The Interpretation of the Bible in Bullinger's Early Works

Abstract

This article notes Luther's, Melanchthon's, and Augustine's influence, but also Bullinger's independence in interpretation. It explores Bullinger's rejection of the view that Scripture is obscure and needs the Fathers to interpret it. His underlying position is that Scripture interprets Scripture. Other principles include the comparison of passages of Scripture, interpreting a few texts by many, obscure texts by clear ones, the necessity for languages, the use of rhetoric, the covenant as the sum and scope of Scripture, an emphasis on the natural sense, and the contribution of secular disciplines. A concluding section considers briefly Bullinger's later use of essentially five principles     

Beyond the Biblical Impasse: Homosexuality Through the Lens of Theological Anthropology

Abstract: What does the Bible say about homosexuality? The argument developed in this article demonstrates that the five biblical texts often cited as “proof” that the Bible condemns homosexuality reflect a theological anthropology that is challenged within Scripture itself and that has been determined by the church to be contextual rather than binding in relation to other debated issues. By bringing the theological anthropology reflected in the five texts into conversation with contrasting biblical anthropologies, it becomes possible to re‐frame the contemporary conversation on homosexuality in terms of discerning which biblical theological anthropology will be considered authoritative for the church in the 21^st century.     

Scripture as the Voice of God: The Continuing Importance of Autopistia

This article argues that the concept of autopistia offers a helpful perspective for theological reflection on the authority of Scripture in the present context. It explains the concept by eliminating some misunderstandings and offering a definition of the autopistia of Scripture from its theological sources. It faces the objections that the idea is inutile because it is too specifically Protestant and outdated because it rests on pre‐modern presuppositions. Finally it draws some implications of this perspective for the role of the church, for the communication of the authority of Scripture in the postmodern context, and for the proper place of the doctrine of Scripture in systematic theology.     

A Treasure Hidden in a Field: Katherine Sonderegger on Scripture

This paper considers Katherine Sonderegger's view of Scripture. In volume 2 of her Systematic Theology Sonderegger suggests a ‘dogmatic reading’ that overcomes the impasse of both a too historicist and a too theologically narrow view of the biblical text. As evidenced in her innovative reading of Isaiah 53, Sonderegger's engagement with Scripture is both thoroughly traditional and a novel approach to theologically engaging the biblical text.     

To Think and to Speak of the Living God: Katherine Sonderegger's Systematic Theology,Volume 2

This review of the second volume of Katherine Sonderegger's Systematic Theology reflects upon its several extraordinary features before exploring in some detail the theological account of Scripture integrated into its argument. The possibility of unfolding a metaphysically robust account of God's immanent triune life on the basis of the biblical witness turns upon a highly distinctive view of the Bible and its relation to God's own being.     

Revelation,Scripture and Tradition: Lessons from Vatican II's Constitution Dei verbum for Contemporary Theology

For Roman Catholic systematic theology, any reflection on the relation between revelation, Scripture and tradition has to take into account the dogmatic constitution of the Second Vatican Council concerning this theme: Dei verbum. In this document, the dialogical nature of these fundamental theological concepts has been accentuated. Revelation, but also Scripture and tradition, are historical dynamic givens that reveal a salvific God at work in our history, both through Christ and in the Spirit. In conversation with Joseph Ratzinger, now Benedict XVI, both the coming into being of this document and its main assets are discussed. Moreover, it will be Dei verbum's reception, and especially the difficulties subsequently encountered to uphold and institutionally anchor the dialogical nature of revelation, tradition, theology and the magisterium that are also commented upon. Inasmuch, however, as Dei verbum has become a part of tradition for the Roman Catholic Church, a reading and rereading of this tradition requires the same dialogical hermeneutical principles which Dei verbum itself presents and requires.     

Noah J. Toly and Daniel I. Block,eds. Keeping God's Earth: The Global Environment in Biblical Perspective

Abstract

Ted Peters rightly rejects, on biblical and theological grounds, the understanding of kenosis presumably endorsed by Niels Gregersen (and with him Jürgen Moltmann, John Polkinghorne and Arthur Peacocke) as divine withdrawal from creation (tsim tsum). That said, a second version of kenosis, one more consistent with Scripture and early patristic theology, meets Peters' criticism by presenting kenosis not as a creative withdrawal of divine power but as a self-negation on the part of God that results in the generation of created reality along with God's reappearance and presence in it, albeit in another form. This is the kenosis-plerosis model, one according to which God gives history its momentum and empowers finite beings as a consequence of God's own self-negation; this would make possible a way for Gregersen meaningfully to affirm God's action at higher levels of nature without violating nature's integrity, even though it does so in a heterodox way.     

