m e n t a l i s m received i m p e t u s from a series of Bible conferences b e t w e e n 1 8 7 6 a n d 1910. These centered u p o n b o t h prophecy a n d apologetics, a t t e m p t i n g t o d e m o n s t r a t e t h e "true faith" a n d to w a r n against t h e c o m i n g "apostasy" (2 T h e s s . 2:3) w h i c h was i d e n t i f i e d w i t h t h e rising liberal m o v e m e n t . T h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t was t h e 1 8 9 5 c o n f e r e n c e in N i a g a r a , N e w York. It a d o p t e d t h e five-point p l a t f o r m w h i c h later b e c a m e t h e basis of 'The Fundamentals: t h e i n e r r a n c y o f t h e Bible, t h e virgin b i r t h , t h e d e i t y of C h r i s t , t h e s u b s t i t u t i o n a r y a t o n e m e n t (the view t h a t Jesus d i e d as t h e sacrifice o r " s u b s t i t u t e " for man's sins), a n d t h e physical r e s u r r e c t i o n o f C h r i s t a n d his s e c o n d c o m i n g . Second, the gradual control which nonconservatives established over t h e nation's h i g h e r i n s t i t u t i o n s o f l e a r n i n g led to t h e Bible Instit u t e m o v e m e n t . As t h e i r i n f l u e n c e w a n e d in t h e m a j o r s e m i n a r i e s , f u n d a m e n t a l i s t s d e v e l o p e d t h e i r o w n schools in w h i c h t h e Bible was t h e core o f t h e p r o g r a m . T h e i r p u r p o s e was t o p r e p a r e c h u r c h leaders r a t h e r t h a n t o p r o v i d e a b r o a d - b a s e d e d u c a t i o n . T h e r e f o r e , t h e y e s c h e w e d t h e arts in favor of biblical a n d practical courses like p a s t o ral care or e d u c a t i o n (yet w i t h o u t e d u c a t i o n a l t h e o r y d e r i v e d from t h e universities). H o w e v e r , this m o v e m e n t was n o t so m u c h a retreat from society as it was an a t t e m p t to preserve t h e B i b l e - b a s e d e d u c a -

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

133

rion o f t h e past. This c a m e to a h e a d in 1 9 2 9 , w h e n J. G r e s h a m M a c h e n a n d R o b e r t D i c k W i l s o n r e s i g n e d from P r i n c e t o n a n d crea t e d a n e w s c h o o l , W e s t m i n s t e r T h e o l o g i c a l S e m i n a r y , in P h i l a d e l p h i a . F r o m t h a t t i m e t h e s e p a r a t i o n was fairly c o m p l e t e , a n d for t h e n e x t t w o d e c a d e s t h e r e was little d i a l o g u e b e t w e e n t h e liberal a n d fundamentalist factions. 1

O n e e v e n t w h i c h illustrates t h e g r o w i n g rift was t h e so-called " m o n k e y trial" in 1 9 2 5 o f J o h n S c o p e s , a t e a c h e r o f e v o l u t i o n in D a y t o n , Tennessee. T h e scene, t r u m p e t e d a r o u n d the world by the press, p i t t e d W i l l i a m J e n n i n g s B r y a n , g o l d e n - t o n g u e d o r a t o r a n d f o u r - t i m e c a n d i d a t e for p r e s i d e n t of t h e U n i t e d States, against t h e l e a d i n g trial lawyer o f his day, C l a r e n c e D a r r o w . T h e results are t o o well k n o w n t o c h r o n i c l e : D a r r o w n o t o n l y d e m o l i s h e d Bryan's a r g u m e n t s b u t also h u m i l i a t e d his views. F r o m t h a t t i m e , f u n d a m e n t a l ism was increasingly c o n s i d e r e d a b a c k w a r d , r e a c t i o n a r y , a n d a n t i intellectual b a s t i o n of rural P r o t e s t a n t i s m . T h e e n s u i n g years saw t w o d e v e l o p m e n t s w i t h i n f u n d a m e n t a l ism: a d i m i n u t i o n o f i n f l u e n c e in b r o a d sectors of A m e r i c a n life a n d i n f i g h t i n g a m o n g t h e m s e l v e s . In t h e years o f The Fundamentals there was a sense of u n i t y a m o n g t h e R e f o r m e d , W e s l e y a n , a n d m i l l e n a r i a n s e g m e n t s . In fact, w e m u s t c o r r e c t t h e h y p e r b o l i c s t a t e m e n t s o f S a n d e e n a n d o t h e r s t h a t f u n d a m e n t a l i s m was a m i l l e n a r i a n o r disp e n s a t i o n a l m o v e m e n t (the view t h a t biblical h i s t o r y p r o c e e d e d via p e r i o d s or " d i s p e n s a t i o n s " w i t h i n w h i c h G o d a t t e m p t e d in v a r i o u s ways to b r i n g m a n k i n d b a c k i n t o fellowship w i t h h i m s e l f ) . W h i l e this faction has b e c o m e p r e d o m i n a n t a m o n g c u r r e n t f u n d a m e n t a l ists, t h e origins of t h e m o v e m e n t were c o m p l e x a n d i n c l u d e d an a m a l g a m a t i o n o f m a n y t r a d i t i o n s . H o w e v e r w i t h t h e increased c o n t r o versies w i t h i n each g r o u p , t h e y lost c o n t a c t w i t h o n e a n o t h e r a n d in t h e 1 9 3 0 s b e g a n s p l i t t i n g i n t o factions w i t h i n t h e m s e l v e s . ' T h e c o n c e r n for t h e o l o g i c a l p r e c i s i o n b e g a n t o e x t e n d t o p e r i p h e r a l as well as c a r d i n a l t e n e t s o f t h e faith, a n d d e n o m i n a t i o n a l splits m u l t i p l i e d , often over t h e issue of s e p a r a t i o n (from C h r i s t i a n g r o u p s n o t d e e m e d sufficiently o r t h o d o x ) . O f c o u r s e , t h e r e w e r e m o r e t h a n d o c t r i n a l differences b e h i n d t h e s e w a r s . In a t i m e o f controversy, m a n y s t r o n g 4

See Louis Gasper, The Fundamentalist Movement, 1930-1956 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book H o u s e , 1981) 1-20 ("The Fundamentalist Herirage"), and N o r m a n F. Furniss, The Fundamentalist Controversy, 1918-/931 (New Haven: Yale U n i versity Press, 1954) 1 1 7 - 8 8 . - For reactions within the A r m i n i a n , Holiness, and Pentecostal sectors, see Vinson Tyson, "Theological Boundaries: T h e A r m i n i a n Tradition," The Evangelicals, ed. David F. Wells and John D. Woodbridge (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1975) 38-57.

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

134

willed, c h a r i s m a t i c i n d i v i d u a l s c a m e t o t h e forefront. The p o w e r plays a m o n g these leaders also c a u s e d m a n y of t h e splits. It is fair to say t h a t m o s t o f t h e vast n u m b e r o f small d e n o m i n a t i o n s t o d a y c a m e i n t o b e i n g in t h e late 1 9 2 0 s or t h e 1 9 3 0 s . These i n t e r n a l conflicts as well as t h e p o o r i m a g e o f f u n d a m e n talism c a u s e d it t o lose p u b l i c visibility a n d i n f l u e n c e d u r i n g t h e 1 9 3 0 s . H o w e v e r , it w o u l d b e e r r o n e o u s t o c o n c l u d e t h a t it was d y i n g d u r i n g t h o s e years. Statistics, in fact, s h o w t h a t it c o n t i n u e d t o grow, p a r t l y from t h e influx of i m m i g r a n t g r o u p s w h o a l i g n e d t h e m selves w i t h f u n d a m e n t a l i s t c o n c e r n s a n d p a r t l y from m a n y A m e r i cans w h o g r e w d i s e n c h a n t e d w i t h t h e m a i n s t r e a m d e n o m i n a t i o n s . N e v e r t h e l e s s , d i s c o u r a g e m e n t was t h e o r d e r o f t h e d a y w i t h i n f u n d a m e n t a l i s m , p r i m a r i l y b e c a u s e t h e y h a d n o n a t i o n a l voice b u t also b e c a u s e t h e splits h a d m a d e t h e s p l i n t e r g r o u p s s m a l l , ineffective units w h i c h c o u l d n o t perceive t h e g r o w t h w i t h i n t h e scene as a w h o l e . Moreover, the polemical, reactionary mindset which p r e d o m i n a t e d w a s n o t a t t u n e d t o o p t i m i s m , t h a t is, t h e y c e n t e r e d u p o n t h e n e g a tive a s p e c t s o f t h e m o v e m e n t a n d c o u l d n o t p e r c e i v e t h e l a r g e r picture. 6

7

In t h e 1 9 4 0 s a n e w g r o u p b e g a n t o e m e r g e , n o w k n o w n as "evangelicalism." It differed from m i l i t a n t f u n d a m e n t a l i s m a l o n g several lines: (1) a desire t o d i a l o g u e w i t h t h e w o r l d o f s c h o l a r s h i p , (2) a disavowal o f radical s e p a r a t i o n (i.e., t h e view t h a t o n e h a d to separate oneself from a n y g r o u p or p e r s o n n o t e s p o u s i n g t h e " p a r t y l i n e " in its details as well as in its essentials), (3) a greater theological o p e n ness o n p e r i p h e r a l m a t t e r s , for i n s t a n c e o n eschatological issues, (4) c o o p e r a t i v e e v a n g e l i s m , seen especially in t h e Billy G r a h a m c r u s a d e s in t h e 1 9 5 0 s , (5) a m o r e eclectic e d u c a t i o n , as seen in t h e f o r m a t i o n of Fuller S e m i n a r y in 1 9 4 7 , (6) a refusal t o align flag-waving, p o l i t i cal c o n s e r v a t i s m w i t h o r t h o d o x y , a n d (7) social c o n c e r n , for i n s t a n c e 6

George Marsden, " F r o m F u n d a m e n t a l i s m to Evangelicalism: A Historical Analysis," The Evangelicals, Wells and W o o d b r i d g e , eds., 147, calls rhe period from 1926 ro the 1940s a stage of "withdrawal a n d r e g r o u p i n g , ' d u r i n g which rime sectarianism p r e d o m i n a r e d and b o r h separatism and millenarianism b e c a m e resrs of orrhodoxy. T h i s , however, was true only in rhe mainstream of f u n d a m e n t a l ism. O n the edges, for insrance a m o n g m a n y reformed Wesleyan a n d Anabaprisr groups, this did n o t hold true. See Joel Carpenter, " F u n d a m e n t a l i s t Institutions and the Rise of Evangelical Protestantism, 1 9 2 9 - 1 9 4 2 , " Church History 4 9 (1980) 7 3 - 7 5 . I Ie argues that the four basic areas of fundamentalist activity (education, Bible conferences, radio broadcasting, and foreign missions) demonstrated "a growing, d y n a m i c m o v e m e n t . " There was no "American Religious Depression" in the 1930s b u t rarher a shift of e m p h a sis from polemics to evangelism.

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

135

t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f m i s s i o n a r y agencies w h i c h p r i m a r i l y d e a l t w i t h w o r l d relief a n d m e d i c a l p r o b l e m s . There are n o w t w o basic factions w i t h i n t h e u l t r a c o n s e r v a t i v e c a m p , n a m e l y t h e f u n d a m e n t a l i s t a n d t h e evangelical. T h e m a j o r issue w h i c h d i s t i n g u i s h e s t h e t w o is s e p a r a t i o n , w h i c h entails a m o r e holistic set o f a t t i t u d e s r e g a r d i n g t h e Christian's r e l a t i o n s h i p t o t h e w o r l d a n d o t h e r C h r i s t i a n g r o u p s . In m a n y cases t h e use o f t h e Bible is very similar, especially o n t h e p o p u l a r level. B o t h g r o u p s t e n d t o p r o o f - t e x t a n d t o a t o m i z e S c r i p t u r e (see f u r t h e r b e l o w ) . Yet w i t h res p e c t t o external aspects t h e y differ m a r k e d l y . The f u n d a m e n t a l i s t s t e n d to t a k e a negative a p p r o a c h t o o t h e r C h r i s t i a n g r o u p s a n d t o s u c h " w o r l d l y " a m u s e m e n t s as m o v i e s , cards, d a n c i n g , etc. M o r e over, t h e y are often c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y " s e c o n d - d e g r e e s e p a r a t i o n , " i.e., s e v e r a n c e n o t o n l y f r o m t h e w o r l d o f l i b e r a l i s m b u t also f r o m evangelicals w h o refuse t o d e t a c h t h e m s e l v e s from s u c h . T h e classic e x a m p l e is t h e f u n d a m e n t a l i s t o p p o s i t i o n t o Billy G r a h a m because o f his o p e n n e s s t o "liberal" p a r t i c i p a t i o n in his c r u s a d e s . The evangelical, o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , is m o r e o p e n t o s u c h t h i n g s as m o v i e s o r r e c r e a t i o n o n S u n d a y . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e r e is a desire to d i a l o g u e w i t h other Christian m o v e m e n t s a n d to cooperate where such does n o t c o m p r o m i s e t h e basic tenets of evangelical d o g m a (see t h e seven p o i n t s a b o v e ) . Evangelicals p a r t i c i p a t e in t h e Society o f Biblical L i t e r a t u r e a n d a t t e n d m e e t i n g s of t h e N a t i o n a l C o u n c i l of C h u r c h e s ( a l t h o u g h there is great debate regarding the extent of participation in t h e latter). T h e b r e a k b e t w e e n t h e t w o can b e s e e n , for i n s t a n c e , in t h e rival n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s . In S e p t e m b e r 1 9 4 1 , C a r l M c l n t i r e f o r m e d t h e A m e r i c a n C o u n c i l of C h r i s t i a n C h u r c h e s ( A C C C ) a n d in O c t o b e r of t h a t year a n o t h e r c o n f e r e n c e was h e l d at M o o d y Bible I n s t i t u t e t o f o r m t h e N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n o f Evangelicals. T h e f o r m e r o r g a n i z a t i o n specifically w i s h e d t o c o m b a t t h e Federal C o u n c i l o f C h u r c h e s w h i l e t h e latter d i d n o t d e m a n d t h a t their m e m b e r s sever all ties. W h i l e t h e t w o g r o u p s h a d q u i t e s i m i l a r views w i t h respect t o S c r i p t u r e a n d o t h e r d o c t r i n e s , t h e y differed greatly in t e r m s o f a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d o u t s i d e r s (see t h e p r e v i o u s p a r a g r a p h ) . H o w e v e r , o t h e r s p l i n t e r m o v e m e n t s w i t h i n t h e t w o g r o u p s have o c c u r r e d . F u n d a m e n t a l i s m has seen several splits, for e x a m p l e t h a t b e t w e e n M c l n t i r e a n d B o b J o n e s . J e r r y Falwell has b e e n m o v i n g m o r e t o w a r d t h e evangelical c a m p in his r h e t o r i c , a l t h o u g h m a n y o f his political s t a t e m e n t s are g e a r e d t o t h e f u n d a m e n t a l i s t . T h e A C C C 8

8

See Jerry Falwell, The Fundamentalist Phenomenon: The Resurgence Conservative Christianity ( G a r d e n City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1981).

of

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

136

s p l i t a few y e a r s a g o b e t w e e n a m o d e r a t e f a c t i o n a n d a M c l n t i r e l e d s p l i n t e r g r o u p . The c u r r e n t o r g a n i z a t i o n is c o n t r o l l e d b y t h e moderates. E v a n g e l i c a l i s m is also d i v i d e d p r i m a r i l y o n t h e issue o f i n e r r a n c y . The d e b a t e h a s b e e n c h r o n i c l e d in t h e t w o w o r k s o f H a r o l d L i n d s e l l ,

9

w h i c h u n f o r t u n a t e l y are h i g h l y p o l e m i c a l . T h e Evangelical T h e o logical Society, o r g a n i z e d in 1 9 4 9 t o p r o v i d e an eclectic f o r u m for t h e o l o g i c a l d i s c u s s i o n , h a s m a d e i n e r r a n c y its o n l y d o c t r i n a l s t a t e m e n t so as to p r o v i d e a p l a t f o r m for differences o n o t h e r m a t t e r s . In r e c e n t years, h o w e v e r , it h a s b e e n d i v i d e d o n a d e f i n i t i o n a n d criteria for i n e r r a n c y . As a result, a n o t h e r o r g a n i z a t i o n , t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o u n c i l o n Biblical I n e r r a n c y ( I C B I ) h a s b e e n f o r m e d to a d j u d i c a t e a m o r e carefully d e f i n e d s t a t e m e n t o n t h e issue. Those w h o affirm t h e d o c t r i n e o f total i n f a l l i b i l i t y / i n e r r a n c y are n o w s u b d i v i d e d i n t o t w o f u r t h e r g r o u p s , o n e s e g m e n t s e e k i n g t o establish criteria for d e c i d i n g w h a t affirms t h e d o c t r i n e a n d a n o t h e r w i s h i n g t o allow flexibility in d e t e r m i n i n g details. This, o f c o u r s e , is n o t t o i n t i m a t e t h a t i n e r r a n c y is t h e sole or even t h e m a j o r d i v i d i n g factor a m o n g evangelicals. M a n y o t h e r factors (e.g., h i g h versus l o w forms of w o r s h i p , e s c h a t o l o g i c a l views, t h e c h a r i s m a t i c issue, t h e s a c r a m e n t s , w o m e n in t h e C h u r c h , ethical issues, C a l v i n i s m versus A r m i n i a n i s m versus A n a b a p t i s m ) c o u l d b e m e n t i o n e d . H o w e v e r , i n e r r a n c y m o s t clearly relates to t h e use of S c r i p t u r e a n d c u r r e n t l y is a m a j o r c o n t e n t i o n . 'The 1 9 8 2 m e e t i n g of t h e Evangelical 'Theological S o c i e t y ( D e c e m b e r 1 5 - 1 7 , 1 9 8 2 ) c e n t e r e d u p o n "biblical criticism" a n d c o n c l u d e d w i t h a basic a f f i r m a t i o n of critical tools w h e n u s e d m o d e r a t e l y , i.e, as a m e a n s o f i n t e r p r e t i n g a passage r a t h e r t h a n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e d e g r e e o f a u t h e n t i c i t y . I. T H E EVANGELICAL AND SCRIP LURE

As o n e m i g h t d e t e r m i n e f r o m t h e p r e c e d i n g d i s c u s s i o n , t h e r e is w i d e diversity a m o n g evangelicals w i t h respect t o t h e i r use of S c r i p ture. M a n y segments of the various camps do indeed e m p l o y an atom i s t i c , p r o o f - t e x t i n g a p p r o a c h a n d s t r o n g l y d i s p a r a g e t h e use o f tools like c o m m e n t a r i e s o r b a c k g r o u n d l i t e r a t u r e , s a y i n g t h a t t h e y i n v a r i ably focus u p o n p r o b l e m s of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a n d i n e v i t a b l y m o v e o n e a w a y f r o m a c o m m i t m e n t t o t h e " s i m p l e g o s p e l . " This relic o f " c o m m o n sense realism" is still p r e v a l e n t . H o w e v e r , t h e interest in a p r o p e r a p p r o a c h t o t h e Bible is c e r t a i n l y g r o w i n g , as w i t n e s s t h e r e c e n t u p '' H a r o l d Lindsell, Battle for the Bible ( G r a n d Rapids: Z o n d e r v a n , 1976), and The Bible in the Balance (Grand Rapids: Z o n d e r v a n , 1979).

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

137

surge in evangelical w o r k s o n Bible s t u d y m e t h o d s o r h e r m e n e u t i c s . T o be c e r t a i n , m a n y b o o k s g o n o f u r t h e r t h a n i n d u c t i v e Bible study. H o w e v e r , o t h e r s are e x t r e m e l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d a n d a w a r e of t h e e n o r m o u s b o d y of l i t e r a t u r e , secular a n d religious, o n t h e p r o b l e m o f literary i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . J. R o b e r t s o n M c Q u i l k i n , p r e s i d e n t o f C o l u m b i a Bible College, says, "Even a n i n t r o d u c t o r y t e x t b o o k o n h e r m e n e u t i c s o u g h t t o be . . . t h o r o u g h l y g r o u n d e d in solid s c h o l a r s h i p . . . . " It is very clear t h a t M c Q u i l k i n a n d o t h e r s d e n y t h e validity o f prooft e x t i n g . W a l t e r Kaiser states t h a t " ' p r o o f t e x t i n g , ' t h e isolation a n d use o f verses a p a r t f r o m t h e i r i m m e d i a t e o r sectional c o n t e n t , is r e p r e h e n s i b l e a n d s h o u l d be d i s c o n t i n u e d i m m e d i a t e l y . " " R e c e n t g r a d u ates o f evangelical s c h o o l s have h a d s t r o n g courses in p r o p e r exegetical p r o c e d u r e . I0

A. Meaning and the Author-Text-Reader Problem Evangelicals t r a d i t i o n a l l y stress " w h a t it m e a n t " as well as " w h a t it m e a n s . " There is s t r o n g u n a n i m i t y w i t h respect to i n t e n t i o n a l i t y , i.e., t h e possibility o f r e c o v e r i n g t h e a u t h o r ' s i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g . The m o d e r n h e r m e n e u t i c a l d i l e m m a s t e m s from t h e relation b e t w e e n a u t h o r , text, a n d reader. The a u t h o r creates t h e text in o r d e r t o c o m m u n i c a t e a certain i n t e n d e d message. The r e a d e r searches t h e text in o r d e r t o discover a message, a n d it is here t h a t t h e p r o b l e m o c c u r s . The a u t h o r is n o t p r e s e n t t o clarify t h e i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g , a n d readers often find q u i t e different m e a n i n g s in t h e text. I n h e r e n t in this is t h e difficulty o f p r e u n d e r s t a n d i n g , o f m o v i n g b e h i n d one's o w n p r e c o n c e i v e d n o t i o n s t o e n t e r i n t o t h e t h o u g h t - w o r l d of t h e text. W h e n o n e goes t h e n e x t s t e p a n d seeks to discover t h e a u t h o r ' s i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g , t h e task b e c o m e s i m m e a s u r a b l y m o r e c o m p l e x . As a result, m a n y literary s c h o o l s p o s i t t h e a u t o n o m y o f t h e t e x t from t h e a u t h o r a n d t o a g r e a t e r o r lesser degree p r o n o u n c e t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y of ascert a i n i n g t h e "author's i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g . " Instead, t h e focus has shifted t o t h e reader, a n d t h e o r i e s o f " p o l y v a l e n c e " o r " m u l t i p l e m e a n i n g s " p r e d o m i n a t e . As o n e e n t e r s t h e w o r l d of t h e text, a h e r m e n e u t i c a l circle o c c u r s in w h i c h b o t h text a n d reader are altered. W h i l e total " J. Robertson M c Q u i l k i n , Understanding and Applying the Bible (Chicago: M o o d y Press, 1983) 10. See also J. I. Packer, "Infallible Scripture and the Role of Hermeneutics,'' Scripture and Truth, ed. D . A. Carson and J o h n D . W o o d b r i d g e (Grand Rapids: Z o n d e r v a n , 1983) 3 2 5 - 5 6 , w h o speaks of "the centraliry of h e r m e neutics today" ( 3 2 5 - 2 7 ) . Walter Kaiser, Toward an Exegetical Theology ( G r a n d Rapids: Baker, 1981) 8 2 . He clarifies this by arguing that a misuse of the "analogy of faith,' in w h i c h a future passage is utilized to interpret a previous o n e , is equally w r o n g . ;l

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

138

s u b j e c t i v i t y d o c s n o t result, t h e d y n a m i c transference of m e a n i n g allows m a n y p o s s i b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s t o o c c u r d e p e n d i n g o n t h e c o n text o r p e r s p e c t i v e o f t h e reader. 12

W h i l e r e c o g n i z i n g t h e t h o r n y p r o b l e m s i n v o l v e d in t h e task o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , evangelicals are n o t so p e s s i m i s t i c r e g a r d i n g t h e task of d e t e r m i n i n g t h e i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g . W h i l e t h e r e is n o space t o p r e s e n t d e t a i l e d a r g u m e n t s , I m i g h t m e n t i o n a few s a l i e n t p o i n t s . A t t h e o u t s e t , t h e w o r k o f t h e literary critic E. D . H i r s c h has b e c o m e very p o p u l a r . B u i l d i n g u p o n W i t t g e n s t e i n ' s t h e o r y of "family r e s e m b l a n c e s " b e t w e e n " l a n g u a g e g a m e s , " H i r s c h argues t h a t u n d e r s t a n d i n g is c o n n e c t e d t o " i n t r i n s i c g e n r e , " t h a t is, t h e "type o f u t t e r a n c e " w h i c h n a r r o w s d o w n t h e "rules" t h a t a p p l y t o a p a r t i c u l a r s p e e c h . W h i l e p r e u n d e r s t a n d i n g plays a m a j o r role in i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e r e is a basic g e n r e w h i c h is i n t r i n s i c t o a literary w o r k a n d w h i c h , w h e n d i s c o v e r e d , can l e a d t o a c o r r e c t d e l i n e a t i o n of its original i n t e n d e d meaning.' 5

H i r s c h separates m e a n i n g ( w h a t it m e a n t ) a n d significance ( w h a t it m e a n s ) i n t o t w o s e p a r a t e aspects o f t h e h e r m e n e u t i c a l task. T h e issue is w h e t h e r o n e can g e t b e h i n d t h e latter t o t h e former. After lengthy discussion of the p r o b l e m of semantics a n d m e a n i n g , Moisés Silva is c o n v i n c e d t h a t o n e c a n : "I take it as a valid a s s u m p t i o n t h a t t h e i n t e r p r e t e r a p p r o a c h e s a n y text w i t h a m u l t i t u d e o f e x p e r i e n c e s . . . t h a t i n f o r m his o r h e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h a t text. . . . B u t I believe just as s t r o n g l y t h a t t h e i n t e r p r e t e r m a y transcend, t h o u g h n o t e l i m i n a t e , t h a t p o i n t of reference. . . . T h e m o m e n t w e l o o k a t a text w e c o n t e x t u a l ize it, b u t a self-awareness o f t h a t fact o p e n s u p t h e possibility of m o d i f y i n g o u r p o i n t of reference in t h e l i g h t o f c o n t r a dictory data."' 1

For good discussions of rhis, see Charles M . W o o d , The Formation of Christian Understanding. An Essay in Theological Hermeneulics (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1981), and David H . Kelsey, The Uses of Scripture in Recent Theology (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975). Kelsey has a "functional"' view of a u t h o r ity which sees Scripture as providing "patterns" rather t h a n concepts. •' E. D . Hirsch, Validity in Interpretation (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1967) 7 2 - 8 8 . For a slightly different proposal, centering on the text rather than the author, see P. D . Juhl, Interpretation: An Essay in the Philosophy of Literary Criticism (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980) 1 2 - 1 5 . Two w h o follow closely this a r g u m e n t are Walter Kaiser, " T h e Single Intent of Scripture," Evangelical Roots, ed. K e n n e t h Kantzer (Nashville: T h o m a s Nelson, 1978), and Elliott J o h n s o n , Hermeneulics (Grand Rapids: Z o n d e r v a n , f o r t h c o m i n g ) . : 1

Moisés Silva, Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics (Grand Rapids: Z o n d e r v a n , 1983) 148. See also William W. Klein, Craig I.. Blomberg, a n d R o b e r t I.. H u b b a r d , Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Dallas: Word Books, 1993) 132-34.

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

139

A c o n n e c t e d issue relates t o t h e q u e s t i o n s of biblical a u t h o r i t y a n d p r o p o s i t i o n a l revelation in S c r i p t u r e , i.e., t h a t t h e Bible is t h e actual W o r d o f G o d in p r o p o s i t i o n a l f o r m r a t h e r t h a n a w i t n e s s t o G o d ' s revelation. Paul A c h t e m e i e r asserts t h a t a c o n c e r n for an infallible, p r o p o s i t i o n a l revelation has led t o t h e t y p e o f h a r m o n i z i n g (in o r d e r t o solve discrepancies) w h i c h in effect is self-contradictory, since it creates m o r e p r o b l e m s t h a n it s o l v e s . H e t h e r e f o r e p r o p o s e s a d y n a m i c m o d e l w h i c h views i n s p i r a t i o n as a process i n v o l v i n g n o t only t h e original tradition b u t later situations a n d respondents. Interestingly, t h e type of "glib h a r m o n i z a t i o n " w h i c h A c h t e m e i e r attacks is also denied by D . A. C a r s o n , w h o nevertheless argues further t h a t the m e t h o d w h e n utilized as o n e a m o n g m a n y literary tools can be highly useful.' 6

T o return to the subject of propositional revelation, W a y n e G r u d e m p r o v i d e s an extensive discussion of Scripture's "self-attestat i o n , " a r g u i n g (1) t h a t all of t h e O l d Testament w r i t i n g s are c o n s i d e r e d G o d ' s w o r d s , (2) t h a t t h e w r i t t e n w o r d s of G o d have t h e s a m e t r u t h - s t a t u s as t h e s p o k e n w o r d s o f G o d , a n d (3) t h a t t h e N e w Testam e n t w r i t i n g s a t t a i n e d t h e s a m e status as t h e O l d Testament w r i t i n g s . ' H e c o n c l u d e s this after e x a m i n i n g i n t r o d u c t o r y f o r m u l a s a n d claims t o a u t h o r i t y w i t h i n t h e biblical text. The i m p l i c a t i o n s are c r u cial for t h e evangelical claim to p r o p o s i t i o n a l revelation. I f G r u d e m ' s f i n d i n g s are c o r r e c t , t h e Bible claims t o be t h e W o r d o f G o d , n o t o n l y to testify to t h e W o r d o f G o d . M o r e o v e r , t h e Bible w o u l d d e m a n d t o be u n d e r s t o o d in t e r m s o f its o r i g i n a l m e a n i n g , n o t m e r e l y be o p e n t o m u l t i p l e m e a n i n g s in v a r i o u s c o n t e x t s . This is at t h e h e a r t o f t h e evangelical view o f S c r i p t u r e . I also c o n c u r w i t h A n t h o n y C . T h i s e l t o n ' s excellent discussion o f a u t h o r i t y a n d t h e Bible's " l a n g u a g e g a m e s . " H e argues t h a t b o t h static a n d d y n a m i c views are valid: 'The Bible is m o r e t h a n "a h a n d b o o k o f i n f o r m a t i o n a n d d e s c r i p t i o n " in t h a t it e m b r a c e s a " w h o l e r a n g e o f d y n a m i c s p e e c h - a c t s " ; yet at t h e s a m e t i m e this p e r f o r m a t i v e e l e m e n t rests "on t h e t r u t h o f c e r t a i n states o f affairs in G o d ' s relation to t h e w o r l d . " ' F e w evangelicals 7

8

;s

Paul Achtemeier, The Inspiration of Scripture: Problems and Proposals (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1980) 5 7 - 7 5 . D . A. Carson, "Uniry and Diversity in t h e N e w Testament: T h e Possibility of Systematic Theology," Scripture and Truth, ed. Carson and W o o d b r i d g e , 9 0 - 9 3 (cf. 139-41). ' Wayne A. G r u d e m , "Scripture's Self-Arrestation and rhe Problem of Formularing a Docrrine of Scriprure," Scripture and Truth, 4 9 (cf. 19-59). A. C . T h i s e l r o n , The Two Horizons: New Testament Hermeneulics and Philosophical Description (Grand Rapids: F.erdmans, 1980) 4 3 7 (cf. 4 3 2 - 3 8 ) . Seealso his New Horizons in Hermeneutics: The Theory and Practice of Transforming Biblical Reading (Grand Rapids: Z o n d e r v a n , 1992) 5 9 7 - 6 1 9 . :li

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

140

w o u l d a r g u e for a p u r e l y static v i e w of S c r i p t u r e . M o s t w o u l d see b o t h static a n d d y n a m i c e l e m e n t s , w h i c h w e m i g h t align w i t h m e a n i n g a n d significance. In r e c e n t evangelical h e r m e n e u t i c s , t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e r e a d e r as i n t e r p r e t e r is i n c r e a s i n g l y r e c o g n i z e d . K l e i n , B l o m b e r g , a n d H u b b a r d see t h r e e aspects in literary c r i t i c i s m : "(1) focus o n t h e a u t h o r ' s i n t e n t in c o m p o s i n g t h e text, (2) t h e c o n v e n t i o n s of t h e text t h a t reflect t h a t i n t e n t , a n d (3) t h e reader's r e s p o n s e t o t h e t e x t . " ' All these e l e m e n t s i n t e r a c t in t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f m e a n i n g . Yet h o w d o e s t h e reader align w i t h t h e i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g o f t h e text? T h i s e l t o n believes t h a t t h e text p e r f o r m s a t r a n s f o r m i n g f u n c t i o n , g u i d i n g t h e readers t o t h e n e w h o r i z o n s or life-worlds o f t h e text a n d c o n t r o l l i n g t h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n of t h e reader in t h e t e x t . I see a u t h o r , text, a n d r e a d e r e n g a g i n g in a t r i a l o g u e in c o m i n g - t o - u n d e r s t a n d i n g . W h i l e t h e a u t h o r p r o d u c e s t h e text, it is t h e text n o t t h e a u t h o r t h a t t h e r e a d e r s t u d i e s . R e a d e r s p a r t i c i p a t e in a u t h o r i a l / t e x t u a l m e a n i n g by s t u d y i n g t h e exegetical aspects ( c o n t e x t , g r a m m a r , s e m a n t i c s , b a c k g r o u n d ) t h a t p r o v i d e clues t o m e a n i n g a n d t h e n b y l i s t e n i n g t o a n d p a r t i c i p a t i n g in t h e d e m a n d s of t h e text. As readers w e recognize t h e g u i d i n g i n f l u e n c e of o u r p r e u n d e r s t a n d i n g b u t place this in f r o n t of t h e text (with t h e text g u i d i n g t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f m e a n i n g ) r a t h e r t h a n b e h i n d t h e text ( w i t h us c o n t r o l l i n g t h e t e x t ) . 1

23

21

B. Literary Criticism The first stage o f evangelical criticism o b v i o u s l y deals w i t h t h e larger q u e s t i o n s o f g e n r e , p l o t , n a r r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e , a n d t h o u g h t d e v e l o p m e n t . T h e best c o n t r o l over t h e t e n d e n c y t o a t o m i z e i n d i v i d u a l s t a t e m e n t s is c o n s t a n t c o g n i z a n c e of t h e e n t i r e c o n t e x t w i t h i n w h i c h assertions are f o u n d . T h u s serious Bible s t u d y begins w i t h r h e t o r i c a l c r i t i c i s m , t h e s t u d y o f t h e logical p a t t e r n s w h i c h c h a r a c t e r i z e t h e total message. S o m e t e x t b o o k s o n h e r m e n e u t i c a l t h e o r y h a v e d i s cussed g e n r e u n d e r t h e r u b r i c "special r e v e l a t i o n . " H o w e v e r , these texts are s e l d o m holistic o n g e n r e , for w h i l e t r a d i t i o n a l aspects like figures o f s p e e c h , p a r a b l e s , a n d a p o c a l y p t i c are discussed, t h e r e is s e l d o m coverage of gospels o r n a r r a t i v e h e r m e n e u t i c s . A n excellent w o r k w h i c h rectifies this is How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth by G o r d o n D . Fee a n d D o u g l a s S t u a r t , w i t h successive c h a p t e r s o n 19

H!

:

Klein, Blomberg, H u b b a r d , Biblical Thiselton, New Horizons, 61 1-19.

Interpretation,

136.

' See Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove, 111.: InterVarsity Press, 1991) 3 1 0 - 1 1 .

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

141

the basic genres: the epistles, O l d Testament narratives, Acts, the Gospels, parables, the law(s), the p r o p h e t s , the Psalms, w i s d o m , and Revelation. G e n r e has c o m e increasingly t o t h e fore in r e c e n t d e b a t e s o n t h e G o s p e l s . N o t o n l y h a s a p l e t h o r a of w o r k s a p p e a r e d o n t h e gospel g e n r e , b u t also it has led t o several s t u d i e s p u r p o r t i n g t o i n t e r p r e t t h e gospel narratives o n t h e basis of g e n e r i c c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . This m a y best b e exemplified by R o b e r t G u n d r y ' s c o m m e n t a r y o n M a t t h e w . H e states t h a t s o m e of t h e M a t t h e a n p o r t i o n s of this gospel (e.g., t h e M a g i ) are n o t historical b u t are "creative m i d r a s h , " Jewish fictional pieces w h i c h w e r e m e a n t t o be i n t e r p r e t e d as s u c h b y his J e w i s h a u d i e n c e . H o w e v e r , m a n y feel t h a t G u n d r y has n o t d e f i n e d m i d r a s h p r o p e r l y n o r h a s h e a p p l i e d p r o p e r parallels. G e n r e m u s t first be i d e n t i f i e d correctly a n d t h e n t h e characteristics m u s t be d r a w n a d e q u a t e l y b e t w e e n t h e pieces o f l i t e r a t u r e . 2 2

O n c e t h e g e n r e has b e e n isolated, an e v e r - n a r r o w i n g series o f c o n c e n t r i c a p p r o a c h e s delve d e e p e r a n d d e e p e r i n t o t h e text. H e r e t h e evangelical h e r m e n e u t i c d e m o n s t r a t e s an affinity w i t h m o d e r n t r e n d s , as r e c e n t schools (e.g., s t r u c t u r a l i s m , c a n o n c r i t i c i s m , r h e torical criticism) have m o v e d away from a stress o n t h e p a r t s ( t h e e r r o r of f o r m criticism) t o t h e c e n t r a l i t y o f t h e w h o l e . Literary criticism a s s u m e s t h a t t h e " w o r l d o f t h e text" as well as historical-critical c o n c e r n s is a valid s o u r c e for study. The s y m m e t r y of t h e final p r o d u c t t h e r e f o r e is a p r i m a r y focus, a n d evangelical a p p r o a c h e s have historically stressed this c o n t e x t u a l aspect. Interestingly, t h e m a j o r Bible s t u d y a p p r o a c h s t e m m i n g from t h e " C o m m o n Sense R e a l i s m " s c h o o l at t h e t u r n o f t h e c e n t u r y was t h e s y n t h e t i c m e t h o d d e s c r i b e d in J a m e s Gray's How to Master the Bible ( 1 9 0 4 ) , w h i c h a s s u m e d t h e priority of the w h o l e . 23

This r e m a i n s t h e c o r e o f m o d e r n - d a y i n d u c t i v e m e t h o d o l o g y , w h i c h begins b y c h a r t i n g t h e w h o l e s t r u c t u r e of a b o o k , d e l i n e a t i n g t h e p a t t e r n of its a r g u m e n t a t i o n a n d its m a j o r t h e m e s . W i t h o u t t h e s o p h i s t i c a t e d s t u d y o f c o m p o s i t i o n a l t e c h n i q u e s e x h i b i t e d in t h e w o r l d of a c a d e m i a , t h e i n d u c t i v i s t still seeks t h e i n t e r p l a y of n a r r a -

" Roberr G u n d r y , Matthew: A Commentary on His Literary and Theological Art (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981). See m y review arricie in TSF (Theological Students Fellowship) Bulletin 61A (March-April 1983) 14-16, w h i c h relares the c o m m e n t s of the symposia o n his work at ETS and AAR in D e c e m b e r 1982. " See rhe discussion in Weber, " T h e T w o - E d g e d Sword," The Bible in America, 111-14. Weber describes this synthetic m e t h o d in this way: " O n c e the whole was in h a n d , one could t u r n one's artention to a m o r e detailed srudy of its c o m p o n e n t parts . . ." ( 1 1 2 - 1 3 ) .

