275 - Bible-Theology-Church

Bible-Theology-Church
By Patrick D. Miller Jr.

THE RUBRIC "Bible-Theology-Church" is set forth at the beginning of this issue as a double reminder to those who prepare and those who read this journal: (1) No one of these three realities-a document (Bible), an enterprise (theology), and a community church)-can have meaning or function apart from the other two; and (2) it is in the interface of the Bible, the task of theology, and the faith and life of the church in the world that THEOLOGY TODAY carries out its work. While it is possible for the Bible to be read and studied on its own, for theology to take form without attention to Scripture and unrelated to the actualities of the community of faith, and for the church to carry on many enterprises and exhaust energies without seeking direction or renewal from the Bible and without thinking about its life and work vis-a-vis its source and ground in God, it is not finally possible for any of those things to take place in a perduring fashion.

The primary emphasis of THEOLOGY TODAY is on the theological task, but not apart from its source (Scripture) or its context (church). So in this issue the \weight of emphasis shifts to the source, the Bible. It is a relative shift of emphasis, however, and not a departure or a breach of the dynamic interaction described above. We did not set out to report on trends in biblical scholarship. Rather we extended open invitations to several interpreter-theologians to contribute to an issue in which biblical interpretation would be the primary focus. The results of their work are an obvious and varied demonstration of the intrinsic relationship (hat Scripture, theology, and church have to each other.

At the same time, the discerning reader will get some feel for what is going on in the study of Scripture. For while the writers did not set out in any instance to report, they do in fact reveal some of the major currents and issues in biblical study today.

(1) Hermeneutics. The last quarter-century has seen such a widespread interest in hermeneutics that the term "hermeneutics" has moved from designating a particular aspect of biblical study, that is, the rules, principles, and procedures for interpreting the different kinds and character of biblical literature, to becoming a synonym for theology or even further a rubric for any effort at understanding that is capable of

276 - Bible-Theology-Church

reflection and orderly analysis. A major focus in this period has been the "problem" of the Old Testament. What lines of approach to that part of Scripture can overcome its differences from the New Testament and its strangeness from our world? And in the discussion the character and degree of both difference and strangeness his been much debated. The New Testament, however, has not remained outside the discussion. The issue of what and how does Scripture mean has been forced upon us by such varying developments as the history-of-religion analysis of biblical literature, which places it so thoroughly in the context of its own world and thus distances it from our own; existentialist philosophy, which opens up a way out of that ancient world but one more applicable to Paul than to the prophets, or even Jesus for that matter, and Karl Barth's implicit rejection of the hermeneutical problem in his claim that the ancient Scriptures and the daily newspaper can be read together and make sense of each other.

In more recent times, the hermeneutical discussion has spilled over-or, perhaps better, burst out of-its biblical context. Two quotations demonstrate this sharply, and they can be multiplied easily. The first is from David Tracy's The Analogical Imagination:

All contemporary systematic theology can be understood as fundamentally hermeneutical. This position implies that systematic theologians, by definition will understand themselves as radically finite and historical thinkers who have risked a trust in a particular religious tradition. They seek, therefore, to retrieve, interpret, translate, and mediate the resourcess the questions and answers, form and content, the subject matter-of the classic events of understanding of those fundamental religious question.w imbedded in the classic events, images, persons, rituals, texts and symbols of a tradition.¹

The second quotation is front the introduction to Donald Capps' effort to develop a hermeneutical model for pastoral care:

Technically, hermeneutics is concerned wkith interpretation of texts. Yet. in recent years, the principles of hermeneutics have been applied to phenomena other than texts, and they hive been proposals for applying hermeneutics to the sphere of human action. The idea that certain human actions are like texts has caught on, and it has already been applied with notable success to social and political action. There is every reason to believe that this idea will be equally useful for interpreting pastoral actions such as those that fall under the general heading of pastoral care.²

In some sense. all of the articles either reflect hermeneutical interests or demonstrate hermeneutical procedures. The latter is well evidenced in James Mays' interpretation of a single text, Psalm 22, Paul Hanson's interpretation of the identity and purpose of the church out of the whole sweep of Scripture, and Abby Johnson's discovery of the rich consonance between a fundamental pair of biblical images-light and darkness-and the human reality of life in a literally dark world. Two essays here focus more generally and theoretically on hermeneutics. The

¹ David Tracy The Analogical Imagination (New York: Crossroad. 1981). p. 104.
² Donald Capps, Pastoral Care and Hermeneutics (Philadelphia: Fortress. 1984). p. 12.