SCIENCE MEETS BIBLICAL EXEGESIS IN THE GALILEO AFFAIR

Abstract Although Galileo's venture into theology, as discussed by McMullin, is limited to Galileo's exegesis of Scripture, it can be seen as an important element in a broader role in theology, namely in ecclesiology and in the development of doctrine. From the Council of Trent, the Reformation Council, until today there has been a development in the Church concerning the manner in which Sacred Scripture should be interpreted and as to whether it can be said to be in conflict with our scientific knowledge of nature. Galileo made a significant contribution to this development. With his telescopic observations he was, in fact, undermining the prevailing Aristotelian natural philosophy of his day and was defending the birth of modern science against a mistaken view of Scripture. The Church of his time was not prepared to accept his contribution to this theological development. What does this history have to contribute to the challenges we face today in the interactions between science and religious belief?     

Theology as a human science: Reflections on Gadamer’s Truth and Method

Abstract

Gadamer’s attempt to ’rehabilitate tradition in general clarifies that which theology and the human sciences have in common since he claims that the rehabilitation of tradition is crucial for all human science enquiry. His systematic unfolding of the hermeneutical process described in Truth and Method is discussed under three headings: The meaning of tradition and how the idea of tradition may be rehabilitated; how do we know in the human sciences? and, the nature of theological reflection as part of the human sciences. Gadamer’s hermeneutics helps to transcend the antithesis between reason and tradition. It offers a more appropriate way to understand cultural and historical texts and broadens the purview of the human sciences. It is within this broader understanding of the human sciences that theological reflection comes to itself.     

‘That is Best,Which Was First’: Christian Primitivism and the Reformation Church of England, 1548-1722

Abstract

This essay explores the Church of England's theologico-historical sense of self during the tumultuous period of the ‘long Reformation.’ By taking its claim to be ‘primitive Christianity restored’ seriously it is argued that Church of England polemical apology was guided by Christian primitivism, an ideology shaped by a belief in the theological primacy of the beginning of Christianity. This made it intellectually possible to conceive of a past true, pure Church that should and could be re-formed in the present. In a more speculative vein it is also argued that this primitivism was formative in the Church's self-defining apologetic recourse to Scripture, reason, and tradition.     

THE BIBLICAL ROOTS OF LOCKE'S THEORY OF PERSONAL IDENTITY

Locke's consciousness‐based theory of personal identity resulted not only from his agnosticism on substance, but also from his biblical theology. This theory was intended to complement and sustain Locke's moral and theological commitments to a system of otherworldly rewards and sanctions as revealed in Scripture. Moreover, he inferred mortalist ideas from the Bible, rejecting the resurrection of the same body and maintaining that the soul dies at physical death and will be resurrected by divine miracle. Accordingly, personal identity is neither in the soul, nor in the body, nor in a union of soul and body. To Locke, personal identity is in consciousness, which, extending “backwards to any past Action or Thought,” enables the self, both in this life and upon resurrection for the Last Judgment, to recognize that “it is the same self now it was then; and ‘tis by the same self with this present one that now reflects on it, that that Action was done” (Essay II.xxvii.9).     

Theology at the Freak Show: St Uncumber and the Discourse of Liberation

Abstract

Christian theology can begin to contemplate release or escape from a gendered theological hierarchy which has been mapped onto the cultural view of gender normativity by following the ancient saintly pattern of St Uncumber's tradition. St Uncumber responds to the call to difference by retaining her anomalous sexual characteristics —as the bearded lady. And tradition, by making of her a liberator, opens up the possibility of configuring her as a liberator from the imprisonment of biological essentialisms or normative sex gender.     