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

142

rive factors in t h e text. Evangelical scholars are m o r e a n d m o r e b e i n g t r a i n e d in literary t h e o r y a n d p r o d u c i n g w o r k s in this field. Yet t h e so-called "Active" (rhetorical s c h o o l s a r g u e t h a t all narratives have t h e basic e l e m e n t s o f "fiction," i.e., p l o t , s t r u c t u r e , character, c o n flict) c o m p o n e n t s s t e m m i n g from t h e s c h o o l o f n a r r a t i v e h e r m e n e u tics are s t r o n g l y criticized for t h e facile a s s u m p t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e a e s t h e t i c e l e m e n t o f S c r i p t u r e . Evangelicals w o u l d w a n t t o restrict fictive factors to t h a t g e n r e r a t h e r t h a n e x t e n d t h e m t o historical a n d d i d a c t i c p o r t i o n s o f t h e Bible. W i t h respect to p a r a b l e s , for i n s t a n c e , evangelicals w o u l d utilize m o d e r n p a r a b l e research r e g a r d i n g t h e c o m plexity o f t h e interpretive task b u t w o u l d still seek t h e i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g of t h e p a r a b l e in its s e t t i n g as o p p o s e d t o t h e m u l t i p l e m e a n i n g s a t t r i b u t e d b y s t r u c t u r a l i s t s . H o w e v e r , t h e y w o u l d differ in o t h e r respects, w i t h s o m e still h o l d i n g t o t h e "single m e a n i n g " a p p r o a c h o f Jiilicher a n d J e r e m í a s , b u t w i t h o t h e r s t a k i n g a m o d i f i e d "allegorical" a p p r o a c h . ' 21

2

C . Textual C r i t i c i s m Evangelicals, w i t h their stress o n t h e p r o p o s i t i o n a l c o n t e n t of S c r i p t u r e , are n a t u r a l l y very c o n c e r n e d t o ascertain t h e original w o r d s of t h e biblical text. The description of t h e task by Professor H a r r i n g t o n is very s i m i l a r to t h a t e m p l o y e d b y e v a n g e l i c a l s . Issues, however, are slightly different. O n e m a j o r d e b a t e b e t w e e n f u n d a m e n t a l i s t s a n d evangelicals c e n t e r s u p o n t h e textus receptus, t h e "received text" d e v e l o p e d b y E r a s m u s a n d t h a t b e h i n d t h e K i n g J a m e s Bible. Those b e h i n d t h e " K i n g J a m e s o n l y " m o v e m e n t a r g u e for t h e " m a j o r i t y text," i.e., t h e text s u p p o r t e d b y t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e a n c i e n t m a n u scripts. H o w e v e r , since m o s t e x e m p l a r s c o p i e d before A . D . 8 0 0 have b e e n d e s t r o y e d , t h e m a j o r i t y of evangelical scholars a c c e p t t h e eclectic m e t h o d d e v e l o p e d b y W e s t c o t t a n d H o r t r a t h e r t h a n t h e "received text." 26

In s p i t e o f t h e c o m m i t m e n t t o t h e text, however, t h e r e is also a p a u c i t y o f evangelical text-critics. M a n y h a v e d o n e text-critical research in their d o c t o r a l w o r k , largely d u e t o t h e fact t h a t several g r a d u M

Sec Robert H . Stein, An Introduction to the Parables of Jesus (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1981). ' See m y Hermenéutica/ Spiral, 2 3 5 - 4 9 , and Craig Blomberg, Interpreting the Parables ( D o w n e r s Grove, 111.: InterVarsity Press, 1990). T h i s holds that Jesus utilized allegory in his parables, and that there is no "single" thrust, b u t several theological thrusts in Jesus' parables. ' See the chapter by Daniel H a r r i n g t o n in this volume. 5

6

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

143

ate p r o g r a m s will n o t allow exegetical s t u d i e s from an evangelical p e r s p e c t i v e . H o w e v e r , few follow u p this p r o g r a m w i t h f u r t h e r textcritical research. The reasons g i v e n b y Professor H a r r i n g t o n for t h e p o o r state of textual criticism in C a t h o l i c circles a p p l y also t o t h e evangelical s i t u a t i o n .

D . The Historical-Critical Method T h e r e is a great d e b a t e in b o t h evangelical a n d n o n e v a n g e l i c a l circles r e g a r d i n g t h e validity of historical-critical research. T h e pessim i s m o f t h e a p p r o a c h a n d t h e a b s e n c e of c o n s t r u c t i v e results have m a d e scholars from m a n y t r a d i t i o n s leery a b o u t its value. H o w e v e r , o n e m u s t differentiate various aspects o f a p a r t i c u l a r m e t h o d a n d a v o i d l a b e l i n g t h e e n t i r e s c h o o l by its negative characteristics. This is t h e d e b a t e w i t h i n evangelicalism a t t h e p r e s e n t t i m e . B o t h f o r m a n d r e d a c t i o n criticism have b e e n closely identified w i t h t r a d i t i o n criticism, w h i c h t e n d s t o d e t e r m i n e t h e a u t h e n t i c i t y of a p e r i c o p e or s t o r y o n t h e basis o f its f o r m . If t h e s a y i n g o r s t o r y is s i m p l e r a t h e r t h a n c o m p l e x , it is m o r e likely t o be a u t h e n t i c , t h a t is, t o s t e m from t h e historical Jesus r a t h e r t h a n t h e later c h u r c h . T h e s e scholars t h e o rize t h a t t h e n e e d s of t h e C h u r c h w e r e r e a d b a c k o n t o t h e lips of Jesus. Tradition critics t e n d to d e t e r m i n e t h e a u t h e n t i c i t y o f Jesus' sayings in t h e G o s p e l s o n t h e basis o f t h r e e c r i t e r i a : (1) dissimilarity, w h i c h a s s u m e s t h a t a s a y i n g is a u t h e n t i c o n l y if it c a n n o t be paralleled e i t h e r in J u d a i s m o r in t h e early c h u r c h , (2) m u l t i p l e attest a t i o n , w h i c h views a s a y i n g / p e r i c o p e as a u t h e n t i c if it can be t r a c e d t h r o u g h several sources or layers of t r a d i t i o n , a n d (3) c o h e r e n c e , w h i c h accepts a t r a d i t i o n t h a t is c o n s i s t e n t w i t h passages w h i c h have already been authenticated. However, the philosophical skepticism b e h i n d these has b e e n c h a l l e n g e d from m a n y q u a r t e r s , a n d t h e a p p r o a c h is u n a c c e p t a b l e to evangelicals. 27

S o m e believe t h a t s u c h m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m s belie t h e m e t h o d as w h o l e . They a r g u e for a h i s t o r i c a l - t h e o l o g i c a l r a t h e r t h a n a h i s torical-critical m e t h o d o n t h e g r o u n d s t h a t t h e f o r m e r is in closer 28

'•' For evangelical responses, see my " T h e F.vangelical and Traditionsgeschichte" in The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 2 1 / 2 (1978) 1 17-30, and R. H . Siein, " T h e 'Criteria' for Authenticity,'' Gospel Perspectives /, ed. R. T. France and David W e n h a m (Sheffield: J S O T Press, 1980) 225-6.3. See Gerhard Maier, The End of the Historical Critical Method (Sr. Louis: C o n c o r d i a , 1977), and G e r h a r d Hasel, Understanding the Living Word of God (Motinrain View, Calif.: Pacific Press, 1980).

144

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

p r o x i m i t y to t h e biblical view o f itself. The r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e "original e v e n t " is v i e w e d as a s p e c u l a t i v e e n t e r p r i s e w h i c h c a n never p r o v i d e a c o n s t r u c t i v e a l t e r n a t i v e to t h e text as it is. O t h e r s , like t h e c a n o n critics, a c c e p t t h e criticisms b u t assert t h a t o n e m u s t n o t t a k e a "naive" a p p r o a c h t o t h e text. Evangelicalism is d i v i d e d o n t h e issue, a l t h o u g h I a d m i t t h a t I s t a n d m o r e closely t o t h e l a t t e r p o s i t i o n . R e d a c t i o n criticism is a case in p o i n t . W h i l e f o r m criticism s o u g h t t h e Sitz irn Leben or social m a t r i x from w h i c h various s t r a t a of t r a d i t i o n s t e m m e d , r e d a c t i o n criticism has s t u d i e d t h e final a u t h o r ' s c o n t r i b u t i o n . In so d o i n g , m a n y critics have a s s u m e d t h a t o n l y t h o s e s e g m e n t s p e c u l i a r t o a n i n d i v i d u a l evangelist carry his i m p r i m a t u r . H o w e v e r , s u c h a s u p p o s i t i o n lacks proof, for t h e biblical w r i t e r s used t h e t r a d i t i o n s t h e m s e l v e s as well as a d d i t i o n s / o m i s s i o n s in p r e s e n t i n g t h e i r messages. M o r e o v e r , m o s t evangelicals are n o t s o s e t t l e d o n t h e classical form of t h e d o c u m e n t a r y h y p o t h e s i s ( M a t t h e w a n d L u k e u t i l i z i n g M a r k a n d Q ) t h a t t h e y will b u i l d e n t i r e edifices of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n u p o n it. W h i l e it is c o m m o n l y a c c e p t e d as a w o r k i n g h y p o t h esis, few w o u l d wish to m a k e it t h e core of r e d a c t i o n - c r i t i c a l research. Therefore, b o t h in t e r m s o f t r a d i t i o n a n d s o u r c e criticism, t h e r e is a degree of caution toward a full-blown redactional p r o g r a m . N e v e r t h e l e s s , a t a r e c e n t E'TS (Evangelical 'Theological Society) m e e t i n g ( 1 9 8 2 ) t h e basic a p p r o a c h was affirmed. The theological goals of r e d a c t i o n criticism parallel b o t h r h e t o r i c a l criticism (in t h e c e n t r a l i t y o f s t r u c t u r e ) a n d biblical t h e o l o g y (in t h e d e l i n e a t i o n of t h e i n d i v i d u a l a u t h o r ' s message). I n d e e d , t h e basic desire t o p r o t e c t t h e a u t h o r ' s i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g is best fulfilled b y r e d a c t i o n c r i t i c i s m , w h i c h accents t h e final f o r m over t h e s e p a r a t e t r a d i t i o n s . For these reasons t h e r e is a g r o w i n g a f f i r m a t i o n of a n u a n c e d m e t h o d o l o g y w i t h i n evangelicalism. In similar fashion, a carefully c o n t r o l l e d historical-critical m e t h o d is s t r o n g l y q u e s t i o n e d b u t n o t n e g a t e d , a n d t h e q u e s t i o n s a d d r e s s e d t o it are very s i m i l a r t o t h o s e a s k e d b y t h e broader spectrum of scholarship. E. Biblical B a c k g r o u n d s D i s c i p l i n e s w h i c h u n c o v e r d a t a b e a r i n g u p o n biblical h i s t o r y a n d c u s t o m s h a v e always b e e n r e p r e s e n t e d heavily in t h e evangelical s c h o o l . The c o n c e r n for t h e exact m e a n i n g o f t h e text n a t u r a l l y leads t o a n e m p h a s i s u p o n t h e fields o f archaeology, a n c i e n t l a n g u a g e s , a n d history. A t t i m e s t h e r e h a v e b e e n hasty c o n c l u s i o n s d r a w n reg a r d i n g t h e a p o l o g e t i c value of such finds as J e r i c h o o r t h e H i t t i t e s , a n d careful scholars n o w p r o c l a i m correctly t h a t t h e p r i m a r y value

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

145

of a r c h a e o l o g y is d e s c r i p t i v e ( p r o v i d i n g d a t a for u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e biblical w o r l d ) r a t h e r t h a n a p o l o g e t i c ( p r o v i n g t h e historical reliability of a c c o u n t s ) , since results are so t e n t a t i v e . H o w e v e r , t h e value o f s u c h discoveries is i m m e n s e , a n d o u r k n o w l e d g e o f t h e biblical w o r l d has increased d r a m a t i c a l l y in r e c e n t years. 19

There are several criteria for d e c i d i n g w h e n an extrabiblical p a r allel m a y b e a d d u c e d in e l u c i d a t i n g a text: (1) D o n o t a s s u m e t h a t a n y t h e m a t i c l i n k c o n s t i t u t e s a genealogical r e l a t i o n s h i p . H i s t o r y of-religions scholars have often a s s u m e d t h a t H e l l e n i s t i c parallels were s u p e r i o r t o J e w i s h parallels; o n e m u s t see w h i c h m o r e closely elucidates t h e text. (2) M a k e c e r t a i n t h a t it c o m e s from t h e s a m e p e r i o d ; t h e m y s t e r y religions, for i n s t a n c e , s t e m from a later p e r i o d a n d c a n n o t b e b e h i n d s u c h N e w 'Testament practices as b a p t i s m . Also Talm u d i c e v i d e n c e has often b e e n u s e d t o o casually w i t h o u t a s k i n g w h e t h e r it t r u l y s t e m m e d from t h e p r e - A . D . 7 0 J e w i s h s i t u a t i o n . (3) W o r k n o t o n l y w i t h t h e c u r r e n t s i t u a t i o n at t h e t i m e of w r i t i n g b u t also w i t h t h e historical d e v e l o p m e n t b e h i n d it. I n t e r t e s t a m e n t a l all u s i o n s are critical for u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e m i n d s e t o f t h e N e w 'Testam e n t w r i t e r s . (4) Be holistic in y o u r search. W e can n o l o n g e r ass u m e t h a t e i t h e r J u d a i s m or H e l l e n i s m is solely r e s p o n s i b l e for N e w Testament ideas, n o r t h a t C a n a a n i t e practices are r e s p o n s i b l e for O l d Testament d e v e l o p m e n t . R e c e n t s t u d i e s have s h o w n h o w c o s m o p o l i t a n t h e a n c i e n t w o r l d actually w a s . (5) L o o k a t w o r d i n g a n d style. If t h e c o n n e c t i o n is n o m o r e t h a n c o n c e p t u a l , it is possible b u t less likely t h a n if o n e can d e n o t e a n allusion t o t h e parallel piece. (6) If differences o u t w e i g h similarities, o n e s h o u l d c o n s i d e r o t h e r o p t i o n s . Preliminary theories regarding the influence of Q u m r a n on the N e w ' T e s t a m e n t (e.g., w i t h Jesus o r J o h n t h e Baptist) h a v e b e e n d i s c a r d e d b e c a u s e t h e similarities were o v e r d r a w n . M o s t i m p o r t a n t l y , historical b a c k g r o u n d is d e e m e d a b s o l u t e l y critical for a p r o p e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e text. The evangelical d e m a n d for p r o p o s i t i o n a l t r u t h has always p r o d u c e d a g r e a t desire to d e t e r m i n e t h e literal m e a n i n g o f S c r i p t u r e . This c a n n o t be d o n e a d e q u a t e l y w i t h o u t a p p l y i n g t h e b a c k g r o u n d b e h i n d t h e biblical s t a t e m e n t s , for o n e m u s t r e c o g n i z e t h e analogical n a t u r e o f biblical l a n g u a g e a n d t h e c u l t u r a l g a p b e t w e e n it a n d o u r day. To o v e r c o m e t h a t g a p , historical d a t a is a critical n e e d .

"' See E d w i n Y a m a u c h i , I.ippincott, 1972) 146-57.

The Stones

and

the Scriptures

(Philadelphia:

146

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

F. Semantics and Grammar M a n y evangelical schools still r e q u i r e G r e e k a n d H e b r e w , a n d t h e biblical l a n g u a g e s are d e e m e d necessary for p r o p e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . T h e classical t e n e t s of g r a m m a t i c a l - s y n t a c t i c a l exegesis are at t h e h e a r t o f t h e h e r m e n e u t i c a l task. S t u d e n t s are r e q u i r e d t o s t u d y a r d u o u s l y t h e classical g r a m m a r s s u c h as B l a s s - D e b r u n n e r - F u n k , M o u l t o n - H o p e - 1 u r n e r , Z e r w i c k a n d M o u l e for G r e e k , o r G e s e n i u s K a u t z s c h , H a r t m a n n , a n d L a m b d i n for H e b r e w . M o r e o v e r , t h e c o g n a t e l a n g u a g e s s u c h as A k k a d i a n , S u m e r i a n , U g a r i t i c , a n d A r a m a i c are t a u g h t t o t h o s e w h o wish t o specialize. In fact, T r i n i t y Evangelical D i v i n i t y S c h o o l is o n e o f t h e c e n t e r s d e v e l o p i n g a n e x c i t i n g t o o l for g r a m m a t i c a l research, called G R A M C O R D , i.e., a G r a m m a t i c a l C o n c o r d a n c e for t h e biblical l a n g u a g e s e m p l o y i n g c o m p u t e r p r o g r a m m i n g . T h e g r a m m a t i c a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n of t h e e n t i r e N e w Testam e n t in G r e e k has b e e n c o d e d i n t o t h e c o m p u t e r , a n d s i m i l a r p r o g r a m s are in process for t h e H e b r e w O l d T e s t a m e n t as well as for t h e S e p t u a g i n t a n d s u c h extrabiblical l i t e r a t u r e as J o s e p h u s a n d P h i l o . G r a m m a t i c a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n s can n o w b e t r a c e d w i t h p r e c i s i o n a n d s p e e d , a n d s t u d e n t s in o u r a d v a n c e d g r a m m a r c o u r s e are already rew o r k i n g m a j o r g r a m m a t i c a l c o n c e p t s . J u d g i n g from t h e g r o w i n g n u m b e r of S B L (Society of Biblical L i t e r a t u r e ) s e m i n a r s a n d p a p e r s o n this t o p i c , this is clearly o n e o f t h e m a j o r m o v e m e n t s for t h e n e x t decade. L e x i c o g r a p h y , t h e m e a n i n g o f i n d i v i d u a l w o r d s a n d c o n c e p t s , is also receiving n e w i m p e t u s in o u r day. T h e n u m b e r o f tools available for w o r d studies has risen r e m a r k a b l y , a n d h i g h l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d s t u d ies a l o n g t h e lines o f J a m e s Barr's classic Semantics of Biblical Language ( 1 9 6 1 ) are readily available. In a d d i t i o n to t h e t e n - v o l u m e Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, t h e r e is t h e w e l l - w r i t t e n t h r e e - v o l u m e New International Dictionary of New 'Testament Theology, t h e t h r e e - v o l u m e Exegetical Dictionary of the New 'Testament, a n d m a n y similar w o r k s . W h i l e t o an e x t e n t m a n y fall i n t o Barr's criticism o f "illegitimate t o t a l i t y transfer" (i.e., t h e t e n d e n c y t o r e a d t h e w h o l e t h e o l o g y b e h i n d a c o n c e p t i n t o i n d i v i d u a l uses o f a t e r m ) , t h e r e is e v i d e n c e for a g r o w i n g a p p r e c i a t i o n for p r o p e r lexical t e c h n i q u e s (e.g, Silva's w o r k in n. 14). O n e m a j o r i m p r o v e m e n t lies in t h e use of parallels. In t h e p a s t it has b e e n c o m m o n t o read a n y possible parallel passage i n t o t h e m e a n i n g o f an i n d i v i d u a l s t a t e m e n t . T h u s t h e r e w o u l d be articles o n t h e Essene b a c k g r o u n d of t h e i n c a r n a t i o n a l t h e o l o g y of H e b r e w s 2 a l o n g side articles o n t h e H e l l e n i s t i c o r i g i n of t h a t passage. N o w t h e r e is a

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

147

g r e a t e r t e n d e n c y to differentiate s e e m i n g parallels from t r u e p a r a l lels. N o l o n g e r can w e i n t e r p r e t James's d i s c u s s i o n o f faith a n d w o r k s s i m p l y o n t h e basis o f Paul's t e a c h i n g . N o w w e m u s t e x a m i n e t h e s e m a n t i c l i n k a g e a n d t h e c o n t e x t u a l m e a n i n g in b o t h c o n t e x t s b e fore w e establish c o n n e c t i v e lines b e t w e e n t h e t w o . I believe t h a t t h e differences o u t w e i g h t h e similarities a n d t h a t t h e r e f o r e w e c a n n o t establish a valid l i n k b e t w e e n Paul a n d J a m e s . The evangelical heritage, from A. T. R o b e r t s o n a n d J. B. L i g h t f o o t at t h e t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y t o F. F. B r u c e a n d I. H o w a r d M a r s h a l l today, has always s h o w n p r i m a r y i n t e r e s t in this a s p e c t o f h e r m e n e u tics. T h e m i n u t i a e o f t h e text h a v e always h a d a p a r t i c u l a r fascinat i o n for evangelical p r e a c h e r s , as w i t n e s s t h e n u m b e r o f years M a r t i n Lloyd-Jones s p e n t p r e a c h i n g o n R o m a n s or J a m e s M o n t g o m e r y Boice o n t h e G o s p e l o f J o h n . T h i s of c o u r s e is i n t i m a t e l y c o n n e c t e d to t h e view o f S c r i p t u r e , b u t it also is seen in t h e c o n c o m i t a n t d e m a n d for accuracy, t h a t is, t h e n e e d t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e p a r t s before e x p o u n d ing the whole.

G. Biblical Theology and Systematic Theology T h e q u e s t i o n o f u n i t y a n d diversity in t h e Bible has l o n g fascin a t e d scholars. R e c e n t l y it has c o m e t o t h e fore in t h e d e b a t e o n t h e validity of s y s t e m a t i c theology. The r e f o r m e r s stressed t h e p r i n c i p l e of analogia fidei, t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l p o r t i o n s of S c r i p t u r e o n t h e basis o f o t h e r p o r t i o n s . S i n c e t h e rise of t h e biblical t h e o l o g y m o v e m e n t in G e r m a n y in t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y , this p r i n ciple has b e e n u n d e r attack. T h e diverse e m p h a s e s o f i n d i v i d u a l p o r t i o n s of t h e Bible h a v e so b e e n stressed t h a t any possibility of a t t a i n i n g a unified field o f m e a n i n g w h i c h cuts across t h e differences has often b e e n rejected as an i m p o s s i b l e task. T h e o l o g y , it is n o w b e i n g said, is d e s c r i p t i v e r a t h e r t h a n n o r m a t i v e . Evangelicals have always rejected this d i c h o t o m y as u n n e c e s s a r y (see C a r s o n ' s article in n. 16). T h e basic u n i t y is n o t a given, for it m u s t be d e m o n s t r a t e d . D i v e r s i t y is c e r t a i n l y p r e s e n t b e t w e e n t h e d o c u m e n t s . Yet t h i s diversity d o e s n o t rule o u t o f h a n d t h e unity, a n d scholars a r g u e t h a t an i n t e r p r e t e r can a m a l g a m a t e i n d i v i d u a l s t a t e m e n t s i n t o " c o v e r i n g m o d e l s " w h i c h unify t h e diverse a p p r o a c h e s t o an issue i n t o an overall biblical theology. Evangelicals w o u l d seek t o m a i n t a i n diversity (biblical t h e o l o g y ) a n d yet to d e t e r m i n e t h e u n d e r l y i n g u n i t y b e h i n d it ( s y s t e m a t i c t h e o l o g y ) . T o stress t h e diversity a t t h e e x p e n s e o f t h e u n i t y is r e d u c t i o n i s t i c ; t o stress t h e u n i t y a n d i g n o r e t h e diversity is s p e c u l a t i v e a n d subjective. W h e n o n e goes

148

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

b e y o n d t h e surface l a n g u a g e to t h e u n d e r l y i n g c o n c e p t s , t h e diverse s t a t e m e n t s are often seen to be c o m p a t i b l e . N e v e r t h e l e s s , o n e c a n n o t ignore t h e surface m e a n i n g a n d "prooftext" d o g m a . It is also increasingly r e c o g n i z e d t h a t isolated biblical s t a t e m e n t s d o n o t s t a t e d o g m a t i c t r u t h s as m u c h as a p p l y aspects of t h e larger t r u t h t o c i r c u m s t a n t i a l n e e d s in t h e c o m m u n i t y a d d r e s s e d by t h e b o o k . D o g m a is d e t e r m i n e d b y a c o m p l e x p r o c e s s . First, o n e n o t e s all t h e biblical passages w h i c h address a p a r t i c u l a r t o p i c a n d exegetes t h o s e passages in t e r m s o f t h e i r o r i g i n a l , i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g . H e r e i n o n e n o t e s t r e m e n d o u s diversity o f e m p h a s i s a n d expression. N e x t , t h e t h e o l o g i a n b e g i n s t h e task of c o m p i l a t i o n . First, he or s h e e l u c i d a t e s t h e biblical t h e o l o g y o f b o o k s a n d t h e n a u t h o r s o n t h i s t o p i c . S e c o n d , o n e d e t e r m i n e s t h e larger u n i t y w i t h i n m a j o r trad i t i o n s , e.g., t h e p a t r i a r c h a l / m o n a r c h i c a l o r p r o p h e t i c p e r i o d s in t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t o r t h e Palestinian o r G e n t i l e m i s s i o n p e r i o d s of t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t . T h i r d , t h e full-fledged d o c t r i n e is t r a c e d t h r o u g h t h e biblical p e r i o d , n o t i n g shifts o f i n t e r e s t a n d t h e p r o g r e s s o f reve l a t i o n in s a l v a t i o n - h i s t o r y . This o c c u r s u n d e r t h e aegis of biblical theology. Finally, t h e s y s t e m a t i c t h e o l o g i a n takes this d a t a , seen in its diversity a n d unity, a n d restates it a l o n g t h e lines first of t h e h i s t o r y of d o g m a a n d s e c o n d of t h e cultural expressions of t h e c u r r e n t a g e . In s h o r t , h e o r s h e r e w o r k s t h e b i b l i c a l m a t e r i a l s o t h a t it m a y be u n d e r s t o o d logically, in its w h o l e a n d in its p a r t s , b y t h e modern person.

H . Contextualization W e have m o v e d f r o m " w h a t it m e a n t " ( t h e task o f exegetical t h e o l o g y a n d biblical t h e o l o g y ) t o " w h a t it m e a n s " (the task of systematic theology a n d homiletical theology). Contextualization, the h e r m e n e u t i c a l side of h o m i l e t i c a l theology, is t h e final s t e p , l i n k e d w i t h t h e task o f p r o c l a m a t i o n . "Fhe t h e o r y has b e e n d e v e l o p e d b y missiologists w h o are c o n c e r n e d for cross-cultural c o m m u n i c a t i o n . Evangelicals, historically l i n k e d t o pietistic a n d revivalist c o n c e r n s , have always stressed this aspect. C o n t e x t u a l i z a t i o n says t h a t t h e task of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is never c o m p l e t e u n t i l o n e has w e d d e d t h e exegesis of t h e W o r d t o an exegesis of t h e w o r l d . F h e d e b a t e o n this issue c e n t e r s u p o n t h e interface b e t w e e n t h e t w o s p h e r e s . If t h e W o r d of G o d is p r o p o s i t i o n a l , o n e can " c o n t e x t u a l i z e " t h e f o r m b u t n o t t h e c o n t e n t of t h e biblical m e s s a g e . If it is f u n c t i o n a l (see n. 1 2 ) , t h e current context would control the interpretation and one would dev e l o p an " i n d i g e n o u s t h e o l o g y " (the claim of t h e l i b e r a t i o n t h e o l o -

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

149

g i a n , for i n s t a n c e ) . T h e evangelical has always a r g u e d for t h e f o r m e r stance. The c o n t e x t u a l i z a t i o n c o n c e r n s t h e q u e s t i o n o f n o r m a t i v e versus c u l t u r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . T h e i n t e r p r e t e r asks w h e t h e r t h e biblical c o m m a n d o r p r i n c i p l e is totally l i n k e d t o t h e c u l t u r a l s i t u a t i o n (e.g., Paul's u r b a n - c e n t e r e d e v a n g e l i s m at E p h e s u s in Acts 19) or w h e t h e r t h e t e a c h i n g t r a n s c e n d s t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s a n d is n o r m a t i v e for all ages (e.g., t h e S e r m o n o n t h e M o u n t ) . For i n s t a n c e , this q u e s t i o n is b e h i n d t h e w i d e s p r e a d d e b a t e o n t h e o r d i n a t i o n o f w o m e n in light of 1 C o r . 1 4 : 3 4 - 3 6 a n d 1 T i m . 2 : 8 - 1 5 . S o m e a r g u e t h a t t h e use of c r e a t i o n a n d t h e fall in t h e s e passages a n c h o r s t h e c o m m a n d t o silence ( n o t t o teach) in G o d ' s r e d e m p t i v e d e c r e e s , a n d t h e r e f o r e it is m e a n t for all ages. O t h e r s a r g u e t h a t t h e c u l t u r a l b a c k g r o u n d a n d the distance between the underlying principle (submission to husb a n d s ) a n d t h e c o m m a n d ( n o t t o teach) d e m o n s t r a t e s a cultural rather t h a n s u p r a c u l t u r a l n o r m . T h e p r i n c i p l e is t h a t t h e s u p r a c u l t u r a l c o n t e n t o f S c r i p t u r e is e t e r n a l / u n i v e r s a l w h i l e c u l t u r a l f o r m s will a p p l y t h e u n d e r l y i n g p r i n c i p l e differently d e p e n d i n g u p o n t h e c o n t e x t . C o n t e x t u a l i z a t i o n w o r k s w i t h t h e results o f t h e exegesis a n d c u l t u r a l / s u p r a c u l t u r a l d e l i n e a t i o n . It applies t h e biblical t e a c h i n g t o t h e r e c e p t o r c u l t u r e , a n d its p u r p o s e is t o allow t h e W o r d t o e n c o u n t e r t h e w o r l d . A t t i m e s it will c o n f o r m to c u r r e n t c u l t u r e , a n d at o t h e r t i m e s it will c o n f r o n t m o d e r n m a n . I n t h e latter sense, S c r i p t u r e will c h a l l e n g e a n d t h e n t r a n s f o r m t h a t c u l t u r e . For t h e evangelical, it is i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e , this is n o t a subjective d e c i s i o n . T h e a u t h o r i t y of t h e a p p l i c a t i o n varies in d i r e c t p r o p o r t i o n t o its c o n f o r m i t y to t h e m e a n i n g of t h e text. F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e level of a u t h o r i t y lessens as o n e m o v e s a w a y f r o m t h e S c r i p t u r e itself. I n t e r p r e t a t i o n , since it is finite, has less a u t h o r i t y t h a n the text, a n d contextualization, a n o t h e r step away from interpretation, has even less authority. Therefore, for t h e evangelical, t h e process of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n - c o n t e x t u a l i z a t i o n m u s t rem a i n tied t o t h e p r o p o s i t i o n a l c o n t e n t of G o d ' s revelation. A g a i n , it is t h e d y n a m i c o r f u n c t i o n a l a s p e c t o f b i b l i c a l a u t h o r i t y . I. H e r m e n e u t i c s : A S u m m a r y It is i m p o r t a n t to realize t h a t t h e evangelical p r i n c i p l e s elucid a t e d a b o v e are q u i t e d i s t i n c t f r o m t h e lines of a u t h o r i t y e l u c i d a t e d by H a r r i n g t o n , P r o k u r a t , a n d Burgess (in t h i s v o l u m e ) . The Reform a t i o n p r i n c i p l e of sola scriptura a n d t h e S c o t t i s h C o m m o n Sense Realism o f t h e last c e n t u r y h a v e p r o d u c e d an e x t r e m e l y eclectic s i t u a t i o n . There is n o t t h e t y p e o f u n i f o r m i t y s t e m m i n g from t h e C a t h o -

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

150

lie p r i n c i p l e o f t h e m a g i s t e r i u m . The sense of t r a d i t i o n is still t r u e in e v a n g e l i c a l i s m , b u t it is u n d e r t h e surface of c o n t e m p o r a r y e x p o s i t i o n a n d is r e s t r i c t e d t o d e n o m i n a t i o n a l d i s t i n c t i v e s . This f r e e d o m has forced m e to discuss c o n s t a n t l y the different c a m p s w i t h i n evangelicalism o n e a c h of t h e issues a b o v e . A b o v e all, t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f d i a l o g u e , or w h a t I m a y call " c o m m u n i t y exegesis," m u s t b e stressed. It is t h r o u g h t h e i n t e r a c t i o n of t h e t r a d i t i o n s t h a t c o n s e n s u s is r e a c h e d . This relates t o t h e issue o f s e p a r a t i o n d i s c u s s e d a b o v e a n d d e p e n d s largely u p o n t h e evangelical w i l l i n g n e s s to d i a l o g u e w i t h diverse t r a d i t i o n s in o r d e r to arrive at " t r u t h . " F o r i n s t a n c e , w h i l e t h e r e is d e b a t e r e g a r d i n g t h e e x t e n t o f i n e r r a n c y , t h e r e is c o n s e n s u s w i t h respect t o t h e p r o p o s i t i o n a l c o n t e n t of Scripture a n d the presence of b o t h static a n d d y n a m i c aspects of i n s p i r a t i o n . T h e Bible deals w i t h u n i v o c a l t r u t h s e x p r e s s e d in a n a logical l a n g u a g e , a n d so it is i m p o r t a n t t o d i s t i n g u i s h f o r m

from

c o n t e n t . T h e exact details a n d significance of specific s t a t e m e n t s m a y differ, b u t t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e Bible for m o d e r n life is u n i l a t e r a l l y a c c e p t e d . As is t h e case w i t h C a t h o l i c i s m , evangelicalism is tied m o r e t o t h e C h u r c h t h a n t o t h e a c a d e m y . T h e issues o f o u r d a y set t h e a g e n d a for m u c h o f s c h o l a r l y research, a n d it is s t r o n g l y a r g u e d t h a t t h e Bible m u s t relate t o m o d e r n life if it is t o b e relevant. T h e steps of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n as e x p l i c a t e d a b o v e are all necessary to t h i s task. II. CASE STUDY—EPHESIANS 2 : 1 - 1 0 W h i l e t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e a u t h o r s h i p o f E p h e s i a n s is n o t c r u c i a l t o t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h i s b o o k , m o s t evangelicals w o u l d affirm t h a t Paul has w r i t t e n i t .

JO

It is p a r t of t h e g r o u p called t h e p r i s o n or

c a p t i v i t y epistles ( E p h e s i a n s , P h i l i p p i a n s , C o l o s s i a n s , P h i l e m o n ) . M a n y believe t h a t it was a c i r c u l a r letter, s e n t t o Asia M i n o r , since en Ephesb is m i s s i n g in m a n y a n c i e n t m a n u s c r i p t s a n d it has t h e t o n e in p l a c e s o f a t r e a t i s e . T h e m a t i c a l l y it c e n t e r s u p o n a n e x a l t e d C h r i s t o l o g y , t h a t is, it p r e s e n t s t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h e exalted C h r i s t for t h e life of t h e C h u r c h , p a r t i c u l a r l y for its u n i t y a n d m i s s i o n . As s u c h , E p h e s i a n s focuses u p o n t w o aspects, t h e a b o v e a n d t h e below, t h e already a n d t h e n o t yet. In t h i s s e n s e , t h e crucial p h r a s e is "in t h e heavenlies," that realm where the exalted C h r i s t operates (1:20) a n d w h e r e w e p r e s e n t l y reign w i t h h i m ( 2 : 6 ) . A t t h e s a m e t i m e it is t h e "' See A. van R o o n , The Authenticity of Ephesians (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1974). For furrher dara, see A n d r e w Lincoln's review article in Westminster Theological Journal 4 0 ( 1 9 7 7 - 7 8 ) 1 7 2 - 7 5 .

