Nielsen’s Nook

Dr. Peter Enns, former all-star professor of Old Testament at Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, was interviewed at 10:00 am (Central) today by Public Radio WHYY’s Marty Moss-Coane.

Dr. Enns’ now infamous and scholarly (and dare I say it … pastoral) book, Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament seeks to approach difficulties in the Old Testament (e.g., two drastically different Hebrew Manuscripts of Jeremiah) and in terms of the Incarnation. Ultimately, Dr. Enns seeks to uphold the mystery of the divine and human union of Scripture as the basis for its trustworthiness in faith and practice.

Dr. Enns blogs at a time to tear down | A Time to Build Up.
Listen to the interview with WHYY’s Marty Moss-Coane:

[Download]

Addendum:

About 41 minutes in, an atheist caller named Jim calls and makes the statement that if he would have had the paradigm of scripture that is presented in Inspiration and Incarnation, he wonders if that would not have saved his faith. Pete does a very pastoral job of encouraging Jim toward the God revealed in the Bible.

In exploring trans-tradition hermeneutics, trying to get at where interpretive authority lies in a span of traditions, I did a little reading on the Roman Catholic Church from their own Vatican II documents. So what follows is a concise summary of what I understand the Roman Church to be saying about interpretive authority in their context.

Apostolic Succession through Bishops

The Roman Church has and asserts an unbroken apostolic succession in which “the apostles left bishops as their successors” to whom they gave “‘their own position of teaching authority.’” As such, this tradition of apostolic succession is said to function as a mirror in which the church contemplates God. [1]

A Single Composite Sacred Deposit

The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium) precedes the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum). This subtle logical priority is worked out practically in Dei Verbum as the tensions represented in the hermeneutical continuum are worked out. “Tradition and scripture make up a single sacred deposit of the word of God, which is entrusted to the church,” appears to capture the practical effect succinctly.[2]

Correlatively, as Roman Christians adhere to this single deposit united to the pastors of the church they are said to continue in the trajectory of the “teaching of the apostles” (τῇ διδαχῇ), the “communion of life” (τῇ κοινωνίᾳ), the “breaking of bread” (τῇ κλάσει τοῦ ἄρτου) and the “prayers” (ταῖς προσευχαῖς) established in Acts 2:42. Consequently, in maintaining such trajectory, a “unique interplay” exists between bishops and the faithful.[3]

Magisterial Interpretation

“Authentic interpretation” of this single sacred deposit has been “entrusted to the living teaching office of the church alone.”[4] Dei Verbum goes on to explain:

This magisterium is not superior to the word of God, but is rather its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it [ostensibly from the apostles and prophets]. … It is clear, therefore, that, in the supremely wise arrangement of God, sacred tradition, sacred scripture, and the magisterium of the church are so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others.[5]

Summary

In short, the “single sacred deposit” of the word of God is composed of two component parts: scripture and tradition. This deposit requires interpretation and it is the magisterium alone, composed of bishops, serving the church and the single sacred deposit that gives “authentic interpretation.” In other words, if the reader of scripture wants to know if her interpretation of it is correct she must only see how the Magisterium has interpreted it.

[1] Austin Flannery, “Dei Verbum,” in Vatican II the Basic Sixteen Documents : Constitutions Decrees Declarations (Northport, NY: Costello Pub., 1996), II.7.

[2]Ibid., II.10.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

I know the translation of Hebrews has been slow out of the gate. I am not abandoning it; however, I have a paper due on May 1. The thesis of the paper is to underscore how, generally speaking, the historic/traditional Anglican hermeneutic provides a via media between the hermeneutical (and epistemological) problems of private interpretation in Protestantism and unresolvable parity given to Tradition and Scripture in the Roman Church.

If you have any good articles you might suggest that are engaged with contemporary primary sources ¹ please leave a comment and let me know about them. I appreciate the help.

__________

¹ For example, articles dealing with how Roman Catholics, Protestants or Anglicans deal with Tradition and Scripture today would be helpful. However, articles about Tridentine formulations and polemics are a bit removed for much relevant discussion.