How to take a stand on difficult issues (part 3)

Have I studied the opinions of the church both past and present?

The Bible is a community book. It is a revelation that we share with one another. It is revelation that we share with the community of faith past, present, and future. Modernity has given us the philosophy that our own human reason is enough for discovering truth in scripture. Technology has made such a philosophy practical. And pietism has provided a spiritual justification for such individualistic approaches to the text.

The reality however is that scripture was never intended for mere private consumption. Do I believe in the virtue of individual study of the text? Yes. Certainly. But do I believe in the privatization of the text and studying the text in isolation? No. The Bible is and always has been the word that shapes our community as believers. Our New Testament was originally received through the ears as it was read publicly among the Church.

This has some important implications for us when it comes to navigating difficult theological/hermeneutical issues. Augustine (among many others) argued strongly for what is known as the “rule of faith.” This rule of faith (regula fidei) is closely associated with the T word – tradition. When we come across a text that is difficult to understand or an issue that is tough to figure out, Augustine advocated looking back on what has traditionally been taught in the tradition of the Church.

We modern evangelicals don’t much care for tradition. It’s a word that makes us feel constricted. (“What about freedom?”) It’s a word that we too often associate with “backwardness.” (“What about relevance?”) And to an extent, we are correct. Tradition has oftentimes been appallingly wrong. Those who preached indulgences in the late Middle Ages and those who preached segregation in more recent times come to mind. There have clearly been times where tradition has become more important than the clear teaching of scripture. But to shut the door on tradition altogether seems to me to be very unwise and extremely arrogant. It smacks of the type of generational prejudice that says, “We have got it all figured out. We would never make the types of embarrassing errors made by generations past. All of human history has been anxiously awaiting the wisdom and insight of our generation. You’re welcome!” (I’ve seen the same people turn into young curmudgeons as soon as they start to get passed by the next generation who obviously don’t know anything about anything.)

In light of this, I want to offer this suggestion. When taking a stand on any difficult issue, we should pause and ask, “How has this been handled by the Church historically?” This probably shouldn’t be our first question, but it definitely should be one of the questions we ask. There may be some insight to be gained from looking at 2,000 years of church history.

On a related note, I would also suggest that you should seek out expert opinions on issues from Christians in your own day (particularly Christians who might be outside of your immediate heritage). There are experts who have dedicated substantial time and effort to studying virtually any issue that we might have to deal with. Draw from their insight as they have struggled with the text.

The Bible is a community book. Interpretation does not begin and end with you. And further, let’s get rid of this pietistic error that essentially teaches that the Holy Spirit only (or principally) works on an individual level. The Holy Spirit is active in Christians everywhere and through all times. It could be that the Holy Spirit wants to teach us through the insights of others.

Part 1
Part 2

Roman Catholic Hermeneutics

The Holy, Ecumenical and General Synod of Trent…having this aim always before its eyes, that errors may be removed and the purity of the Gospel be preserved in the Church, which was before promised through the prophets in the Holy Scriptures and which our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God first published by his own mouth and then commanded to be preached through his Apostles to every creature as a source of all saving truth and of discipline of conduct; and perceiving that this truth and this discipline are contained in written books and in unwritten traditions, which were received by the Apostles from the lips of Christ himself, or, by the same apostles, at the dictation of the Holy Spirit, and were handed on and have come down to us; following the example of the orthodox Father, this Synod receives and venerates, with equal pious affection and reverence, all the books both of the New and Old Testaments…together with the said Traditions…as having been given either from the lips of Christ or by the dictation of the Holy Spirit and preserved in unbroken succession in the Catholic Church.

Henry Bettenson, ed., Documents of the Christian Church (London: Oxford, 1963), 261.

Augustine

Augustine’s Six Rules: (From Robert Lowery, Lincoln Christian Seminary)
1. The authority of Scripture rests on the authority of the church – authority is given to the ancient text as the church receives it.
2. The obscurities in Scripture have been put there by God, and are to be interpreted on the basis of many plain passages. Also consult traditional interpretation and the context.
3. When Scripture is ambiguous the rule of faith can be used to interpret it (what the church has customarily taught).
4. Figurative passages must not be taken literally; attention must be paid to the literary form of each text.
5. A figure need not always have only one meaning. Meaning may vary with context.
6. Any possible meaning which a text can have is legitimate, whether the author realized it or not. A truth could be apprehended at many different levels, and it was wrong to limit the biblical text to just one meaning.