Protestants, patristics, and the art of biblical interpretation

Jason Byassee is an assistant editor at the Christian Century whose wife is a Methodist minister. In a review essay titled, "Reading with the Saints: The art of biblical interpretation," he writes:

Ever since Martin Luther pulled the Bible and the traditions of the church apart by playing the former off against the latter, we have had problems. The Reformed tradition described the Scriptures as clear, "perspicuous," intelligible to any reader. They meant, of course, to stand in contrast to a Roman Catholic suggestion that only ordained, Latin-reading, Mass-mumbling priests could read God's word. But if Scripture were so perspicuous, why did Calvin have to write the multivolume Institutes and a library of commentaries to tell us what it meant? And why have subsequent generations of Protestants, each insisting they were following the Bible, shattered like so many pieces of smashed glass into a bewildering variety of denominations? It's not obvious that the result is a more biblically literate population among Protestants. The Bible sits atop bestseller lists but often gathers dust on believers' shelves.

And, a bit later:

Those in Reformation-based churches have often recoiled at allegory as one of the means by which the plain sense of Scripture is distorted. This is rooted in our revolt against our Catholic forebears: let them have allegory, and pretty soon they'll find the Queen of Heaven in Revelation, or prayers to the saints in 1 Maccabees. Williams ably shows that the heartbeat of allegory for the ancient church was Christological. Allegory was a means to further the church's passionate love affair with Christ through discerning his presence on every page of Israel's Scripture. Like any interpretive practice, allegorical reading can go wrong and stand in need of reining in, sure enough. But without it, something dear to the heart of Protestants is lost: the chance to see Jesus anew, now refracted through the words not only of the New Testament, but of the Old as well. And there are so many more words in the Old! This is no individual venture, as Williams makes clear; it is an intensely ecclesial, communal one, to a point that our love for privacy is scandalized: St. Egeria writes in the 4th century that before baptism the bishop asks the neighbors of those seeking baptism whether they are indeed as good and decent as they claim!

An interesting read, to say the least.

For more on the senses of Scripture and allegorical interpretations, see the following Ignatius Insight articles:

• Approaching the Sacred Scriptures | Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch
• Origen and Allegory | Henri de Lubac  | Introduction to History and Spirit: The Understanding of Scripture According to Origen
• Singing the Song of Songs | Blaise Armnijon, S.J. | The Introduction to The Cantata of Love

Comments

[Augustine II]

They're just catching on to all this? Brilliant.

[Carl Olson]

I think that one of the best developments in Evangelical circles in the past 10-20 years is a serious interest in patristics specifically and Church history in general. It hardly existed prior to, say, the 1990s; it certainly wasn't much of an issue when my wife and I attended our respective Evangelical Bible colleges in the late 1980s/early 1990s. It has led to a much greater appreciation of the Catholic Church and the Orthodox churches (and the death of a lot of stereotypes about Catholicism), a deeper basis for ecumenical conversation, and, of course, a growing number of folks becoming Catholic (and Orthodox). It is, I believe, the work of the Holy Spirit, and am hopeful it will continue to bear fruit.

[Cajun Nick Jagneaux]

And, thank goodness for Carl pointing out that all these Evangelicals are (re)discovering the patristics. Seriously.

As a cradle-Catholic, I don't think I would have given the Church Fathers a second thought.

However, because Carl (and others in the blogosphere) are reporting on this with regularity, it gives me an opportunity to learn more myself. And I find that my faith grows ever deeper.

[LJ]

Cajun Nick Jagneaux,

Praise God. I think Carl might agree, but I know that the enthusiasm of us converts occasionally grates on some cradle-Catholics, and sometimes for good reason, but it is good to know that just having the conversation has helped you.

And thank you Carl.

[Brian Schuettler]

“The Christianity of history is not Protestantism. If ever there was a safe truth it is this, and Protestantism has ever felt it so. To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant”
(Cardinal Newman – An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine).

[Kevin]

Brian - Is that essay available online? A friend of mine is seriously considering returning to the Church, and a main impetus is history... Thanks!

[Brian Schuettler]

Kevin,

Yes...you can read it online at:
http://www.newmanreader.org/works/development/index.html