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

151

s p h e r e o f c o s m i c warfare ( 6 : 1 2 ) , a n d G o d ' s activity in r e d e m p t i o n m a k e s t h e C h u r c h a living t e s t i m o n y t o t h e c o s m i c forces of G o d ' s w i s d o m (3:10). Ephesians thus amalgamates the two spheres. This t e n s i o n is seen in c h a p t e r s 1 to 3 , w h i c h regulate G o d ' s activity in t e r m s of his e l e c t i n g will ( 1 : 3 - 1 0 ) a n d t h e u n i o n of J e w a n d G e n t i l e in t h e C h u r c h ( 1 : 1 1 - 1 4 ) . E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 occurs at t h e j u n c t u r e b e t w e e n t h e p o w e r o f G o d o p e r a t i v e in t h e C h u r c h ( 1 : 1 9 b - 2 3 ) a n d the w o r k of corporate salvation, centering u p o n the unity bet w e e n J e w a n d G e n t i l e , in 2 : 1 1 - 2 2 . T h i s p a r a g r a p h describes t h e results of t h e d i v i n e salvific love u p o n t h o s e , J e w a n d G e n t i l e alike, w h o w e r e d e a d in sin. The N e w I n t e r n a t i o n a l Version o f t h e Bible, w h i c h was p r o d u c e d by an i n t e r n a t i o n a l g r o u p o f P r o t e s t a n t scholars " c o m m i t t e d t o t h e full a u t h o r i t y a n d c o m p l e t e t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s of t h e S c r i p t u r e s , " t r a n s lates E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 as follows: 'As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 'in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 'All of us also lived a m o n g them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. 'But because of his great love lor us, G o d , who is rich in mercy, 'made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. "And G o d raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 'in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. T o r it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of G o d — ''not by works, so that no one can boast. '"For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do. T h e evangelical w o u l d first a t t e m p t a d e t a i l e d g r a m m a t i c a l a n d s t r u c t u r a l analysis o f t h e p a r a g r a p h . In t h e original G r e e k , t h e r e are t w o s e n t e n c e s (vv. 1-7, 8 - 1 0 ) , w i t h t h e first s e n t e n c e n a t u r a l l y c o m p r i s i n g t w o sections ( w . 1-3, 4 - 7 ) . T h u s t h e r e is a t r i p a r t i t e s t r u c t u r e , m o v i n g from t h e sinfulness o f m a n k i n d (1-3) t o t h e g r a c i o u s p r o v i s i o n o f G o d in C h r i s t (4-7) a n d c o n c l u d i n g w i t h a s w e e p i n g s u m m a r y o f this G o d - g i v e n salvation ( 8 - 1 0 ) . T h e t o n e is clear: Sin is a result of i n f l u e n c e from secular influences as well as hostile p o w e r s

152

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

a n d results in r e b e l l i o n , sensuality, a n d s e l f - a g g r a n d i z e m e n t . The res u l t is t h a t all m a n k i n d is u n d e r t h e w r a t h of G o d . G r a m m a t i c a l l y it is i m p o r t a n t t o realize t h a t t h e m a i n verb for verse 1 d o e s n o t a p p e a r u n t i l verse 5. As a result Paul keeps t h e reader in a s t a t e of t e n s i o n as t o t h e effects o f "sin": C a n it b e o v e r c o m e or n o t ? The " t h e n " a n d t h e " n o w " t e n s i o n is clearly stressed,' for Paul c o n t i n u e s his a c c e n t u p o n t h e i n d i v i d u a l believer's privileges. The realized side o f salvation is c e n t r a l , a n d t h e basis is t h e sovereign act of G o d . It is n o t o n t h e basis o f p e r s o n a l m e r i t or " w o r k " b u t solely by d i v i n e " g r a c e . " The t e r m i n o l o g y utilized to describe this m e r c y s h o w s h o w i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e it is t o m a n . N o single t e r m can d e scribe it. The G o d w h o has p r o c u r e d salvation o n o u r b e h a l f is "rich in m e r c y " ("rich" is f o u n d six t i m e s in E p h e s i a n s , m o r e often t h a n in a n y o t h e r N e w T e s t a m e n t b o o k , a n d in E p h e s i a n s - C o l o s s i a n s it is always u s e d of G o d ) a n d is c h a r a c t e r i z e d by "great love," a "grace" (twelve t i m e s in Ephesians!) w h i c h is " i m m e a s u r a b l y r i c h , " a n d b y " k i n d n e s s . " A l l t h e s e r e f l e c t t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t hesed the " l o v i n g k i n d n e s s " w h i c h is t h e basic relational a t t r i b u t e o f G o d . 1

32

The sovereign c o n t r o l o f G o d is clearly seen in t h e c h o i c e o f l a n g u a g e . It is G o d w h o has " m a d e us alive"; w e were " d e a d in t r a n s gressions" (v. 5, r e s t a t i n g v. 1) a n d t h e r e f o r e c o u l d e x p e c t o n l y d i v i n e " w r a t h " (v. 3 ) . Salvation c o m e s via "grace" ( w . 5 b , 8a) a n d is t h e "gift of G o d " (v. 8c); it is " n o t via w o r k s , " w h i c h w o u l d lead t o " p r i d e " (v. 9 ) . It is clear t h a t G o d a l o n e d i s t r i b u t e s his salvific p o w e r ; r e d e m p t i o n c a n n o t be c l a i m e d o n t h e basis o f h u m a n m e r i t (for t h e J e w this specifically referred t o legalistic r i g h t e o u s n e s s ; see P h i l . 3 : 9 ) . In E p h e s i a n s 1 - 2 , w i t h a s t r o n g stress o n G o d ' s e l e c t i n g will as t h e basis of C h r i s t i a n blessings, Paul w a n t s t h e reader t o u n d e r s t a n d perfectly t h a t G o d , n o t m a n , is r e s p o n s i b l e for t h e basic privilege, salvation. It is clear in t h e c o n t e x t t h a t "saved" (v. 8) is e m p l o y e d m o r e n a r r o w l y of "justification" r a t h e r t h a n b r o a d l y of t h e C h r i s t i a n life. Yet t h e believer does have a p a r t in t h e p r o c e s s . The "faith" res p o n s e (v. 8) o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l entails a c o m p l e t e o p e n n e s s o r s u r r e n d e r o f t h e self t o G o d ' s salvific a c t i o n . It is clear h e r e t h a t even t h i s f a i t h - r e s p o n s e is n o t a w o r k b u t itself is a "gift o f G o d " (see P h i l . 1:29); it is " n o t of ourselves" b u t is p o s s i b l e o n l y b e c a u s e o f t h e e n " For derailed discussions of rhe r h e n - n o w schema, see A n d r e w Lincoln, Ephesians ( W B C 4 2 ; Dallas; W o r d , 1990) 8 7 - 8 8 . " For rhe corporare versus individual srress in Ephesians 1 - 2 , see C . L. M i r r o n , Ephesians (New C e n t u r y Bible; G r e e n w o o d , S.C.: Attic Press, 1976) 7 9 - 8 0 . W h i l e he overdoes rhe individualistic aspect somewhat, he is basically correcr that Paul here is looking at the individual within the C h u r c h .

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

153

a b l i n g p o w e r of G o d . " Ar t h e s a m e t i m e it is i m p o r t a n t t o realize t h a t Paul is n o t b y p a s s i n g h u m a n c h o i c e , i.e., free will. O f c o u r s e t h e r e are m a n y different f o r m u l a t i o n s o f this d e b a t e , from A u g u s t i n e versus Pelagius in t h e fifth c e n t u r y t o t h e C a l v i n i s t versus A r m i n i a n controversies o f o u r o w n t i m e . W h a t e v e r one's p e r s p e c t i v e ( a n d I confess t h a t I a m nearer t o A r m i n i a n i s m o n this issue), it is crucial h e r e t o preserve b o t h s o v e r e i g n t y a n d free will in t h e f o r m u l a . M o r e o v e r , I w o u l d stress t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f c o m m u n i t y exegesis h e r e . The i n t e r p r e t e r m u s t be in c o n s t a n t d i a l o g u e w i t h t h e past c o m m u n i t y of faith (the h i s t o r y of d o g m a ) a n d t h e c u r r e n t c o m m u n i t y of faith ( r e c e n t c o m m e n t a r i e s , etc.) o n this p o i n t as well as o t h e r s . The p r e s e n t a n d future results o f this c o n g r u e n c e b e t w e e n d i v i n e grace a n d h u m a n faith in salvation are also h i g h l i g h t e d in 2 : 1 10. These are f o u n d in verses 5 - 7 , 10. First, t h e believer has b e e n " m a d e alive" o r "raised u p " (from spiritual d e a t h — v . 5a). F o r Paul t h e b i r t h of faith is t h e h o u r of r e s u r r e c t i o n (see R o m . 6 : 8 ; G a l . 2 : 1 6 , 2 0 ; C o l . 2 : 1 2 ; 3:1) a n d leads t o " n e w n e s s o f life" ( R o m . 6:6; 2 C o r . 5 : 1 7 - 2 0 ; E p h . 4 : 2 2 - 2 4 ; C o l . 3 : 8 - 1 0 ) . S e c o n d , G o d has " m a d e ( t h e believer) sit in t h e heavenlies w i t h C h r i s t , " a r e m a r k a b l e passage in t h a t it a d d s to Jesus' e x a l t a t i o n in 1:20 t h e C h r i s t i a n ' s e x a l t a t i o n here. The believer shares n o t o n l y C h r i s t ' s r e s u r r e c t i o n b u t also his exaltat i o n . Yet, as L i n c o l n says, '"The p h r a s e . . . at his r i g h t h a n d ' in 1:20 is reserved for C h r i s t a n d n o t r e p e a t e d in t h e case o f believers in 2 : 6 . A l t h o u g h believers share in Christ's e x a l t a t i o n , his p o s i t i o n in t h e h e a v e n l y realm a n d his r e l a t i o n s h i p t o G o d are u n i q u e . " It is i m p o r t a n t t o n o t e t h e p a s t tense, w h i c h indicates t h a t this eschatological e x a l t a t i o n is n o t a future p r o m i s e b u t a p r e s e n t reality, b a s e d u n d o u b t e d l y o n t h e P a u l i n e m e t a p h o r of a d o p t i o n . D u e to G o d ' s gracious i n c l u s i o n o f us in his family, w e are " j o i n t - h e i r s " ( R o m . 8 : 1 5 17) a n d t h u s share Jesus' e x a l t e d s t a t u s . 3 1

'The final p r e s e n t blessing is f o u n d in verse 10, w h i c h describes o u r " c r e a t i o n " as G o d ' s " w o r k m a n s h i p " in o r d e r t h a t w e m i g h t p e r f o r m " g o o d w o r k s . " This is i m p o r t a n t as a clarification of t h e c o m m o n belief t h a t Paul a n d J a m e s are at o d d s o n faith a n d w o r k s . A s e m a n t i c m a p w o r k o f their use o f t e r m s i n d i c a t e s t h e i r basic agreem e n t : A professed ( b u t false) faith (James) w h i c h seeks w o r k s - r i g h t e o u s n e s s (Paul) is useless (Paul a n d J a m e s ) ; o n l y a t r u e faith (Paul)

" See the fine discussion of this p o i n t in M a r k n s Barth, Ephesians (Anchor Bible; G a r d e n City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1974) 2 2 4 - 2 5 . H e p o i n t s to the conjunction here of God's (and Christ's) faithfulness with o u r faith. ' Lincoln, Ephesians, 107. 4

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

154

w h i c h leads t o g o o d w o r k s (James a n d Paul h e r e in 2 : 1 0 ) is valid. The c o n c e p t of faith p u t t o w o r k in acts o f c h a r i t y is c e n t r a l in t h e p a s t o r a l epistles, w h e r e " g o o d w o r k s " a p p e a r s e i g h t t i m e s . The f u t u r e a s p e c t is f o u n d in verse 7 a n d is i m p o r t a n t for t h e a l r e a d y / n o t yet t e n s i o n in E p h e s i a n s (see a b o v e ) . W h i l e t h e r e is d e b a t e as t o w h e t h e r t h e " c o m i n g ages" m e a n s future g e n e r a t i o n s o f C h r i s t i a n s or t h e e s c h a t o n , it is likely t h a t n o e i t h e r - o r r e s p o n s e is possible. B o t h are p r o b a b l y in m i n d . The " i m m e a s u r a b l e riches" m a n i fested in his " k i n d n e s s t o w a r d u s " will b e e x p e r i e n c e d b y all f u t u r e ages o f t h e C h u r c h a n d will b e c o n s u m m a t e d in t h e s e c o n d c o m i n g of C h r i s t . T h e c o n t e x t u a l i z a t i o n (or "transfer v a l u e , " t o use H a r r i n g t o n ' s p h r a s e ) of t h i s passage is very d i r e c t for t h e evangelical. M e d i t a t i o n u p o n one's p a s t s t a t e in sin is integral t o t h e m e a n i n g o f s a l v a t i o n . T h e t h r e e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of verses 2 - 3 ( r e b e l l i o n , s e n s u a l i t y , selfcenteredness) describe t h e c o m m o n d i l e m m a o f m a n , as d e m o n s t r a t e d in r e c e n t sociological a n d p s y c h o l o g i c a l profiles o f m e n a n d w o m e n in this m o d e r n p o s t i n d u s t r i a l society. This, w e w o u l d a r g u e , is t r u e of b o t h secular m a n a n d t h o s e w h o n o w b e l o n g t o t h e C h u r c h . " The d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n c o n v e r s i o n l a n g u a g e a n d m a i n t e n a n c e l a n g u a g e p o s e d b y H a r r i n g t o n m a k e s a g r e a t deal o f sense h e r e . Yet at t h e s a m e t i m e I d o u b t w h e t h e r Paul w o u l d s t r o n g l y e m p h a s i z e t h e difference. T h e a o r i s t (past) tenses of t h e verbs ( " m a d e alive," "raised u p , " " m a d e to sit") m u s t b e seen in t h e l i g h t o f t h e p e r f e c t p e r i p h r a s tic " h a v e b e e n saved," w h i c h stresses t h e p r e s e n t c o n d i t i o n . Paul actually is stressing t h e p r e s e n t C h r i s t i a n s i t u a t i o n of r e s u r r e c t i o n life w h i c h has r e s u l t e d from t h e p a s t c o n v e r s i o n . O n c e a g a i n , it is n o t a n e i t h e r - o r . For this reason, t h e d y n a m i c p o w e r , t h e e x a l t e d s t a t u s , a n d t h e c o n c o m i t a n t d e m a n d for g o o d w o r k s are e m i n e n t l y a p p l i c a b l e . Finally, t h e evangelical e n d o r s e s t h e necessity o f c o n v e r s i o n l a n g u a g e for o u r day. T h e d e p r a v i t y o f m a n , t h e salvific sacrifice of C h r i s t , a n d t h e i n d i s p e n s a b i l i t y of f a i t h - d e c i s i o n are a t t h e h e a r t o f t h e revivalist spirit so e n d e m i c to t h e m o v e m e n t . III. SUMMARY

Evangelicals h a v e always m a d e a " h i g h " v i e w o f biblical a u t h o r ity a b a s i c t e n e t o f t h e i r faith. In spite of t h e w i d e s p r e a d d e b a t e t o d a y

" Here the application d e p e n d s u p o n one's view of the s a c r a m e n t of b a p t i s m . M o s t evangelicals, even from a srrongly sacramental posirion, would argue rhar a later fairh-discussion parallel to rhat in this passage must occur.

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

155

over t h e exact f o r m u l a t i o n o f s u c h issues as " i n e r r a n c y , " evangelicals c o n s i s t e n t l y stress t h a t S c r i p t u r e a l o n e m u s t d i c t a t e o u r faith. W h i l e t h e r e is c o g n i z a n c e of t h e c o m p l e x n a t u r e o f t h e i n t e r p r e t i v e task a n d t h e factor o f p r e u n d e r s t a n d i n g as s h a p i n g t h a t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e r e is u n a n i m i t y t h a t t h e i n t e n t i o n o f t h e a u t h o r is b o t h a possible goal a n d a necessary e l e m e n t in d e t e r m i n i n g t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e Bible in o u r day. At t h e s a m e t i m e , t h e relevant significance of S c r i p t u r e is also stressed, a n d t h e i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e b e t w e e n exegesis, biblical t h e ology, historical theology, s y s t e m a t i c theology, a n d c o n t e x t u a l i z a t i o n forms t h e c o r e o f evangelical h e r m e n e u t i c s . The g r a m m a t i c a l - h i s t o r i c a l m e t h o d p r e d o m i n a t e s . The tools of textual a n d source criticism, syntactical (grammar) a n d s e m a n t i c ( w o r d ) study, a n d f o r m , r e d a c t i o n , a n d n a r r a t i v e criticisms are all s u b o r d i n a t e to t h e task of e l u c i d a t i n g t h e text. After several d e c a d e s of i s o l a t i o n , t h e r e is a g r o w i n g desire o n c e again to e n g a g e in d i a l o g u e w i t h o t h e r t r a d i t i o n s , a n d i n d e e d this b o o k is an i m p o r t a n t p a r t o f t h a t m o v e m e n t . A n "evangelical" r e a d i n g o f E p h . 2 : 1 - 1 0 stresses t h e P a u l i n e o r i g i n o f t h e t e a c h i n g a n d its c o n n e c t i o n w i t h R o m a n s 1-8 a n d related texts. The progress of t h e passage fits t h e d i l e m m a o f m o d e r n h u m a n i t y , l o c k e d in sin a n d n e e d i n g t o a p p l y t h e salvific grace o f G o d a n d t h e sacrifice of C h r i s t in a c o n v e r s i o n e x p e r i e n c e . D i v i n e grace a n d h u m a n faith m e e t in t h e s u p r e m e gift of f a i t h - d e c i s i o n . This u n l o c k s G o d ' s w o r k m a n s h i p i n h e r e n t in m a n / w o m a n , leading to the "good works" which characterize the presence of G o d in t h e c o m m u n i t y .

EVANGELICAL INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

156

R E C O M M E N D E D READINGS Black, D a v i d A l a n a n d D a v i d S. D o c k e r y , cds. New Testament Criticism and Interpretation. G r a n d Rapids: Zondcrvan, 1991. An excellent series of articles o n critical m e t h o d s such as text a n d source criticism a n d schools such as form, redaction, a n d literary criticism. C a r s o n , D . A. a n d J o h n W o o d b r i d g e , eds. Scripture and 'Truth. G r a n d Rapids: Z o n d c r v a n , 1 9 8 3 . A series of essays centering u p o n t h e i m p o r t a n c e of inerrancy a n d a propositional a p p r o a c h to Scripture. . Hermeneutics, Authority, and Canon. Grand Rapids: Z o n d c r v a n , 1 9 8 6 . A s e c o n d series of articles s i m i l a r t o t h e 1 9 8 3 volume. Fee, G o r d o n a n d D o u g l a s S t u a r t . How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth. P h i l a d e l p h i a : W e s t m i n s t e r , 1 9 8 2 . A n excellent general disc u s s i o n o n t h e p r o p e r a p p r o a c h t o specfic g e n r e s , e.g., p o e t r y , w i s d o m , gospels, Acts. Hatch, Nathan O. Essays in Cultural 1 9 8 2 . A series o f various traditions

a n d M a r k A. N o l l , eds. 'The Bible in America: History. N e w York: O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, essays t r a c i n g t h e progress of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n in in A m e r i c a n C h r i s t i a n i t y .

Klein, William, Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Dallas: W o r d , 1993. A n excellent, up-to-date i n t r o d u c t i o n to h e r m e n e u t i c s from an evangelical perspective. M a r s d e n , G e o r g e B . Fundamentalism and American Culture: The Shaping of'Twentieth Century Evangelicalism 1870-1925. New York: O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1 9 8 0 . A m a j o r w o r k o n t h e factors w h i c h led t o t h e f u n d a m e n t a l i s t / e v a n g e l i c a l m o v e m e n t . M a r s h a l l , I . H o w a r d , ed. New Testament Interpretation: Essays on Principles and Methods. G r a n d R a p i d s : E e r d m a n s , 1 9 7 7 . Essays t r a c i n g various schools a n d issues in t h e field of h e r m e n e u t i c s , d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h e m a n y differences in t h e a p p r o a c h e s o f evangelicals as t h e y i n t e r a c t w i t h diverse critical issues. N i c o l e , R o g e r R. a n d J. R a m s e y M i c h a e l s , eds. Inerrancy and Common Sense. G r a n d R a p i d s : Baker, 1 9 8 0 . Essays t r a c i n g v a r i o u s as-

G R A N T R. O S B O R N E

157

p e c t s , b o t h a c a d e m i c a n d practical, o n t h e issue o f biblical a u t h o r ity. M o r e t h a n o t h e r w o r k s o n inerrancy, this d e m o n s t r a t e s t h e v a r i o u s evangelical a p p r o a c h e s . O s b o r n e , G r a n t R. The Hermeneutical Spial: A Comprehensive Introduction of Biblical Interpretation. D o w n e r ' s G r o v e , 111.: I n t e r V a r s i t y Press, 1 9 9 1 . A n a t t e m p t t o i n t e g r a t e every a s p e c t (exegesis, biblical a n d systematic theology, c o n t e x t u a l i z a t i o n ) o f h e r m e neutical inquiry into a comprehensive whole. R o g e r s , J a c k a n d D o n a l d M c K i m . Authority and Interpretation of the Bible: An Historical Approach. N e w York: H a r p e r a n d Row, 1 9 7 9 . A n a t t e m p t t o s h o w t h a t a m o r e d y n a m i c m o d e l o f biblical a u t h o r i t y existed from t h e p a t r i s t i c p e r i o d u n t i l t h e P r i n c e t o n i a n s o f t h e last c e n t u r y . Silva, M o i s e s . Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics. G r a n d R a p i d s : Z o n d e r v a n , 1 9 8 3 . N o t o n l y a s t u d y of t h e m e t h o d s of lexical s t u d y b u t also an i l l u s t r a t i o n o f t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s of a p r o p o s i t i o n a l a p p r o a c h t o S c r i p t u r e . Tate, W. R. Biblical Interpretation. Peabody, Mass.: H e n d r i c k s o n , 1 9 9 1 . Provides g o o d discussion of c u l t u r a l issues in h e r m e n e u t i c s like a u t h o r a n d reader or t h e i n t e r p r e t i v e s c h o o l s . T h i s e l t o n , A n t h o n y C . The Two Horizons: New Testament Hermeneutics and Philosophical Description. G r a n d Rapids: Eerdmans, 1 9 8 0 . A m a j o r d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e h e r m e n e u t i c a l p r o b l e m of t h e p a s t ( w h a t it m e a n t ) a n d p r e s e n t ( w h a t it m e a n s ) p r o b l e m in interp r e t a t i o n theory, u s i n g t h e a p p r o a c h e s of H e i d e g g e r , B u l t m a n n , a n d G a d a m e r as t h e c o n t r o l . . New Horizons in Hermeneutics: The Theory and Practice of'Transforming Biblical Reading. G r a n d R a p i d s : Z o n d e r v a n , 1 9 9 2 . A n u n b e l i e v a b l y c o m p r e h e n s i v e i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h every m o d e r n s c h o o l o f h e r m e n e u t i c a l t h o u g h t . Difficult, yet m u s t r e a d i n g for the serious student. W o o d b r i d g e , J o h n D . Biblical Authority: A Critique of the Rogers/ McKim Proposal. G r a n d R a p i d s : Z o n d e r v a n , 1 9 8 2 . A r g u e s c o n tra R o g e r s a n d M c K i m (above) t h a t t h e C h u r c h d o w n t h r o u g h t h e ages h e l d a v i e w o f p r o p o s i t i o n a l a u t h o r i t y or total infallibility.

REFORMED INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE by

MARION L. SOARDS

A

t t h e h e a r t of C h r i s t i a n faith a c c o r d i n g t o t h e R e f o r m e d Trad i t i o n ' is t h e word of G o d , w h i c h is u n d e r s t o o d to be G o d ' s .self-revelation to h u m a n k i n d t h r o u g h o u t the centuries of creation's existence. " R e f o r m e d " C h r i s t i a n s believe G o d ' s Word incarnate is Jesus C h r i s t . M o r e o v e r , t h e y regard t h e Bible as G o d ' s written word, a n d t h e y view C h r i s t i a n p r e a c h i n g as G o d ' s word proclaimed. In t h e o l o g i c a l d i s c u s s i o n s , R e f o r m e d t h e o l o g i a n s often use a capital " W " in reference t o t h e W o r d i n c a r n a t e in d i s t i n c t i o n from t h e use of a lowercase " w " for references t o t h e word of G o d in its w r i t t e n a n d p r e a c h e d f o r m s . The a u t h o r i t y of G o d ' s W o r d , i n c a r n a t e a n d living, is h e l d t o be t h e f o u n d a t i o n of t h e a u t h o r i t y o f t h e Bible. I n d e e d , t h e a u t h o r i t y o f t h e Bible is u n d e r s t o o d to reside in t h e s u b ject t o w h i c h it w i t n e s s e s , n o t in t h e b o o k itself. N e v e r t h e l e s s , b e cause o f t h e i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e W o r d i n c a r n a t e , t h e w o r d p r o c l a i m e d , a n d t h e w o r d as w r i t t e n , t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n h o l d s a h i g h view o f s c r i p t u r e . Historically, o r d a i n e d m i n i s t e r s o f t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n are e x p e c t e d t o be well-versed, h i g h l y literate, critical i n t e r p r e t e r s of t h e B i b l e . T h u s , in t h e d e n o m i n a t i o n s o f t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n , c l e r g y p e r s o n s are r e q u i r e d t o s t u d y a n d d e m o n s t r a t e proficiency in t h e use of o r i g i n a l biblical l a n g u a g e s , t h e c o n t e n t s of b o t h t h e O l d a n d N e w ' T e s t a m e n t s , a n d t h e necessary tools o f scholarly i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e Bible. In t h e c o u r s e o f r e q u i r e d s e m i n a r y e d u c a t i o n t h a t is p r e r e q u i s i t e for o r d i n a t i o n , t h e r e are m a n d a t o r y classes a n d s t u d ies in H e b r e w , G r e e k , i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e O l d a n d N e w 'Testaments, a n d original l a n g u a g e exegesis o f t h e biblical texts. F u r t h e r m o r e , c a n d i d a t e s for o r d i n a t i o n are r e q u i r e d t o pass e x a m i n a t i o n s in "Bible

:

Hisrorically, rhe "Reformed" Tradirion refers to Calvinisr bodies as distinguished from rhe Lutherans.

REFORMED INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

160

c o n t e n t " a n d exegesis of t h e biblical texts ( u s i n g t h e o r i g i n a l l a n g u a g e s ) . The i m p o r t a n c e o f a n e d u c a t e d clergy in t h e R e f o r m e d trad i t i o n is n o t t o create a special class o f Bible readers a n d i n t e r p r e t e r s in t h e c h u r c h , b u t t o i n s u r e a n d facilitate t h e e d u c a t i o n o f all believers so t h a t all m e m b e r s o f t h e c h u r c h are skilled s t u d e n t s of s c r i p t u r e . I. T H K PLACE OF SCRIP TURF IN THE REFORMED TRADITION

The a u t h o r i t y o f t h e Bible is a n i r r e l i n q u i s h a b l e a s s u m p t i o n of t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n . Yet, t h e a u t h o r i t y o f t h e Bible is a t h e o l o g i cal c l a i m t h a t c a n n o t b e logically d e m o n s t r a t e d . R a t h e r , t h i s c o n t e n t i o n rests in t h e c o n v i c t i o n t h a t G o d is u n i q u e l y related b o t h t o t h e o r i g i n s o f t h e s c r i p t u r e s in t h e p a s t a n d t o t h e use of t h e s c r i p t u r e s n o w . T h e Bible h a s a u t h o r i t y b e c a u s e t h e H o l y S p i r i t takes h u m a n w i t n e s s e s a n d t h r o u g h t h e i r w i t n e s s b r i n g s a b o u t faith a n d o b e d i e n c e t o Jesus C h r i s t . Persons in t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n r e c o g n i z e t h e a u t h o r i t y o f t h e Bible "in d e p e n d e n c e o n t h e i l l u m i n a t i o n o f t h e Holy Spirit."

2

O n e c a n a n d m u s t d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n t h e Bible as t h e w o r d o f G o d a n d Jesus C h r i s t as G o d ' s W o r d , b e t w e e n G o d in t h e m i d s t of h u m a n i t y a n d a b o o k a b o u t G o d ' s will a n d w o r k . Yet, o n e s h o u l d see t h a t t h e r e is a s o l i d a r i t y b e t w e e n Jesus C h r i s t a n d t h e Bible; for t h e Reformed tradition contends that one knows the incarnate and pers o n a l W o r d o f G o d o n l y as o n e e n c o u n t e r s h i m in a n d t h r o u g h t h e w r i t t e n w o r d of G o d . T h u s , t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n has a n d m a i n tains a h i g h view o f s c r i p t u r e , so t h a t in t h e official d o c u m e n t s o f t h e P r e s b y t e r i a n C h u r c h ( U . S . A . ) o n e reads in p o r t i o n o f t h e church's c o n s t i t u t i o n e n t i t l e d 'The Book

of

Confessions:

As we believe and confess the Scriptures of G o d sufficient to instruct and make perfect the m a n of G o d , so d o we affirm and avow their authority to be from God, and not to depend on m e n or angels. W e affirm, therefore, that those who say the Scriptures have no other authority save that which they have received from the [Church] are blasphemous against God a n d injurious to the true [Church], which always hears and obeys the voice of her own Spouse and Pastor, but takes not u p o n her to be mistress over the same ("The Scots Confession": 3.19).

' The Constitution of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.): Confessions. " T h e Confession of 1 9 6 7 ' : 9.30.

Part I: The Book of

MARION L . SOARDS

161

CAN'ONK:AI. SCRIPTURE. We believe and confess the canonical Scriptures of the holy prophets and apostles of both Testaments to be the true Word of God, and to have sufficient authority of themselves, not of men. For God himself spoke to the fathers, prophets, apostles, and still speaks to us through the Holy Scriptures. And in this Holy Scripture, the universal Church of Christ has the most complete exposition of all that pertains to a saving faith, and also to the framing of a life acceptable to God; a n d in this respect it is expressly c o m m a n d e d by G o d that nothing be either added to or taken from the same. SCRIPTURE T E A C H E S FULLY A n . G O D L I N E S S . W e judge, therefore,

that from these Scriptures are to be derived true wisdom and godliness, the reformation and government of the churches; as also instruction in all duties of piety; and, to be short, the confirmation of doctrines, and the rejection of all errors, moreover, all exhortations according to that word of the apostle, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof," etc. (2 Tim. 3:16-17) ("The Second Helvetic Confession": 5.001-5.003a). Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and N e w Testaments . . . . All which are given by inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life ("The Westminster Confession of Faith": 6.002). T h e whole counsel of G o d , concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man's salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which n o t h i n g at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations or the Spirit, or traditions of men. Nevertheless we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of G o d to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word; a n d that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and the government of the C h u r c h , c o m m o n to h u m a n actions a n d societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed ("The Westminster Confession of Faith": 6.006). T h e Supreme Judge, by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentences we are to rest, can be n o other but t h e Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture ("The Westminster Confession of Faith": 6.010).

REFORMED INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE

162

Q . 3. W h a t d o the Scriptures principally teach? A.The scriptures principally teach what man is to believe concerning G o d , and what duty God requires of man ("The Shorter Catechism": 7.003). Q . 3. W h a t is the Word of God? A . T h e holy Scriptures of the Old and N e w Testaments are the Word of God, the only rule of faith and obedience. Q . 4 . H o w doth it appear that the Scriptures are the W o r d of God? A . T h e Scriptures manifest themselves to be the W o r d of G o d , by their majesty and purity; by the consent of all the parts, and the scope of the whole, which is to give all glory to G o d ; by their light and power to convince and convert sinners, to comfort and build up believers u n t o salvation. But the Spirit of God, bearing witness by and with the Scriptures in the heart of man, is alone able fully to persuade it that they are the very word of God. Q . 5. W h a t d o the Scriptures principally teach? A . T h e Scriptures principally teach, what man is to believe concerning God, and what duty God requires of m a n ("The Larger Catechism": 7.113-7.115). T h e one sufficient revelation of G o d is Jesus Christ, the Word of G o d incarnate, to w h o m the Holy Spirit bears unique and authoritative witness through the Holy Scriptures, which are received a n d obeyed as the word of G o d written. T h e Scriptures are not a witness a m o n g others, but the witness without parallel. T h e church has received the books of the O l d and N e w Testaments as prophetic and apostolic testimony in which it hears the word of G o d and by which its faith and obedience are nourished and regulated ("The Confession of 1967": 9.27). We trust in God the Holy Spirit . . . the same Spirit w h o inspired the prophets and apostles [andl rules our faith and life in Christ through Scripture . . . ("A Brief Statement of Faith": 10.4). II. A DISTURBING G L I T C H IN THE T R A D I T I O N

D e s p i t e t h e regular avowal of p r i m a r y c o n c e r n w i t h t h e Bible, t h e r e is a b u n d a n t e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e s c r i p t u r e s are s o m e w h a t t a k e n for g r a n t e d a n d n o t r e g u l a r l y s t u d i e d w i t h c a r e . C o n s i d e r

this

evidence: A. R e c e n t l y a biblical s c h o l a r w a s a s k e d to s p e a k at a m a j o r Bible c o n f e r e n c e in t h e e a s t e r n U n i t e d States. T h e s e t t i n g w a s a n e v e n i n g e v e n t in a large p a v i l i o n w h e r e several h u n d r e d p e o p l e g a t h e r e d for

JMARION L . SOARDS

163

Bible s t u d y in t h e c o n t e x t o f a w o r s h i p service. A b o u t five m i n u t e s before t h e session was t o b e g i n several of t h e w o r s h i p leaders were s c u r r y i n g a m o n g t h e p e o p l e s p e a k i n g w i t h o n e g r o u p after a n o t h e r . S h o r t l y thereafter t h e m a i n liturgist sheepishly a p p r o a c h e d t h e speaker a n d said, "It's t i m e t o s t a r t b u t w e can't find a Bible t o r e a d t h e s c r i p t u r e lesson. D o y o u have o n e w e c o u l d use?" The s p e a k e r h a d o n l y a G r e e k N e w T e s t a m e n t , w h i c h p r o v e d u n h e l p f u l for t h e liturgist. S o , the assembly spent twenty m i n u t e s singing while s o m e o n e drove to t h e nearest c h u r c h t o b r i n g b a c k a c o p y o f an English Bible. It m a y have b e e n a sheer a n o m a l y , b u t at least o n c e p e o p l e d i d n ' t even b o t h e r t o b r i n g t h e i r Bibles t o a Bible c o n f e r e n c e . B. A t t h e level o f t h e m o s t basic i n f o r m a t i o n m e m b e r s of t h e c h u r c h d e m o n s t r a t e a lack of k n o w l e d g e of t h e m o s t e l e m e n t a r y m a t ters o f c o n t e n t o f t h e Bible: 1. A large S u n d a y S c h o o l class o f h i g h s c h o o l s t u d e n t s was asked, " H o w m a n y disciples d i d Jesus have?" O n l y o n e b o y k n e w t h a t t h e r e were twelve disciples; b u t w h e n asked to n a m e t h e m he c o u l d o n l y c o m e u p with "Peter a n d Paul." Paul was in fact n o t o n e of t h e twelve disciples. 2 . Even s e m i n a r i a n s a n d p a s t o r s s o m e t i m e s c o m e u p s h o r t o n p r i m a r y facts. A n u n a n n o u n c e d Bible c o n t e n t e x a m i n a t i o n was given t o an a s s e m b l y o f o r d a i n e d clergy a n d s e m i n a r y s t u d e n t s at a relig i o u s c o n f e r e n c e a n d o n l y a small m i n o r i t y o f t h e p e r s o n s tested c o u l d a n s w e r t h e following four q u e s t i o n s accurately: (a) H o w m a n y b o o k s are in t h e Bible? There are sixty-six. (b) H o w m a n y b o o k s are in t h e N e w Testament? There are t w e n t y seven. (c) W h i c h N e w ' T e s t a m e n t a u t h o r w r o t e t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e m a terials in t h e N e w 'Testament? L u k e , t h e a u t h o r o f L u k e a n d Acts. Even t h e t h i r t e e n letters a t t r i b u t e d t o Paul in t h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t a m o u n t t o less m a t e r i a l t h a n t h a t f o u n d in L u k e a n d Acts. (d) In w h i c h t e s t a m e n t is t h e b o o k of " H e z e k i a h " ? N e i t h e r . The p e r s o n , H e z e k i a h , is in t h e O l d Testament, b u t t h e r e is n o b o o k called by t h a t n a m e . 'This level of familiarity w i t h scripture m a y seem t o be q u i t e trivial, a n d w h i l e m a s t e r i n g "Bible facts" d o e s n o t g u a r a n t e e a c o n c e r n w i t h t h e Bible as a u t h o r i t a t i v e t e s t i m o n y t o G o d ' s w o r d a n d w o r k for s a l v a t i o n , n o r m a l l y a h i g h view o f t h e Bible s h o u l d result in serious s t u d y of s c r i p t u r a l w r i t i n g s . Yet, t h e e v i d e n c e seems t o i n d i c a t e , d e spite t h e s t a t e d , official p o s i t i o n of t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n , t h a t t h e r e is a lack of c o n c e r n w i t h t h e Bible or t h a t t h e Bible is n o t b e i n g s t u d i e d seriously.

