Christian truth and scriptural referentiality

I probably shouldn't just copy quotes from other people's blogs, but this one is just so beautiful that I can't resist it. Sister Macrina Walker posted the following from a certain Father Andrew Louth, a theologian who will be getting far more of my attention in the future:

For the central truth, or mystery, of the Christian faith is primarily not a matter of words, and therefore ultimately of ideas or concepts, but a matter of fact, or reality. The heart of the Christian mystery is the fact of God made man, God with us, in Christ; words, even his words, are secondary to the reality of what he accomplished. To be a Christian is not simply to believe something, to learn something, but to be something, to experience something. The role of the Church, then, is not simply as the contingent vehicle - in history - of the Christian message, but as the community, through belonging to which we come into touch with the Christian mystery. [*]

Christian truth as a matter of fact, as a reality. That is the thrust of my current thread looking at the meaning of the regula veritatis (rule of truth) in the early church. It was something that Childs, much to the surprise of many, emphasised throughout his career, an emphasis that gave his brand of "canonical exegesis" its particular profile. As he said in penultimate publication:

Is there a determinate meaining within the biblical texts of the Chrisitian Bible? Traditional Christian exegesis took it for granted that the biblical witness was directed toward a specific reference. Its testimony provided access to the mysteries of divine reality. At times the reality perceived was earthly, bound in time and space. At other times it was a transcendent reality related directly or indirectly to sense perception, but requiring divine inspiration for its full comprehension. Accordingly, scripture contains multiple meanings, but all joined in some manner to a referent.[**]

Grasping this fact in all its subtle dialectical complexity should be a primary task of all those engaged in so-called "theological exegesis." It should function as a kind of compass guiding us through the murky disputes concerning the relationship between diachronic and synchronic exegesis, between literalistic and metaphorical reading, between academic and homiletic interpretation etc. etc.

I also think that grasping this truth leads to the joy that what we love about this world is lovable, and what we hate is redeemable, and that somehow, in all our broken particularity, faith makes total sense.

I have discussed this issue in a thread dealing with the sensus spiritualis and sensus literalis, summarised here (in which, I should add, my identification of the theological referent with the spiritual sense was challenged in the comments. I'd appreciate any feedback on the dialogue!)

[*] Andrew Louth, Discerning the Mystery. An Essay on the Nature of Theology, (Oxford: Clarendon, 1983) 74. (Biblicalia, by the way, posts on a cheap offer of this book by Eighth Day Books here).

[**] B.S. Childs, The Struggle to Understand Isaiah as Christian Scripture, 313.

Ooh, a patristics carnival!

Up until now I've only ever been linked to, if at all, on biblical studies Carnivals (see Getz for the most recent contribution). I was delighted, however, to see that there is such a thing as a patristics carnival and that the extremely industrious blogger at The God Fearin' Forum has taken time to read my recent postings.

So thanks to Tim A. Troutman for his time and especially for the really quite exhaustive work he's done on all things patristic within the blogosphere. He divides the relevant blogging activiy into the following helpful subcategories:

Hall of Fame: My hand-picked recommendations.

Introduction to & Biographies of the Fathers. New to the fathers? This is the place to start.

General Patristics. Posts surrounded by asterisks are especially worth viewing and should have broad appeal.

General Patristics. Posts surrounded by asterisks are especially worth viewing and should have broad appeal.

Book Review: Books of interest regarding the early Church & patristic literature.

Apocryphal Corner

Patristic Obituaries

That really is a phenomenal and benefical amount of work.

Thread Summary: The Literal and Spiritual Sense of Scripture

The following is a summary of all my posts dealing with the literal and spiritual senses of Scripture:

1. The literal and spiritual sense of scripture

2. The Relation between the "spiritual" and the "literal" senses

3. Antiochenes and Alexandrians

4. The spiritual sense and exegetical integrity

5. Childs on the sensus literalis of Scripture

6. Literal sense and historical reference

7. Historical criticism and medieval allegory: Some parallels

8. What is the sensus literalis of Scripture?

N.T. Wright on "righteousness" and "justification"

Thanks to the blog Biblical Thoughts for linking to two dictionary entries in New Dictionary of Theology on the subject. For "righteousness" go here and for "justification" go here.

Childs on Scripture/Incarnation

I'm back from my brief sojourn in the Ardennes, Belgium. Apart from illness and thunderstorms it was a pleasant retreat. I've only got a few minutes before I dash off to a birthday party so a quick quote by the illustrious Childs (pbuh) on the subtle dialectic between historical-criticism of the Bible and the Bible as a witness to God. It's things like this that make my mouth water ...

The Bible in its human, fully time-conditioned form, functions theologically for the church as a witness to God's divine revelation in Jesus Christ. The church confesses that in this human form, the Holy Spirit unlocks its truthful message to its hearers in the mystery of faith. This theological reading cannot be simply fused with a historical reconstruction of the biblical text, nor conversely, neither can it separated. This is to say, the Bible's witness to the creative and salvific activity of God in time and space cannot be encompassed within the categories of historical criticism whose approach filters out this very kerygmatic dimension of God's activity. In a word, the divine and human dimensions remain inseparably intertwined, but in a highly profound, theological manner. Its ontological relation finds its closest analogy in the incarnation of Jesus Christ, truly man and truly God. [*]

I feel like some quotes are like ripe peaches packed with health and juiciness. You just have squeeze them for a while and all manner of goodness oozes out. Or am I just weird? Does anyone know another doctrine of Scripture - or a compact summary thereof - that can produce such joy?

