In our class discussion a very insightful observation was made. Much of the tension between the church's sense of what is moral and society's is in the tension between which source of knowing will be the primary authority.
The Protestant church tradition says scripture is the primary authority.
The Roman Catholic church tradition says church doctrine, tradition with a capital "T," is the primary authority.
Secular society says personal and minority experience must be accepted and valid and authoritative for each person and sub-culture.
And science and academia would argue empirical evidence as the only truth.
We have to make a choice. Which will be our source of authority?
For United Methodists scripture, the church's book, is our measuring rod by which all things are measured. The bible is the primary authority on all things concerning the life of salvation in Jesus Christ. We make a choice by becoming United Methodists in the protestant Christian tradition to accept the Bible as the authority for living our lives faithfully before God.
But scripture is not the singular source. The Bible is read sometimes through a tradition of interpretation and other voices are consulted through the centuries. What has the church had to say about this particular point in scripture? Aside from committed theologians, professors and pastors, most of us ignore tradition. What the preacher preaches becomes the voice of tradition unless we choose to delve into the massive resources available to learn what has been said in the past.
The Bible is also read from the position of experience. A feminist reads the scriptures and sheds new interpretations from her perspective as a marginalized person in a make dominated culture. An immigrant to the USA reads the exodus story about slaves in Egypt and finds themselves in a similar situation. They are outside most of the blessings of this nation. They are given grunt work to do. They are barred from establishments or treated with inhospitality. They are feared because "there are too many of them." Efforts are made to control them. The Bible is read devotionally by someone needed inspiration or help, guidance or assurance. What is heard is very different than what was originally meant.
And empirical sciences have brought to bible study two very significant schools of interpretation: the historical-critical and the literary-critical.
Historical criticism works to help us read the scriptures through understanding the context in which a document was written. We gain understanding about the historical, political, social and religious lives of the original recipients of the document. We try and understand why it was written and to whom for what explicit purposes. Then once we have heard the text as closely as our knowledge of the original historical context allows, the and only them can we think about how the text might speak to our current situation.
Literary criticism looks at literary genre and textual analysis. A prophet's writings are filled with imagery which is meant to evoke strong emotion in its hearers. Imagery points to something deeper. It is not meant to be read at face value, but as metaphor. Poetry uses metaphor. Jesus' parables are metaphorical. Apostle's letters are written in response to certain letters to which the apostle is responding, like 1 and 2 Corinthians. In another case the letter is sent by means of introduction like the letter to the Romans. In other cases the letter is general in nature and meant to be circulated around to all the churches in the region to which it was sent as a means of encouragement. Some letters are personal in nature sent to an individual and yet they are part of the New Testament. We read letters more literally than we read parables except when the apostle is using metaphor in his letter. A literary critical approach considers these questions of genre and form to help one understand the text.
Literary criticism also considers location of a passage within the context of the book or letter itself. What precedes the passage under inspection? What follows? How does that shed light on the passage? What are the major themes in this book or letter that might help one understand the passage or verse? What words in the passage are used elsewhere in the book or letter? How is the word used in other parts of the scriptures? How is the word used in other documents that are outside the Bible written around the same time and region? How does this help us understand the word's use in the passage?
And literary criticism looks at the position of the passage as part of canon. How does the whole of scripture help one understand the passage or verse? This is why knowledge of the Old Testament is essential to grasping the depth and richness of what is begin conveyed in the New Testament.
Reading commentaries and study bible notes will help a great deal, but always remember you are reading someone else's thoughts and ideas from their tradition. Quite often tradition colors the commentary in Study Bibles and Life Application Bibles and Commentaries. It is nearly impossible to write an unbiased statement. We are growing individuals shaped by our education, traditions and experiences. What we write one day may later need revision.
As a Christian, I think my real authority, my driving rule, is trying to please God. I accept the Bible as divinely revealed knowledge of God. I have experienced God through the Holy Spirit speaking to me as I read the Bible and I have experienced God in prayer and living life in relationship with Him. The Bible is the primary to which I go to for measuring my life and the life of the Christ's church.
Recognize that not every United Methodist clergy is where I am theologically. Some find the Bible antiquated and not the best source for guidance. They tend to look to contemporary voices and their own experience and perceptions. They know the God of love and want everyone who is oppressed or marginalized by church or society to enjoy full participation in the life of the church and society regardless of what the Bible condemns as sin. For this position love (defined as full acceptance of the other) is the only law by which we must live.
The United Methodist Church holds these positions and many others in a big umbrella. We all choose to treat one another with respect and honor even when we sharply disagree. But there are times that, when passions flare and our need to have our position get the upper hand, drive us into combative behavior. There is always this tension at work in our dialogue in the conversation between church and society, on church conference floors and even in our classroom.
Let God be the winner and humbly admit you do not yet have a total grasp on the mind of God. The Bible contains all things necessary for you to be saved. Work on your salvation, your becoming a fuller reflection of Jesus Christ. Let that be enough.
I find with this approach to dialogue I am free to play devil's advocate, to stir up controversy for the sake of breaking loose blinders from past perspectives to open me into deeper and fuller understanding.
Wrestling with angels has its advantages (Gen. 32:26). Like Jacob wrestled with God we should adopt the same quest when wrestling with scripture and traditional voices, personal experience and voices in society beyond the church.