REFORMED INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE

164

I I I . T H E HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE OI SCRIPTURE

A p r a g m a t i c a r g u m e n t o n l y illustrates a n d d o e s n o t establish t h e a u t h o r i t y o f s c r i p t u r e , b u t t h e fact is t h a t t i m e a n d a g a i n , C h r i s t i a n s — t h r o u g h involvement with the Bible—have found themselves j u d g e d , called, a n d c o m p e l l e d t o a n essentially C h r i s t i a n faith a n d life. In t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n o n e n e e d s o n l y to recall t h e i m p o r t a n c e a n d t h e effect of t h e Bible o n t h e leaders o f t h e R e f o r m a t i o n — M a r t i n L u t h e r , J o h n C a l v i n , a n d o t h e r s — t o u n d e r s c o r e t h e crucial role t h a t t h e Bible has p l a y e d in t h e life of t h e c h u r c h . T h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n h o l d s t h a t t h e very f o r m a t i o n a n d t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of life o c c u r s t h r o u g h e n g a g e m e n t w i t h t h e s c r i p t u r e s b e c a u s e t h e Bible is... Vital -

The s c r i p t u r e s s t a n d in p r o x i m i t y t o t h e o r i g i n a l events

t h a t e v e n t u a t e d in t h e c h u r c h . T h e y testify t o G o d ' s w o r k a m o n g Israel, a n d especially t o t h e life, d e a t h , r e s u r r e c t i o n , a n d e x a l t a t i o n of Jesus C h r i s t . The Bible bears witness t o G o d ' s formative activity a m i d s t t h e p e o p l e of Israel a n d t h e earliest C h r i s t i a n s . D i s c e r n i n g — In its a r t i c u l a t i o n o f Israel's a n d early C h r i s t i a n i t y ' s beliefs a n d p r a c t i c e s , t h e Bible testifies t o t h e p r o f u n d i t y of J e w i s h a n d C h r i s t i a n p e r c e p t i o n a n d reflection o n G o d ' s self-revelation. T r u s t w o r t h y - T h e s c r i p t u r e s w e r e w r i t t e n as i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t e x p e r i e n c e s , beliefs, a n d p r a c t i c e s in o r d e r to p r o v i d e g u i d a n c e ; a n d s u b s e q u e n t g e n e r a t i o n s o f believers h a v e p r o v e n t h e Bible's usefulness over a n d over. N o r m a t i v e — A b o v e all, t h e s c r i p t u r e s p r o v i d e believers w i t h a n o r m or a m e a n s to j u d g e b e t w e e n t h e Spirits. The Bible g u i d e s b e lievers as t h e y seek faithfully t o d e c i d e a m o n g t h e c o m p e t i t i v e claims t h a t arise in t h e life of t h e c h u r c h . It is " t h e w i t n e s s w i t h o u t parallel" ("The Confession of 1967": 9.27). I V . T H E NECESSITY OF INTERPRETATION

After r e c o g n i z i n g t h e c e n t r a l place of t h e Bible in t h e life of t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n , o n e m u s t also r e c o g n i z e t h a t u s i n g t h e Bible as t h e authoritative source for t h e belief a n d practice of t h e c h u r c h is n o t w i t h o u t its difficulties. T h e Bible was w r i t t e n l o n g ago a n d far away: A . in a different t i m e - from m o r e t h a n a t h o u s a n d years before C h r i s t t o several d e c a d e s after his d e a t h ; B . in a different place - t h e M e d i t e r r a n e a n a n d t h e N e a r East; C . in a different culture or different cultures - S e m i t i c a n d G r e c o Roman;

MARION L . SOARDS

165

D . in different languages — Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, with reference to a n d e v i d e n c e o f t h e i n f l u e n c e o f L a t i n . O n e c a n n o t i g n o r e these a n d m a n y o t h e r factors as o n e t u r n s t o r e a d t h e Bible. Frankly, t h e s e differences f o r m barriers, so t h a t o n e n e e d s h e l p in r e a d i n g w i t h real u n d e r s t a n d i n g , b e c a u s e all r e a d i n g of t h e Bible requires i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e texts. In fact, all reading of the Bible is interpretation. In t h e first place, p e o p l e frequently m a k e a u t o m a t i c distinctions as t h e y read t h e B i b l e — for e x a m p l e , t h e y d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n " p o e t i c " a n d n o n - p o e t i c elem e n t s in t h e biblical texts. T h u s , w h e n t h e Elder addresses his a u d i e n c e in 1 J o h n as "little c h i l d r e n " readers d o n o t c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e Elder's r e m a r k s w e r e a i m e d a t a n a s s e m b l y of infants a n d y o u t h s . Yet, w h e n t h e G o s p e l s tell t h e r e a d e r t h a t Jesus w e n t t o C a p e r n a u m — unless t h e y are a r d e n t d e v o t e e s o f w i l d a l l e g o r i z a t i o n — t h e readers c o n c l u d e t h a t Jesus w e n t t o a p a r t i c u l a r g e o g r a p h i c a l l o c a t i o n . M o r e over, w h e n t h e G e n e s i s s t o r y tells readers t h a t "Fisau is a h a i r y m a n , " t h e y d o n o t e x p e c t t o g a i n m u c h s p i r i t u a l edification from t h e inform a t i o n . A l t h o u g h , w h e n Paul discusses "the flesh" in G a l a t i a n s , readers l o o k for s p i r i t u a l insights r a t h e r t h a n a b i o l o g y lesson. In t u r n , readers a u t o m a t i c a l l y d o i n t e r p r e t a t i o n b a s e d o n these distinctions: " T h e L o r d is m y s h e p h e r d " is n o t i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t d i v i n e a n i m a l h u s b a n d r y , n o r is it a c l a i m b y t h e p s a l m i s t t o be a s h e e p . T h e Psalm is a p r o f o u n d s t a t e m e n t o f faith a b o u t G o d ' s care for h u m a n ity a n d a b o u t t h e s e c u r i t y of t h e believer, o r as C a l v i n w o u l d p u t it, a b o u t "sovereignty" a n d "perseverance o f t h e s a i n t s . " " B e h o l d t h e L a m b o f G o d " is n o t J o h n t h e Baptist's m i s t a k i n g Jesus for a s h e e p . It is a christological confession t h a t recognizes "Jesus is t h e paschal L a m b o f t h e C h r i s t i a n Passover w h o b y his d e a t h (at t h e very m o m e n t t h e paschal l a m b s w e r e b e i n g killed in t h e T e m p l e ) delivered t h e w o r l d from sin, as t h e original paschal Iamb's b l o o d delivered t h e Israelites from t h e d e s t r o y i n g a n g e l . " ' In i n s t a n c e s s u c h as these, t h e necessity a n d p r a c t i c e o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o c c u r naturally. B u t , t h e r e are t i m e s in r e a d i n g s c r i p t u r e w h e n t h e readers m a y n o t a u t o m a t i c a l l y m a k e d i s t i n c t i o n s , a n d t h e r e f o r e m a y n o t d o i n t e r p r e t a t i o n (correctly), a n d so, t h e y m a y m i s u n d e r s t a n d . For e x a m p l e : In J o h n 3 Jesus tells N i c o d e m u s t h a t he m u s t be b o r n o n d f t u G e i ' [ a n o < - > t h e n ] . H e r e , dfojOev [ a n o < - > t h e n J is a n a m b i g u o u s G r e e k w o r d t h a t can m e a n "again" o r "from a b o v e , " a n d

' R. E. Brown, The Gospel and Epistles of John: A Concise Commentary ed.; Collegeville, M i n n . : T h e Liturgical Press, 1988) 2 5 .

(4th

166

REFORMED INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE

N i c o d c m u s hears "again" r a t h e r t h a n "from a b o v e , " so t h a t his s u b s e q u e n t r e m a r k s are a t least as c o m i c a l as t h e y are tragic. Jesus declares t h a t h u m a n s m u s t be b o r n "from a b o v e " — t h a t is, b y t h e p o w e r of G o d r e n e w i n g t h e i r lives. U n f o r t u n a t e l y , N i c o d c m u s is n o t t h e o n l y o n e w h o fails t o g r a s p Jesus' m e a n i n g , for m a n y in t h e w o r l d t o d a y cheerfully use t h e l a n g u a g e o f N i c o d e m u s ' s m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g to d e scribe t h e i r t h e o l o g i c a l c o n v i c t i o n t h a t t h e y are " b o r n a g a i n . " Similarly, in J o h n 1 2 : 3 2 Jesus said, " A n d I, w h e n I a m lifted u p from t h e e a r t h , will d r a w all p e o p l e t o myself"; a n d t h e reader is forced t o ask, W h a t d o e s " b e i n g lifted u p " m e a n ? D o e s it refer to crucifixion, t o e x a l t a t i o n , or t o b o t h ? In an effort to a n s w e r this q u e s t i o n , careful s t u d y of t h e w o r IR|X'XJJ Lhypsoo<->J, "lifted u p " in this passage, or even careful s t u d y o f t h e larger s p e e c h in w h i c h Jesus m a k e s this s t a t e m e n t , p r o b a b l y w o n ' t m a k e a final d e c i s i o n possible; for, in c o n t e x t , t h e s t a t e m e n t f u n c t i o n s as a p r o p h e c y of Jesus' d e a t h . Yet, in t h e b r o a d e r r a n g e o f John's theological reflection as it is k n o w n f r o m t h e e n t i r e G o s p e l , it is t h e crucified a n d e x a l t e d L o r d w h o ( t h r o u g h t h e Spirit) d r a w s h u m a n i t y t o himself. T h i s o b s e r v a t i o n a b o u t J o h n 1 2 : 3 2 leads t o a larger issue r e g a r d ing t h e Bible: A t its very h e a r t , t h e Bible r e c o r d s a n d c o m m u n i c a t e s i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t requires i n t e r p r e t a t i o n in o r d e r t h a t t h e i n f o r m a tion have relevance for faith a n d life. Indeed, it is in the process of interpretation that the biblical information becomes relevant Moreover, the Bible itself bears witness t o the necessity of o u r interpreting its message as the biblical a u t h o r s themselves engage in theological interpretation. C o n s i d e r , for e x a m p l e , the death of Jesus: O n t h e surface, as a m e r e fact, Jesus' d e a t h is b u t a tragic e n d i n g t o t h e life of a s e e m i n g l y g o o d b u t p r o b a b l y i m p r u d e n t first-century Jew. But, t h r o u g h Jesus' o w n t e a c h i n g a n d t h e disciples' experience o f t h e resurrection of Jesus, t h e early c h u r c h k n e w Jesus' d e a t h t o be m o r e t h a n a fact of history. T h e r e f o r e , t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t never really speaks o f Jesus' d e a t h at its p u r e l y historical level—Jesus' d e a t h is always s p o k e n o f in a n d through interpretation. Indeed, t h a t the church's interpretation of Jesus' d e a t h d i d n o t o c c u r s i m p l y o n c e - u p o n - a - t i m e . . . t h a t in t h e light o f t h e r e s u r r e c t i o n t h e earliest believers s t r u g g l e d t o g r a s p t h e d e p t h s o f t h e m e a n i n g o f C h r i s t ' s d e a t h . . . b o t h are clear from t h e w e a l t h o f images r e c o r d e d in t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t offering i n t e r p r e t a tion of Jesus' death. C o n s i d e r o n l y Paul: F o r h i m ( a n d o t h e r early C h r i s t i a n s ) Jesus' d e a t h was the fulfillment of scripture; a n d s o , Jesus' d e a t h w a s d e s c r i b e d a n d e x p l a i n e d in s c r i p t u r a l t e r m s ( O l d T e s t a m e n t ) — a s an e x p i a t o r y sacrifice (1 C o r . 5:7; R o m . 3 : 2 5 — s e e Lev. 1 6 : 1 3 - 1 5 ; E x o d .

JMARION L . SOARDS

167

1 2 : 2 1 - 2 7 ) ; as d i v i n e h u m i l i a t i o n in o b e d i e n c e (Phil. 2 : 6 - 1 1 — s e e Isa. 5 3 : 3 , 1 1 ; 4 5 : 2 2 - 2 3 ) ; as d i v i n e r e d e m p t i o n o n t h e m o d e l o f b u y i n g o u t o f c o n s e c r a t e d service i n t o f r e e d o m (1 C o r . 6 : 2 0 , 7 : 2 3 — s e e Lev. 2 7 : 1 - 2 1 ) ; a n d as rescue o n t h e m o d e l s of t h e E x o d u s o r t h e a p p e a l s of t h e Psalms for d e l i v e r a n c e f r o m peril ( R o m . 7 : 2 4 ; 2 C o r . 1:10; 1 T h e s s . 1 : 1 0 — s e e , for e x a m p l e , E x o d . 5 : 2 3 ; 6 : 6 ; 1 2 : 2 7 ; 1 4 : 3 0 ; Pss. 6:4; 7 : 1 ; 17:13; 18:17; 56:13). All t h e s e i m a g e s are m e t a p h o r s for e x p r e s s i n g t h e crucial c o n v i c t i o n t h a t Jesus' death

brings salvationl

S o , o n e sees t h a t Paul d e c l a r e d

t h e s a v i n g significance of Jesus' d e a t h in t h e l a n g u a g e of O l d Testam e n t salvific m o t i f s . The Bible itself s h o w s t h e r e a d e r t h a t early C h r i s t i a n s t u r n e d t o t h e s c r i p t u r e s in o r d e r t o c o m p r e h e n d in g r e a t e r d e p t h t h e m e a n i n g of C h r i s t ' s d e a t h . Similarly, today's readers m u s t e n g a g e in s t u d y a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e s c r i p t u r e s in o r d e r t h a t t h e s c r i p t u r e s m a y s p e a k a n e w to believers t o d a y as t h e y s p o k e t o t h o s e first C h r i s t i a n s . P e o p l e t o d a y m u s t c o m e t o k n o w w h a t it m e a n s to confess t h a t " C h r i s t d i e d for o u r sins in accordance w i t h t h e s c r i p t u r e s . . . a n d t h a t h e was raised o n t h e third d a y in accordance with the scriptures" (1 Cor. 15:3-4). V . C H R I S T O U R HERMENEUTIC

W h a t , t h e n , is t h e basis o f r e s p o n s i b l e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n for p e r s o n s in t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n ? H o w shall believers g o a b o u t t h e crucial w o r k of m a k i n g sense of t h e a u t h o r i t a t i v e texts o f t h e Bible? H e r e , o n e sees t h a t t h r e e c o n c e r n s coalesce: 1. W h a t t h e Bible says t o e a c h p e r s o n as a n i n d i v i d u a l . 2 . W h a t t h e Bible h a s said t o t h o s e in t h e c h u r c h before t o d a y a n d so with today's r e a d e r in t h e life of t h e c h u r c h . 3 . W h a t t h e biblical w r i t i n g s s a i d t o t h e i r first readers, or w h a t t h e later i n f o r m e d r e a d e r perceives t h a t t h e a u t h o r i n t e n d e d to say t o the original audience. These are all valid ( t h o u g h debatable) questions, b u t a key for accurate interpretation is t h e sequence in w h i c h o n e poses these questions. I w o u l d a r g u e t h a t t h e p r i m a r y task for p e r s o n s in t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n t o d a y w h o seek t o b e r e s p o n s i b l e i n t e r p r e t e r s is t o b e g i n b y a s k i n g Q u e s t i o n # 3 . O n l y w h e n readers h a v e resolved t h i s issue are t h e y in a p o s i t i o n to ask a n d , t h e n , c r i t i q u e t h e a n s w e r s t o Q u e s t i o n # 2 a n d Q u e s t i o n # 1 . I n t e r p r e t i n g in t h i s m a n n e r is n o t t o d e n y t h a t t h e Bible can s p e a k in d i s t i n c t w a y s in different t i m e s a n d places, b u t t o d e t e r m i n e t h e v a l i d i t y of w h a t a n y a n d all believers c o n c l u d e t h e Bible m e a n s , o n e m u s t ask w h e t h e r t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s offered are

168

REFORMED INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE

c o n g r u e n t w i t h t h e "plain sense" o f t h e s c r i p t u r e s . In o r d e r t o c o n trol, t o g u i d e , t o criticize, a n d t o g u a r a n t e e a p p r o p r i a t e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , readers m u s t b e c o m e i n f o r m e d a n d active. T h e y m u s t e d u c a t e t h e m s e l v e s in t e r m s o f history, a n c i e n t p h i l o s o p h y a n d religion, l a n g u a g e s , theology, a n d h e r m e n e u t i c s . T h i s strategy for r e a d i n g s c r i p t u r e d o e s n o t m e a n t h a t C h r i s t i a n s o t h e r t h a n t h o s e w h o are biblical scholars are u n a b l e t o read t h e Bible w i t h p e r c e p t i o n a n d insight. Yet, t h e d i s t a n c e b e t w e e n today's readers a n d t h e Bible a n d t h e l o n g history of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n — w i t h seemingly myriad explanations t h a t s o m e t i m e s conflict or c o n t r a d i c t each o t h e r — m e a n s t h a t scholars have a r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e s t u d y of t h e s c r i p t u r e s in t h e life of t h e c h u r c h . T h u s , t h e R e f o r m e d tradition's insistence o n an e d u c a t e d r e a d i n g a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e texts. The i n t e r p r e t i v e e l e m e n t s of history, p h i l o s o p h y a n d religion, l a n g u a g e s , a n d t h e o l o g y are fairly s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d — a l t h o u g h t h e y i m p l y a h i g h degree o f s o p h i s t i c a t i o n for t h e i n t e r p r e t e r ; b u t b e c a u s e o f its c o m p l e x i t y t h e following p a r a g r a p h s focus o n t h e issue o f h e r m e n e u t i c s , especially in relation t o t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n . S i m p l y d e fined, hermeneutics d e s i g n a t e s t h e m e t h o d s , t h e m e a n s , a n d t h e m e a sure o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . W h a t is t h e s t a n d a r d o f R e f o r m e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f scripture? S o m e p r o p o s e justice, o t h e r s liberation, still o t h e r s love—all o f w h i c h are n o b l e s t a n d a r d s — b u t t h e confessions o f t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n s e e m clearly t o insist t h a t t h e c r i t e r i o n for valid u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e Bible is Jesus Christ himself. " T h e o n e sufficient revelation o f G o d is Jesus C h r i s t , t h e W o r d o f G o d i n c a r n a t e . . ." ( " T h e C o n f e s s i o n of 1 9 6 7 " : 9 . 2 7 ) ; a n d "the Bible is t o b e i n t e r p r e t e d in t h e light of its w i t n e s s t o G o d ' s w o r k of r e c o n c i l i a t i o n in [Jesus] C h r i s t " ( " T h e C o n fession o f 1 9 6 7 " : 9 . 2 9 ) . If Jesus C h r i s t is confessed t o b e t h e i n c a r n a t e W o r d o f G o d , t h e n , t h e R e f o r m e d i n t e r p r e t e r o f s c r i p t u r e m u s t h o l d h i m at t h e b e g i n n i n g a n d at t h e c e n t e r of faith a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e Bible. The d i s t i n c t i v e c h a r a c t e r o f C h r i s t i a n i t y as u n d e r s t o o d in t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n is t h a t C h r i s t i a n i t y focuses o n G o d a n d t h e relat i o n s h i p b e t w e e n G o d a n d h u m a n i t y ( a n d , for t h a t m a t t e r , t h e cosmos!) by f o c u s i n g o n t h e person o f Jesus C h r i s t a n d t h e personal relationship w i t h Jesus C h r i s t t h a t h u m a n i t y a n d c r e a t i o n enjoy. I n t e r p r e t a t i o n of s c r i p t u r e is an e n c o u n t e r w i t h a text, n o t w i t h a p e r s o n . B u t , b e c a u s e believers k n o w t h e p e r s o n of Jesus C h r i s t as h e is m e d i a t e d t o t h e m t h r o u g h t h e s c r i p t u r e s , n o i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e Bible can be called C h r i s t i a n t h a t is d e v o i d of t h e i n h e r e n t p e r sonal q u a l i t y o f C h r i s t i a n faith. In o n e way, valid historical i n t e r p r e -

MARION L . SOARDS

169

t a t i o n o f t h e Bible can be d o n e b y an h o n e s t a t h e i s t , b u t in t h e c o n text o f t h e c o m m u n i t y o f faith i n t e r p r e t e r s s h o u l d strive t o effect a p e r s o n a l q u a l i t y in t h e i r historical a n d critical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e Bible. A t a s t a r k m i n i m u m this w o r k in i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e Bible s h o u l d be a t h r e e - w a y e n c o u n t e r — b e t w e e n t h e texts, t h e believers, a n d t h e p e r s o n a l p r e s e n c e of t h e risen L o r d Jesus C h r i s t — a l l " u n d e r t h e g u i d a n c e o f t h e H o l y Spirit" ( " T h e C o n f e s s i o n o f 1 9 6 7 " : 9 . 2 9 ) . M o r e over, an awareness o f t h e p r e s e n c e of C h r i s t in t h e life o f t h e c h u r c h , especially in t h e w o r k o f i n t e r p r e t i n g s c r i p t u r e , s h o u l d i m m e d i a t e l y r e m i n d s t u d e n t s of s c r i p t u r e t h a t t h e y are n o t i n v o l v e d in an i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c s o j o u r n , w h e r e i n d i v i d u a l or g r o u p s , a l o n g w i t h Jesus C h r i s t a n d t h e Bible, "get a g o o d t h i n g g o i n g . " P e r h a p s t h e best i m a g e for w h a t it m e a n s t o d o valid i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e Bible (in t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g f o r m u l a t e d in t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n ) is t h e idea of an o p e n r o u n d - t a b l e d i s c u s s i o n . O n e can i m a g i n e t h e Bible (even its a u t h o r s ) at table w i t h t h e m o d e r n readers, w i t h Jesus C h r i s t , a n d w i t h representatives o f t h e e n t i r e c o m m u n i t y o f C h r i s t i a n faith. T h e Bible is n o t t h e p r o p e r t y of an i n d i v i d u a l , a g r o u p , or even o f a d e n o m i n a t i o n a l o n e . It is t h e s c r i p t u r e of t h e c h u r c h universal; it is t h e m o s t basic t e s t i m o n y t o t h e L o r d a n d G o d o f all believers. T h u s , t h o s e s e t t i n g o u t t o r e a d t h e Bible s h o u l d invite all Christ's p e o p l e t o t h e c o n v e r s a t i o n . By necessity, a significant n u m b e r o f t h o s e at t h e i n t e r p r e t i v e table will be scholars a n d p r o m i n e n t leaders o f t h e c h u r c h w h o have l o n g s i n c e read a n d i n t e r p r e t e d t h e Bible. N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e c h u r c h as t h e b o d y o f C h r i s t is m o r e t h a n a b r a i n or a m o u t h . T h e w h o l e b o d y of C h r i s t c o m p r i s e s eyes, ears, h a n d s , feet, a n d h e a r t . A n d so, in a t t e m p t i n g t o h e a r t h e voice of s c r i p t u r e — o r , t h e voices of t h e B i b l e — readers m u s t carefully call for t h e insights of all Christ's p e o p l e — n o t merely those m o s t c o m p a t i b l e with one's or one's group's p o i n t s of view. As believers w o r k w i t h s c r i p t u r e , t h e y m u s t u n d e r s t a n d t h a t in t h e overall process o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e y t h e m s e l v e s — t h e i r very p e r s o n s a n d lives—are b e i n g called i n t o q u e s t i o n . T h e l a b o r of i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e Bible does n o t necessarily lead t o a c o m f o r t i n g c o n f i r m a t i o n o f w h o w e h u m a n s are a n d w h a t w e d o . I n d e e d , n o i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e Bible is t r u l y valid w h e r e i n t h e i n t e r p r e t e r s are n o t as equally v u l n e r a b l e as are texts t h e y seek t o i n t e r p r e t . Believers e n c o u n t e r t h e Bible in t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e total c o m m u n i t y o f f a i t h — a n d they, o t h e r s , a n d t h e s c r i p t u r e s are all t o g e t h e r u n d e r t h e L o r d s h i p o f Jesus C h r i s t . In t h e give a n d t a k e o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n readers m u s t c o n s t a n t l y h o l d t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of all p a r t n e r s in t h e c o n -

REFORMED INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

170

versación u p a g a i n s t t h e p e r s o n o f C h r i s t , w h o is t h e final c r i t e r i o n for valid u n d e r s t a n d i n g . As t h e W o r d of G o d , Jesus m e a n s f r e e d o m . T h e call o f C h r i s t is a call t o f r e e d o m — t o l i b e r a t i o n f r o m all i n v o l v e m e n t s t h a t enslave a n d t h e r e b y , r e d u c e h u m a n lives t o levels less t h a n t h a t i n t e n d e d b y G o d in c r e a t i o n a n d r e d e m p t i o n . M o r e o v e r , believers are n o t o n l y freed

from

o p p r e s s i o n , t h e y are freed for a rich, r e w a r d i n g r e l a t i o n -

s h i p t o C h r i s t t h a t m e a n s a life o f l o v i n g service t o o t h e r s a c c o r d i n g to C h r i s t ' s will. T h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e Bible m u s t b e d o n e in t h e context of these concerns a n d c o m m i t m e n t s . Interpretation

must

always raise t h e C h r i s t - c e n t e r e d q u e s t i o n s o f l i b e r a t i o n a n d o b l i g a t i o n , o f f r e e d o m a n d service. P e r s o n s in t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n seek t o find t h e i r w a y f o r w a r d as G o d w o u l d h a v e t h e m g o as t h e y r e a d t h e Bible a n d a t t e n d t o its message as i l l u m i n a t e d b y t h e H o l y Spirit. W i t h o u t t h e gifts o f t h e w o r d o f G o d w r i t t e n a n d t h e g u i d a n c e o f t h e Spirit readers are left to t h e i r o w n d e v i c e s — a n d as J o h n C a l v i n said, " T h e w h o l e w o r l d lies in w i c k e d n e s s " a n d t h e m i n d o f this w o r l d is "a false i m a g i n a t i o n . "

1

Yet, a g a i n s t t h a t n e g a t i v e s i t u a t i o n , G o d w h o reconciles t h e believers in J e s u s C h r i s t gives s c r i p t u r e a n d t h e S p i r i t t o d i r e c t believers in faithfulness. V I . CASK STUDY - EPHESIANS 2 : 1 - 1 0

In t h e late t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y , p e r h a p s t h e m o s t e c u m e n i c a l d i s c i p l i n e in t h e r a n g e o f t h e o l o g i c a l s t u d i e s has b e c o m e biblical int e r p r e t a t i o n . T o d a y vast n u m b e r s of specialists from essentially every d e n o m i n a t i o n a n d t r a d i t i o n ( i n c l u d i n g p e r s o n s w h o d i s a v o w relig i o u s affiliations) m e e t a n d w o r k t o g e t h e r in large o r g a n i z a t i o n s s u c h as t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l S o c i e t y o f Biblical L i t e r a t u r e . S t a n d a r d s for critical exegetical research are a f f i r m e d a n d s h a r e d b y p e r s o n s f r o m a w i d e array o f traditions. Thus, exegesis as a historical-critical enterprise is n o t necessarily confessional in its m e t h o d s or conclusions. Nevertheless, after t h e w o r k of exegesis has been d o n e , it is easier to find consensus c o n c e r n i n g w h a t a text " m e a n t " t h a n regarding w h a t a text " m e a n s . " T h e f o l l o w i n g b r i e f exegetical essay a s s u m e s t h e s h a r e d m e t h o d s ( a n d m a n y c o n c l u s i o n s ) o f t h e g u i l d o f biblical s c h o l a r s . T h e n , w o r k i n g f r o m s u c h scholarly i n s i g h t s , I h a v e t r i e d t o "read" t h e t e x t in relation t o t h e religious sensibilities of t h e R e f o r m e d t r a d i t i o n . A b o v e

4

J o h n Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans (Grand Rapids: F.erdmans, 1959) 4 5 3 - 5 5 .

MARION L . SOARDS

171

all, I h a v e s o u g h t t o b e g e n u i n e l y t h e o l o g i c a l in this w o r k , n o t s i m p l y to register historical a n d sociological i n s i g h t s . W h a t follows is develo p e d w i t h t h e ecclesiastical e n v i r o n m e n t in m i n d ; t h u s , I shall att e n d t o t h e literary a n d historical s e t t i n g o f t h e passage from Ephesians, a n d t h e n I shall focus o n t h e s t r u c t u r e of t h e m a t e r i a l s , a n d finally I shall r e m a r k o n t h e t h e o l o g i c a l significance of t h e m a t e r i a l s for t h e life o f believers a n d t h e c h u r c h . VII. Ephesians 2:1-10 W H A T I T MKANS TO BK A BELIEVER

S e t t i n g . The letter t o t h e " E p h e s i a n s " s e e m s u n r e l a t e d t o

any

specific s i t u a t i o n , b u t it is clearly c o n c e r n e d w i t h every d i v i n e a n d h u m a n m o m e n t . The e n t i r e epistle falls i n t o t w o b r o a d p a r t s : c h a p ters 1-3 are a n e l a b o r a t e , p r o f o u n d l y t h e o l o g i c a l s t a t e m e n t , w h i c h are a l m o s t esoteric in n a t u r e b e c a u s e t h e y are so lofty, c o m p l e x , a n d even e l e g a n t ; c h a p t e r s 4 - 6 are also q u i t e elevated in style, e x p r e s s i o n , a n d o u t l o o k , b u t h e r e t h e r e a d e r finds s t a t e m e n t s a b o u t t h e practical o r d e r i n g o f t h e every d a y life o f believers. The g e n e r a l t h e m e o f this epistle, h o w e v e r , in b o t h its theological a n d practical p a r t s , is c o s m i c r e c o n c i l i a t i o n a n d t h e m e a n i n g o f s u c h h e g e m o n y for all of life. T h e first t w e n t y - t w o verses o f c h a p t e r o n e are f o c u s e d o n t h e i n d i v i d u a l believer, a n d o n l y a t 1:23 d o e s t h e a u t h o r i n t r o d u c e t h e C h u r c h as t h e universal b o d y of C h r i s t . Yet, t o p r e v e n t o n e f r o m m o v i n g f r o m t h e level of t h e i n d i v i d u a l believer t o t h a t of t h e C h u r c h universal a n d , in t u r n , f o r g e t t i n g t h e crucial i m p l i c a t i o n s o f salvat i o n for t h e i n d i v i d u a l m e m b e r s o f t h e b o d y , t h e a u t h o r d r o p s b a c k in 2 : 1 - 1 0 t o c o n t r a s t t h e pitiful life w i t h o u t C h r i s t t o t h e glories of life b r o u g h t b y t h e p o w e r o f C h r i s t ' s s a l v a t i o n . S t r u c t u r e . T h e reflection in t h e s e verses is elevated a n d a b s t r a c t , b u t t h e logic is progressive a n d clear. T h e lesson articulates t h e s u b s t a n c e of salvation, p o n d e r s t h e way t h a t salvation c o m e s t o t h e b e liever a n d t h e w a y it d o e s n o t , a n d declares t h a t t o w h i c h s a l v a t i o n leads. The p a t h of t h e logic is from s a l v a t i o n t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l b e liever t o t h e life o f t h e C h u r c h . T h u s , w h i l e salvation is t h e o v e r a r c h i n g t h e m e , t h e verses m e d i t a t e o n b o t h t h e i n d i v i d u a l a n d c o r p o r a t e d i mensions of salvation a n d the relationship between the two. S i g n i f i c a n c e . The h e a r t o f t h i s passage is a c o n t r a s t b e t w e e n t h e g l o o m y p r e d i c a m e n t o f a h u m a n life lived w i t h o u t C h r i s t a n d t h e g r a c i o u s glories o f life lived in his h e a l i n g r e s u r r e c t i o n p o w e r . H a v ing m e n t i o n e d the C h u r c h (1:23, "his body"), the author's m i n d recoils t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l believer. A r e a d e r c o u l d c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e

172

REFORMED INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE

b o u n t e o u s benefits o f faith are f o u n d t h r o u g h merely j o i n i n g t h e C h u r c h , b u t t h e a u t h o r u n d e r m i n e s s u c h faulty logic. For E p h e s i a n s t h e C h u r c h is t h e c o r p o r a t e c o m m u n i t y o f saved i n d i v i d u a l s . U n l e s s salvation has m e a n i n g for t h e i n d i v i d u a l , t h e r e is n o t h i n g p e r s o n a l or c o m p e l l i n g a b o u t t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f C h r i s t . Yet, clearly i n d i v i d u a l s d o n o t simply derive benefits from attaching themselves to the C h u r c h . Rather, the only legitimate way to b e c o m e a m e m b e r of the C h u r c h is t o b e a believer. C h u r c h m e m b e r s h i p d o e s n o t m a k e o n e a C h r i s t i a n . W e are C h r i s t i a n s t h r o u g h o u r i n d i v i d u a l a n d p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s . Yet, C h r i s t i a n i t y is n o t i n d i v i d u a l i s m . B e i n g a C h r i s t i a n m e a n s , in t u r n , affiliation w i t h a n d p a r t i c i p a t i o n in t h e life of t h e C h u r c h — E p h e s i a n s m a k e s this p l a i n ; b u t this passage labors t o m a k e sure t h a t readers d o n o t miss t h e i n d i v i d u a l m e a n i n g of salvation t h r o u g h artificially f o c u s i n g o n t h e m e a n i n g o f C h u r c h m e m b e r s h i p . As believers w e n e i t h e r s t a n d a l o n e n o r h i d e in t h e C h u r c h ; rather, w e are i n d i v i d u a l s m u t u a l l y related t o o n e a n o t h e r t h r o u g h o u r u n i q u e r e l a t i o n s h i p s t o C h r i s t as i n d i v i d u a l believers. T h e vertical d i m e n s i o n of faith is t h e s o u r c e a n d p o w e r of t h e h o r i z o n t a l d i m e n s i o n of life in Christ. Part of w h a t Christian life m e a n s for individual Christians is t h a t because of their personal relationships t o Christ, they are led to b e c o m e m e m b e r s of t h e corporate b o d y o f Christ. B e y o n d this crucial basic m a t t e r , t h r e e s t r i k i n g t h e m e s in this text r e q u i r e r e c o g n i t i o n a n d , p e r h a p s , t r e a t m e n t in t h e o l o g i c a l reflection. First, t h e difference b e t w e e n life before a n d after C h r i s t is t h e difference b e t w e e n life a n d d e a t h , n o w a n d forever. This is a m a t t e r o f t h e q u a l i t y o f life as well as t h e e n e r g y o r e n d u r i n g value o f life. S e c o n d , t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f life, f r o m d e a t h t o life, c o m e s t h r o u g h t h e believer's r e l a t i o n s h i p t o C h r i s t h i m s e l f a n d c o m e s by t h e grace of G o d . The e x p e r i e n c e o f salvation, m e a n i n g t h e real t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of existence, is t h e w o r k o f G o d . T h e text tells t h e g o o d n e w s o f G o d ' s s a v i n g grace in C h r i s t , a n d it b l u n t l y p u t s believers in t h e i r p r o p e r places (see vv. 8 - 9 ) . T h i r d , in expressing t h e t r u l y inexpressible c h a r a c t e r o f C h r i s t i a n life, E p h e s i a n s d r a w s o n t h e s t o r y o f C h r i s t h i m s e l f t o explicate t h e m e a n i n g of salvation for t h e believer. T h e a u t h o r goes f u r t h e r t h a n a n y o t h e r N e w T e s t a m e n t w r i t e r in u s i n g t h e s t o r y o f C h r i s t for d e c l a r i n g t h e glories of C h r i s t i a n life. Believers have d i e d w i t h C h r i s t , t h e y are raised w i t h C h r i s t , a n d t h e y are exalted w i t h C h r i s t i n t o t h e heavenly places. This m a n n e r of speaki n g m a y s e e m t o e x p o u n d a p u r e l y realized eschatology, b u t n o t i c e t h e r e is a future t h a t is o p e n t o , b u t different from, t h e p r e s e n t ; ind e e d , t h e future is a n t i c i p a t e d as g r e a t e r t h a n t h e p r e s e n t (v. 7 ) .

MARION L . SOARDS

173

RECOMMENDED

READING

A c h t e m e i e r , Paul J. The Inspiration of Scripture: posals. P h i l a d e l p h i a : W e s t m i n s t e r , 1 9 8 0 .

Problems

and

Pro-

B a i r d , W i l l i a m . History of New 'Testament Research: Volume One. From Deism to 'Tubingen. M i n n e a p o l i s : Fortress, 1 9 9 2 . P p . xiiixix. Fee, G o r d o n D . New 'Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors. Rev. ed. Louisville: W e s t m i n s t e r / J o h n K n o x , 1 9 9 3 . G e r r i s h , Brian A. Grace and Gratitude: The Eucharistic John Calvin. M i n n e a p o l i s : Fortress, 1 9 9 3 .

Theology

G r a n t , R o b e r t a n d D a v i d Tracy. A Short History of the tion of the Bible. 2 n d ed. P h i l a d e l p h i a : Fortress, 1 9 8 4 .

of

Interpreta-

Harrisville, R o y A. a n d W a l t e r S u n d b e r g . 'The Bible in Modern Culture: Theology and Historical-Critical Method from Spinoza to Kasemann. G r a n d R a p i d s , M i c h . : W m . B. E e r d m a n s , 1 9 9 5 . P p . 10-31. H a y e s , J o h n H . a n d C a r l R. H o l l a d a y . Biblical Handbook.

Exegesis: A

Beginner's

Atlanta: John Knox, 1982.

Kelsey, D a v i d . " S c r i p t u r e , D o c t r i n e of." In The Westminster Dictionary of Christian 'Theology, e d i t e d by A l a n R i c h a r d s o n a n d J o h n Bowden. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1983. Pp. 5 2 9 - 3 1 . M a r s h a l l , I. H o w a r d , ed. New Testament Interpretation: Essays on Principles and Methods. G r a n d R a p i d s , M i c h . : W m . B. E e r d m a n s , 1977. M c K i m , D o n a l d . " S c r i p t u r a l A u t h o r i t y ( a n d t h e P r o t e s t a n t Reform a t i o n ) . " In The Anchor Bible Dictionary: Volume 5, e d i t e d b y D a v i d N o e l F r e e d m a n . N e w York: D o u b l e d a y , 1 9 9 2 . P p . 1 0 3 2 35.

174

REFORMED INTERPRETATION OP SCRIPTURE

M e e k s , W a y n e A., ed. The HarperCollins Study Bible: New Revised Standard Version—with ApocryphallDeuterocanonical Books. S a n Francisco: Harper, 1993. Neill, S t e p h e n a n d N . T. W r i g h t . The Interpretation of the New tament 1861-1986. O x f o r d : O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1 9 8 8 . P a r k e r , T. H . L. Calvin's New Testament Commentaries. Louisville: W e s t m i n s t e r / J o h n K n o x , 1 9 9 3 .

Tes-

2 n d ed.

. Calvin's Old Testament Commentaries. 1st A m e r i c a n e d . L o u isville: W e s t m i n s t e r / J o h n K n o x , 1 9 9 3 ; o r i g i n a l l y p u b l i s h e d : Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1986. R o g e r s , J a c k a n d D o n a l d M c K i m . Authority and Interpretation of the Bible: An Historical Approach. N e w York: H a r p e r a n d R o w , 1979. S t u h l m a c h e r , Peter. Historical Criticism and tion of Scripture: Toward a Hermeneutics p h i a : Fortress, 1 9 7 7 .

Theological of Consent.

InterpretaPhiladel-

SCRIPTURE AS WORD OF G O D AND THE ECUMENICAL TASK by

GF.ORGF. H . TAVARD, A.A.