Coleridge and the 'master-key' of biblical interpretation

Claude Welch, the distinguished historian of nineteenth‐century religious thought, once declared that Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772–1834) ‘may be seen as the real turning point into the theology of the nineteenth century’ and that he ‘was as important for British and American thought as were Schleiermacher and Hegel’.² Still, Coleridge remains largely marginalized in the annals of church history and theology despite his unwavering prominence throughout much of the nineteenth century. Perhaps it should come as no surprise, then, that Coleridge's posthumously published Confessions of an Inquiring Spirit (1840), with its rejection of the verbal infallibility of Scripture and elevation of the importance of the individual in rightly discerning the truths of the Christian faith, has often been misread as an attestation of the primacy of the individual subject over the biblical text. It has been treated alternately as a document that signals the emergence of German higher criticism in England,³ a Romantic appeal to the fundamental importance of the subjective in religion,⁴ and an early form of reader‐oriented literary criticism.⁵ In this article I suggest that the attention devoted to Coleridge's denial of the verbal inspiration of Scripture, epitomized by the phrase that biblical inspiration is constituted by ‘whatever finds me’, has overshadowed his equally significant attention to the authority of church tradition in that same document. More specifically, rather than arguing for subjectivism in biblical interpretation, Coleridge equally emphasizes the objective sources of revelation expressed in Scripture and the church traditions handed over from the apostles. Rather than proposing a model of biblical inspiration that is wholly individualistic, Coleridge maintains a vision of Christianity that affirms the vitality of both the authority of the church and that of the believer. Thus, Coleridge's theological contribution to religious history is not that of an aberrant, absent‐minded poet, but rather that of a central participant engaged in an ongoing and pivotal debate in the history of England: the relationship between Scripture and church traditions. In order to draw out this important, though neglected, strand of thought in those ‘Letters on the Scriptures’, the name by which the Confessions is sometimes identified,⁶ I begin by briefly clarifying the nature of the idea of tradition both in relation to Coleridge and English theology in the nineteenth century. I then summarize the argument of the Confessions as a whole and turn more particularly to those sections of the Confessions that suggest the role Coleridge assigns to church tradition in relation to Scripture. Finally, after assessing the authority of the church in relationship to the divine Word, I turn to Coleridge's earlier works and his notes on the Works of William Chillingworth (1602–1644) in order to demonstrate that his views on the respective authority of both the individual and the church were consistently held since near the time of his conversion to Trinitarian Christianity. I conclude that Coleridge's conception of the relationship between Scripture and church traditions calls for a reevaluation of his place in the history of religious thought in England.     

Theology of Creation and the Use of Scripture Creation,David Fergusson,Eerdmans, 2014 (ISBN 978‐0‐8028‐7196‐1), viii + 149 pp., pb $18 From Nothing: A Theology of Creation,Ian A. McFarland,Westminster John Knox, 2014 (ISBN 978‐0‐664‐23819‐3), xvii + 212 pp., pb $35

David Fergusson's recent book, Creation, overviews differing aspects of creation for a theologically‐literate but non‐specialist readership, while Ian McFarland's From Nothing: A Theology of Creation offers a sophisticated account of the meaning and theological implications of the classic doctrine of creatio ex nihilo. Although both books make constructive appeal to Scripture, I suggest that their use of Scripture indicates that their creative theological thinking is not primarily done by working through the interpretative challenges that Scripture presents. There thus remains a distance between biblically and systematically oriented theological thinking.     

John Milbank and Biblical Hermeneutics: the End of the Historical‐Critical Method?

It is perhaps ironic that a methodology still convinced of its radical iconoclasm and progressive nature should at the same time be regarded as critically backward, a by‐product of a disappearing philosophy. Such a view of the historical‐critical method is held by John Milbank who argues that because of its dependence upon heretical philosophies that affirm the ontological autonomy of a world without reference to or participation in God, it should be confined to theological history. This essay will argue that Milbank's challenge ought to be taken seriously by Christian biblical interpreters and suggests that historical‐critical study, in the form criticised by Milbank, needs to be rejected. Milbank exposes the philosophical bankruptcy of the method from a Christian perspective; nevertheless, Milbank overstretches himself. His rejection of the historical‐critical method results in a hermeneutic that has no place for a biblical text's historical particularity and sense. 1 Because of this, he is left subsuming historic texts into the regula fidei of his philosophical meta‐narrative, whether they fit such a move or not. This is particularly the case with Milbank's treatment of biblical texts, which, it shall be argued, operates as a refusal of history and a refusal of the particularity and alterity of the text. This highlights the need for an historical hermeneutic for Christian biblical interpretation, based on theological presuppositions, which takes the theological value of both historical particularity and the text seriously.     

An Eastern Heritage in a Western Rite: A Study of Source and Method for Archbishop Cranmer's Inclusion of ‘A Prayer of Chrysostome‘ in the English Litany of 1544

Abstract

Representing the first officially authorized printing of an English-language text, Thomas Cranmer's Litany (1544)—a direct precursor of the 1549 Book of Common Prayer—is an important historical document. It also has linguistic significance, since ‘in setting forth certain godly prayers and suffrages in our native English tongue', Cranmer went beyond simple translation of the Latin. Among his innovations was the insertion of ‘A Prayer of Chrysostome', taken directly from an Eastern Orthodox source. The English rendering of the prayer has long been considered a masterly translation. However, while beautifully executed, Cranmer's version (compared with earlier Greek and Latin texts) is peculiar at points and raises theological questions. This study reviews and critiques scholarship on the matter while offering new insights into Cranmer's connections to Christian Orthodox thought and practice.