277 - Bible-Theology-Church

theologian Albert Outler insists that the hermeneutical issue is a right hearing of the Bible, but he makes us sharply aware of the larger context in which hermeneutics goes on and the heritage of which we are a part. Reminder of that heritage is not, however, a simple call for repristination. On the contrary, a new age requires fresh thinking. But some of the old questions, such as the nature of Scripture's unity and authority, must be a part of the agenda.

In a deceptively simple fashion, Sandra Schneiders addresses herself not to the distance between ancient text and modern world but to the relationship between historical critical biblical scholar and informed believer. Her analysis not only breaks down the antagonistic relationship that often exists or seems to exist between scholar and believer, but serves also to give some handles for working on the distance problem. One can find here, for example, a framework that will help us think about the presently controversial issue of inclusive language translation of Scripture.

(2) Texts It may seem to be an expression of the obvious to say I hat biblical study places the study of texts at the center of its work. But the point is a stronger one than might be assumed at first. Biblical literature is always the focus of biblical scholarship, but one may come at that in various ways. It is specifically biblical literature as text and texts that is a central concern in the study of Scripture, and it is no accident that we should find in this issue a systematic exposition of an important Christological text-and from the Old Testament, no less.

For the sake of brevity, several features of this concern for texts may be listed.

(a) Whether or not it is true or to what degree it may be true, the accusation that historical critical study of the Bible is bankrupt has taken its toll. One result or expression has been a disaffection on the part of some and a de-emphasis on the part of other with regard to questions and issues that have to do with matters outside the text-historical, environmental, and the like. What is in the text is either the appropriate subject, the necessary subject, or the only accessible subject.

(b) The final form of the text has become the focus of study in a way and to a degree that has not been the case for some time. Genetic concerns about the growth of a text are more often seen-and no longer only in conservative circles-as secondary or irrelevant. The text as is is the subject matter for interpretation.

(e) A consequence or expression of the focus on the text as is is the large amount of literary study of Scripture presently engaging biblical scholarship. The disdain for the literary approach to the Bible that one found in post-war biblical theology has been turned on its head as literary analysis has come to the fore. In biblical studies, literary

278 - Bible-Theology-Church

criticism now means what it does generally in the study of literature rather than simply source analysis as has been the case in the past. Attention to rhetorical features and stylistic devices, to figures of speech as well as narrative and poetic structure is now a central feature of biblical study.

(d) Recognition of the locus of Scriptures function in the community of faith means a heavy focus on texts For it is indeed the texts. of Scripture, whether smaller literary units or larger blocks such as books, that form the basis for teaching, preaching, and theological construction in the church. One very concrete signal of this fact is the spate of commentaries now being published, most of them consciously directed toward church and ministry. For this reason, one may predict that James Mays' study of prayer and Christology in Psalm 22 will be one of the most "used" essays in this issue.

(3) Sociological analysis. One could hardly find another approach more distant in aims and method from literary criticism than the sociological analysis of Scripture. Yet it represents the most noticeable competing methodology to literary analysis in contemporary biblical scholarship. The text is not a thing in itself but a product a reflection, and a catalyst of a social world to be investigated and uncovered.

The essays by Bernhard Anderson and Norman Gottwald are an indication of the interest in such social analysis of ancient Israel and the early Christian community. They are not. however, themselves examples of social scientific criticism, to use Gottwald's term. Rather they address two very important issues arising from this type of criticism. In the conclusion to his Sociological Approaches to the Old Testament. Robert Wilson issues a mild challenge to the field: "Both ancient Israel and the sacred text that it produced were part of a complex cultural system, and the theological implications of this fact must now be explored. ³ Anderson. an Old Testament theologian, takes up that challenge and explores some of those implications with particular attention to the question of the ways by which social ideologies are vehicles for divine communication and presence.