T

h e i n t e n t o f t h i s essay is t o e x a m i n e a q u e s t i o n t h a t has b e e n i m p l i c i t l y at t h e c e n t e r o f d e b a t e s b e t w e e n C a t h o l i c s a n d P r o t e s t a n t s , b o t h in t h e p o l e m i c a l t i m e s o f t h e R e f o r m a t i o n a n d

C o u n t e r R e f o r m a t i o n a n d in t h e e c u m e n i c a l d i a l o g u e s of t h e t w e n t i eth c e n t u r y . W h a t d o w e affirm w h e n w e d e s i g n a t e S c r i p t u r e as t h e

W o r d of G o d ? 1 am n o t asking a b o u t w h a t various theologians have u n d e r s t o o d b y t h e expression; n o r a m I c o n c e r n e d w i t h varieties of i n t e t p r e t a t i o n , b u t w i t h essential s t a t e m e n t . In a d d i t i o n , m y c o n c e r n is n o t w i t h specific t h e o l o g i e s b u t w i t h t h e C h u r c h a n d its o r g a n i c t r a d i t i o n as a w h o l e . T h e ecclesial c o n t e x t s h a p e s t h e a p p r o a c h of t h e o l o g i a n s a n d of t h e e d u c a t e d faithful, at least in t h e i r m a i n lines, as t h e y i n t e r p r e t , s p o n t a n e o u s l y o r reflexively, w h a t S c r i p t u r e says. In this ecclesial c o n t e x t I w i s h t o deal m o r e specifically w i t h w h a t m e a n i n g t h e C a t h o l i c t r a d i t i o n has given t o t h e a s s e r t i o n t h a t S c r i p t u r e is t h e W o r d of G o d . The q u e s t i o n is o f i m p o r t a n c e for t h e s t r u c t u r e o f d i a l o g u e , w h i c h , as P o p e Paul VI a f f i r m e d in his encyclical Ecclesiam

suam

(in

1 9 6 4 , t h e t h i r d year o f V a t i c a n I I ) , b e l o n g s t o t h e essence of t h e C h u r c h . T h e m u l t i f a c e t e d d i a l o g u e in w h i c h t h e C h r i s t i a n w o r l d is n o w e n g a g e d is first of all i n t e r n a l , as b e t w e e n O r i e n t a l O r t h o d o x , B y z a n t i n e O r t h o d o x , C a t h o l i c s , a n d P r o t e s t a n t s , a n d also, less m a r k edly, classical P e n t e c o s t a l a n d f u n d a m e n t a l i s t c h u r c h e s . It is also increasingly e x t e r n a l , t h a t is, w i t h o t h e r religions, several of w h i c h also h a v e S c r i p t u r e s t h a t t h e y r e g a r d as b e i n g in s o m e sense W o r d o f G o d . I. ECCLKSIAL C O N T E X T

T h e ecclesial c o n t e x t of c a t h o l i c i t y m a y b e l o o k e d a t f r o m t w o angles. S y n c h r o n i c a l l y , t h i s c o n t e x t is t h e C a t h o l i c c o m m u n i o n as it

SCRIPTURE AS W O R D OF G O D

176

n o w lives u n d e r t h e p r i m a c y o f P o p e J o h n Paul II, in t h e p u z z l i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s of t h e p o s t c o n c i l i a r p e r i o d , t h e c o m i n g e n d of t h e t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y , t h e e n s u i n g d a w n o f t h e t h i r d m i l l e n n i u m after C h r i s t , a n d t h e t u r m o i l a n d u n c e r t a i n t y t h a t are following t h e b r e a k u p of t h e Soviet U n i o n , t h e d i s a p p e a r a n c e o f C o m m u n i s t d i c t a t o r s h i p s in E a s t e r n E u r o p e , a n d t h e i r resilience in Asia. D i a c h r o n i c a l l y , this c o n t e x t is t h e C a t h o l i c t r a d i t i o n . H i s t o r i a n s o f religious ideas a n d i n s t i t u t i o n s can c o m p a r e it w i t h parallel t r a d i t i o n s in o t h e r C h r i s t i a n c o m m u n i o n s , a n d even w i t h c o r r e s p o n d i n g , if n o t parallel, t r a d i t i o n s in s o m e o f t h e o t h e r g r e a t w o r l d religions. This t r a d i t i o n has h a d a n u n d e n i a b l e c o n t i n u i t y t h r o u g h t i m e e v e n if it has u n d e r g o n e c e r t a i n shifts a n d t u r n s . This c o n t i n u i t y has given t h e C a t h o l i c reality a r e c o g n i z a b l e consistency, a s o r t o f t h i c k n e s s t h a t m a y n e e d t o b e p e e l e d off if w e are t o g r a s p t h e h e a r t of t h e C a t h o l i c r e a d i n g o f S c r i p t u r e as W o r d o f G o d . C a t h o l i c t h e o l o g y a n d p r a c t i c e , h o w e v e r , h a v e also c o n v e y e d t h e i m p r e s s i o n t h a t t h e n o r m a t i v i t y o f S c r i p t u r e has b e e n q u a l i f i e d in C a t h o l i c c o n t e x t , n o t o n l y b y reference t o a n o r m a t i v i t y of t r a d i t i o n , b u t also b y o b e d i e n c e to t h e a u t h o r i t y t h a t has b e e n r e c o g n i z e d t o , or a s s u m e d by, t h e l i v i n g m a g i s t e r i u m o f b i s h o p s . This was of c o u r s e t h e m a i n reason w h y t h e n o r m a t i v i t y of t h e W o r d o f G o d was p o i n t edly u n d e r l i n e d b y t h e R e f o r m e r s in t h e i r a p p e a l t o S c r i p t u r e a l o n e . II. TRADITION

The C a t h o l i c e t h o s has i n d e e d given p a r t i c u l a r i m p o r t a n c e t o t h e w e i g h t of t r a d i t i o n . The p r e s e n t m o m e n t is n e v e r seen a p a r t f r o m its o r i g i n a t i o n in t h e p a s t . T h e c o n t e m p o r a r y c o o r d i n a t e s o f a d o c t r i n e , t e a c h i n g , i n s t i t u t i o n , o r p r a c t i c e are n e v e r sufficient t o explain it. O n e also n e e d s t o trace its r o o t s . S e a r c h i n g t h e g r o u n d of c o n t e m p o r a r y d o c t r i n e , t h e C a t h o l i c d i v i s i o n o f h i s t o r y h a s p i n p o i n t e d cert a i n m o m e n t s , chiefly t h o s e of e c u m e n i c a l c o u n c i l s , as b e i n g n o r m a tive for t h e p r e s e n t . T o t h e critical o b s e r v e r it w o u l d t h e n s e e m t h a t t h e p r e s e n t c h u r c h b o w s t o selected e p i s o d e s in t h e p a s t . T o t h e b e liever, critical o r naive, it m e a n s t h a t t h e C h u r c h lives from m e m o r y , a n d t h a t this m e m o r y , like all m e m o r i e s , has b e e n selective. If it is healthy, t h e C h u r c h ' s m e m o r y selects t h o s e e v e n t s t h a t h a v e b o r n t h e clearest w i t n e s s , given t h e i r t i m e a n d place, t o t h e o r i g i n a l m e m o r y t h a t lies at t h e very h e a r t of t h e C h r i s t i a n c o n s c i o u s n e s s , namely, t h e m e m o r y of t h e L o r d . I n d e e d , C h r i s t i a n c h u r c h e s differ a t t h e level of these r e m e m b e r e d e v e n t s . They d o n o t r e m e m b e r t h e R e f o r m a t i o n or t h e C o u n -

G E O R G E H . TAVARD, A.A.

177

cil of T r e n t in t h e s a m e way. Yet t h e y also differ at t h e v e r y level o f t h e o r i g i n a l m e m o r y , if at least s o m e o f t h e m identify t h e c e n t r a l l y rem e m b e r e d e v e n t as t h e Last S u p p e r , o t h e r s as t h e c r u c i f i x i o n , a n d o t h e r s p e r h a p s as t h e r e s u r r e c t i o n . E a c h o f t h e s e r e m e m b e r e d m o m e n t s is t h e n h a l o e d w i t h a u n i q u e t h e o l o g i c a l e m p h a s i s : t h e Last S u p p e r evokes t h e real p r e s e n c e of t h e L o r d a m o n g his p e o p l e o n e a r t h ; t h e cross o f Jesus u n d e r l i n e s g r a t u i t o u s s a l v a t i o n ; t h e r e s u r r e c t i o n h i g h l i g h t s t h e p r e s e n t a n t i c i p a t i o n o f eschatological

transfor-

m a t i o n . I n t o t h e i r c e n t r a l m e m o r y of t h e p r e s e n c e , C a t h o l i c s h a v e also, a n d m o r e t h a n ever since t h e e n d o f t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y , i n s e r t e d t h e s o u n d of t h e living magisterial v o i c e , b o t h t h a t o f b i s h o p s at large a n d t h e i n c r e a s i n g l y s t r i d e n t voice of t h e b i s h o p o f R o m e in t h e exercise o f w h a t is believed t o b e t h e c o n t i n u i n g m i n i s t r y of t h e first of t h e apostles. A u t h o r i t y for t h e C a t h o l i c m i n d has t h u s b e e n n o t o n l y t h a t of t h e W o r d o f G o d in S c r i p t u r e ; it h a s also b e e n t h a t o f t h e t r a d i t i o n . O r , in t h e m o r e r e c e n t f o r m u l a t i o n t h a t was e n d o r s e d , p e r h a p s t o o hastily, b y V a t i c a n II, it h a s b e e n t h e a u t h o r i t y o f t h e t r a d i t i o n a n d of t h e m a g i s t e r i u m . I say, hastily, b e c a u s e if t h e m a g i s t e r i u m is n o l o n g e r seen as p a r t of t h e t r a d i t i o n b u t as an a d d i t i o n a l s o u r c e of a u t h o r i t y t h a t is c o n n u m e r a t e d w i t h S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e t r a d i t i o n , its s e e m i n g i m p o r t a n c e h i d e s t h e fact t h a t it has lost its f o u n d a t i o n t h a t c a n lie n o w h e r e else t h a n in S c r i p t u r e a n d in t r a d i t i o n . Yet, w h e t h e r o n e c o u n t s t w o or t h r e e p o i n t s of reference in t h e C a t h o l i c p a t t e r n of authority, o n e c a n n o t assume that the relationships between the t w o o r t h e t h r e e are n e v e r c o n f l i c t u a l . H i s t o r i a n s h a v e t o l d t h e s t o r y o f p e r i o d s of crisis w h e n conflicts surfaced. In o r d e r t o illustrate t h e q u e s t i o n , w e will n e e d t o l o o k briefly a t w h a t t h e c o u n c i l s of T r e n t a n d o f V a t i c a n II said a b o u t t r a d i t i o n . III. T I M E AND TRADITION

T h e r e is, it w o u l d s e e m , a p r e l i m i n a r y q u e s t i o n in regard t o t r a d i t i o n . T h e r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t t r a d i t i o n is a m a j o r i n g r e d i e n t in t h e C h r i s t i a n self-definition t h r o w s l i g h t o n a p r o b l e m t h a t h a s b e e n s e l d o m a d d r e s s e d in m o d e r n theology, t h e p r o b l e m o f t h e n a t u r e of time. St. A u g u s t i n e e x a m i n e d this q u e s t i o n at l e n g t h in t h e

Confes-

sions. T h a t t i m e h e l d a p r o m i n e n t p l a c e in A u g u s t i n e ' s reflection a b o u t t h e p r o c e s s o f his c o n v e r s i o n is often d i s c o n c e r t i n g t o readers of t h e Confessions

w h o are chiefly l o o k i n g for e d i f i c a t i o n . T h i s is

easily u n d e r s t a n d a b l e s i n c e c a t e c h e t i c a l p r a c t i c e h a s f r e q u e n t l y s e p a -

SCRIPTURE AS W O R D OF G O D

178

r a t e d scholarly k n o w l e d g e a n d piety. As I will p o i n t o u t f u r t h e r b e low, t h e C a t e c h i s m of t h e C a t h o l i c C h u r c h , p u b l i s h e d b y v i r t u e of t h e a p o s t o l i c c o n s t i t u t i o n Fidei depositum ( O c t o b e r 1 1 , 1 9 9 2 ) , is n o t e x e m p t from this failing. By c o n t r a s t , t h e early reflection o f t h e b i s h o p o f H i p p o t u r n e d a r o u n d t h e ways of d i v i n e grace. As he l o o k e d over t h e c o u r s e of his life from his i n f a n c y t h r o u g h his years in Italy t o his r e t u r n h o m e t o Africa, A u g u s t i n e c o u l d see t h a t G o d h a d m y s t e r i o u s l y led h i m from a practical p a g a n i s m t h r o u g h t h e d o c t r i n e s o f t h e M a n i c h e e s t o t h e b o o k s o f C i c e r o a n d of N e o - P l a t o n i s t s t o t h e epistles o f Paul. H e h a d b e e n led, slowly a n d painfully, t o t h e faith t h a t t h e Logos o f G o d , t h e V e r b u m t h a t is s e c o n d in t h e eternal Trinity, h a d t r u l y b e c o m e m a n , s h a r i n g t e m p o r a l existence w i t h us as Jesus o f N a z a r e t h . W h a t t h e n can it m e a n t h a t t h e E t e r n a l has lived t e m p o r a l l y ? The theological a n s w e r o f t h e G r e e k s , t h a t h a d b e e n effectively u s e d against t h e d o c t r i n e s of A r i u s , p o i n t e d o u t t h a t t h e Logos has b e e n m a d e flesh so t h a t his followers m a y be in s o m e sense deified. The d i v i n e W o r d s h a r e d t e m p o r a l i t y so t h a t t h o s e w h o are by n a t u r e t e m p o r a l c o u l d s h a r e e t e r n i t y by grace. 'Phis o f c o u r s e was n o t t o be d e n i e d in t h e c o n t e x t of Latin theology. B u t it was an a p p e a l t o mystery. T h e G r e e k m i n d c o u l d be familiar w i t h this: O n e does n o t u n d e r s t a n d a m y s t e r y b y dialectics b u t b y p a r t i c i p a t i o n , as it were from t h e inside; o n e e n t e r s it by faith. Phis, h o w e v e r , p o s e d serious p h i l o s o p h i c a l q u e s t i o n s t o t h e d i a lectical m i n d of t h e Latin r h e t o r i c i a n t h a t A u g u s t i n e still was in his early years as b i s h o p o f H i p p o . H e t h e r e f o r e d e v o t e d c o n s i d e r a b l e a t t e n t i o n , n o t t o m y s t e r y as s u c h , b u t t o t h e n a t u r e o f t i m e in B o o k XI o f t h e Confessions. 'Lime is c o m p a r e d t o t h e slow flow of w a t e r falling d r o p b y d r o p , p r e s u m a b l y o n t h e m o d e l o f t h e w a t e r clocks t h a t existed at t h e p e r i o d or o n t h a t o f a n h o u r g l a s s in w h i c h g r a i n s fall t h r o u g h a n a r r o w n e c k , m a r k i n g t h e passage of t i m e . " T h e d r o p s of t i m e are d e a r t o m e , " ' A u g u s t i n e declares. W h y ? Because each o n e of t h e m can a n d s h o u l d be d e v o t e d t o t h e praise a n d glory of G o d . Thus t h e passage o f t i m e , d i s c o n c e r t i n g as it m a y b e w h e n o n e feels t h e m a r k s o f a g i n g in one's o w n b o d y o r w h e n o n e o b s e r v e s t h e instability of civilizations t h a t g o t h r o u g h p e r i o d s o f decay after p r o m i s i n g p e r i o d s of rise, is also t h e p r o v i d e n t i a l offer o f m o m e n t s o f praise for t h e C r e a t o r . For, A u g u s t i n e asks himself, h o w is t h e p a s s i n g of t i m e lived? T h e c o m m o n l a n g u a g e refers t o t i m e past, p r e s e n t , a n d

:

Confessions, XI, ii, 2; see G e o r g e H . Tavard, Les jardins de Saint Lecture des "Confessions" (Montreal: Bellarmine, 1988) 18-22.

Augustin.

G E O R G E H . TAVARD, A.A.

179

f u t u r e . B u t this is illusionary. I n reality t h e r e is o n l y t h e p r e s e n t , b u t this p r e s e n t is itself successive: " T h e r e are t h r e e t h i n g s in t h e soul, a n d I d o n o t see t h e m a n y w h e r e else: t h e p r e s e n t m e m o r y o f t h i n g s past, t h e p r e s e n t a t t e n t i o n t o t h i n g s p r e s e n t , a n d t h e p r e s e n t e x p e c t a t i o n o f t h i n g s f u t u r e . " O n e m a y c o n c l u d e from this t h a t "there are t h r e e t i m e s : t h e p r e s e n t of w h a t is past, t h e p r e s e n t o f w h a t is p r e s e n t , a n d t h e p r e s e n t of w h a t is f u t u r e . " 1

N o w , as h e reflected o n t h e n a t u r e o f t i m e A u g u s t i n e was raising t h e m o r e i m m e d i a t e l y t h e o l o g i c a l q u e s t i o n of t h e n a t u r e o f t r a d i t i o n . H e d i d n o t , I believe, realize this as h e w r o t e t h e Confessions, for t h e s i m p l e reason t h a t h e was n o t yet sufficiently i n v o l v e d in t h e t h e o l o g i c a l controversies t h a t w e r e t o o c c u p y m u c h of his life, o n revelation (against t h e M a n i c h e a n s ) , o n grace (against Pelagius a n d his followers), o n t h e s a c r a m e n t s a n d t h e C h u r c h (against t h e D o n a t i s t s ) . As was m a d e e v i d e n t in these c o n t r o v e r s i e s , n e i t h e r t h e m e a n i n g of S c r i p t u r e n o r t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f d o c t r i n e was e n s u r e d o n c e for all w i t h t h e a d o p t i o n o f t h e b i b l i c a l c a n o n a n d t h e a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t of t h e faith t h a t was f o r m u l a t e d at N i c a e a . The necessity to call c o u n c i l s a n d s y n o d s , in s o m e of w h i c h A u g u s t i n e h i m s e l f was t o take p a r t , as at t h e a n t i - P e l a g i a n s y n o d o f C a r t h a g e in 4 1 6 , i l l u s t r a t e d t h e fact t h a t as t h e life o f t h e C h u r c h flows o n it follows a t i m e of its o w n . Ecclesial t i m e is n o t i d e n t i c a l w i t h g e n e r i c t i m e . N o r d o e s it c o i n c i d e w i t h i m p e r i a l o r political t i m e . T h a t is, t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n of t r u e d o c t r i n e in fidelity t o t h e S c r i p t u r e s is n o t a m e r e succession o f teaching. Teaching u n d e r g o e s successive b u t n o t h o m o g e n e o u s phases, t h a t are m a r k e d b y t h e discussion of h y p o t h e s e s , t h e raising of q u e s t i o n s , t h e a d o p t i o n of w r o n g s o l u t i o n s , t h e e m e r g e n c e o f false d o c t r i n e s , t h e i r d e n u n c i a t i o n s as heresies, t h e conciliar d e t e r m i n a t i o n of t r u e d o c t r i n e . The difficulty of d e c i d i n g w h a t is correct t e a c h i n g o f t h e faith, t r u e praise o f G o d , faithful a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t o f t h e W o r d at w o r k in c r e a t i o n a n d o f t h e Spirit at w o r k in t h e C h u r c h a n d in C h r i s t i a n life illustrates w h a t t h e later A u g u s t i n e will d i a g n o s e as t h e c o e x i s t e n c e o f t h e C i t y o f G o d , civitas sanctorum, t h a t is b a s e d o n love o f G o d g o i n g t o c o n t e m p t o f self, w i t h t h e city o f evil, t h a t is b a s e d o n love of self g o i n g t o c o n t e m p t of G o d , a n d t h e practical i m p o s s i b i l i t y of s o r t i n g t h e m o u t in t h e c o n c r e t e reality of t h e ecclesia in its t e m p o r a l existence. T h u s t h e t i m e o f t h e C h u r c h , ecclesial t i m e , is identical w i t h t h e t r a d i t i o n o f d o c t r i n e . A n d this is n o t , except in an idealizing o v e r s i m p l i f i c a t i o n of facts, a h a r m o n i o u s succession of Confessions,

XI, xx, 2 6 .

SCRIPTURE AS W O R D OF G O D

180

t e a c h i n g "from p a r e n t to c h i l d . " ' It is a r e c u r r i n g s t r u g g l e of g o o d a n d evil as these affect t h e soul a n d t h e m i n d , a n d t h e r e b y t h e select i o n a n d f o r m u l a t i o n o f w h a t is t a u g h t a n d believed. The succession o f t e a c h i n g (giving, p a s s i n g o n ) a n d b e l i e v i n g (receiving), a n d t h e n t e a c h i n g a g a i n , a n d so o n indefinitely, is n o t exempt from the ambiguity of time. For the experience of the present necessarily colors b o t h one's m e m o r y of t h e p a s t a n d one's a n t i c i p a t i o n o f t h e future. The C h r i s t i a n as individual believer a n d t h e C h u r c h as t h e local a n d universal c o n g r e g a t i o n o f t h e faithful are affected by t h e s a m e k i n d of a m b i g u i t y . N e i t h e r t h e believer n o r t h e collectivity is infallibly p r o t e c t e d from t h e e q u i v o c i t i e s of t e m p o r a l existence. T h e m a r k o f s i n f u l n e s s , w h i c h A u g u s t i n e d e t e c t e d in t h e massa perditionis of h u m a n i t y , is b o u n d t o affect t h e c h u r c h m i l i t a n t as l o n g as C h r i s t has n o t yet w i t h d r a w n it from t h e t e m p o r a l i t i e s o f t h e w o r l d , as l o n g as it d o e s n o t fully c o i n c i d e w i t h t h e c h u r c h t r i u m p h a n t in h e a v e n , as l o n g as t h e C i t y o f M e n is n o t i s o t o p i c w i t h t h e C i t y o f t h e Saints t h a t is t h e eternal C i t y o f G o d . Even t h e p r e d e s t i n e d , in A u g u s t i n e ' s theology, d o n o t k n o w t h a t t h e y are p r e d e s t i n e d and must go on struggling with ambiguity. W h a t d o e s this m e a n r e g a r d i n g t h e n a t u r e of ecclesial t i m e ? O n e m a y take a c u e from t h e l a n g u a g e o f late m e d i e v a l t h e o l o g y a n d t h e C o u n c i l o f T r e n t as it s p o k e of S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e a p o s t o l i c t r a d i t i o n s . T h e y d i d n o t , as was seen earlier, p e r s o n a l i z e t r a d i t i o n in t h e s i n g u l a r as o n e reality n e x t t o S c r i p t u r e . T h a t t h e y saw it as t r a d i t i o n s in t h e plural implies t h a t w h a t t h e C o u n t e r R e f o r m a t i o n c o n s t r u e d as a u n i f i e d traditio, as o n e u n i f o r m o r c o n t i n u o u s s t r e a m o f t r a n s m i s s i o n o f d o c t r i n e o r of t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f S c r i p t u r e , p r o t e c t e d from e r r o r ( w i t h Vatican I a n d I I , b y t h e ecclesial, conciliar, a n d p a p a l c h a r i s m of infallibility t h a t e n s u r e s t h e f o r m u l a t i o n o f i r r e f o r m a b l e d o c t r i n e s ) , w a s p r e v i o u s l y p e r c e i v e d as a d i s c o n t i n u o u s series o f m o m e n t s , d r o p s o f t h e flow o f t i m e , in w h i c h t h e face o f t h e past m o v e s is r e s h a p e d a n d r e p a i n t e d by t h e c o n v i c t i o n s of t h e p r e s e n t , a n d t h e h o p e d for perfection t o c o m e varies w i t h t h e lacks, wishes, a n d projects of t h e p r e s e n t . In this p e r s p e c t i v e , t h e A u g u s t i n i a n m e d i t a t i o n o n t h e n a t u r e o f t i m e i n t r o d u c e s a p r i n c i p l e of u n c e r t a i n t y in t h e t r a d i t i o n . In t h e t h r e e f o l d reference of t i m e t o t h e past, t h e p r e s e n t , a n d t h e f u t u r e , t h e r e is a necessary p r i o r i t y o f t h e p r e s e n t . For it is in t h e p r e s e n t t h a t o n e r e m e m b e r s a n d m e n t a l l y r e c o n s t r u c t s t h e p a s t a n d t h a t o n e looks f o r w a r d to t h e future a n d t o t h e fulfillment of t h e p r o m i s e s t h a t have 1

See G e o r g e H . Tavard, The Seventeenth-Century Recusant Thought (Leiden: E . J . Brill, 1978) 1 8 8 - 8 9 .

Tradition.

A Study

in

G E O R G E H . TAVARD, A.A.

181

b e e n r e a d in t h e p a s t a n d t h a t are s e n s e d in t h e p r e s e n t . Likewise it is always in t h e light o f t h e p r e s e n t t h a t S c r i p t u r e is read, p r e a c h e d , t a u g h t , a n d i n t e r p r e t e d . A n d it is in t h e s a m e l i g h t o f t h e p r e s e n t a n d in t h a t o f t h e p a s t t h a t has b e e n t h u s r e i n t e r p r e t e d t h a t o n e h o p e s for t h e f u t u r e , w h e t h e r this is t h e t w e n t y - f i r s t c e n t u r y a n d t h e t h i r d m i l l e n n i u m o r t h e e s c h a t o n . T h u s t h e C h u r c h ' s self-awareness in t h e p r e s e n t h o l d s t h e key t o its m e m o r y a n d m e n t a l r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h e past, t o its r e a d i n g , p r e a c h i n g , t e a c h i n g , a n d i n t e r p r e t i n g of S c r i p t u r e , t o its f o r m u l a t i o n of faith, a n d t o its p r o m i s e a n d t e n t a t i v e c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h e f u t u r e . B u t in this case w h a t t h e late C a r l Peter liked to call t h e C a t h o l i c p r i n c i p l e — n a m e l y , t h e n o t i o n t h a t t h e grace of G o d is so e m b o d i e d in t h e e a r t h l y reality o f t h e Ecclesia t h a t it b r i n g s t o C h r i s t i a n life a n d d o c t r i n e an e l e m e n t o f a b s o l u t e a n d total c o n f i d e n c e — c a n n o t be a c c e p t e d w i t h o u t c o n s i d e r a b l e q u a l i f i c a t i o n . If i n d e e d t h e s u b j e c tive e l e m e n t in t h e A u g u s t i n i a n analysis of t i m e is in fact at w o r k at t h e very h e a r t of t h e t r a d i t i o n , t h e n t h e r e is n o t h i n g in t h e t r a d i t i o n t h a t is given t o us as a p u r e a n d totally objective d a t u m . It all n e e d s t o be sifted t h r o u g h faith w h i c h , b e i n g objectively t r u e in C h r i s t , is subjectively received a n d p e r s o n a l l y assimilated. A t this p o i n t t h e analysis of t i m e as a p p l i e d t o t h e ecclesial t i m e t h a t flows t h r o u g h t h e C h u r c h ' s t r a d i t i o n converges o n Luther's i n s i g h t t h a t justificat i o n , w h i c h is totally G o d ' s gift in C h r i s t a l o n e , is in us t h r o u g h faith, w h i c h is itself totally G o d ' s gift in t h e H o l y Spirit. Every ecclesial d o c t r i n e a n d i n s t i t u t i o n n e e d s t o be sifted t h r o u g h it. 1

I w o u l d therefore n o t p u t S c r i p t u r e a n d t r a d i t i o n side b y side o r face t o face, even in an existential dialectic as in Paul Tillich's t o o n e a t d i c h o t o m y of P r o t e s t a n t p r i n c i p l e a n d C a t h o l i c s u b s t a n c e . B u t I w o u l d r e c o g n i z e a fact t h a t is at t h e h e a r t of t h e t r a d i t i o n u n d e r s t o o d in its m o d e r n i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h t h e t o t a l life o f t h e C h u r c h , liturgical, d o c t r i n a l , a n d m o r a l . The t r a d i t i o n t h a t has b e e n i n h e r ited in t h e C h u r c h from past ages i n c l u d e s b a d l i t u r g y as well as g o o d , false d o c t r i n e as well as t r u e , sinfulness as well as v i r t u o u s n e s s . U l t i m a t e l y it is n o t t h e t r a d i t i o n of received d o c t r i n e s t h a t p r o v i d e s t h e c e r t a i n t y o f faith, w h e t h e r d e f i n e d in its subjective s t r e n g t h o r in its objective i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f belief. The c e r t a i n t y of faith can o n l y d e r i v e — n o t from a t e n t a t i v e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e past, from a t r a n s m i s s i o n o f w h a t has b e e n r e m e m b e r e d , a n d still less f r o m t h e n u m e r o u s t r a d i t i o n s t h a t have c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e church's h i s t o r y — b u t •* H . George Anderson, T. Austin Murphy, and Joseph A. Burgess, eds. Justification by Faith. Lutherans and Catholics in Dialogue VII (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1985) 3 0 4 - 1 5 .

SCRIPTURE AS W O R D OF G O D

182

from t h e W o r d w h o m a y a t t i m e s , d i s c o n t i n u o u s l y , be h e a r d t h r o u g h t h e m u l t i p l i c i t y o f h u m a n w o r d s t h a t are s p o k e n in t h e C h u r c h a n d r e a d in t h e S c r i p t u r e s , a n d from t h e Spirit w h o m a k e s t h e W o r d s p e a k a n d live in t h e h e a r t o f t h e faithful as these are m a d e a w a r e o f b e i n g justified b y faith a l o n e in C h r i s t a l o n e . The q u e s t i o n o f t h e n a t u r e of t i m e was still e x a m i n e d b y t h e Scholastics in t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e t h e o l o g y o f c r e a t i o n , specifically of t h e c r e a t i o n of m a t t e r ( t i m e p r o p e r l y so called, in c o m m e n t a r i e s o n t h e Sentences, B o o k II, D i s t i n c t i o n I) a n d o f t h e c r e a t i o n of angels (aevum, or a n g e l i c d u r a t i o n , in D i s t i n c t i o n II). In m o r e r e c e n t c e n t u r i e s , however, t h e q u e s t i o n has c o m m o n l y b e e n left o u t o f t h e t h e o logical field of vision, a l o n g w i t h a general lack o f interest in a t h e o l o g y o f c r e a t i o n a n d of n a t u r e . The q u e s t i o n of t h e n a t u r e o f t i m e is t h e n a b a n d o n e d t o p h i l o s o p h e r s , s u c h as H e i d e g g e r a n d J e a n Paul S a r t r e . S i n c e E i n s t e i n a n d t h e t h e o r y o f g e n e r a l i z e d relativity, t i m e can also be i d e n t i f i e d as a scientific p r o b l e m . It has t h u s b e c o m e a natural p h e n o m e n o n t h a t can be investigated by t h e sciences of n a t u r e a n d , as w i t h S t e p h e n H a w k i n g , b y a d v a n c e d p h y s i c s a n d mathematics. 5

6

7

T h e o l o g y , however, n e e d s t o c l a i m it b a c k , t h a t is, to recover t h e sense t h a t it h o l d s a u n i q u e key t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e n a t u r e o f t i m e . The q u e s t i o n of t i m e b e l o n g s directly to t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f H o l y S c r i p t u r e . For, as was n o t e d b y A u g u s t i n e in a passage t h a t is q u o t e d in t h e Catechism of the Catholic Church, t h e i n c a r n a t i o n r e q u i r e d t h e s u b m i s s i o n t o t i m e o f O n e w h o lives o u t o f t i m e : " R e m e m b e r t h a t o n e W o r d o f G o d is s p r e a d o u t t h r o u g h all t h e S c r i p t u r e s , t h a t O n e W o r d r e s o u n d s in t h e m o u t h of t h e sacred w r i t e r s , t h e O n e w h o , b e i n g at t h e b e g i n n i n g w i t h G o d , has n o n e e d of syllables t h e r e b e c a u s e t h e r e h e is n o t s u b j e c t t o t i m e . " In c o n t r a s t , t h e s u b j e c t i o n of t h e d i v i n e W o r d t o t i m e as Jesus of N a z a r e t h e n t a i l e d his s p e a k i n g in t h e b r o k e n l a n g u a g e o f h u m a n i t y a n d t h e w r i t i n g of t h e S c r i p tures as t h e p r i m a r y e m b o d i m e n t of this s p e a k i n g . Likewise it is b e cause of t h e n a t u r e of t i m e t h a t t h e d i v i n e revelation given in C h r i s t reaches d i s t i n c t g e n e r a t i o n s of believers in t h e i r o w n t i m e s a n d places t h r o u g h t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n or t r a d i t i o n o f t h e faith. 8

!

undZeit 6

Being and Time ( N e w York: H a r p e r and Row, 1962); original G e r m a n , Sein ( T u b i n g e n : N e o m a r i u s Verlag, 1927). L'Etre et le néant. Essai d'ontologie phénoménologique (Paris: G a l l i m a r d ,

1943). Stephen H a w k i n g , A Brief History of Time. From the Big Bang to Black Holes (New York: B a n t a m Books, 1988). Catéchisme de l'Eglise catholique (Paris: M a m e / P l o n , 1 9 9 2 ) , n. 102, p . 3 5 , from Enarr. In Ps. 1 0 3 , 4 , 1 . 8

GEORGE. H . TAVARD, A.A.

183

IV. T H K COUNCIL OF T R E N T

The d e c r e e t h a t was p r o m u l g a t e d at t h e C o u n c i l o f T r e n t o n t h e 8 t h of A p r i l , 1 5 4 6 , was s h o r t . B u t a g r e e m e n t a b o u t its m e a n i n g a n d s c o p e has b e e n l o n g t o c o m e . Strictly s p e a k i n g , t h e d e c r e e d i d n o t b e a r o n S c r i p t u r e as s u c h , b u t o n t h e f o u n d a t i o n o n w h i c h t h e c o u n cil w i s h e d t o base its f u t u r e d e c i s i o n s . In t h e T r i d e n t i n e l a n g u a g e , these w o u l d b e b a s e d o n t h e g o s p e l , a n d t h e g o s p e l w o u l d b e k n o w n through Scripture a n d the traditions. S c r i p t u r e w a s i d e n t i f i e d as t h e b o o k s o f t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t S e p t u a g i n t a l o n g w i t h t h o s e of t h e N e w Testament, b o t h o f w h i c h w e r e t h e n familiar t o t h e W e s t chiefly in t h e i r r e n d e r i n g in t h e L a t i n V u l g a t e . B u t t h e r e was little c o n c e r n r e g a r d i n g t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a n d use of S c r i p t u r e . O n t h e o n e h a n d t h i s q u e s t i o n was n o t faced as s u c h in t h e d e c r e e . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , an e l e m e n t o f a m b i g u i t y was i n t r o d u c e d b y t h e w a y S c r i p t u r e was j o i n e d t o t h e t r a d i t i o n s . The t r a d i t i o n s in q u e s t i o n w e r e u n d e r s t o o d t o b e t h o s e t e a c h ings t h a t f o r m u l a t e d o c t r i n e ( n o t d i s c i p l i n e ) a n d t h a t also h a v e b e e n t r a n s m i t t e d from t h e apostles d o w n t o o u r d a y ( a n d t h e r e f o r e n o t t r a d i t i o n s o f m o r e r e c e n t o r i g i n ) . In c o n t e x t , t h e apostles w e r e t h e twelve apostles m e n t i o n e d in t h e N e w ' T e s t a m e n t , p l u s o f c o u r s e St. Paul. B u t it is a g r e e d t o d a y t h a t t h e g r o u p o f a p o s t l e s was b r o a d e r a n d m u s t i n c l u d e t h e o t h e r m i s s i o n a r i e s w h o , like Paul, b r o u g h t t h e gospel t o t h e n a t i o n s . In l i g h t of m o d e r n views of history, h o w e v e r , t h e t r a d i t i o n s t h u s i d e n t i f i e d d o n o t c o n s t i t u t e a sufficient a n d c o m p r e h e n s i v e tool for t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f d o c t r i n e . F o r it is practically i m p o s s i b l e to a s c e r t a i n t h e a p o s t o l i c i t y o f specific d o c t r i n e s . W h a t goes b a c k t o t h e apostles t h e m s e l v e s is a m o o t p o i n t . S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e a p o s t o l i c t r a d i t i o n s are j o i n e d in t h e T r i d e n t i n e d e c r e e b y t h e w o r d , et, " a n d . " M a n y q u e s t i o n s w e r e raised in t h e 1 9 5 0 s a b o u t t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h i s c o p u l a . Are t h e t r a d i t i o n s p l a c e d o n a n e q u a l basis w i t h S c r i p t u r e ? A r e t h e t w o c o n n u m e r a t e d as i n d e p e n d e n t a n d parallel s o u r c e s o f C h r i s t i a n d o c t r i n e ? Is o n e of t h e m s u b o r d i n a t e d t o t h e o t h e r ? A r e t h e y m u t u a l l y i m p l i e d in each o t h e r ? A r e t h e y c o m p l e m e n t a r y in t h e i r c o n t e n t s , o r o n l y in t h e i r t o n e a n d t h e i r a p p r o a c h to d o c t r i n e ? Is e a c h o n e c o m p l e t e w i t h o u t t h e o t h e r ? O r are t h e t r a d i t i o n s n o m o r e t h a n historical c h a n n e l s t h r o u g h w h i c h S c r i p t u r e h a s b e e n t r a n s m i t t e d f r o m age t o age? W h a t d i d Trent m e a n w i t h its s t a t e m e n t t h a t it regards S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e a p o s t o l i c t r a d i t i o n s pari pietatis

affectu

piety a n d veneration"?

ac reverentia,

" w i t h a n e q u a l affection

of

SCRIPTURE AS W O R D OF G O D

184

These a n d related q u e s t i o n s w e r e d e b a t e d in C a t h o l i c t h e o l o g y s h o r t l y before Vatican II. A c c o r d i n g t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t I m y s e l f r e a c h e d at t h e t i m e ,

9

Trent b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e m e a n i n g of S c r i p t u r e

e m e r g e s in t h e a p o s t o l i c t r a d i t i o n s . In t h e l a n g u a g e o f " w o r d a n d s a c r a m e n t , " d e a r t o t h e R e f o r m e r s , t h e m e a n i n g of t h e w r i t t e n w o r d is elicited b y faithful p r a c t i c e o f t h e s a c r a m e n t s , for t h e s a c r a m e n t s t h e m s e l v e s d r a w t h e i r graceful c o n t e n t s from t h e p r o m i s e of C h r i s t t h a t is c o n v e y e d in t h e w o r d , t h i s p r o m i s e b e i n g called, in classical C a t h o l i c l a n g u a g e , t h e i r d i v i n e i n s t i t u t i o n . ' T h u s , in t h e T r i d e n t i n e f o r m u l a t i o n , S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e t r a d i t i o n s deserve " o n e a n d t h e s a m e affection of p i e t y " b e c a u s e t h e y are i n s e p a r a b l e . In t h e m e s s a g e o f S c r i p t u r e t h e t r a d i t i o n s find t h e i r u l t i m a t e o r i g i n a n d j u s t i f i c a t i o n ; a n d it is t h r o u g h t h e t r a d i t i o n s t h a t t h e m e s s a g e o f S c r i p t u r e is carried t o t h e p o s t a p o s t o l i c g e n e r a t i o n s . The C h u r c h ' s t e a c h i n g a n d b e lief as t h e y are b e i n g lived u n f o l d t h e m e a n i n g of S c r i p t u r e in t h e h e a r t s o f t h e faithful. V. VATICAN C O U N C I L II

The d i s c u s s i o n s of t h e 1 9 5 0 s a b o u t t h e decree o f T r e n t r e m o t e l y p a v e d t h e w a y for t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n Dei Verbum

o f Vatican II ( N o -

v e m b e r 1 8 , 1 9 6 5 ) . In c o n t r a s t w i t h t h e Tridentine e m p h a s i s o n t h e g o s p e l , a t t e n t i o n was t h e n focused o n r e v e l a t i o n . It is t h e d i v i n e reve l a t i o n t h a t is w r i t t e n in S c r i p t u r e a n d t r a n s m i t t e d b y t r a d i t i o n ( n o w u s u a l l y c o n c e p t u a l i z e d in t h e s i n g u l a r ) . As t o t h e m e a n i n g o f S c r i p t u r e , it is a p p r o a c h e d f r o m t w o different angles. F r o m a " m a t e r i a l " p o i n t o f view, Vatican II e q u a t e s this m e a n i n g w i t h " w h a t t h e s a c r e d w r i t e r s t r u l y m e a n t a n d G o d gracefully revealed t h r o u g h t h e i r w o r d s " (ch. 3 , n o . 12). 'Two p r i n c i p l e s s h o u l d b e at w o r k in t h e process o f u n c o v e r i n g this m e a n i n g . First, o n e s h o u l d take a c c o u n t of the "literary forms" a n d the "customary, indigenous ways of feeling, of s p e a k i n g , o r o f telling a tale t h a t o b t a i n e d in t h e s a c r e d a u t h o r s ' t i m e s , a n d o f t h o s e c o m m o n l y u s e d in h u m a n relat i o n s at t h a t p e r i o d . " S e c o n d , " S c r i p t u r e m u s t b e r e a d a n d i n t e r p r e t e d in t h e s a m e spirit in w h i c h it was w r i t t e n . " O n e c a n also r e a d t h i s s e n t e n c e in t h e m a s c u l i n e : "in t h e s a m e S p i r i t in w h o m it was w r i t t e n . " In e i t h e r case t h e H o l y S p i r i t is a t w o r k , w h e t h e r d i r e c t l y o r in t h e effects of d i v i n e i n s p i r a t i o n . B u t h o w are w e t o identify t h e sense of t h e Spirit? Dei Verbum suggests a t r i p l e c r i t e r i o n : t h e c o h e r -

'' George H . Tavard, Holy Writ or Holy Church. The Crisis of the Reformation ( N e w York: H a r p e r & Row, 1959) 2 0 7 - 9 .

