The fourth of my ten-part series on a basic systematic theology deriving from the Nicene Creed.

------------------------------------

All the churches, all Christians, are called to do theology and to be theologians.
-- Joe Jones

Before getting into the heart of the matter of faith by examining the Creed, we must examine two issues: that of the purpose and context of theology (without which, none of this much matters) and that of sources, from which this examination and formulation of faith derives. The first of these was discussed in my last article (Basic Theology III).


Sources of Theology

Different traditions have different notions of the source or sources of theology. While they hold that it is the revelation of God, exactly how this revelation is conveyed to humankind is a matter of debate. Some hold that it is Scripture alone which is the source, and indeed go further in that Scripture is a norma normans, to be defined by itself for itself. However, this easily leads to the trap of bibliolatry. Scripture seeks to proclaim ‘...freedom from all idolatry, including bibliolatry...’ (Migliore, p. 42) However, in the search for certainty, and in the search up against the historical method for greater assurance in the word of God, ‘the doctrine of inspiration became a theory of the supernatural origin of Scripture.’ (Migliore, p. 43) ‘Thus, to the Roman Catholic dogma of the infallibility of the pope (1870), directed against the rising tide of modernity, there corresponded the Protestant doctrine of the infallibility of the Bible.’ (Migliore, p. 44)

But this is to confuse the idea of inspiration with incorruptibility. ‘Inspired does not mean inerrant and infallible in every respect.’ (Jones I, p. 62) To insist on so heavy an emphasis on Scripture, and not only that, but on the attribute of Scripture as a perfect-in-every-way document and guide, results in a ‘...biblicism which turns the authority of Scripture into a deadening authoritarianism.’ (Migliore, p. 44) Indeed, this sort of biblicism become a framework from which the liberating and transforming qualities of Scripture are absent. The continuing action of the Holy Spirit is denied in this approach. However, ‘if we do not have to defend a fundamentalist view that every sentence of the New Testament is inerrant, we can probe more deeply for the continuities in grammar of the various witnesses of the New Testament. We do not have to be misled by some surface dissimilarities and seeming disagreements.’ (Jones I, p. 69)

Scripture, being a construct of the church and first written by and then transmitted by human agents, must necessarily share in the fallibility of those human agents, not only in interpretation but in creation and transmission. ‘No precautionary measures exist which can exclude [the human factor] unambiguously at the very start.’ (Rahner I, p. 148) This is not to say they are false, or wrong, but rather that they at the very least suffer from the same limitations as humans do. ‘All human statements, even those in which faith expresses God’s saving truths, are finite. By this we mean that they never declare the whole of a reality.’ (Rahner I, p. 148) Some have tried to turn the biblical authors into scribes, somehow taking divine dictation (which was then, of course, proofread by God to insure accuracy!), thus leaving none of the humanity of the authors free to influence the text in any way. However, ‘...the Spirit of God does not have to destroy the humanity of the biblical witnesses in order to work through them.’ (Migliore, p. 50)

To work with Scripture as the only source is itself a tradition--to say that tradition plays no part is rather hollow, just as to claim that Scripture should not be ‘interpreted’ but rather taken literally is itself a choice of interpretation. This can lead to problems, as the voices of Scripture are often at odds with one another, and are not in fact a harmonised chorus of voices, but rather a cacophony from which certain voices emerge more strongly than others at different times. ‘The church should have no theological interest in regarding the Bible as inerrant in the totality of its sentences.’ (Jones I, p. 62) Rather, the church should hold true to the gospel message. ‘The believing church possesses what it believes: Christ, his Spirit, the earnest of eternal life and its vital powers.’ (Rahner I, p. 154)

Other traditions, such as the Anglican (my own tradition, despite my denominational shift), hold that there are other sources, such as Scripture, tradition, and reason, or the Methodists, which add experience to this triad. These sources dance together in an uneasy and unclearly defined way--indeed, the way in which these interact vary in interpretation among interpreting communities depending upon issues, particularly leadership, and community needs. However, these communities hold Scripture as a primary source, and often the elements of reason, tradition, experience, etc. are elements primarily applied to the interpretation of Scripture. ‘The larger context for interpreting Scripture is the community of believers. The Bible is the book of the church.’ (Migliore, p. 54, see also Jones I, p. 61) Scripture by itself has an historical value, a literary value, but ‘...the real authority of Scripture [is] in the life of the community of faith.’ (Migliore, p. 46) Scripture even defies individual interpretation as normative--’applications made by individual Christians and theologians are never more than appeals to the church itself, which consequently has to be recognised as the court of last appeal.’ (Rahner I, p. 147, also Jones, lecture 10/5/99) ‘The interpretation of the Bible is properly a community activity--something the people of the church do together and never simply the private interpretations of assorted individuals.’ (Jones I, p. 64) To interpret Scripture (or tradition, or to use reason, for that matter) can never be an individual event--each is raised in a certain tradition with certain reason-able precepts, which one can embrace or reject, but can never work in isolation and without influence from those sources. Scripture was produced by a community; tradition is kept alive in community; reason is developed and practiced in the education of a community; experience, learning, cultures past and present, all these are founded in communal activities. Only a feral child could claim to be free of these, and as such, would not have the Scriptures, traditions, etc., upon which to expound.

Just as reliance on Scripture can become idolatrous and ultimately disastrous for a theology true to the gospel message, so to can reliance on any other element of the sources of theology. To give undue weight to tradition or reason can lead to other problems. ‘Traditionalism--the incapacity to disagree with tradition--can unduly bind the church’s witness today. Revisionism unruled can subject the church’s witness to the "fads and whims" of worldly times.’ (Jones I, p. 66) ‘The gospel also wants to proclaim a new freedom from bondage.’ (Migliore, p. 41)

It is the task of each source (regardless of the number of sources ultimately relied upon) to be in dialectical relationship with the other sources. Tradition must recognise the multiplicity of voices in Scripture. ‘The witness of Scripture accomplishes its purpose in a polyphonic rather than homophonic manner.’ (Migliore, p. 47) Reason and experience must be guided by Scripture and tradition. ‘The listening church is both freed (liberated) and bound by the Bible.’ (Jones I, p. 63) Hopefully, the community will recognise when care is needed in evaluating new claims to authority of certain interpretations, and be able to respond to the gospel message as it is interpreted anew. ‘When the church automatically reacts to liberation theology and liberation movements with alarm, it merely shows that it no longer understands the message of Scripture.’ (Migliore, p. 53) But by being true to the gospel message, God’s transforming power as revealed in Jesus Christ and the history of Israel, the community can become truly Christian.


References for this section:

Book of Common Prayer. 1979. Seabury Press: New York.

Jones, Joe. Manuscript for A Grammar of Christian Faith, Volumes I & II. 1999-2000. Rowman and Littlefield, 2002.

Migliore, Daniel L. Faith Seeking Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Theology. 1991. Eerdmans: Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Rahner, Karl. The Trinity. 1997. Crossroad Publishing: New York.

Rahner, Karl. Edited by Geffrey B. Kelly. Karl Rahner. 1992. Augsburg Fortress Press: Minneapolis, Minnesota.