Gottwald, one of the foremost practitioners of social scientific criticism, shares a concern for the theological dimensions of this approach. In his essay, he rejects any imperialistic claims that social analysis is sufficient in itself as an approach to the biblical text and demonstrates that social analysis and canonical criticism, which is oriented toward the final form of the text and literary analysis, are not competing incompatible methodologies but need each other and have some important contributions to make to each other. Attention to Gottwald's proposals may help break down the conflict of methodologies in biblical schola-

³ Robert Wilson, Sociological Approaches Fowler the Old Testament (Philadelphia: Fortres 1984), p. 83.

279 - Bible-Theology-Church

ship and bring about a more sophisticated hermeneutics. In both cases, the impact on the church's theological work is still not fully clear.

(4) God. Twenty years ago systematic theology found itself foundering on its primary subject matter, at worst embarrassed to talk about (much less to) God, at best pressing to comprehend the reference and reality of all its God-talk. In his essay, Albert Outler speaks about this "embargo on 'God-talk' as the Encompassing Mystery, self-disclosed in Scripture." Biblical scholars were affected by the mood of the times-it is not accidental that the study of wisdom literature had a recrudescence during this period-but a priori were not quite as free to explore as many options when their texts remained so insistently focused on God.

The present scene does, however, show a renewed conviction that God is the principal subject matter of Scripture and thus a necessary focus for substantive biblical study. Examples of such a focus may be seen in Old Testament studies in such recent works as Dale Patrick's The Rendering of God in the Old Testament, Terence Fretheim's The Suffering of God, and Samuel Balantine's The Hidden God.

With their obvious need to deal with Jesus as the center of the New Testament, New Testament scholars have not given as much attention to what the New Testament says about God. Ten years ago Nils Dahl could write about God as "the neglected factor in New Testament theology" and say: "For more than a generation the majority of New Testament scholars have not only eliminated direct references to God from their works but also neglected detailed and comprehensive investigation of statements about God. ⁴ The situation has not changed significantly since Dahl wrote, but some probes have been made, reflected here in Pheme Perkin's bibliography and her own foray into this theological territory. The writer ventures to predict increasing attention to theology proper, our understanding of God, in both Old and New Testament studies.

There is more to the essays contained herein than this editorial suggests and even more happening in biblical study than these articles reflect. One need only think, for example, of the significant impact of feminist studies and liberation theology on the hermeneutical enterprise to realize how lively is contemporary biblical scholarship and how inextricably the Bible, the church, and Christian theology are interwoven. The following essays are offered as a sampler bearing witness to the liveliness of biblical scholarship in our time and its commitment to the theological service of the church.

⁴ Nils A. Dahl. "The Neglected Factor in New Testament Theology," Reflection. 73 (1975), p. 5.

280 - Bible-Theology-Church

A Word from the Editor
By Hugh T. Kerr

This issue of THEOLOGY TODAY was designed and supervised by Patrick D. Miller, Jr., Professor of Old Testament Theology at Princeton Theological Seminary, and our new Book Editor. A graduate of Davidson College and Union Theological Seminary in Virginia, he took his doctorate at Harvard University Divinity School.

Dr. Miller is a member of several academic societies, the editorial board of Harvard Theological Review and the RSV Bible Committee. He is the author of The Divine Warrior in Early Israel (1973), Sin and Judgment in the Prophets (1982). Genesis 1-11: Studies in Structure and Theme (1978), and (with J. J. M. Roberts) The Hand of the Lord (1977). He serves as Old Testament editor of Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching.

A member of the much discussed Inclusive Language Lectionary Committee, Dr. Miller prepared an interpretation of the Lectionary for THEOLOGY TODAY in our April 1984 issue.

As seems appropriate, this October 1985 issue of THEOLOGY TODAY under Dr. Miller's guest editorship, pursues in a variety of articles and features the theme of "Biblical Studies Today."