Protestant

G E O R G E H . TAVARD, A.A.

185

e n c e of t h e w h o l e S c r i p t u r e , h a r m o n y w i t h t h e C h u r c h ' s living t r a d i t i o n , a n d t h e a n a l o g y o f faith. B u t t h e l i v i n g t r a d i t i o n will n o t b e c o m p l e t e before this w o r l d e n d s a n d t h e N e w J e r u s a l e m is m a d e m a n i fest. In o t h e r w o r d s , t h e full m e a n i n g o f S c r i p t u r e will b e a n e s c h a t o l o g i c a l e v e n t , w h a t t h e c o u n c i l calls " t h e w o n d r o u s d e s c e n t of e t e r n a l W i s d o m t o o u r level" ( n o . 1 3 ) . Before t h e e s c h a t o n , t h e n e a r est a p p r o x i m a t i o n o f t h i s W i s d o m is n o o t h e r t h a n t h e s u m total of t h e living t r a d i t i o n u n t i l o u r o w n t i m e , t h e C h u r c h o f t h e p a s t a n d t h e p r e s e n t s e e n a n d e x p e r i e n c e d as o n e , in a n t i c i p a t i o n o f t h e eschatological

fulfillment.

A s e c o n d p o i n t of view, t h a t o n e m a y call "final," is t h u s i n t r o d u c e d , w h i c h is d e v e l o p e d in t h e last c h a p t e r o f Dei

Verbum:

The

w r i t t e n W o r d o f G o d is n o t given o n l y for t h e sake o f t h e objective t r u t h of its c o n t e n t s as d i v i n e r e v e l a t i o n b u t also for t h e p u r p o s e of n u r t u r i n g t h e life o f t h e faithful, for its v a l u e as s p i r i t u a l n o u r i s h m e n t . T o believers it s h o u l d b e " s t r e n g t h of t h e i r faith, food for t h e i r s o u l , p u r e a n d p e r e n n i a l f o n t o f t h e i r s p i r i t u a l life" ( n o . 2 1 ) . W o r d a n d s a c r a m e n t are t h e n j o i n e d t o g e t h e r , for t h e e u c h a r i s t i c table is " b o t h t h a t of t h e W o r d o f G o d a n d t h a t o f t h e b o d y o f C h r i s t . " W o r d a n d s a c r a m e n t , t h e text affirms, h a v e always b e e n c o n s i d e r e d by t h e C h u r c h " a l o n g w i t h H o l y T r a d i t i o n , as t h e s u p r e m e r u l e of h e r f a i t h . " In t u r n , " t h e o l o g y rests u p o n t h e w r i t t e n W o r d o f G o d in u n i t y w i t h H o l y T r a d i t i o n " ( n o . 2 4 ) . This is t h e s o u r c e o f all ministry. The d o c t r i n e o f V a t i c a n II m a y t h e n b e s u m m e d u p in t h e idea t h a t S c r i p t u r e has a twofold relevance: to the f o r m u l a t i o n of d o c t r i n e , i n s o f a r as it d e p i c t s t h e e a r l i e s t r e c e p t i o n o f t h e r e v e l a t i o n t o t h e a p o s t l e s ; a n d t o t h e g r o w t h o f f a i t h , t h a t is i n s p i r e d a n d i l l u s t r a t e d b y it as a G o d - g i v e n p a r a b l e o f t h e b e l i e v e r s ' e x p e r i ence of grace. V I . PATRISTIC ORIGINS

The d o c t r i n e o f S c r i p t u r e as W o r d o f G o d b e l o n g s t o a l o n g t h e o l o g i c a l t r a d i t i o n . In t h e first c e n t u r i e s t h e Fathers o f t h e C h u r c h , t h e G r e e k s first, followed a n d e c h o e d by t h e L a t i n s , v i e w e d o n l y t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t as S c r i p t u r e , w h i c h w i t n e s s e d t o t h e f u t u r e c o m i n g o f t h e L o r d , t h e L i v i n g W o r d . W h e n C h r i s t c a m e as its fulfillment, n o o t h e r S c r i p t u r e s w e r e , in p r i n c i p l e , n e e d e d . The i n c a r n a t e W o r d was h i m s e l f k n o w n f r o m t h e "rule of faith" [regula fidei), w h i c h m a y b e p r a c t i c a l l y i d e n t i f i e d w i t h t h e b a p t i s m a l creed, t h e c o n t e n t s o f w h i c h w e r e s u p p o r t e d b y t h e a p o s t o l i c w r i t i n g s . B u t in t h e c o n t r o v e r s i e s

186

SCRIPTURE AS W O R D OF G O D

a g a i n s t t h e G n o s t i c s a n d against M a r c i o n t h e s e a p o s t o l i c w r i t i n g s w e r e r e c o g n i z e d as, or, if o n e prefers, p r o m o t e d t o t h e r a n k of, S c r i p t u r e ; a n d s i n c e t h e y differ f r o m t h e p r e v i o u s Bible in t h a t t h e y s p e a k directly a n d explicitly of C h r i s t , t h e y q u i c k l y b e c a m e t h e p r i m a r y S c r i p t u r e s of C h r i s t i a n s . O n c e t h e a c c r e t i o n o f t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t t o t h e S c r i p t u r e s was finalized, t h e c h r i s t o c e n t r i c i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of all S c r i p t u r e , O l d a n d N e w , b e c a m e m o r e m a r k e d , a n d S c r i p t u r e g a i n e d a p r i o r i t y o f its o w n as t h a t e l e m e n t in t h e t r a d i t i o n t h a t reveals t h e ways of t h e d i v i n e W o r d o n e a r t h . As is p a t e n t t o a n y r e a d e r o f h o m i l e t i c l i t e r a t u r e , h o w e v e r , S c r i p t u r e s o o n a c q u i r e d , especially a m o n g t h e later fathers, a m u l t i t u d e of senses. A l r e a d y for O r i g e n t h e historical o r literal s e n s e s e r v e d as s t a r t i n g p o i n t for s p i r i t u a l a p p l i c a t i o n s . S c r i p t u r e is t h e f o o d of t h e s o u l . A n d if t h e C h r i s t i a n soul lives b y faith, t h i s faith is n u r t u r e d b y t h e experience of C h r i s t i a n love a n d by t h e i m a g i n a t i o n w h i c h projects the present into the eschatological future and anticipates

the

e s c h a t o l o g i c a l f u t u r e in t h e p r e s e n t — w h i c h is t h e c o r e o f t h e C h r i s t i a n h o p e . In its early stages, t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n of s p i r i t u a l senses m a y h a v e b e e n i n d e b t e d to t h e h e r m e n e u t i c s of P h i l o a n d to t h e ways of H e l l e n i s t i c r h e t o r i c . B u t it was s o o n c h a n n e l e d i n t o t h r e e p r i v i l e g e d senses t h a t w e r e c o n n e c t e d w i t h faith, love, a n d h o p e . In his

Moralia

in Job G r e g o r y t h e G r e a t was less i n t e r e s t e d in t h e literal t e x t u a l sense t h a n in its relevance t o t h e s e t h r e e aspects o f C h r i s t i a n life. V I I . T H E MEDIEVAL EPISODE

In its m o n a s t i c f l o w e r i n g f r o m t h e e i g h t h t o t h e twelfth c e n t u r y , the medieval tradition shared the patristic concern a b o u t the threefold a p p l i c a t i o n o f S c r i p t u r e . Yet w i t h t h e e n d of t h e twelfth c e n t u r y a n d t h e b l o s s o m i n g of s c h o l a s t i c t h e o l o g y in t h e t h i r t e e n t h , s y s t e m atic t h o u g h t i n c r e a s i n g l y s h a p e d t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f its m e a n i n g o r m e a n i n g s . W h e r e r h e t o r i c form e r l y a c t e d as t h e chief a n c i l l a r y s u p p o r t of biblical h e r m e n e u t i c s , g r a m m a r first, t h e n logic, a n d finally m e t a p h y s i c s a c q u i r e d s t a t u s as tools for s c r i p t u r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . In t h e p r o c e s s , h o w e v e r , m e a n i n g c h a n g e d . It c a m e t o b e m o r e closely related t o t h e r e c i p i e n t s o f t h e W o r d . T h u s , i n n u m e r a b l e m e d i e v a l a u t h o r s f o u n d t h e sense of S c r i p t u r e in t h e C h u r c h seen m e t a p h o r i c a l l y as t h e universal b r i d e of C h r i s t , in t h e souls of t h e faithful as C h r i s t ' s i n d i v i d u a l b r i d e s , a n d in t h e V i r g i n M a r y as t h e typical, i c o n i c b r i d e in w h o m b o t h t h e C h u r c h a n d t h e s o u l are given a graceful m o d e l . F a i t h , love, a n d h o p e — e a c h of t h e m a gift o f G o d , b u t a gift t h a t c o m e s alive in t h e believer's

G E O R G E H . TAVARD, A.A.

187

h u m a n c o n s c i e n c e — d e t e r m i n e d the chief variants of spiritual interpretation, namely, the analogical, tropological, and anagogical senses. The basic process was neatly s u m m e d u p by H u g h o f St. V i c t o r , w h o , in t h e twelfth c e n t u r y , was d e e p l y c o n c e r n e d a b o u t C h r i s t i a n symbols: T h e exposition [of Scripture] contains three points, the letter, the sense, the sententia [doctrine]. T h e letter is the proper ordering of discourse. T h e sense is the easy and obvious signification that the letter presents at face-value. T h e sententia is the deeper understanding that cannot be found without exposition and interpretation. . . . First the letter, then the sense, then the sententia: when this is done the explanation is finished.'" In this general f r a m e w o r k a n u m b e r o f a u t h o r s — s u c h as t h e Cistercian a b b o t , Baldwin of C a n t e r b u r y , a n d the Franciscan B o n a v e n t u r e — m a d e it clear t h a t t h e literal sense o f t h e N e w Testam e n t is already s p i r i t u a l . It is t h e letter itself, littera, a n d n o t t h e reader's i m a g i n a t i o n , t h a t is t h e locus of t h e s p i r i t u a l senses, t h a t i m p l i e s b o t h sensus and sententia. W h a t is t o be believed, w h a t is t o be d o n e , w h a t is t o be h o p e d for are n o o t h e r t h a n w h a t t h e letter says as it s p e a k s of t h e p e r s o n , t h e w o r d s , a n d t h e a c t i o n s o f C h r i s t . In this case s p i r i t u a l d i m e n s i o n s are n o t a d d e d t o t h e letter. B u t t h e letter is itself fully s p i r i t u a l . It o p e n s w i n d o w s o n t h e basic d i m e n sions of faith w h i c h t h e Scholastics i t e m i z e d , in light of t h e i r faculty psychology, as t h e t h e o l o g i c a l virtues o f faith, love, a n d h o p e . As to t h e letter o f t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t , it finds its s p i r i t u a l m e a n i n g , as B o n a v e n t u r e e x p l a i n e d , n o t in itself b u t in t h e N e w , for A b r a h a m , M o s e s , a n d t h e p r o p h e t s said a n d d i d n o t h i n g t h a t d i d n o t e v e n t u ally refer to C h r i s t . T h e p r o p h e c y o f J o a c h i m o f Fiora was n o t entirely alien t o this logic, w h e n , p u s h i n g t h e process further, t h e C a l a b r i a n a b b o t affirmed t h a t t h e m e a n i n g of t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t is n o t t h e last t h a t is i n t e n d e d b y G o d . A n eschatological m e a n i n g is still to be revealed, a m y s t e r y to be u n f o l d e d . W h a t t h e c h u r c h d i d n o t a c c e p t in t h e t h i r t e e n t h c e n t u r y ( L a t e r a n C o u n c i l IV, 1 2 1 5 ) was J o a c h i m ' s n o t i o n t h a t t h i s u n f o l d i n g will lead t o a n e w revelation o f t h e Spirit in a p u r e l y m o n a s t i c ecclesia, b e y o n d C h r i s t a n d t h e p r e s e n t f o r m of t h e C h u r c h . M a r t i n leather h i m s e l f s t o o d s q u a r e l y in t h e line of m o n a s t i c t h e o l o g y a n d t h e basic m e d i e v a l t r a d i t i o n w h e n , w i t h o u t a b a n d o n ° Diditscaiion,

Ii, 9.

SCRIPTURE AS W O R D OF G O D

188

i n g rhc v o c a b u l a r y of t h e s p i r i t u a l s e n s e , h e f o c u s e d t h e r e a d i n g o f t h e Bible o n " w h a t carries C h r i s t " {was Christum

treibet),

what the

letter of S c r i p t u r e says of C h r i s t ' s s a v i n g w o r k t h a t is effective in t h e justification o f t h e s i n n e r . In this case, faith a l o n e , t h e pistis

o f St.

Paul, a l r e a d y c o n t a i n s e v e r y t h i n g s p i r i t u a l , b o t h t h e love t h a t is alive in g o o d w o r k s a n d t h e h o p e t h a t is t o t a l reliance o n t h e p r o m i s e s o f Christ. V I I I . THOMAS AQUINAS In t h e t h e o l o g i c a l m e t h o d of T h o m a s A q u i n a s , S c h o l a s t i c i s m t u r n e d C a t h o l i c h e r m e n e u t i c s a r o u n d . I n d e e d , as p r e a c h e r a n d as p o e t t h e A n g e l i c D o c t o r w a s n o t averse t o p r o v i d i n g s p i r i t u a l senses t h a t w e r e familiar t o his t i m e s . Yet as t h e o l o g i a n h e was q u i t e clear t h a t " o n l y t h e literal sense p r o v i d e s d e m o n s t r a t i v e a r g u m e n t s . " " In o t h e r w o r d s , w h a t e m e r g e s f r o m s p i r i t u a l or allegorical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s is n o t t h e r e v e l a t i o n . This is given b y t h e very letter of S c r i p t u r e . The s p i r i t u a l senses s u g g e s t a p p l i c a t i o n s t o t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s of life as faith inspires c h a r i t y a n d h o p e . Yet t h e letter itself, sacra pagina,

" t h e sacred p a g e , " is t h e n o r m of faith a n d t h e r e b y o f t h e o -

logical j u d g m e n t . In t h e s t r u c t u r e of t h e Summa,

"authorities," that

is, a p p r o p r i a t e passages f r o m S c r i p t u r e o r f r o m s o m e of t h e Fathers of t h e C h u r c h , c o n s t i t u t e t h e p r i n c i p l e o f ' T h o m a s ' s r e s p o n s e ( i n t r o d u c e d b y sed contra)

to the various opinions t h a t have just been

listed. Sed contra d e t e r m i n e s t h e m o m e n t w h e n t h e diverse suggest i o n s o f t h e o l o g i a n s a n d d o c t o r s are b r o u g h t t o a s t o p by t h e testim o n y of t h e w r i t t e n W o r d . It is in t h i s t e s t i m o n y t h a t Thomas's s o l u t i o n , e x p o u n d e d in t h e b o d y of his r e s p o n s e , finds its s t a r t i n g p o i n t a n d its u l t i m a t e j u s t i f i c a t i o n . W h e n medieval theologians used formulations that anticipated t h e R e f o r m e r s ' p r i n c i p l e of Scriptura

sola, t h e y still g e n e r a l l y m e a n t

S c r i p t u r e w i t h t h e s p i r i t u a l senses t h a t h a d b e e n e x p o u n d e d in n u m e r o u s c o m m e n t a r i e s . S c r i p t u r e a l o n e , in this case, i n c l u d e d its s u b s e q u e n t h e r m e n e u t i c a l t r a d i t i o n . B u t the theological m e t h o d of A q u i n a s u n d o u b t e d l y c o n t r i b u t e d to d o w n g r a d i n g t h e search for spiritual senses t h a t c o u l d b e d i s t i n c t f r o m t h e literal m e a n i n g of S c r i p t u r e . W i t h A q u i n a s , t h e "sacred p a g e , " S c r i p t u r e , d e s i g n a t e s t h e literal m e a n i n g a l o n e . A t t h e s a m e t i m e , h o w e v e r , A q u i n a s k e p t t h e e s t a b l i s h e d s c h o l a s t i c p r a c t i c e of a r g u i n g from isolated s e n t e n c e s . The use of p i n p o i n t e d references t o S c r i p t u r e m a y h a v e b e e n p a r t l y d u e " Summa

theologiae, I, q. 1, a. 10, ad 1.

G E O R G E H . TAVARD, A.A.

189

to t h e necessity o f often w o r k i n g w i t h c o l l e c t i o n s o f excerpts r a t h e r w i t h full texts. In a n y case, it also favored an u n f o r t u n a t e c o l l a p s i n g of biblical a r g u m e n t a t i o n i n t o a few w o r d s w h i c h t h e r e b y t e n d e d t o b e given a b s o l u t e v a l u e . A l o n g w i t h q u o t a t i o n s from S c r i p t u r e t h e Scholastics a r g u e d from q u o t a t i o n s from t h e F a t h e r s o f t h e C h u r c h , from t h e i r o w n m o r e r e c e n t f o r e r u n n e r s , a n d also o c c a s i o n a l l y f r o m A r i s t o t l e a n d his c o m m e n t a t o r s . B u t t h i s , in lesser m i n d s , c o u l d m a k e S c r i p t u r e as r e m o t e f r o m religious c o n c e r n s as A r i s t o t l e was or, reversely, it c o u l d give r e v e l a t o r y v a l u e t o A r i s t o t l e a n d t o w h a t was t a k e n to b e t h e n a t u r a l law. S u c h a n a s s u m p t i o n w a s n o t u n k n o w n in t h e t h e o l o g i c a l textb o o k s of t h e early t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r y , w h e n Leo XIII's e n d o r s e m e n t of N e o - S c h o l a s t i c i s m as t h e official t h e o l o g y of C a t h o l i c s e m i n a r i e s p r o m o t e d t h e q u a s i c a n o n i z a t i o n of w h a t was t a k e n t o b e t h e C h r i s tian reading of Aristotle. I X . RECENT QUESTIONS

T h e place o f S c r i p t u r e in C a t h o l i c t h e o l o g y b e g a n t o c h a n g e , t h o u g h slowly, w i t h t h e s p r e a d of m o d e r n scientific exegesis. B u t w e h a v e t h e n r u n i n t o o t h e r p r o b l e m s . W h e n t h e literal sense is n o l o n g e r i d e n t i f i e d w i t h w h a t Jesus s a i d a n d d i d , b u t w i t h w h a t v a r i o u s a u t h o r s , c o n v e y i n g t h e c o n c e r n s of w h a t e v e r local c h u r c h t h e y k n e w , i n t e r p r e t e d h i m as s a y i n g a n d d o i n g , t h e p r i o r i t y o f t h e literal sense n e e d s t o b e qualified. Was Christum

treibet,

t o use L u t h e r ' s f o r m u l a ,

is t h e n far f r o m e v i d e n t , unless o n e can d r a w o n a special i n s i g h t i n t o t h e g o s p e l . S u c h a n i n s i g h t m i g h t c o m e from t h e p r e v i o u s t r a d i t i o n or f r o m t h e t e s t i m o n y o f t h e S p i r i t i n d e p e n d e n t l y of t h e p r e s e n t r e a d i n g of S c r i p t u r e . In t h e a b s e n c e o f a clear c r i t e r i o n for i n t e r p r e t i n g S c r i p t u r e a n d d i s c e r n i n g t h e W o r d of G o d in it, t h e w a y is w i d e o p e n t o n e w k i n d s o f s p i r i t u a l senses. In fact, n e w m e a n i n g s n e e d n o t r e q u i r e d r a s t i c revisions o f p r e vious principles o f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . A small qualification m a y be e n o u g h t o c h a n g e t h e w h o l e t o n e of biblical r e a d i n g . By d r a w i n g a t t e n t i o n t o the self-transcendent potentialities of creation,

transcendental

T h o m i s m itself o p e n s u p n o t o n l y a n e w e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e h u m a n b u t also a s y m p a t h e t i c h e a r i n g o f t h e Utopian h o p e s o f N e w Age. A d m i t t e d l y , this is n o t w i t h o u t d a n g e r a n d s h o u l d n o t b e h a i l e d n a ively as a b r e a k t h r o u g h . It calls for critical a p p r a i s a l . O r let us focus o n t h e preferential o p t i o n for t h e p o o r , a n d politics c a n b e c o m e a key for i n t e r p r e t i n g S c r i p t u r e , w i t h t h e u n a v o i d a b l e c o n s e q u e n c e t h a t c o n f l i c t i n g political readings of S c r i p t u r e will arise. Bossuet's

Politique

SCRIPTURK AS W O R D OF G O D

190 tirée de l'Ecriture

Sainte

was cast precisely in t h a t m o l d , a n d w h a t h e

f o u n d in S c r i p t u r e was a justification o f L o u i s X I V ' s a b s o l u t e m o n archy. In t h e e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y t h e f r e q u e n t a p p e a l of p i o u s t h e o l o gians t o d i v i n e p r o v i d e n c e t o e x p l a i n t h e existence o f p o v e r t y a n d t h e p o o r was in t h e s a m e vein. T h e d o u b l e l a n g u a g e o f a preferential o p t i o n for t h e p o o r a n d o f s p e n d i n g m i l l i o n s o f dollars o n p a p a l j o u r n e y s is n o t e x e m p t f r o m t h e a m b i g u i t y o f politics b a s e d u p o n the Scriptures. A n d whatever their c o n t e m p o r a r y justification, the insights a n d also t h e p r o b l e m s o f l i b e r a t i o n t h e o l o g y c a n n o t b e t o tally s e p a r a t e d f r o m a s i m i l a r a m b i g u i t y . O r let us c h o o s e a n e x i s t e n tial key. If this is t h a t of B u l t m a n n , o n e o b t a i n s a d e m y t h o l o g i z e d a n d in fact s o o n d i s i n c a r n a t e r e a d i n g o f S c r i p t u r e . B u t let it b e t h e n e w a w a r e n e s s o f f e m i n i n e e x i s t e n c e , a n d h e r m e n e u t i c s is h a n d e d a n o t h e r key that opens new insights into the implications of the gosp e l . O r let us find a h e r m e n e u t i c a l key in h u m a n i t y ' s general s e a r c h for t h e U l t i m a t e , a n d t h e J e w i s h a n d C h r i s t i a n S c r i p t u r e s b e c o m e o n e o f m a n y sets in a universal c o l l e c t i o n o f r e v e l a t o r y t e x t s . Thus o u r t i m e s are w i t n e s s i n g a n e w i n c a r n a t i o n of t h e o l d search for s p i r i t u a l m e a n i n g s in t h e s a m e texts t h a t h a v e b e e n read, in different w a y s , from t h e b e g i n n i n g . B u t this search h a s n o w b e e n freed from t h e classical c o n c e r n for t h e t h e o l o g i c a l v i r t u e s o f faith, love, a n d h o p e , w h i c h , all o f t h e m b e i n g c e n t e r e d in C h r i s t , s e r v e d to c o n t r o l t h e o l d s p i r i t u a l exegesis. A t this p o i n t in t h e h i s t o r y o f b i b lical r e a d i n g , h o w e v e r , t h e p a t r i s t i c - m e d i e v a l c o n c e r n for active faith, a n d t h e c h r i s t o c e n t r i c a n d soteriological p r i n c i p l e o f M a r t i n L u t h e r ' s exegesis, are b o t h in d a n g e r o f b e i n g stifled precisely b y n e w keys t o the Scripture. X . LESSONS OF M O D E R N LINGUISTICS

It s e e m s t o m e difficult t o s p e a k of r e a d i n g t h e W o r d t o d a y w i t h o u t l i s t e n i n g t o t h e m o d e r n sciences of l a n g u a g e . W h e n o n e s p e a k s of t h e W o r d of G o d in a C h r i s t i a n c o n t e x t , o n e affirms t h e existence of a b o d y o f w r i t i n g s in w h i c h c o n t e m p o r a r y C h r i s t i a n s believe t h a t t h e y h a v e f o u n d t h e W o r d o f G o d . B u t t h i s is n o t o n l y t o say t h a t successive c o m m u n i c a t i o n s from G o d w e r e w r i t t e n d o w n in biblical t i m e s a n d in t h e c e n t u r y t h a t f o l l o w e d t h e d e a t h o f J e s u s o f N a z a r e t h , or t h a t t h e h i s t o r y o f d i v i n e c o m m u n i c a t i o n s t o a c h o s e n p e o p l e c a n b e r e c o n s t r u c t e d w i t h t h e h e l p of t h e O l d a n d t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t w r i t i n g s . G i v e n t h e t h e o l o g y of t h e Trinity, it is also s a y i n g t h a t S c r i p t u r e is b o t h t h e W o r d o f G o d w r i t t e n a n d also o n e m o d e of t h e p r e s e n c e o n e a r t h , a m o n g h u m a n s , o f t h e e t e r n a l W o r d o f G o d . The

GEORGE. H . TAVARD, A.A.

191

e t e r n a l W o r d is also called t h e e t e r n a l S o n , t h e S e c o n d P e r s o n , t h e L o r d , t h e R e d e e m e r a n d Savior, t h e W i s d o m , I m a g e o r I c o n of G o d . In r e l a t i o n to h i m G o d is called Father, t h e U n o r i g i n a t e d , t h e First P e r s o n . A n d his Spirit, t h e T h i r d P e r s o n , s p o k e t h r o u g h t h e p r o p h ets a n d n o w , as Paraclete a n d C o m f o r t e r , a b i d e s in t h e C h u r c h a n d in t h e faithful s o u l . A special r e l a t i o n s h i p is t h u s suggested b e t w e e n S c r i p t u r e as W o r d of G o d a n d t h e d i v i n e T r i n i t a r i a n life. S c r i p t u r e has r e c o r d e d t h e w o r d s p o k e n t o t h e p r o p h e t s a n d t h r o u g h t h e evangelists a n d epistle w r i t e r s o f t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t . B u t t h e r e is m o r e t o it. It also e m b o d ies t h e p r e s e n c e o f t h e d i v i n e W o r d t h a t n o c r e a t e d m i n d a n d m o u t h c a n speak, a n d t h a t m a y b e d i s c e r n e d o n l y t h r o u g h faith in a n e x p e r i e n c e t h a t is s i m i l a r t o w h a t J e a n C a l v i n d e s i g n a t e d as t h e i n t e r i o r t e s t i m o n y o f t h e H o l y S p i r i t . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e C h r i s t i a n faith, it is t h i s d i v i n e W o r d w h o w a s i n c a r n a t e as t h e p r o p h e t Jesus o f N a z a r e t h , b e c o m i n g o n e o f us, b e i n g s e e n , h e a r d , a n d t o u c h e d , a n d l e a v i n g a m e m o r i a l o f his p r e s e n c e in t h e e u c h a r i s t i c m e a l . S c r i p t u r e is t h u s p r o f o u n d l y c h r i s t o c e n t r i c , f o c u s e d f o r w a r d , in t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t , a n d , as it w e r e , b a c k w a r d , in t h e N e w , o n t h e events o f t h e b i r t h , life, a n d d e a t h of J e s u s , a n d o n t h e r e n e w e d e x p e r i e n c e o f his p r e s e n c e w h i c h t h e disciples called his r i s i n g f r o m t h e d e a d . W h e n w e s p e a k o f t h e S e c o n d P e r s o n as W o r d , w e o f c o u r s e s p e a k analogically. W e m o v e in t h e area of s e m i o t i c s a n d s y m b o l i s m . W e affirm in G o d t h a t w h i c h allows us to use c o m p a r i s o n s

from

h u m a n l a n g u a g e a n d e x p e r i e n c e t o p o i n t t o G o d . A n d as, in h u m a n l a n g u a g e , w r i t i n g is t h e sign of s p e e c h a n d s p e e c h t h e sign a n d ins t r u m e n t of t h o u g h t , so S c r i p t u r e is t h e sign o f p r o p h e t i c w o r d s s p o k e n o n e a r t h , w h i c h are t h e m s e l v e s t h e sign a n d i n s t r u m e n t o f G o d ' s e t e r n a l W o r d . B e t w e e n S c r i p t u r e a n d t h e e t e r n a l W o r d t h e r e is a s e m i o t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p . T h e u l t i m a t e m e a n i n g o f S c r i p t u r e is t h e eternal W o r d as it " b e c a m e flesh for us a n d for o u r s a l v a t i o n . " X I . T H E ULTIMATE MEANING

W e are t h u s faced w i t h t h e p a r a d o x t h a t t h e u l t i m a t e m e a n i n g o f S c r i p t u r e is, in final analysis, ineffable. It lies b e y o n d a n y a t t e m p t at f o r m u l a t i o n , w h e t h e r in a t h e o l o g y o f g l o r y o r in a t h e o l o g y o f t h e C r o s s . " T h e o l o g i a n s o f g l o r y " h a v e c l a i m e d g l o w i n g success for t h e i r i n v e s t i g a t i o n s of G o d a n d t h e d i v i n e r e v e l a t i o n . M o r e h u m b l y b e fore t h e m y s t e r y o f t h e d e a t h o f C h r i s t , " t h e o l o g i a n s of t h e C r o s s , " as L u t h e r p e r c e i v e d , h a v e c o n t e m p l a t e d t h e infinite c o n d e s c e n s i o n o f G o d w h o in t h e d e a t h of C h r i s t p r o c l a i m s s i n n e r s just. Yet in b o t h

192

SCRIPTURE AS W O R D OF G O D

cases t h e reality o f G o d r e m a i n s h i d d e n — D e u s absconditus—bey o n d w h a t is said a n d i m a g i n e d , a n d n o less b e y o n d t h e h u m a n face of Jesus, living, d y i n g , or rising, t h a n b e y o n d t h e h o p e d for g l o r y o f h u m a n a c h i e v e m e n t s . T h u s t h e r e always r e m a i n s a p r i n c i p l e o f u n c e r t a i n t y in o u r r e a d i n g of S c r i p t u r e . O n e m a y find in this t h e reas o n w h y each c o m i n g C h r i s t i a n g e n e r a t i o n c a n n o t s i m p l y take t h e S c r i p t u r e s a n d t h e W o r d of G o d for g r a n t e d b u t has t o receive t h e m anew. This is w h y t h e t o n e a n d c o n c e r n s of scientific exegesis vary every five t o t e n years, w h y each c u l t u r e w h e r e t h e C h r i s t i a n faith has t a k e n h o l d has c o m e u p w i t h n e w a p p r o a c h e s t o theology, w h y in t h e R o m a n E m p i r e a n d in later E u r o p e E a s t e r n a n d W e s t e r n insights have differed, a n d w h y a t t h e p r e s e n t t i m e Africa, Asia, a n d L a t i n A m e r i c a are o p e n i n g n e w a v e n u e s t o t h e S c r i p t u r e s , as are likewise d o i n g s o m e s e c t i o n s o f C h r i s t i a n society for w h i c h S c r i p t u r e w a s , u n t i l recently, a relatively closed b o o k . N o h u m a n c u l t u r e a n d n o s u m total o f h u m a n c u l t u r e s can a d e q u a t e l y g r a s p t h e m e a n i n g o f S c r i p t u r e as t h e i m p r i n t o f t h e eternal W o r d . O n e m a y be t e m p t e d to c o n c l u d e from this to a r e v e r e n t a g n o s ticism r e g a r d i n g t h e possibility of f o r m u l a t i n g t h e m e a n i n g of S c r i p t u r e in h u m a n l a n g u a g e . A n d this c o u l d o p e n u p t h e gate to a m a n i fold e x p l o i t a t i o n of S c r i p t u r e b y p a r t i s a n c o n c e r n s . For if, t h e u l t i m a t e m e a n i n g b e i n g ineffable, t h e r e is n o recognizable s t a n d a r d of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , t h e n t h e r e w o u l d s e e m t o b e n o c h e c k s a n d balances o n misuses o f t h e text. The p r o p e r c o n t r o l , h o w e v e r , is already available in t h e f u n d a m e n t a l p r i n c i p l e t h a t S c r i p t u r e is n o t given in o r d e r to be used. S c r i p t u r e is u s e d w h e n w e p l a c e ourselves above t h e text in o r d e r t o d e t e r m i n e its m e a n i n g . W h e n o n e realizes t h a t t h e o n l y possible place for t h e C h u r c h , its m e m b e r s , a n d its officers is b e l o w t h e W o r d , in a s t a n c e o f expectancy, o f a t t e n t i o n , of l i s t e n i n g , t h e n t h e text itself a c q u i r e s its c o r r e c t d i m e n s i o n . It b e c o m e s a m e d i u m for o b e d i e n t e n c o u n t e r w i t h t h e W o r d . O n e m a y t h e n rightly l o o k for a c a n o n w i t h i n t h e c a n o n , for a sign, w i t h i n t h e s e m i o t i c s y s t e m or systems o f S c r i p t u r e , t h a t t h e W o r d is p r e s e n t . L u t h e r ' s search for was Christum treibet c o n s t i t u t e s historically t h e first m a j o r a t t e m p t to d i s c e r n s u c h a n o r m . Yet even this does n o t solve t h e p r o b l e m o f the m e a n i n g of Scripture. T o say t h a t S c r i p t u r e is a w r i t i n g , a text, a d i s c o u r s e is t o i m p l y t h a t , w h a t e v e r its u l t i m a t e m e a n i n g as W o r d of G o d , it falls w i t h i n t h e s t r u c t u r e s of h u m a n l a n g u a g e . If G o d c o m m u n i c a t e s w i t h us t h r o u g h p r o p h e t s a n d apostles, t h e n G o d has n o c h o i c e b u t t o s p e a k a h u m a n l a n g u a g e . A text d e p e n d s originally o n t h e i n t e n t i o n of its a u t h o r a n d e v e n t u a l l y o n t h a t of its r e d a c t o r o r r e d a c t o r s . Yet, like a

GEORGE. H . TAVARD, A.A.

