Monday, May 14, 2007

We Seek the Grail

For centuries Christians have sought the Holy Grail. This relic captivates the imagination. To have the grail is to hold in your hands the very cup that Jesus shared with His disciples…to touch salvation history. How glorious would that be? Just as these types of relics hold a particular fascination for many, there are also theological concepts that have gained great prominence. In fact, there are many “grails” we hold with religious fervor. My hope is to begin a reasoned discussion about these dearly held beliefs. Ultimately, the objective is to foster positive dialogue that may help bridge gaps rather than create new ones. With this in mind, here is the first “grail”.

Let's talk about Sola Scriptura. Protestants hold unwavering to this concept of Scripture alone as our spiritual authority. Without question this high view of Scripture along with Sola Fide (faith alone) are the “holy grails” of the Reformation. In Sola Scriptura, the Bible is the pillar and foundation of truth - the authority. That seems apparent, right? Oops, we have a Biblical dilemma. The Scriptures state that the Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Timothy 3:15). What are we to make of that?

Consider that the Church existed before the New Testament Scriptures. Was Sola Scriptura in effect before the books of the New Testament were in existence? How can that be? Did Sola Scriptura take effect after the Scriptures were canonized at Hippo in 393 and Carthage in 397? When did it apply and how did the Church survive without it? Where is Scripture alone as the Authority taught in the Scriptures? Paul states in 2 Timothy 3:16, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness..." This reference to the Old Testament does not claim authoritative exclusivity. (Stay with me...please read on.)

Clearly, the Church after Pentecost forged her way into the future with dedication to Truth, but what Truth? Without the New Testament Scriptures in place, what was their source of authority in spiritual matters? May I suggest it was the Tradition that was handed down by Jesus to the Apostles and by the Apostles to the bishops, and so on down the time line? The Apostle Paul said, “So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings (Tradition) we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.” As Christians, according to 2 Thessalonians 2:15, we are to hold on to the Tradition – by word of mouth or by letter. Note that Paul does not see the oral Tradition (kerygma) to be in contrast with his written documents. In his book, "Evangelicals and Tradition," D. H. Williams notes, "Paul does not set these traditions and his letter in opposition to each other. Rather, he sees them as complementary..." Acts 2 holds another clue. The early Church, "dedicated themselves to the Apostles teaching..." These students of Jesus taught to their students what Jesus had taught them. Obviously orthodoxy was established by the Lord and as Paul said, "What I received from the Lord I also passed on to you..." (1 Corinthians 11:23). The Tradition was handed down by and within the Church, "the pillar and foundation of the Truth."

This raises several questions about the Church today. Do we really see the Church as the pillar and foundation of Truth? Which one is still faithfully passing on the Tradition? Or, regardless of what the church says, does my personal interpretation of Scripture and what I believe trump everything else? Looking at the results of the Reformation teaching of Sola Scriptura can it be said that this view has led to a “subjectifying” of the Scriptures? Truly, the Holy Spirit will lead us into all Truth, but what happens when sincere believers are led to different interpretations or understandings of the Sciptures? Is there more than one Truth? Who settles the debate?

I want to affirm the Scriptures as our source of authority in spiritual matters. They certainly are. My questions concerning Sola Scriptura are born of sincere inquiry into God’s Word concerning authority in the Church. I am amazed that with the Bible alone as the authority, the Body of Christ has not become unified but rather it has fractured into many denominations. Compare the reality of ecclesial diffusion and division to what the Scriptures teach - that, "There is one Body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called, one Lord, one faith, one baptism..." (Ephesians 4:4-5).

What solution can there be to this conundrum? If the Scriptures are to be our authority in spiritual matters - and I believe they should - we must have a rule or standard by which to interpret what the Bible is teaching. At this point the early Church becomes vital to us. The Traditon that was passed to them can be the measuring stick for interpreting the Scriptures correctly. When this God given Tradition is operating as the corrective to wrong interpretation in the Church - as a sort of check and balance on approaching the Scriptures with integrity, then the Scriptures are accurate in claiming the Church as "The pillar and foundation of truth." Without this dual track of accountability, the Tradition and the Scriptures, we have demonstrated through Church history an amazing capacity to make the Bible say what we want it to say.

D. H. Williams provides clarity on this point by saying, "Though the Word in Scripture comes from God, it is revealed through a process in which the community of faith, appropriating both the Old and the New Testament, is profoundly involved. Indeed, it is fair to say that we will rightly hear God's Word only as we hear it in the corporate and historical voice of the church." He goes on to claim, "The Bible is capable of being understood only in the midst of a disciplined community of believers whose practices embody the biblical story. As part of this embodiment, we are in need of 'spiritual masters,' namely, the venerable voices of the historical church whose journeys empower and enlighten our own pilgrimage toward what is authentically Christian."

What do you think?
Blessings,
Carl Peters