[*] B.S. Childs, "The Canon in Recent Biblical Studies: Reflections on an Era," Pro Ecclesia 14 (2005): 44-45

The Truth of Christianity and a newly discovered blog

I was delighted to receive a comment from a certain Sister Macrina Walker, ocso, a Cistercian monastic of Koningsoord Abbey in the Netherlands. Not only is she well informed concerning good BelgianTrappist beer, she has her own blog, A Vow of Conversation. According to the "About" section, she has "questions about the role of tradition in theology and became increasingly aware of the shortcomings of a typically Western modern-cum-postmodern theology that is cut of from the life of faith and the tradition of the Church." She's particular interested in the Church Fathers, with a completed thread dealing with the Syrian Fathers here (she also links to a fascinating Syrian Encylopaedia , the WikiSyriaca, here).

If that isn't enough to make her blog worth reading, she also happens to be a big fan of Andrew Lowth, a scholar whose significance I am slowly beginning to grasp.

As always, it's Brevard Childs who got me onto the Lowth trail. Childs' later work was dedicated to finding continuity in the Christian tradition, evidence of a theological force creating a Wirkungsgeschichte with a certain profile. Key is the centrality of the hermeneutical category of allegory and the distinction between a literal and a spiritual sense to Christian scripture. It is Childs' influence by Karl Barth - especially his understanding of Scripture as "witness" - that enabled continuity between Childs' historical critical, canonical, and later ... well ... "theological" exegesis.

It's so incarnational it hurts. In a nice way.

Here's a great Lowth quote, taken from Sister Macrina Walker's personal introduction:

For the truth that lies at the heart of theology is not something there to be discovered, but something, or rather someone, to whom we must surrender. The mystery of faith is not ultimately something that invites our questioning, but something that questions us.

Andrew Louth, Discerning the Mystery. An Essay on the Nature of Theology (Oxford: Clarendon, 1983) 95.

I'm off to Belgium!

I won't be able to post much for the next few days as my parents are over from England and we'll be spending the time in the Ardennes, in Belgium. I've only ever driven through Belgium, so it will be interesting to get to know this odd little country. According to Lonely Planet (guides second only to Footprint, in my experience), "the Ardennes is Belgium at its best. This southeastern corner is home to deep valleys, forested hills, meandering rivers and, in its quieter recesses, tranquil stone villages and ancient castles. For those into nature, this is Belgium at its best."

Nice. I'm a big fan of nature, though I'm not expecting much to compete with the Black Forest, which is about the same distance from Bonn. What I'm really looking forward to is the Trappist beer and Ardenne ham. Belgian beer is exquisite, breaking all the German purity laws. It's also fairly strong, which means I will have to plead with my wife to do most of the driving ...

So, I hope to continue my thread on the incredibly important concept of the regula fidei, or "rule-of-faith," though in the next few days it will be in drips and drabs.

The Classics on i-Tunes (for free!)

I just got a e-mail from i-Tunes advertising their latest free products. Go here for a free audio-book of Aristotle's Physics, here for an elementary Greek course from Concordia Seminary, here for some random talks on Greek philosophy and culture, or here for a more Roman slant. A lecture series analysing Virgil's Aeneid is here, the history of the Roman empire is here and finally a video series looking at Roman art in the Louvre here.

I've managed to work my way through two i-Tunes lecture series so far. The first was an introduction to the Old Testament by Christine Hayes of Yale Divinity School, the second was the relationship between theology and philosophy in the modern period by a very conservative historian from Reformed Theological Seminary.

I've never been a gadget freak, but i-Tunes is worth getting for these kinds of resources alone!

The content of the rule-of-truth: Irenaeus' take

In my last post I pointed out that for Irenaeus the regula veritatis, or rule-of-truth, refers to the divine reality itself and not to any one formulation of it. These formulations are true to the degree that they mediate the reality to which they witness. The formulations may vary, but the truth remains stable.

But what is this truth? In other words, what is the gospel?

Irenaeus' own formulation mirrors very closely the Roman baptismal formula, which is explicated as faith in God the Father, Christ the Son,and the Holy Spirit:

God is the Father is unique, omnipotent, uncreated, eternal, invisible, only true, creator of heaven and earth and everything within—seen and unseen. He accomplished the creation through the Son and the Spirit. He is the father of Jesus Christ.

Christ is the Word of God, the Son, a man amongst men, visible, corporal in order to overcome death and reveal life, and to bring about peace and communion between God and man. He became flesh, was born of the Virgin, suffered under Pontius Pilatus, died and rose again and was received into Heaven. He will return in majesty in order to reconstitute everything, to redeem and to judge. He has saved us by his blood, has poured his the Spirit of his Father upon us in order to unite us to God. As true Man he summarises the image Adam within himself.

The Holy Spirit is the spirit of God, through whom everything was created. He preached the way of salvation (τας οικονομιας). In the fullness of time he was poured out upon mankind in order to create them anew for God. He is the mediator of the knowledge of the truth, indeed, he is truth itself.

To summarise: for Irenaeus the term regula veritatis does not primarily refer to the formula of the baptismal confession, neither to the books of holy scripture, nor to the ecclesial doctrinal tradition, but rather to the truth itself, i.e. the way of salvation as revealed by the Holy Spirit.

I should add that in this interesting interview with N.T. Wright, Wright makes a similar statement about the nature of the Gospel as a reference to a reality that is the case (Jesus is Lord) and not the process of salvation (justification by faith). To quote: "The problem with us Evangelicals is that we use the word "Gospel" to denote the system of how someone gets saved. I really want to emphasise this: we are not justified by believing in Justification by Faith, we are justified by believing in Jesus." Great point! Wright's presentation of the content of the gospel, however, is very Pauline, whereas I think Irenaeus has the entirety of Scripture in view. Perhaps that is the advantage of reading Paul in his canonical, and not just historical context. On this, see Childs' latest book.