193

w o r k o f art, it s o o n a c q u i r e s a life of its o w n , i n d e p e n d e n t l y of t h e a u t h o r ' s i n t e n t . The l a n g u a g e u s e d follows its o w n laws, o f w h i c h t h e w r i t e r s m a y well h a v e b e e n u n a w a r e , b u t w h i c h are n o less effectively at w o r k for t h e i r u n a w a r e n e s s . The l a n g u a g e follows n o t o n l y t h e laws o f its f o r m u l a t i o n at t h e m o m e n t w h e n it is s p o k e n , b u t also t h e laws o f its r e c e p t i o n at t h e m o m e n t w h e n it is h e a r d o r read. Like all language, t h e n , Scripture becomes a s y n t a g m a t h a t may be analyzed a n d f o r m a l i z e d . It lies o p e n t o t h e test o f p a r a d i g m a t i c c o m m u t a t i o n . A b o v e all, it d e v e l o p s t h e m y t h i c a l d i m e n s i o n t h a t is to b e f o u n d in all w r i t i n g a b o u t t h e a b s o l u t e a n d t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t . S c r i p t u r e b e comes the written m y t h of Christianity, w h i c h may be systematically c o m p a r e d w i t h o t h e r m y t h s o f h u m a n k i n d , even t h o u g h , in t h e exp e r i e n c e of t h e faithful it b e l o n g s t o a level t h a t is n o t r e a c h e d b y o t h e r m y t h s , t h e level of t h e e t e r n a l W o r d , a n d t o a n e v e n t t h a t s h a t ters t h e n u m i n o u s c o n t e n t of all m y t h s , t h e e v e n t o f t h e C r o s s of Jesus. H u g h ' s p a t t e r n o f letter, sense, a n d sententia

can n o w be reinter-

p r e t e d . A t t h e m o m e n t o f letter, research leads t h e r e a d e r i n t o t h e s e m i o t i c s o f s c r i p t u r a l d i s c o u r s e . A t t h e m o m e n t of sense, several levels of significance are u n v e i l e d in t h e d i s c o u r s e . As t o t h e m o m e n t of sententia,

it is a p r e s u m a b l y rare ineffable i n s t a n t w h e n t h e r e a d e r

is lifted a b o v e t h e letter a n d its i m m e d i a t e m e a n i n g i n t o t h e r e a l m of t h e Spirit. C a r r i e d b y G o d ' s love f r o m g r a c e t o g r a c e , o n e m a y t h e n , like St. Paul, " h e a r ineffable w o r d s t h a t it is n o t p e r m i t t e d t o m a n to r e p e a t " (2 C o r . 1 2 : 4 ) . In s u c h w o r d s t h e u l t i m a t e m e a n i n g o f S c r i p t u r e is r e a c h e d : it is i d e n t i c a l w i t h t h e e t e r n a l W o r d . X I I . T H E ECUMENICAL TASK

In all o f today's c h u r c h e s , I a m afraid, t h e actual a n d even t h e official r e s o n a n c e o f S c r i p t u r e falls s h o r t of w h a t it s h o u l d b e . W e are n o t y e t far r e m o v e d f r o m t h e c o n c e p t i o n o f S c r i p t u r e as w o r d s d i c t a t e d b y G o d , w h i c h c o n v e y t h e d i v i n e r e v e l a t i o n in p r o p o s i t i o n a l f o r m . A t t h e s a m e t i m e t h e c h u r c h e s h a v e n o t effectively r e n o u n c e d t h e n o t i o n t h a t S c r i p t u r e is at t h e disposal o f m i n i s t e r s as a q u a r r y o f q u o t a b l e m a t t e r . P r o o f texts or i l l u s t r a t i o n s are e x t r a c t e d regardless of t h e i r sense in c o n t e x t . If t h e y c a n n o t b e t a k e n literally, t h e n o n e c a n still rely o n allegory t o m a k e a p o i n t , y e t w i t h o u t t h e s o p h i s t i c a t e d u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a l l e g o r y t h a t was familiar t o o u r m e d i e v a l a n c e s t o r s . Even p a p a l d o c u m e n t s a n d t h e decrees o f V a t i c a n II m i n e S c r i p t u r e for i l l u s t r a t i o n of t h e m e s r a t h e r t h a n as t h e o n e s o u r c e a n d n o r m of t h e l a n g u a g e of faith. B e t w e e n t h e f u n d a m e n t a l i s t a n d t h e

SCRIPTURE AS W O R D OF G O D

194

liberal w i n g s of C h r i s t i a n t h o u g h t , m o s t t h e o l o g i a n s refer to S c r i p t u r e as f r o m t h e o u t s i d e , a c c o r d i n g t o t h e s p e c u l a t i v e c o n c e r n s a n d n e e d s of t h e m o m e n t . This, t h e n , p o i n t s t o t h e r e m a i n i n g e c u m e n i c a l task. V a t i c a n II d e c l a r e d : " L i k e t h e C h r i s t i a n religion itself, all c h u r c h p r o c l a m a t i o n m u s t feed o n , a n d b e r u l e d by, H o l y S c r i p t u r e . T h e W o r d of G o d c o n t a i n s s u c h force a n d efficacy t h a t it s t a n d s o u t for t h e C h u r c h as n o u r i s h m e n t a n d h e a l t h a n d for t h e C h u r c h ' s c h i l d r e n as s t r e n g t h of t h e i r faith, f o o d for t h e i r s o u l , p u r e a n d p e r e n n i a l f o n t o f t h e i r s p i r i tual life" {Dei Verbum,

n o . 2 1 ) . A n d a g a i n : ". . . t h e s t u d y o f t h e

s a c r e d text s h o u l d b e , so to s p e a k , t h e s o u l o f sacred t h e o l o g y " ( n o . 2 4 ) . T h e task a h e a d for t h e c h u r c h e s t h a t desire r e c o n c i l i a t i o n is t o find t h e i r c o m m o n s o u l . The p r o c e s s c a n b e p u t s i m p l y , in w o r d s of a d m o n i t i o n t h a t are a d d r e s s e d t o a n e w b i s h o p in t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y R o m a n ritual for t h e o r d i n a t i o n of a b i s h o p : "Believe w h a t y o u read, p r a c t i c e w h a t y o u believe, p r e a c h w h a t y o u p r a c t i c e . " This p o i n t s h o u l d t h r o w l i g h t o n t h e i n t e r n a l a n d t h e e x t e r n a l d i a l o g u e of t h e c h u r c h e s . In t h e i r i n t e r n a l d i a l o g u e w i t h i n t h e i r c o m m o n profession of t h e C h r i s t i a n faith, it is m y o p i n i o n t h a t t h e first p h a s e o f e c u m e n i c a l c o n v e r s a t i o n s is n o w over. T h e d o c t r i n e s over w h i c h C a t h o l i c s a n d P r o t e s t a n t s h a v e differed h i s t o r i c a l l y h a v e b e e n a b u n d a n t l y d e b a t e d . A n d a series of a g r e e d s t a t e m e n t s h a v e c o n s i d e r a b l y n a r r o w e d t h e field of d i v e r g e n c e . The official d i a l o g u e s h a v e s u c c e e d e d in r e d u c i n g t h e differences to a m i n i m u m w h i c h , I s h o u l d t h i n k , h a r d l y justifies t h e c o n t i n u i n g s e p a r a t i o n o f t h e c h u r c h e s at t h e level o f faith. These a g r e e m e n t s o f c o u r s e still n e e d to b e received a n d a s s i m i l a t e d . B u t this will b e chiefly a m a t t e r o f t i m e . In t h e m e a n w h i l e o n e has t o start t h i n k i n g a b o u t o p e n i n g t h e s e c o n d p h a s e . C h r i s tians n o w n e e d t o d i a l o g u e a b o u t t h e i r use, m i s u s e , a n d a b u s e of t h e S c r i p t u r e s , w h i c h w e r e n o t m e a n t , in t h e first place, t o b e used. They s h o u l d t o g e t h e r — n o t s e p a r a t e l y — l e a r n h o w n o t t o b e "above G o d ' s w o r d , " a n d h o w t o serve "the W o r d , t e a c h i n g o n l y w h a t has b e e n t r a n s m i t t e d . . . " {Dei Verbum,

n o . 10). 'This d i a l o g u e s h o u l d b e g i n

w i t h a f u n d a m e n t a l r e e x a m i n a t i o n of p r i n c i p l e s a n d practices in t r y i n g t o listen t o t h e W o r d o f G o d a n d t o d r a w f r o m t h i s t h e p r o p e r c o n c l u s i o n s r e g a r d i n g p r a c t i c a l C h r i s t i a n living. W e h a v e a l o n g w a y t o g o before t h i s s e c o n d p h a s e c a n b e satisfactorily i m p l e m e n t e d . X I I I . T H E CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC C H U R C H

'This sense of a n u n f i n i s h e d task h a s b e e n h e i g h t e n e d for m e b y r e a d i n g t h e Catechism

of the Catholic

Church

as issued in F r e n c h at

G E O R G E H . TAVARD, A.A.

195

t h e e n d of 1 9 9 2 . Parallel to t h e Catechismus romanus or " C a t e c h i s m of t h e C o u n c i l o f f r e n t , " w h i c h e m b o d i e d t h e T r i d e n t i n e t e a c h i n g s , this v o l u m e p u r p o r t s to e m b o d y t h e t e a c h i n g s o f V a t i c a n II in a s i m p l e f o r m t h a t m a y serve as a m o d e l for t h e t e a c h i n g of c a t e c h i s m . It follows t h e g e n e r a l p l a n of t h e C a t e c h i s m o f t h e C o u n c i l o f f r e n t , as it d r a w s a t t e n t i o n , possibly b o r r o w i n g t h e l a n g u a g e of Islam, t o "four pillars," namely, t h e creed or profession o f faith, t h e s a c r a m e n t s of faith, t h e c o m m a n d m e n t s or life o f faith, a n d t h e Lord's Prayer or prayer of t h e believer. T h e text is m a d e of q u o t a t i o n s from t h e C o u n c i l w i t h occasional a d d i t i o n s a n d c o m m e n t s . 1

S t a r t i n g from t h e assertion t h a t " m a n is capax D e i " b y c r e a t i o n , ' t h e First P a r t explains t h a t G o d revealed h i m s e l f from t h e b e g i n n i n g , a n d t h e n t h r o u g h N o a h , A b r a h a m , t h e p e o p l e of Israel, a n d finally t h r o u g h " C h r i s t Jesus, t h e M e d i a t o r a n d t h e Fullness of all t h e Reve l a t i o n . " ' This revelation has b e e n " t r a n s m i t t e d " b y t h e " a p o s t o l i c t r a d i t i o n " w h i c h is m a d e of "the a p o s t o l i c p r e a c h i n g " a n d " a p o s t o l i c s u c c e s s i o n . " As w r i t t e n d o w n after "the first g e n e r a t i o n o f C h r i s t i a n s , " t h e S c r i p t u r e o f t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t "testifies to t h e process o f t h e living T r a d i t i o n . " ' ' 3

1

This a p p r o a c h , however, does n o t lead t h e c a t e c h i s m to c o n s i d e r t h e variety o f a n d t h e d y n a m i c e x c h a n g e s w i t h i n t h e living t r a d i t i o n t h a t e m e r g e from t h e c h r i s t o l o g i c a l diversity o f t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t . N o r d o e s it lead, as it c o u l d c o n c e i v a b l y d o , to an A u g u s t i n i a n a n a l y sis o f s e l f - k n o w l e d g e in t h e light o f G o d - k n o w l e d g e , as at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f Calvin's I n s t i t u t e s . In a typical m o v e in t h e s p i r i t o f t h e C o u n t e r R e f o r m a t i o n , it leads to t h e r e m a r k a b l e feat o f a f f i r m i n g "the m a g i s t e r i u m of t h e C h u r c h , " i m m e d i a t e l y identified as "the bishops in c o m m u n i o n w i t h t h e successor of Peter, t h e b i s h o p o f R o m e , " ' even before any c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h e W o r d of G o d in S c r i p t u r e a n d in t h e e a r l y t r a d i t i o n b e f o r e t h e e p i s c o p a l h i e r a r c h y h a d b e c o m e effective. 1

T h e m o r e d e t a i l e d article o n H o l y S c r i p t u r e c o m e s last in a t h r e e p r o n g e d p r e s e n t a t i o n o f " G o d e n c o u n t e r i n g M a n " (ch. 2 ) , t h a t is, in revelation (art. 1), in t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n o f revelation (art. 2 ) , in t h e H o l y S c r i p t u r e (art. 3 ) . T h i s article is a very brief s u m m a r y o f t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n Dei Verbum (five p a r a g r a p h s : C h r i s t as t h e o n e W o r d of S c r i p t u r e , i n s p i r a t i o n a n d t r u t h o f S c r i p t u r e , t h e H o l y Spirit as i n t e r p r e t e r of S c r i p t u r e , t h e c a n o n of t h e S c r i p t u r e s , S c r i p t u r e in t h e :

' Catéchisme, seer. I, ch. 1, p . 21. " Ibid., p . 2 8 . Ibid., ch. 2, p . 3 2 . -•• Ibid., p . 3 2 .

SCRIPTURE AS W O R D OF G O D

196

c h u r c h ' s life). T h e c o m m e n t a r y insists o n " t h e i n t e n t i o n o f t h e sac r e d a u t h o r s , " b u t it m a k e s n o allusion t o c o n t e m p o r a r y d e b a t e s o n h e r m e n e u t i c s ; a n d it i n c l u d e s a s e c t i o n o n t h e f o u r senses o f S c r i p ture a n d their "profound c o n c o r d a n c e . " '

6

T h i s , in m y j u d g m e n t , d o e s justice n e i t h e r t o t h e p r e s e n t w e a l t h of biblical s t u d i e s in C a t h o l i c circles, n o r t o t h e f i n d i n g s of t h e t h e o l o g y of t r a d i t i o n t h a t p r e c e d e d a n d followed V a t i c a n II, a n d still less t o t h e r i c h n e s s of t h e C a t h o l i c reflection o n S c r i p t u r e a n d its t r a d i t i o n t h a t was n u r t u r e d b y t h o s e d e v e l o p m e n t s . X I V . T H K EXTERNAL DIALOGUE

Still a n o t h e r p e r s p e c t i v e can b e o p e n e d , even if it is difficult to l o o k far d o w n i n t o it. As was s u g g e s t e d a b o v e in relation t o t h e available h e r m e n e u t i c a l keys t h a t lie a r o u n d t h e p r e s e n t theological w o r k s h o p , t h e e c u m e n i c a l h o r i z o n has b e e n c o n s i d e r a b l y b r o a d e n e d in r e c e n t years in t h e c o n t e x t o f w h a t w a s called for s o m e t i m e " t h e w i d e r e c u m e n i s m " a n d is n o w called "the e n c o u n t e r o f religions" o r t h e " d i a l o g u e b e t w e e n r e l i g i o n s . " This u n d o u b t e d l y raises n e w q u e s t i o n s for t h e C h r i s t i a n d o c t r i n e of t h e W o r d o f G o d . There is also, or t h e r e s h o u l d b e , n e x t t o t h e i n t e r n a l d i a l o g u e of C h r i s t i a n s a b o u t t h e W o r d o f G o d , a n external d i a l o g u e . The c h u r c h ' s e x t e r n a l d i a l o g u e is this b e g i n n i n g e n c o u n t e r b e t w e e n all t h e g r e a t religions o f t h e w o r l d . W i t h o u t p a s s i n g j u d g m e n t o n t h e i n t r i n s i c values o f t h e w o r l d relig i o n s as ways o f k n o w i n g a n d l o v i n g G o d , a n d even w h i l e h o l d i n g t h a t t h e r e c a n o n l y b e i d o l a t r y o u t s i d e o f t h e d i v i n e grace a n d revelat i o n given in C h r i s t , o n e m a y see t h e religions as c u l t u r a l d e v e l o p m e n t s t h a t h a v e specified p a r t i c u l a r ways o f b e i n g h u m a n . W h a t e v e r o n e prefers t o n a m e this m o v e m e n t , it is clear t h a t m a n y religions o u t s i d e t h e biblical s t r e a m r e c o g n i z e s o m e S c r i p t u r e s as s o m e h o w d i v i n e r e v e l a t i o n . I n d e e d , t h e C h r i s t i a n i n q u i r y i n t o t h e m e a n i n g of S c r i p t u r e p o i n t s t o t h e n e e d o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e place of s a c r e d w r i t i n g s in t h e o t h e r religions t h a t claim t o h a v e s o m e . O n e m a y t h e n w o n d e r h o w a C h r i s t i a n m a y read t h e S c r i p t u r e s t h a t h a v e developed outside the Judeo-Christian stream. I n d e e d o n e m a y view t h e K o r a n as a l e n g t h y m e d i t a t i o n o n t h e C r e a t o r , t h a t is precisely f o c u s e d o n t h e c e n t r a l a f f i r m a t i o n of t h e g r e a t n e s s a n d s o v e r e i g n t y of t h e C r e a t o r . M o r e o v e r , t h e n i n e t y - n i n e " b e a u t i f u l n a m e s " o f G o d — t h e n a m e s t h a t are f o u n d in t h e K o r a n — i n v i t e C h r i s t i a n believers t o f u r t h e r reflection o n t h e d i v i n e Ibid., p. 3 7 .

GEORGE. H . TAVARD, A.A.

197

a t t r i b u t e s . T h e r e are also t h e sacred w r i t i n g s o f t h e m o n o t h e i s t i c rel i g i o n s , o l d as in Z o r o a s t r i a n i s m ( t h e G a t h a s a n d o t h e r texts o f t h e Avesta), or m o r e r e c e n t l y like t h e s a c r e d w r i t i n g s o f t h e S i k h s . A n d o n e m a y a d d t h e q u a s i - s c r i p t u r a l s t a t u s of t h e T a l m u d o r of t h e K a b b a l a h in s o m e f o r m s of later J u d a i s m . A n d w h a t of t h o s e w r i t ings t h a t h a v e c o m e t o f u n c t i o n as a d d i t i o n a l t o t h e Bible in m a n y heterodox m o v e m e n t s that have grown o u t of Christianity? There are f u r t h e r p r o b l e m s in r e l a t i o n t o t h e m e a n i n g o f S c r i p tures o u t s i d e o f t h e m o n o t h e i s t i c religions in t h e s t r i c t sense. W h a t c a n it m e a n t h a t s o m e w r i t i n g s are r e c o g n i z e d as s a c r e d w h e n t h e r e is n o belief in o n e a b s o l u t e C r e a t o r w h o speaks t h r o u g h t h e m o r has i n s p i r e d t h e m ? 'There are t h e V e d a s , t h e U p a n i s h a d s a n d t h e g r e a t epics of H i n d u i s m , t h a t i n c l u d e t h e B h a g a v a d G i t a . 'There is t h e T r i p i t a k a o f B u d d h i s m in b o t h t h e Small a n d t h e G r e a t Vehicles. W h a t d o e s it m e a n for H i n d u s t o h a v e S a c r e d W r i t i n g s , w h e n o r t h o d o x H i n d u i s m is d i v i d e d in six d a r c a n a s , o r s c h o o l s o f t h o u g h t , s o m e o f w h i c h a p p e a r t o h a v e little in c o m m o n ? W h a t d o e s it say a b o u t t h e C h r i s t i a n c o n c e p t i o n of S c r i p t u r e as d i v i n e W o r d t h a t t h e 'Triple Basket o f t h e B u d d h i s t S c r i p t u r e s has b e c o m e so h u g e a n d c o n t a i n s so m a n y w r i t i n g s t h a t it is q u i t e i m p o s s i b l e t o r e a d t h e m all? Even a p a r t f r o m t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e s o f h o l y s c r i p t u r e s , H i n d u i s m a n d B u d d h i s m raise q u e s t i o n s t h a t c a n n o t b e e l u d e d indefinitely. V e d a n t a challenges C h r i s t i a n i t y in r e g a r d to t h e d i v i n e a t t r i b u t e of e t e r n i t y a n d its relevance t o t h e t r a n s c e n d e n c e a n d t h e i m m a n e n c e of G o d . B u d d h i s m c h a l l e n g e s C h r i s t i a n t h e o l o g y in r e g a r d t o t h e a p o p h a t i c k n o w l e d g e o f t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t t h a t is t o u c h e d u p o n b u t h a r d l y d e v e l o p e d in classical S c h o l a s t i c i s m . S u c h q u e s t i o n s are g r o w i n g at t h e e c u m e n i c a l h o r i z o n . X V . CONCLUSION

There are n o w s o m e d i s c o u r a g e d e c u m e n i s t s . They are g e n e r a l l y w a i t i n g for c h u r c h a u t h o r i t i e s a n d agencies t o c o m m i t t h e c h u r c h e s t o a c t i o n o n t h e basis of t h e f i n d i n g s o f official a n d o t h e r c o m m i s s i o n s . A n d t h e y are t e m p t e d t o give u p t h e h o p e t h a t p r o m i s e s , brill i a n t as t h e y w e r e at o n e t i m e , will b e f o l l o w e d b y a c t i o n . W h e n it s t a r t e d in t h e early years o f o u r f i n i s h i n g c e n t u r y , t h e e c u m e n i c a l m o v e m e n t was i n t e n d e d t o m o v e t h e c h u r c h e s a n d t h e C h u r c h . B u t it d o e s n o t s e e m to h a v e m o v e d m u c h m o r e t h a n itself. Yet if t h e r e is a lesson t o learn f r o m t h e p r e s e n t s t a g n a n t state o f r e l a t i o n s a m o n g C h r i s t i a n c h u r c h e s a n d t h e i r leaders, it is n o t t h a t h o p e c a n b e given u p . It is t h a t , w h a t e v e r c o n v i c t i o n s t h e y h a v e c o r r e c t l y r e a c h e d , t h e

198

SCRIPTURE AS W O R D OF G O D

bilateral a n d o t h e r c o m m i s s i o n s of d i a l o g u e h a v e n o t m a d e a p e r s u a sive case for t h o s e w h o h a v e n o t t a k e n p a r t in t h e i r d i a l o g u e s a n d r e a d t h e i r agreed o r j o i n t s t a t e m e n t s w i t h t h e critical eyes o f o u t s i d ers. I n d e e d " t h e h a r v e s t is ready" b u t t h e c h u r c h e s a t large are n o t q u i t e ready for it. The tools n e e d f u r t h e r s h a r p e n i n g . T h e r e is still a great deal o f w o r k t o d o .

Index A Abbott, Lyman 131 A b r a h a m ' 4 - 5 , 16, 187, 195 Academy 26, 4 9 , 150 Achtemeier, Paul J. 139, 173 Acts 3 7 , 119, 1 4 1 , 163 Actualization 54, 56 A d a m 79 A d o p t i o n 153 African C o d e , C a n o n 24 75 Agnosticism, reverent 192 Aion 122, 124 Al-Gazzali 85 Aldridge, J o h n W. 2 7 Alexander 6 9 - 7 0 Alexandrian School 71 Ambrose 13 Ambrosiaster 80 American Council of Christian C h u r c h e s 135 Amphilocius, Bishop of Seleucus 74 Anderson, H . G e o r g e 181 A n d r o n i c u s 108 Anthropology, Christian 80 Apocalypse 3 7 of Peter 109 Apocalypticism 4 2 , 6 7 Apocrypha 84, 8 9 , 107 Apologetics 132 Apostles 108, 162, 177, 183, 192 apostolic succession 195 Apostolic C a n o n 85 7 2 - 7 3 , 7 5 , 7 7 Archaeology 4 1 , 144 Arianism 72 Aristotle 2, 6-7, 8 6 , 189 Arius 178 Arseniev, N . S. 9 3 Athanasius 72, 8 1 , 108 Atheism 106 A t o n e m e n t 59, 132 Augustine 1, 3 - 5 , 8-9, 13, 16-17, 2 6 , 7 8 - 8 0 , 1 5 3 , 1 7 7 - 8 0 , 182, 195 a n t h r o p o l o g y of 79 Confessions 178-79 massa perditionis 180

Authenticity 143 exclusivistic 68 Authority 156-57, 176-77 biblical 14, 114, 149, 154, 15 160, 163-64 canonical 109 claims to 139 divine 1 0 1 , 160 internal experience 110 a n d interpretation 174 a n d language games 139 Petrine 30 propositior.al 157 of texts and writing 20, 167 of the tradition/magisterium 17^ Authorship, scriptural 20 Ephesians non-Pauline 5 1 , 119 Pauline 5 3 , 96, 108 p s e u d o n y m o u s 53 traditional 131 G o d / H o l y Spirit 8 intention 137 Autographs 40

B Babylonian Exile 6 6 Bacon, Francis 129 Baconianism 130 Baird, William 173 Baldwin of C a n r e r b u r y 187 Baptism 54, 56, 7 9 - 8 0 , 103, 107, 1 2 0 - 2 1 , 1 2 3 , 125, 145 and grace 80 infant 81 Barnabas 108 Barr, James 127, 146 Barrois, Georges 6 1 , 99 Barth, Markus 1 52 Barthélémy, D o m i n i q u e 40 Baruch 64 Beecher, H e n r y Ward 130 B e n S i r a c h 6 8 - 6 9 , 75 Bengel, J o h a n n 24, 106 Berdyaev, N . 6 3 Bergant, D i a n e 57

T H E BIBLE IN T H E C H U R C H E S

200 Bible 14, 2 5 , 6 6 as b o o k of faith 128 in church life 56, 58 discussion groups 54 editions, critical 11-12 h u m a n a n d divine 106 o n inspiration 104 i n t r o d u c t i o n s 19, 2 2 - 2 3 , 25 humanist-rationalist 2 3 languages 11, 30, 4 0 , 4 2 , 145, 165, 168 A k k a d i a n a n d Ugaritic 4 0 ancient 4 0 , 144 Aramaic 3 9 - 4 0 , 4 7 A r m e n i a n 39 cognates 146 Cyrillic alphabet 82 dictionaries 59 Ethiopic 39 g r a m m a r s , classical 146 Greek 3 9 , 4 7 , 6 6 , 145, 159 H e b r e w 4 7 , 6 6 , 90, 145, 159 H o l y Ghost Greek 4 2 Latin 30, 3 9 , 78 lexical semantics 157 original 11, 159 Semitic 51 Slavic 8 2 - 8 3 , 85 Syriac 39 as literature 2 2 , 3 8 - 3 9 must be interpreted 114 post-Gutenbergian 66 as a Protestant b o o k 31 versions Aquila 8 3 C h u r c h Slavic 92 C o m p l u t e n s i a n Polyglot 24, 8 8 Gennadius 86-87 G o o d N e w s Bible 4 7 Greek 8 3 Jerusalem Bible 4 7 King James 6 5 , 9 5 , 104, 142 Latin 1 1 N e w American Bible 4 7 , 59, 9 5 N e w English Bible 104 N e w International 151 N e w Jerusalem Bible 52 N e w Revised Standard 6 1 , 81

O l d Latin editions 81 Ostrog 87-88 Philaret 9 3 questions about 95 Revised New American Bible 51 Revised Standard 4 7 , 6 1 , 9 5 , 121-23 Russian 91 Septuaginr see Septuagint Slavic 8 2 , 8 4 , 8 6 - 8 8 , 92 textus receptus 24, 142 Vulgate 4 7 , 7 8 , 8 1 , 8 6 , 8 8 , 183 C l e m e n t i n e version 8 7 Bible Institute m o v e m e n t 132 Bible Society 91 Biblical Institute Press 41 Bishops 1 7 6 - 7 8 , 194-95 Black, David Alan 156 Blomberg, Craig I.. 138, 140, 142, 156 Boice, James M o n t g o m e r y 147 Bonaventure 187 Boris of Bulgaria 8 3 Bornkamm, Gtinther 44 B o r n k a m m , H e i n r i c h 127 Bossuet, Jacques 189 Bowden, J o h n 173 Bratcher, Robert G. 6 2 Breck, J o h n 6 1 - 6 2 , 9 9 Brethren of the C o m m o n Life 13 Brown, R a y m o n d E. 5 7 - 5 8 , 165 Bruce, E. E. 147 Bryan, William Jennings 133 B u d d h i s m 197 Bulgakov, S. 6 3 B u l t m a n n , Rudolf 4 5 , 157, 190 Burgess, Joseph A. 101, 149, 181

c Calvin, J o h n 1 4 - 1 5 , 2 6 , 7 9 , 1 6 4 - 6 5 , 170, 1 7 3 - 7 4 , 1 9 1 , 195 Institutes of the Christian Religion 14 Calvinism 136, 153, 159 C a n o n 7 6 - 7 7 , 8 8 , 106, 108. 156 apostolic 108 Calvinist 89 d e v e l o p m e n t 109

Index in early C h u r c h and creeds 108-9 historical and theological 110 N e w Testament 7 4 , 107, 109 O l d Testament 7 3 of t r u t h 7 2 w h a t t h e C h u r c h establishes 108 within the canon 110, 192 Carpenter, Joel 134 Carroll, J o h n 58 Carson, D . A. 137, 139, 147, 156 Cassian, J o h n 7 8 Catechisms Catechism of the Catholic C h u r c h 178, 182, 194 Catechism of the C o u n c i l of Trent (Calechismus romanus) 195 Larger Catechism 162 Shorter Carechism 162 C a t h o l i c Biblical Association of America 4 7 - 4 8 C a t h o l i c Biblical Quarterly 4 8 C h a d w i c k , H e n r y 7 1 , 79 C h a u , Wai-Shing 2 7 Christ, Jesus 3-5, 8-9, 14, 16, 34, 45, 46, 4 9 , 52-53, 55, 57, 6 1 , 63-64, 69-70, 72, 79, 8 1 , 83, 8 5 , 9 3 , 9 8 , 106, 112, 114-16, 1 2 3 - 2 5 , 132, 1 4 2 - 4 3 , 145, 150, 1 5 2 - 5 5 , 160, 162, 1 6 4 - 6 6 , 169, 172, 176, 178, 1 8 0 - 8 2 , 185, 187, 1 8 9 - 9 1 , 196 alone 1 1 3 , 116-17, 126, 181 t h e answer 1 10 death of 166, 167 example of 13 of faith 18, 168 gives Scripture its authority 116 and Gospel 16, 9 9 , 117 historical 18, 35 h u m a n i t y of 106 life in 120 horizontal d i m e n s i o n 172 lordship of 169 means freedom 170 as m e d i a t o r 195 m u s t be proclaimed 119 o u r h e r m e n e u t i c 167 personal relationships to 172 p h i l o s o p h y of 13 presence of 169

201 promise in 118 revelation, sufficient 168 Son of G o d 11 5 the t r u t h 116, 118, 126, Word of G o d (Logos) 16, 160, 178 Word of G o d Incarnate 162 words and sayings 6 9 , 109 at work in the W o r d 15 Christ-event 55 Christianity American 156 conservative 135 E n l i g h t e n m e n t 21 not individualism 172 Christians Evangelical 3 6 faith and practice 55 G e n t i l e 5 1 - 5 3 , 122-23 as individual believers 180 Jewish 5 1 , 122 life of 54, 152, 172, 181 Lutheran 3 6 Orthodox 62, 65, 91, 97 Reformed 159 Christology 7 1 , 125, 150 C h r y s o s t o m , J o h n 9 5 , 106 C h u r c h 2, 4, 8, 15, 32, 34, 4 8 , 59, 8 9 , 108, 116, 1 19-20, 126, 1 2 9 - 3 0 , 1 4 3 , 1 5 0 - 5 2 , 154, 160, 172, 175, 179, 182, 1 8 5 - 8 7 , 192, 194, 197 African 7 5 Anabaptist 134, 136 Anglican (Episcopal) 3 1 , 106 A r m i n i a n 133, 136, 153 body of Christ 169, 171-72, 185 bride of Christ 120 Catholic 10, 2 9 , 3 5 , 3 9 , 4 9 , 106, 108, 150 international character of 4 9 C o p t i c , E t h i o p i a n 109 early 1, 108, 1 4 3 , 166 ecclesial time 179 Evangelical 6 3 Fundamentalist 175 Holiness 133 intetprets the Bible 1 14 life of the 15, 3 5 , 150, 169, 172 liturgical 65 local and universal congregation 180

202 L u t h e r a n 3 1 , 102 M e t h o d i s t 31 Millenarian 133 M o d e r n 18 m o r e authoritative t h a n Bible 109 Nestorian 109 order 3 0 O r t h o d o x , Byzanrine 175 O r t h o d o x , Eastern 6 1 , 7 3 , 8 8 8 9 , 9 4 , 9 6 , 9 7 , 100, 108 p n e u m a t o l o g y , ecclesiology, and tradition 8 9 O r t h o d o x , Oriental 175 Peiuecosial 133, 175 Presbyterian 3 1 , 160 p r o b l e m s today 4 9 Protestant 10, 31 reform of the 14 o f the Reformarion 7 9 Reformed 105, 133 Russian 6 1 , 7 1 , 7 3 , 9 3 ecclesiastical life 8 7 self-awareness of 181 Slavic 7 3 , 9 1 - 9 2 universal 119, 169, 171 Wesleyan 133-34 Western 61 Zoroastrian 197 Cicero 178 C l e m e n t of O h r i d 8 3 Collins, J o h n J. 57 Collins, R. P. 62 Colossians 5 1 , 119-20, 150, 152 C o m m e n t a r i e s 6,-7, 13, 4 1 , 132, 136, 1 5 3 , 165, 195 glosses 7 O r t h o d o x 78 C o m m o n Sense Realism, Scottish 129, 132, 136, 1 4 1 , 149 C o m m u n i t y 6 5 , 155, 169 of faith 6 5 , 1 5 3 , 169 monastic 2 prayers of the 62 p r o c l a m a t i o n of the W o r d 6 6 Confession 8 9 - 9 0 Confessions Book of Concord 105, 117 Book of Confessions 160 Brief Sratement of Faith 162 Calvinisr 88

T H E BIBLE IN THE C H U R C H E S christological 165 Confession of 1967 162, 164, 168 Formula C o n s e n s u s Helvetica 105 Formula of C o n c o r d 102 I.urheran 106 Scors Confession 160 Second I lelvetic Confession 161 Westminster Confession o f Fairh 7 7 , 161 Consciousness Chrisrian 176 eschatological 41 hisrorical 1 1 , 19, 25 h u m a n 106 Conservatism, hierarchical 9 2 C o n s t a n t i n e of O s t r o g 88 C o n s t i t u t i o n s of C l e m e n t 7 3 , 7 6 Contextualization 1 4 8 - 4 9 , 1 5 4 - 5 5 , 157 C o n v e t s i o n 54, 154 adult 56 experience 54, 155 language of 54, 154 Conzelmann, Hans 44 C o p e r n i c u s 105 Correlation, principle of 4 6 Councils a n d Synods 71 C a r r h a g e 108, 179 C o n s t a n t i n o p l e , Synod of 89 ecumenical 7 1 , 7 9 , 107 First Ecumenical 7 2 Florence 108 H i p p o 108 H i p p o (393) C a n o n 36 75 Jamnia 77 Jassy 89 Jerusalem 8 8 - 8 9 l.aodicea 88 C a n o n 59 74 Canon 60 75 Lateran IV 187 Moldavia (1642) 8 9 Seven Ecumenical 71 Sevenrh Ecumenical C o u n c i l , Canon 1 76 Trent 10, 15, 7 7 , 176-77, 180, 183 Trullo 7 3 , 7 6 Varican 1 3 2 , 180

Index Vatican II 2 9 - 3 1 , 3 5 , 4 5 , 4 7 , 5 6 , 58, 175, 177, 180, 184-85, 193-96 C o n s t i t u t i o n o n Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum) 3 1 , 3 5 36, 3 8 , 4 5 , 56, 58, 184, 194-95 C o u n t e r (Catholic) Reformation 10, 175, 180, 195 C o v e n a n t 11 1 berith 70 and will or testament 6 9 - 7 0 Creation 4, 7 9 , 149, 153 new 125 Creeds 109, 117, 195 Apostles' 117, 119 Athanasian 1 17 baptismal 185 N i c e n e 7 2 , 117 N i c e n e - C o n s t a n t i n o p o l i t a n 6 3 , 71 Cross 166, 193 alone 1 1 8 , 126 and resurrection 115, 118 Cross, Frank M . 40 Crossan, D o m i n i c 5 / Cultures of the biblical world 41 Gteek 6 6 historical situation and 3 3 otal 64 Russian 6 6 , 7 8 Slavic 8 3 Cyprian 12 Cyril-Constantine 81-84, 88-90 Cyril VI 92

D Darrow, Clarence 133 D a r w i n , Charles 105 David 9, 111 D c Lubac, H e n r i . 2 7 Dead Sea Scrolls 3 9 , 4 2 Dead Sea Scrolls ( Q u m r a n ) 3 9 , 4 1 4 2 , 6 4 , 6 9 - 7 1 , 145 D e a t h 122, 153 Deism 2 1 , 2 3 and rationalism 1 9-20 Deliverance 167 Deutcrocanonical books 6 2 , 7 3 - 7 5 , 8 4

203 D e u t e r o n o m y 64 Devotio moderna 10, 13 Dibelius, M a r t i n 4 5 Didache 107 Dionysius (Pseudo) 8 Dispensational m o v e m e n t 133 D i t m a n s o n , H a r o l d H . 127 Diversity 136, 147 christological 195 and unity 148 Dockery, David S. 156 Doctors of the Western C h u r c h 78 Docrrine 4 - 5 , 181 reform of 16 D o g m a 2 5 , 135 D o n a t i s m 179 Dosirheus 8 8 - 9 0 D u n s Scotus, John 1 3

E Ecclesiology 125, 179, 181 F.cclesiam suam 175 monastic 187 time, ecclesial 179 universalism 125 F.cumenism 2 9 , 3 1 , 4 8 , 5 6 - 5 7 , 106, 170, 175, 193, 196, 197 Bible research 4 4 cooperation 48 dialogues 4 8 , 107, 155, 194 m o v e m e n t 127, 197 Eichhorn, J o h n 2 3 Einsrein, Albert 106, 182 Eliade, Mircea 6 3 El/evir 24 Enlightenment 23 E p a p h r o d i t u s 108 Ephesians 5 1 - 5 4 , 9 4 - 9 6 , 119-20, 1 2 4 - 2 5 , 150, 1 5 3 , 171-72 authenticity 150 historical setting 40 F.phrem the Syrian 95 Epistles 3 8 , 7 3 , 84, 8 7 , 94 captivity 5 1 , 150 o( C l e m e n t 7 3 Pauline 2 7 , 3 5 , 109 Erasmus 1, 12-13, 24, 142 Greek New Testament 24 h e r m e n e u t i c of 27

T H E BIBLE IN T H E C H U R C H E S

204 F.schatology 5 3 , 5 9 , 1 2 3 , 125, 172, 185, 186 dialectic of justification 124 exaltation 153 issues 134 m e a n i n g 187 transfot m a t i o n 177 F.schaton 154, 185 Essenes 146 Esther 3 8 , 7 4 Eusebius o f Caesarea 7 0 Evangelical Alliance 131 Evangelical Theological Society 136, 144 F.vangelicalism 129, 134, 136, 1 4 3 - 4 4 , 1 4 9 - 5 0 , 156 Evangelism cooperative 134 urban-centered 149 Evangelists 191 Evgenii (Bolhovitinov) 84 Evolution 105, 130-31 Exaltation 166 o f C h r i s t 52, 153 o f the C h r i s t i a n 153, 172 eschatological 153 Exegesis 9 6 c o m m u n i t y 150, 153 Jewish 5 medieval 28 Third World 49 Exodus 167 Experience o f faith 118 o f forgiveness 16 of gtace 185 subjective 25 Kxrernalization/internalizarion 2 5 Ezra 6 2 , 64, 6 7

F Faith 4, 54, 112, 1 1 4 - 1 5 , 117, 1 5 2 - 5 3 , 155, 1 8 1 , 194 alone 118, 124, 126, 182, 188 ancestors of 4 certainty of 181 as decision 154-55 deposit of faith (fidei depositum) 178

language of 193 life of 1 6 1 - 6 2 , 164, 166, 186, 195 love a n d h o p e 1 8 6 - 8 8 , 190 a n d obedience 160, 162 rule of (regula fidei) 185 seeking u n d e r s t a n d i n g 6 s t a t e m e n t of 165 vertical d i m e n s i o n of 172 a n d works 146, 153 Fall 149 Falwell, Jerry 135 F a t h e r s / M o t h e t s of the C h u r c h 98 Fathers o f t h e C h u r c h 1, 3 , 7, 1213, 2 8 , 7 4 , 117, 1 3 0 , 157, 185, 1 8 8 - 8 9 homilies 95 Federal C o u n c i l of C h u r c h e s 131, 135 Fedorov, George P. 84, 9 9 Fee, G o r d o n D. 140, 156, 173 Feminism 4 9 - 5 0 , 190 Fitzmyet, Joseph A. 5 7 Flacius Illyricus, M a t t h i a s 20, 22, 105 Flannery, A. 31 Flesseman-van Leer, Ellen 127 Florovsky, Georges 8 5 , 8 7 , 9 0 - 9 3 , 99 Fogarty, G e t a l d R 57 Free will 152 Freedman, D a v i d Noel 9 9 , 173 Freedom 149 a n d gratitude 125 a n d service 170 radical 104 French Revolution 105, 112 Freud, S i g m u n d 106 Prick, David A. 88 F u n d a m e n t a l i s m 102, 129, 1 3 2 - 3 5 , 142, 156, 193 militant 134 Fundamentalism/evangelicalism 129-30 Furniss, N o r m a n F. 133

G Galatians 2 7 , 5 3 , 165 Gamaliel 131 G a m b l e , Harry Y. 9 9

205

Index Gasparov, Boris 85 Gasper, Louis 133 Genesis 6 6 , 165 G e n n a d i u s of Novgorod 8 6 G e r h a r d , Paul 105 Gerrish, Brian A. 173 Gerstenberger, Erhard S. 81 Glukharev, Makarii 90 Gnosticism 7 2 - 7 4 , 8 0 - 8 1 , 1 2 3 , 186 Gold, Victor R. 61 Golitsyn, A. N . 91 Golitzin, Alexander 100 Gorskii-Platonov, P. 90 Gospel 6 9 , 84, 9 3 , 117, 119, 126, 1 3 1 , 1 4 1 , 166, 1 8 3 , 184, 189 gift 16 m u s t be proclaimed 14 narratives 3 8 , 141 simple 136 Gospels 3 0 , 3 4 , 4 6 , 56, 7 3 , 9 1 , 1 3 1 , 140, 1 4 3 , 165 synoptic 4 3 - 4 4 Govorov, I". 90 Grabar, A. N . 9 3 Grace 5 3 , 5 5 - 5 6 , 7 9 , 1 1 1 , 120, 1 2 3 - 2 5 , 152, 155, 172, 1 7 8 - 7 9 , 1 8 1 , 1 9 3 , 196 actual 117 alone 117, 124, 126 natural 117 prevenient 117 radical 122 G r a h a m , Billy 134 crusades 134 G R A M C O R D 146 Grant, Robert 2 7 , 173 Gray, James 141 Gregory Nazianzen 68 Gregory the Great 186 Gregory the T h e o l o g i a n 74 Metered Poems 7 3 Gregory XIII 87 Griesbach, J o h a n n 24 G r u d e m , Wayne A. 139 G u n d r y , Robert 141