“I will not let you go unless you bless me.”
The Protestant church tradition says scripture is the primary authority.
The Roman Catholic church tradition says church doctrine, tradition with a capital "T," is the primary authority.
Secular society says personal and minority experience must be accepted and valid and authoritative for each person and sub-culture.
And science and academia would argue empirical evidence as the only truth.
We have to make a choice. Which will be our source of authority?
For United Methodists scripture, the church's book, is our measuring rod by which all things are measured. The bible is the primary authority on all things concerning the life of salvation in Jesus Christ. We make a choice by becoming United Methodists in the protestant Christian tradition to accept the Bible as the authority for living our lives faithfully before God.
But scripture is not the singular source. The Bible is read sometimes through a tradition of interpretation and other voices are consulted through the centuries. What has the church had to say about this particular point in scripture? Aside from committed theologians, professors and pastors, most of us ignore tradition. What the preacher preaches becomes the voice of tradition unless we choose to delve into the massive resources available to learn what has been said in the past.
The Bible is also read from the position of experience. A feminist reads the scriptures and sheds new interpretations from her perspective as a marginalized person in a make dominated culture. An immigrant to the USA reads the exodus story about slaves in Egypt and finds themselves in a similar situation. They are outside most of the blessings of this nation. They are given grunt work to do. They are barred from establishments or treated with inhospitality. They are feared because "there are too many of them." Efforts are made to control them. The Bible is read devotionally by someone needed inspiration or help, guidance or assurance. What is heard is very different than what was originally meant.
And empirical sciences have brought to bible study two very significant schools of interpretation: the historical-critical and the literary-critical.
Historical criticism works to help us read the scriptures through understanding the context in which a document was written. We gain understanding about the historical, political, social and religious lives of the original recipients of the document. We try and understand why it was written and to whom for what explicit purposes. Then once we have heard the text as closely as our knowledge of the original historical context allows, the and only them can we think about how the text might speak to our current situation.
Literary criticism looks at literary genre and textual analysis. A prophet's writings are filled with imagery which is meant to evoke strong emotion in its hearers. Imagery points to something deeper. It is not meant to be read at face value, but as metaphor. Poetry uses metaphor. Jesus' parables are metaphorical. Apostle's letters are written in response to certain letters to which the apostle is responding, like 1 and 2 Corinthians. In another case the letter is sent by means of introduction like the letter to the Romans. In other cases the letter is general in nature and meant to be circulated around to all the churches in the region to which it was sent as a means of encouragement. Some letters are personal in nature sent to an individual and yet they are part of the New Testament. We read letters more literally than we read parables except when the apostle is using metaphor in his letter. A literary critical approach considers these questions of genre and form to help one understand the text.
Literary criticism also considers location of a passage within the context of the book or letter itself. What precedes the passage under inspection? What follows? How does that shed light on the passage? What are the major themes in this book or letter that might help one understand the passage or verse? What words in the passage are used elsewhere in the book or letter? How is the word used in other parts of the scriptures? How is the word used in other documents that are outside the Bible written around the same time and region? How does this help us understand the word's use in the passage?
And literary criticism looks at the position of the passage as part of canon. How does the whole of scripture help one understand the passage or verse? This is why knowledge of the Old Testament is essential to grasping the depth and richness of what is begin conveyed in the New Testament.
Reading commentaries and study bible notes will help a great deal, but always remember you are reading someone else's thoughts and ideas from their tradition. Quite often tradition colors the commentary in Study Bibles and Life Application Bibles and Commentaries. It is nearly impossible to write an unbiased statement. We are growing individuals shaped by our education, traditions and experiences. What we write one day may later need revision.
As a Christian, I think my real authority, my driving rule, is trying to please God. I accept the Bible as divinely revealed knowledge of God. I have experienced God through the Holy Spirit speaking to me as I read the Bible and I have experienced God in prayer and living life in relationship with Him. The Bible is the primary to which I go to for measuring my life and the life of the Christ's church.
Recognize that not every United Methodist clergy is where I am theologically. Some find the Bible antiquated and not the best source for guidance. They tend to look to contemporary voices and their own experience and perceptions. They know the God of love and want everyone who is oppressed or marginalized by church or society to enjoy full participation in the life of the church and society regardless of what the Bible condemns as sin. For this position love (defined as full acceptance of the other) is the only law by which we must live.
The United Methodist Church holds these positions and many others in a big umbrella. We all choose to treat one another with respect and honor even when we sharply disagree. But there are times that, when passions flare and our need to have our position get the upper hand, drive us into combative behavior. There is always this tension at work in our dialogue in the conversation between church and society, on church conference floors and even in our classroom.
Let God be the winner and humbly admit you do not yet have a total grasp on the mind of God. The Bible contains all things necessary for you to be saved. Work on your salvation, your becoming a fuller reflection of Jesus Christ. Let that be enough.
I find with this approach to dialogue I am free to play devil's advocate, to stir up controversy for the sake of breaking loose blinders from past perspectives to open me into deeper and fuller understanding.
Wrestling with angels has its advantages (Gen. 32:26). Like Jacob wrestled with God we should adopt the same quest when wrestling with scripture and traditional voices, personal experience and voices in society beyond the church.
“I will not let you go unless you bless me.”
No comments:
Post a Comment