H Hagen, K e n n e t h Haggai 6 7

1,9,

19, 2 7

Hahn, Herbert E 27 H a r r i n g t o n , Daniel J. 2 9 , 5 8 , 7 7 , 1 4 2 - 4 3 , 149, 154 Harrisville, Roy A. 173 Hasel, G e r h a r d 143 H a t c h , N a t h a n O . 131, 156 H a u g h , Richard S. 99 H a w k i n g , Stephen 182 Haves, J o h n H . 173 Hebrews 108 Heidegger, M a r t i n 157, 182 Hellenism 145 H e m m i n g s e n , Nils 19-20, 2 2 H e n n a s , Shepherd of 109 H e r m e n e u t i c s 5, 2 5 , 4 8 , 50, 54, 57, 110, 1 3 7 - 3 8 , 146-49, 15657, 168, 174, 186, 190, 196 biblical 5 8 , 186 Catholic 188 evangelical 1 4 0 - 4 1 , 155 of t h e Gospel 1 10 Lutheran 127 m o d e m 20 narrative 140 new 7 N e w Testament 139 O r t h o d o x and Evangelical 6 3 questions 5 8 , 137 spiral 140 theological 6 3 , 138 theory of 4 9 , 140 transfer value 54 as translation, interpretation, u n d e r s t a n d i n g 25 Hesed (lovingkindness) 1 52 Hesychius 7 0 Heterodoxy 68 High M i d d l e Ages 1, 5 H i n d u i s m 197 Hirsch, E. D . 138 Historicism 106 Historicity 34 History of d o g m a 148, 153 of religions 145 of transmission 69 H o d g e , Atchibald A. 129 H o d g e , Charles 129 Holladay, Carl R. 173 Homoousios (consubstantial) 7 2

T H E BIBLE IN T H E C H U R C H E S

206 H u b b a r d Jr., Robert I.. 138, 140, 156 H u g h of St. Victor 187, 193 H u m a n i s m 1 0 - 1 1 , 15, 17-18, 2 5

Isaiah 9 0 Islam 6 5 Israel 3, 9, 4 6 , 6 4 , Ivan III 85

164, 195

I Iconogtaphy 71 Ignatius o f Antioch 120 Letters of 107, 109 Inerrancy 2 1 , 3 3 , 1 2 9 - 3 0 , 132, 136, 154, 156-57 limited 3 3 , 3 6 Infallibility 7 8 - 7 9 , 1.30, 157, 180 biblical 1 3 1 , 137 I n n o c e n t I 108 Inspiration 3 2 , 57, 102-3, 106, 150, 1 7 3 , 195 for action 51 as dictation 2 1 , 6 4 d o c t r i n e of 102 o f the H o l y Spirit 3 3 , 103 h u m a n a u t h o t s as i n s t a l m e n t s 8 a n d inerrancy 3 3 inspired events 106 m a n t i c theory of 104-6 means " G o d - b r e a r h e d " 104 plenary 21 as a process 139 theories of 105 verbal 21 Intentionality 137 International C o u n c i l on Biblical Inerrancy 136 Intetpretation of Scriprure 2, 7, 3 3 , 165-69 all Bible reading is 165 authoritative 1 5 christological 9 3 as c o m m e n t a r y , a n n o t a t i o n , a n d exposition 15 L u t h e r a n 25 only wirhin the C h u r c h 116 Orthodox 6 1 , 95 process of inrerprerarion/contextualization 149 Reformation 16 Reformed 159 between text/believer/Christ 168 theological 166 Irenaeus 105

J Jakobson, R o m a n 82 James 105, 146, 153 Jeremiah 6 4 , 6 8 , 115 J e r o m e 13, 6 8 , 7 8 , 8 1 , 8 6 Jewish writings, intcrtesramental 4 2 Joachim of Fiora 187 J o b 9 0 , 115 J o h n , Gospel of 7 4 , 8 1 , 1 0 8 - 1 0 , 113, 147, 1 6 5 - 6 6 J o h n of Bulgaria 8 4 J o h n of Damascus 95 J o h n Paul II 176 J o h n the Baptist 145, 165 J o h n s o n , Elliott 138 Jonah 3 8 Jones, Bob 135 Joseph of Volok 85 Joseph us, Elavi us 4 2 , 6 9 , 105, 146 Josiah 6 4 Judaism 1 4 3 , 145 Hellenistic 105 Judaizers 8 5 Jude 108 Judith 3 8 Jugie, M a t t i n 9 9 Juhl, P. D . 138 Justice, social 131 Justification 152, 1 8 1 , 188 by faith 16, 125, 181 of the ungodly 117

K Kabbalah 197 Kadloubovsky, E. 9 6 Kaiser, Walter 137-38 Kanrzer, K e n n e t h 138 Karris, Robert J. 5 7 Kelsey, David H . 138, 173 Kesich, Veselin 6 1 , 9 9 Klein, William W. 138, 140, Klocek, T h o m a s 8 2 K o o i m a n , Willen J. 2 7

156

Index Koran 6 5 , 196 Krenrz, Edgar 127 Kiimmel, W e r n e r G e o r g 2 7 ,

207 poetic-mythic 6 3 usage and proclamation 9 7 Lloyd-Jones, Martin 147 Locke, John 22 Lord's Prayer 195 Lossky, Vladimir 7 8 , 100 Lucian 7 0 Lucianic Recension 83 Lukaris, Cyril 8 8 , 89 Luke, Gospel of 4 3 , 94, 108, 144, 163 Luther, M a r t i n 1, 13-14, 16-17, 19-20, 2 6 - 2 7 , 7 9 , 115, 119, 127, 164, 1 8 1 , 187, 189-92 approach to Scripture 127 prayer/meditation/experience 20 Was Christum treibet 17, 116, 1 8 8 - 8 9 , 192 christocentric 190 Lyonner, Stanislas 78

127

L I.achmann, Karl 24 Language, m a i n t e n a n c e I 54 Last j u d g m e n t 124 Late Medieval Period 1, 7, 9 Law 6 9 - 7 0 , 117, 124-25, 141 c a n o n 73 d e m a n d s of the 118 Mosaic 16 new and old 8 Law and Gospel 16, 2 7 I.awes, C u r t i s 131 Lazareth, William 58 Leo XIII 189 Lessing, G o t t h o l d 2 3 Letter of 1 C l e m e n t 107 Letter to the Laodiceans 107 Lexicography 146 Liberal m o v e m e n t 132 Liberation 50, 170 and obligation 170 Lienhard, Joseph T. 58, 6 2 Lightfoot, J. B. 147 Lincoln, Andrew 150, 152-53 Lindbeck, George 58 I.indsell, Harold 136 I.irrera 187 Lirurgy and worship 2 9 , 56, 6 2 , Catholic 29 as celebration 6 3 , 6 5 cycles and seasons 7 7 , 9 6 doxologies 124 institution of Eucharist 70 language of 3 1 , 6 3 , 6 5 , 120 lectio contimta 94 lectio divina 54-56 lecrionaries 6 5 , 94, 9 6 - 9 7 C a t h o l i c 31 O l d Testament 84 O r t h o d o x 94 three-year cycle 30 lex orctndi est lex credendi 77 Liturgy, Divine 94 rhe Mass 29 O r r h o d o x 99

M

181

Maccabees 7 3 , 75 iVlachen, J. G r e s h a m 132 Magi 141 Magisferium 3 2 , 36, 4 9 , 149, 1 7 6 - 7 7 , 195 Maier, Gerhard 143 M a i m o n i d e s 85 M a n i c h e a n s 80, 178-79 M a n u s c r i p t s 142 Codex Vaticanus 72 and codices 11 families 24 Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek 39 Jewish and Christian 4 O l d and N e w Testaments 3 9 M a r c i o n 186 M a r k , Gospel of 4 3 , 108, 144 Mark the Ascetic 96 Marsden, George B. 129, 134, 156 Marshall, 1. H o w a r d 147, 156, 173 M a r t i n i , Carlo M . 40, 54 Marxsen, Willi 44 Masoreric texts 6 8 , 7 1 , 90-91 M M T Hebrew 8 8 , 91 Matthew, Gospel of 30, 4 3 , 110, 1 4 1 , 144 Matthias 108

T H K BIBLE IN T H E C H U R C H E S

208 McCo.sh, James 131 M c D o n a l d , Lee M . 77 M c l n t i r e , Carl 135 M c K i m , D o n a l d 130, 157, 173-74 M c Q u i l k i n , J. Robertson 137 Medieval-early Reformation period 25 Meeks, Wayne A. 173 Mcgivern, James J 5 8 M e l a n c h t h o n , Philip 19 M e n c k e n , J. I.. 106 Mercy 5 2 , 123, 152 Messianism 9 3 Methodius 82-83 Methodology, scriptural 19-20, 136 c a n o n criticism 1 4 1 , 144 deconstruction 38 d o u b t , methodological 4 6 cisegesis 9 6 extrabiblical evidence 4 2 form criticism 3 7 - 3 8 , 4 5 , 56, 9 1 , 9 6 , 1 1 1 , 113, 141-44, 1 5 5 - 5 6 , 184 Sitz im I.eben 6 2 , 144 grammarical-historical 155 grammatical-syntactical 146 historical-critical 1, 18, 2 1 , 2 3 , 25-26, 34-35, 45-47, 50-51, 5 6 - 5 7 , 9 7 , 102, 1 1 0 - 1 4 , 116, 1 18-19, 127, 1 4 1 , 1 4 3 - 4 5 , 170, 173-74 n o t a philosophy 112 historical-grammatical 110, 113 historical-theological 143 inductive 132, 137, 141 linguistics/word s t u d y 10, 4 2 , 5 6 , 190 philological research 4 3 s e m a n t i c s / g r a m m a r 145, 155 semantics, lexical 138 literary-critical 19, 2 5 , 3 3 , 3 5 , 3 7 - 3 8 , 4 5 , 56, 94, 9 6 , 138, 1 4 0 - 4 1 , 156 mid tash 141 narrative analysis 137, 155 perception/speech/narrative .33 philosophical 6 proof-texting 132, 1 3 6 - 3 7 , 147, 193 redaction 4 4 - 4 5 , 56, 143-44, 155-56

rhetorical criticism 1 4 0 - 4 2 , 144 semiotics 193 and symbolism 191 source criticism 4 3 - 4 4 , 5 6 , 144, 155-56 structuralism 3 8 , 141-42, 171 textual criticism 19, 24, 3 9 - 4 0 , 56, 1 4 2 - 4 3 , 1 5 5 - 5 6 tradirion history 144 trans-historical 6 3 Meyendorff, J o h n 8 6 , 100 Michael III 82 Michaelis, J o h n D. 22 Michaels, J. Ramsey 157 M i l l e n n i u m 176 Miracles 112-13 Missions 108, 148 agencies 135 Byzantine-Slavic 8 3 M i t t o n , C. I.. 152 Monasticism 2 - 3 , 10, 54 life a n d practices 12 scriptorium 2 M o n k e y rrial 133 M o n t a n i s m 105, 108 M o o d y Bible Institute 135 Moody, D w i g h t L. 131 Moses 4, 103, 187 Murphy, Roland E. 57 Murphy, T. Austin 181 Mysticism, G e r m a n 10

N Nafzger, Samuel H . 127 N a t i o n a l Ass'n. of Evangelicals 1 35 National C o u n c i l o f C h u r c h e s 135 Naturalises, French 21 Neill, Srephen 127, 174 Neo-Scholasricism 189 N e u h a u s , Richard J o h n 58 New Age 189 New Testament 3, 5, 8-9, 13, 16, 18, 2 2 - 2 3 , 2 7 , 2 9 , 3 4 - 3 5 , 3 7 , 3 9 - 4 2 , 4 6 - 4 7 , 4 9 , 54, 5 8 , 7 3 - 7 5 , 9 1 , 9 3 , 104, 108, 120, 1 2 6 - 2 7 , 139, 1 4 5 , 1 4 8 , 152, 156, 159, 1 6 2 - 6 3 , 166, 172, 183, 186-87, 190-91, 195 authors 70

Index

209

concealed in the O l d 4 Greek 12-13, 40 interprets/fulfills the O l d i n t r o d u c t i o n to 2 2 tradirion 9 7 Nicholas of Lyra 7, 86 Nicole, Roger R. 157 Nilus of Sora 85 N o a h 195 Noll, M a r k A. 1 3 1 , 156 N o m i n a l i s m 10

115

o Obolensky, Dimirri 8 3 , 100 O c c a m , William of 15 O l d Testament 3 - 5 , 8-10, 13, 16-17, 2 3 , 2 7 , 2 9 , 3 4 - 3 5 , 3 7 4 0 , 4 2 - 4 3 , 56, 5 8 - 5 9 , 7 3 , 8 4 8 5 , 9 1 , 9 3 , 1 0 1 , 1 0 4 - 1 0 5 , 107, 1 2 6 - 2 7 , 139, 145-46, 148, 152, 159, 1 6 2 - 6 3 , 166-67, 183, 185, 187, 190-91 c a n o n 74 commentaries 93 crirical hisrory of 22 as firsr covenant 6 8 , 7 3 , 9 8 four sources 4 3 narratives 141 research 4 2 two sources 4 3 uncovered in rhe N e w 4 O r d i n a r i o n of w o m e n 4 9 , 149 O r i g e n 13, 2 7 , 7 0 - 7 1 , 186 Orlinsky, H a r r y M . 6 2 O r r h o d o x 2 5 , 6 3 , 7 8 - 7 9 , 81 O r r h o d o x y 2 0 - 2 1 , 4 4 , 105 and heresy 107 Lurheran and Reformed 20 seventeenth century 105 O r r h o p r a x y 71 O s b o r n e , Granr R. 6 3 , 129, 140, 157 Osrrog Circle 8 7 Osrrozhskii, Konsranin 8 7 Oxford M o v e m e n r 106 P Packer, J. I. Palaea 84

137

Palmer, G . E. H . 9 6 Pamphilus 70 Papacy 15 primacy and infallibility 106 Papias 109 Parables 141-42 Paraclete 191 Parallels 4 2 , 145-46 Parker, T. H . L. 174 Paul 13, 16, 3 7 , 5 1 - 5 4 , 56, 6 3 , 7 0 , 7 2 , 7 8 - 7 9 , 8 1 , 104, 1 0 7 - 8 , 110, 1 1 2 - 1 3 , 119, 122-25, 146, 1 4 9 - 5 3 , 163, 165-67, 178, 183, 188, 193 Paul VI 175 Pavskii, Gerasim 9 0 Pelagianism 80, 179 Pelagius 153, 179 Pelikan, Jaroslav 8 0 , 100 Penrareuch 4 3 , 6 4 , 6 7 , 6 9 Samariran 6 8 People of rhe Book 65 Peschirta 109 Peter 163, 195 Perer, Carl 181 Pererson, Michael D . 100 Philaret 9 1 - 9 2 , 96 Philaret (Amfirearrov) 92 Philaret (Drozdov) 91 Philaret of M o s c o w 7 1 P h i l e m o n 5 1 , 150 Philippians 5 1 , 150 Philo of Alexandria 4 2 , 6 9 , 105, 146, 186 Philosophy 2 5 , 4 9 Aristotelian 6 N e o - P l a t o n i s m 178 Platonism 2, 6-7 Photius 82 Pietism 2 0 - 2 1 , 25 Piety 12-13, 131 in Bible reading 14 pracrical 131 Pius XII 2 9 , 3 2 , 58 Divino Spiritu Afflante 18, 2 9 , 32-33, 45, 47 Poetry, H e b r e w 4 2 Pontifical Biblical C o m m i s s i o n 58 Pontifical Biblical Institute 41 Preaching 14, 3 5 , 9 7

T H E BIBLE IN T H E C H U R C H E S

210 of the Gospel 17, 9 4 in the vernacular 14 Princetonians, Old 129-30, Principle

157

o f analogy 4 6 o f correlation 4 6 o f uncertainty 192 Proclamation 15, 118, 148, 194 Prokurat, Michael 6 1 , 6 7 , 100, 149 Promises, scriptutal 16, 119, 184 are self-authenticating 119 Prophecy 70, 8 4 , 103, 132, 141, 162, 'l 8 7 , 1 9 1 , 192 a n d history 6 9 Psalms 3 0 , 3 7 , 4 1 , 4 7 , 6 9 , 7 5 , 8 1 , 109, 1 4 1 , 165, 167 prayerbook of the C h u r c h 62 Psalrer 84, 91 Q Q 4 3 , 144 Quinisext, C a n o n 2 76

R Raevsky-Hughes, Olga 85 Rationalism 2 1 , 2 3 - 2 5 Ratzinger, Joseph 58 Reason 7, 111-12 Reconciliarion 168, 194 R e d e m p t i o n 125, 150, 167 a n d forgiveness 120 Reformation 1, 7, 10, 14, 80, 105, 149, 164, 1 7 3 , 1 7 5 - 7 6 , 184 C a t h o l i c 10 early 1, 14, 18 Relativism 102, 106 Religion history of 18 a n d myrh 6 3 narural 21 Religions, mystety 145 Renaissance 2 , 14 Renan, Joseph E. 9 3 R e p e n t a n c e 131 Resurrection 132, 153-54, 164, 166, 177 R e u m a n n , John 127

Revelation 3 , 8, 12, 14, 2 1 , 3 2 3 3 , 6 6 , 7 3 - 7 5 , 7 7 , 106, 108, 110, 139, 1 4 1 , 182, 184, 187, 1 9 1 , 1 9 3 , 195-96 G o d ' s self-revelation 164 higher 3 a n d inspiration 21 personal 35 primacy of 3 2 progressive 3 , 148 propositional 3 5 , 139 Revelation o f J o h n 74 Revivalism 1 3 1 , 148, 154 R h e t o t i c 3 8 , 123, 186 Riasanovsky, Nicholas V. 8 6 , Richardson, Alan 173 Ricoeur, Paul 5 0 Robertson, A. T. 147 Rogers, Jack 130, 157, 174 R o m a n s 5 3 , 147 Romanticism 23 Rostislav of Moravia 8 2 Rostovtsev, M . I. 9 3 Russian Bible Society 9 0 - 9 2

100

s Sabbatarianism

131

Salvation 3-4, 34, 5 3 - 5 4 , 5 6 , 117, 124, 1 5 1 - 5 2 , 1 6 1 - 6 3 , 1 7 1 - 7 2 , 191 in Ghrisr alone 16 corporare 1 51 gift of 55 by grace 121 healing 4 history 9, 106, 111, 148 individual 6 6 unmerited 53 Sandeen, Ernest 130, 133 Sanders, James A. 100 Sartre, Jean Paul 182 Scanlin, Pace H a r o l d 7 3 Schaff, P. 15 Schleiermacher, Eriederich 106 S c h m e m a n n , Alexander 6 5 , 100 Schneiders, Sandra M . 58 Scholarship, biblical 3 6 Scholasticism 1, 5, 7, 1 0 - 1 3 , 8 6 , 182, 1 8 7 - 8 9 , 197

Index Schwarmer 115 Scicntism 106 Scopes, J o h n 133 Scripture all leads to Chrisr 17 alone (sola Scriptural 14, 101-2, 118, 126, 149, 154, 188 a u t h o r i t y 14, 116 canonical 75 centrality of the whole 141 christocentric 191 clarity is internal, theological 1 15 and Eucharist 35 and faith 51 fulfillment of 166 inspired 161 interprets itself 15, 19, 115, 126 in the life of the C h u r c h 35 liturgical/homilerical use 6 2 , 9 7 m u l t i n u a n c e d view of 5, 4 2 , 137 propositional c o n t e n t of 1 3 9 , 142, 150 ptovidcntial/hetmeneufical foci 9 sacra doctrina (sacred doctrine) 67, 10 sacra littera (sacred letter) 10, 17 sacra pagina (sacred page) 6, 10, 14, 17, 3 5 , 188 n o r m of faith 188 senses of 2, 186 allegorical 3, 5, 7 - 8, 17, 188, 193 anagogical 3, 7-8, 187 double-literal 7, 10, 17 fourfold 3 , 7, 10, 196 Quadriga 3 grammatical - simplest 17 historical-literal 3 , 5, 7-8, 186 letter/spirit d i c h o t o m y 5 literal 5-8, 13, 1 10, 187-89 literal textual 186 litctal-spiritual 3 prophetic-literal 7 sensus a n d sententia 187, 193 spiritual 8, 186-89 ttopological 3 , 7 - 8 , 13, 187 as soul of theology 57 and theology 5, 9 and ttadition 3 2 , 3 5 , 56, 107, 128, 181

211 and the tradirions 1 8 3 - 8 4 and t r u t h 156 unity of I I I as W o r d of G o d 175 Scripture, approaches ro Catholic 1, 18 centrist exegesis 57 language 184 Tfidentine 183 monastic 15 oratiolmeditatiolcontcmplatiol actio 5 4 - 5 6 research 3 6 tradition-conscious 44 historical 130 Lutheran 114, 116 principles 115-16, 126 medieval 18 m o d e r n 18 orthodox Bible as source of doctrine 21 propositional 156-57, 193 Protestant 1, 18 should be doxological 104 University (sacra doctrina) 17 Second c o m i n g 132, 154 Sectarianism 134 Secularism 106 Selah 109 Semi-Pelagianism 78 Semiotic system 192 Senior, D o n a l d 59 Separation 1 50 radical 134 second-degree 135 Septuagint 4 2 , 7 1 , 8 3 , 90, 92, 146, 183 Aldine 88 Lucianic 70, 7 3 three different 70 Service, life of 167, 170 Sikhs 197 Silva, Moisés 138, 146, 157 Simon, Richard 22 Sin 121-22, 1 5 1 , 165 original 7 9 - 8 0 , 123 foundarional ro Wesrern a n t h r o pology 78 radical 122 and spiritual death 52

T H K BIBI.K IN i HI. C H U R C H E S

212 Sins, forgiveness of 118 Smalley, Beryl 28 Smotritsky, Melerii 88 Soards, M a r i o n C . 1 59 Social actions 50 Society of Biblical Literature 4 8 , 135, 146, 170 Society of N e w Testament Studies 48 Society of O l d Testament Studies 48 S o l o m o n 7, 9 Soteriology 5, 190 Sovereignty 165 Spirit, H o l y 4, 6-7, 13, 2 1 , 4 9 , 90, 97, 103-4, 106-7, 119, 132, 160, 162, 169. 179, 1 8 1 , 184, 187, 189, 1 9 3 , 195 expressed by the text 7, 161 internal testimony of 15, 109, 189, 191 inward illumination of 1 6 1 , 170 scriptural a u t h o r 4 of t r u t h 3 4 at w o t k in the C h u r c h 179 Stein, Robert H . 142-43 Stephanus, Robert 24 Stonehouse, N e d 1.32 Strauss, David 1 . 9 3 Stuart, Douglas 140, 156 Stuhlmacher, Peter 2 8 , 127, 174 Stuhlmueller, Carroll 59 Stylianopoulos, Theodore 100 Subjectivity 138, 181 S u n d b c r g , Albert 7 7 Sundberg, Walter 173 Symbolism 3 7 , 187 Synagogue 6 7 :

T T a l m u d 6 9 , 105, 145, 197 Targums 69 Tate, W. R. 157 Tavard, George H . 175, 178, 180, 184 l e m p l e 6 7 , 165 liturgy of 62 Ten C o m m a n d m e n t s 103 Testament (will, promise) of C h r i s t 17 Texts, ancient extrabiblical 4 3

N a g H a m m a d i 41 Sumerian a n d Egyptian 4 0 Ugatitic 4 0 - 4 2 T h e o d o r e of Mopsuestia 78 1 h e o d o r e t o f C y r r h u s 95 Theology apocalyptic 125 biblical 1-2, 15, 19, 2 2 - 2 3 , 2 5 , 4 2 , 5 9 , 144, 1 4 7 - 4 8 , 155, 157 Latin American 4 9 C a t h o l i c 30, 4 1 , 4 5 covenantal 105 o f c i c a t i o n 182 of the cross 191 d e v e l o p m e n t / r r a n s f o r m a t i o n 17 dogmatic 23, 25, 30 eucharistic 173 exegetical 6, 137, 148 of glory 191 historical 155 homilctical/liturgicil 15, 100, 148 incarnational 146 indigenous 148 Latin 178 liberation 50, 148, 190 Latin American 4 9 - 5 0 L u t h e r a n 1 18 monastic 187 moral 3 0 narrative 38 O r t h o d o x , Russian 6 2 , 8 5 , 9 9 Pauline 57, 80, 122, 124-25 polemical 16 Reformed covenantal 106 Scholastic 1 2 - 1 3 , 3 6 , 186 speculative 6 systematic 30, 139, 1 4 7 - 4 8 , 155, 157 T h i s c l t o n , A n t h o n y C. 139, 157 T h o m a s Aquinas 1, 5, 7-9, 2 6 , 188 Aristotelian perspective 7 Summa theologiae 6 - 8 , 188 T h o m i s m , Transcendental 189 I h o m s o n , l'rancis J. 8 5 Tillich, Paul 181 T i n d a l , M a t t h e w 22 Titus 107 'Poland, J o h n 2 2 Tolstoi, A. 92

Index Torah 6 4 , 6 6 - 6 7 and canon 100 law and instruction 6 9 - 7 0 Torrey, Reuben 131-32 Tracy, David 27, 173 Tradition a n d traditions 2, 4 3 , 4 5 4 6 , 6 5 - 6 6 , 6 8 , 7 1 - 7 2 , 8 7 , 143, 1 4 9 - 5 0 , 162, 170, 1 7 6 - 7 7 , 1798 1 , 183, 185 ancient 71 apostolic 183-84, 195 A t m i n i a n 133 C a t h o l i c 2 5 , 4 8 , 56, 80, 100, 175-76 Christian 7 8 , 80, 100, 116 C h u r c h 10, 2 4 - 2 5 , 4 6 , 181 basis for authority 105 of docrrine 179 earliest 108 Evangelical 147 of the faith 182 Gospel 4 9 Jewish 120 J u d e o - C h r i s t i a n 64 living 9 7 , 185, 195 L u t h e r a n 106 medieval 186-87 oral 65 organic 175 O r t h o d o x , Eastern 6 1 , 8 7 parallel 179 Reformed 2 5 , 159-60, 163-64, 167, 169-70 Shechemite 6 8 synoptic 4 5 theological approach to 110 1'raditio 180 Ifakarellis, D e m e t r o i s 95 Transfer value 54, 154 Translations 2 5 , 3 9 , 4 7 , 56, 7 8 , 8 3 , 8 7 , 9 1 , 104 equivalence 4 7 into Greek and Aramaic 6 8 only from the I [cbrew 85 priorities of 91 Russian 7 1 , 8 1 , 90 Slavic 8 1 , 86, 91 vernacular 10, 12 Trinity 111, 178, 190-91 Troeltsch, Ernst 4 6

213 Truth d y n a m i c , personal, relational p o i n t s to Christ 114, 119 propositional 114 of Scripture 195 Types and signs 8 Tyson, Vinson 133

1 14

u Ugrinova-Skalovska, Radmila Uniatism 8 7 Unity 4, 3 1 , 147 in Christ 51 and diversity 139 of Jew and Gentile 150 and mission 150 mystery of 1 11 organic 9

82

V van R o o n , A. 150 Vatican Library 39 Veniamin, Benjamin Victorines 5 Virgin birth 132 Voetius 105

86

w Ware, Kallistos 2 Ware, T i m o t h y 8 8 , 100 Warfield, Benjamin B. 129 Weaver, David 78 Weber, T i m o t h y P. 131, 141 Wells, David F. 133 Wettstein, J o h a n n 24 Will and testament 17 Wilson, Robert Dick 133 W i s d o m (Sitach, Ecclesiasticus) 6 8 , 7 3 , 7 5 , 84, 141 Wittgenstein, Ludwig 138 W o o d , Charles M . 138 Woodbridge, J o h n D . 130, 133, 137, 156-57 Word of G o d 14-15, 3 2 , 6 5 - 6 6 , 1 1 1 , 128-29, 139, 148-49, 1596 3 , 168, 170, 175, 1 7 7 - 7 8 , 182, 185-86, 188-92, 194-96 Christ, Scripture, preaching 14

T H E BIBL

214 Incarnate 159, 168, 185 Jesus C h r i s t 1 15, 126 liturgical 6 3 living 9 8 , 185 ministry of t h e 3 4 - 3 5 p r e a c h e d / p r o c l a i m e d 64, 1 1 4 - 1 5 , 126, 159 a n d sacrament 16, 3 6 , 184-85 service ro 3 2 , 194 at w o r k in creation 179 as w t i t t e n W o r d 1 1 5 , 1 59 Works 5 3 , 5 6 , 117, 1 2 1 , 1242 5 , 1 5 2 - 5 3 , 155, 188 World Council o f C h u r c h e s 107, 127 Wright, N . T . 174

Y Yamauchi, Edwin

z Zernov, N . M . 9 3 Zwingli, Ulrich 14

145

215

Index

Scripture Citations

F.xod. 5:23; 6:6 F.xod. 12:21-27 F.xod. 14:30 F.xod. 2 4 : 4 , 12; 3 4 : 1 , 2 8 I.ev. 16:13-15 I.ev. 27:1-21 N u m . 4 : 1 5 , 19-20 D e u t . 6:4f D e u t . 13:1-5 D e u t . 31:12f. 1 Sam. 2:6 2 Sam. 24:1 1 Kings 18:28-29 1 Kings 2 2 : 2 8 2 Kings 3:15 1 Chr. 13:9-10 1 Chr. 21:1 1 C h r . 25:1 N e h . 8 64, Ps. 6:4; 7 : 1 ; 17:13; 18:17 Ps. 51:5 Ps. 5 6 : 1 3 Wis. 13:1 Isa. 4 5 : 2 2 - 2 3 Isa. 5 3 Isa. 53:3,11 Jer. 4 1 : 5 Zech. 1-8 Zech. 13:4-6 Matt. 22:42 M a t k 3:22 Luke 1:2-4 J o h n 1:1-14 John 2:23-25 John 3 J o h n 3:16 J o h n 3:2; 6:26 J o h n 8:56 J o h n 1 0 : 1 9 - 2 1 ; 11:45-48 J o h n 12:32 J o h n 14:6 J o h n 14:26 J o h n 20:29-31 Acts 1:1-2 Acts 1:26; 14:4, 14 Acts 5:38-39

167 166 167 103 166 167 101 64 103 65 115 111 104 103 104 101 111 104 67 167 81 167 123 167 115 167 104 67 104 104 112 35 115 113 165 110 113 4 113 166 114, 117 104 113 34 108 131

Acts 19 149 Rom 1-8 155 Rom 1:5 125 R o m 3:24 124 R o m 3:25 166 R o m 4:2 125 Rom 4 : 2 , 6 124 Rom 4:5 117 Rom 5:9-10 124 Rom 5:12 7 8 - 7 9 , 122 R o m 5:12, 21 122 Rom 5:12-21 79 Rom 6:6 153 Rom 6:8 123, 153 Rom 6 : 1 5 - 2 3 79 Rom 6:16-18 125 Rom 6:17 107 R o m 6:17-22 120 Rom 6:23 122 Rom 7:24 167 Rom 8:11 123 Rom 8:15-17 153 Rom 9:32 125 Rom 10:6 124 R o m 11:6 125 Rom 13:11 124 Rom 16:7 108 112 1 Cor. 1:18-25 1 C o r. 1:22 113 118 1 C o r. 1:22-24 1 C or. 1:28-31 125 1 C or. 2:2 113 1 Cor. 2:9 107 104 1 Cor. 2:13 1 C or. 4:7 125 166 1 C or. 5:7 1 C or. 6:20, 7:23 167 120 1 C o r. 7 104 1 Cor. 7:6, 10, 12, 2 5 , 4 0 1 C or. 8:6 109 72 1 C or. 1 1 ; 15 1 Cor. 14:34-36 149 1 Cor. 15:2 124 1 C or. 15:3-4 167 1 C or. 15:3-5 109 1 Cor. 15:9 119

T H E BIBI.K IN T H E C H U R C H E S

216 1 Cor. 15:22, 52

123 115 79 124 122 167 122

1 Cor. 15:29 1 Cor. 15:40-49 1 Cor. 15:47 1 Cor. 15:56 2 Cor. 1:10 2 Cor. 1:12 2 Cor. 3:6 2 Cor. 5:17 2 Cor. 5:17-20 2 Cor. 6:2 2 Cor. 8:24 2 Cor. 10:5 2 Cor. 12:4 2 Cor. 12:9-13 Gal. 1:6-9 Gal. 1:13 Gal. 2:16, 20 Gal. 4:8

3 125 153 124 108 112

Gal. 4:8-9 Gal. 6:15 Gal. 6:16 F.ph. 1-3 F.ph. 1:3, 2 0 - 2 2 F.ph. 1:3-10 F.ph. 1:4-5, 11-12 F.ph. 1:5 F.ph. 1:7 F.ph. 1:9 F.ph. 1:10 F.ph. 1:11-14 F.ph. 1:14 F.ph. 1:15 F.ph. 1:15-2:22; 3:1-21 F.ph. F.ph. F.ph. F.ph. F.ph. F.ph. F.ph. F.ph. F.ph. F.ph. F.ph. F.ph. F.ph. F.ph. F.ph.

l:19b-23 1:20 1:21 1:22-2:3 1:23 2:1

193 113 103 119 153 123 120 125 107 94, 150, 171 124 150

125 123 120, 124-25 124 120 151 123 120 95 151 120, 123, 150, 153 122, 124 94

120, 171 1 2 2 - 2 3 , 151 2:1-3 5 2 - 5 3 , 151 2:1-3,4-7 151 2:1-7, 8-10 151 2:1-10 5 1 , 54-56, 93, 121, 1 5 0 - 5 1 , 153, 155, 170-71 2:1-20 123 2:2 122, 124 1 2 1 , 154 2:2-3 152 2:3 2:4 55, 1 2 2 - 2 3

F.ph. 2:4-5 F.ph. 2:4-7 F.ph. 2:4-10 F.ph. 2:5 121-22, F.ph. 2:5a F.ph. 2:5b, 8a F.ph. 2:5-6 53, Eph. 2:5-7, 10 F.ph. 2:6 52, 5 5 , Eph. 2:7 53, Eph. 2:8 Eph. 2:8-9 53, Eph. 2:8-10 Eph. 2:9 Eph. 2:10 5 3 , 55, 1 2 1 , F.ph. 2 : 1 1 - 2 2 Eph. 2:15 Eph. 2 : 1 9 - 2 2 Eph. 2 : 2 3 - 2 5 Eph. 3:1 Eph. 3 : 1 , 14 Eph. 3:1-21 Eph. 3:9, 1 1 , 2 1 Eph. 3:10 F.ph. 3:19 Eph. 4 : 1 - 6 : 2 0 Eph. 4-6 Eph. 4 - 7 Eph. 4 : 9 - 1 0 , 15-16 Eph. 4 : 2 2 - 2 4 F.ph. 4 : 2 4 Eph. 4 : 2 7 Eph. 5 : 2 , 8 , 15 Eph. 5 : 2 , 2 5 Eph. 5:6 Eph. 5:8 Eph. 5:22-33 Eph. 6 : 1 1 , 16 Eph. 6 : 1 1 - 1 2 Eph. 6:1 1-17 Eph. 6:12 Eph. 12:2 Eph. 2 3 Phil. 1:29 Phil. 2:5f Phil. 2:6-11 Phil. 2 : 1 2 - 1 3 Phil. 2:25 Phil. 3:3 Phil. 3:20

52 151 5 2 - 5 3 , 94 124, 151 15.3 152 120, 123 153 125, 150 124, 15.3 152 124, 172 123, 151 152 125, 153 5 1 , 151 125 120 113 94 120 95 124 150 124 95 5 3 , 171 151 124 153 125 125 122 123 123, 125 120 120 122 122 125 150 120 122 152 79 167 125 108 125 124

Index Phil. 3:9 Phil. 3:9-1 1 Col. 1:13 Col. 1:21-22 0)1.2:11-13 Col. 2:12; 3:1 Col. 2:13 Col. 3:8-10 Col. 3:9-10 Col. 4:16 1 Thcss. 1:10 1 Thcss. 4:16 1 T h c s s . 5:8-9 2 Thcss. 2:3 1 T i m . 1-2 1 T i m . 2:8-15 1 T i m . 3:15 2 T i m . 2:18 2 T i m . 3:16 2 Tim. 3:16-17 Titus3:5 Heb. 2 H e b . 10:1 Heb. 1 1 1 Pet. 1:3 1 Pet. 2:10 2 Pet. 1:21 1 J o h n 4:1-4 Jas. 2:19 J u d e 14-15 Rev. 1:10

152 123 122 120 123 153 122-23 153 125 107 167 124 124 132 107 149 122 123 104 161 123 146 8 4 123 121 104 110 1 14 107 104

LIST OF C O N T R I B U T O R S

Rev. D r . J o s e p h A. Burgess, D i r e c t o r I n s t i t u t e for L u t h e r a n H i s t o r i c a l Studies R e g e n t L u t h e r a n Parish Regent, N o r t h Dakota Prof Kenneth Hagen D e p a r t m e n t of T h e o l o g y M a r q u e t t e University Milwaukee, Wisconsin Rev. D a n i e l J. H a r r i n g t o n , S.J. W e s t o n J e s u i t S c h o o l of T h e o l o g y C a m b r i d g e , Masssachusetts Prof. G r a n t R. O s b o r n e Trinity Evangelical D i v i n i t y S c h o o l D e e r f i e l d , Illinois V. Rev. D r . M i c h a e l P r o k u r a t Assistant Professor o f Sacred S c r i p t u r e U n i v e r s i t y o f St. T h o m a s S c h o o l o f ' T h e o l o g y at St. M a r y ' s S e m i n a r y H o u s t o n , 'Texas The Rev. D r . M a r i o n L. Soards Professor of N e w ' T e s t a m e n t S t u d i e s Louisville P r e s b y t e r i a n Theological S e m i n a r y Louisville, K e n t u c k y Rev. G e o r g e H . T a v a r d , A.A. Professor E m e r i t u s of T h e o l o g y M e t h o d i s t Theological S c h o o l in O h i o Delaware, O h i o

The Bible in the Churches: How Various Christians Interpret the Scriptures (Marquette Studies in Theology, Vol 4)