Good Books For Lent, Part I: The Last Word

The Last Word: Scripture and the Authority of God--Getting Beyond the Bible Wars
By N.T. Wright (HarperOne, 2005)

In this brief and helpful book, New Testament scholar (Cambridge, Oxford) and Anglican bishop (Durham, England) N.T. Wright sets out to get past the confusions and polarizations which now surround the phrase "the authority of Scripture". He argues that these confusions and polarizations are largely the product of cultural paradigms which now determine much Christian interpretation. Much of "conservative" Christianity, ironically, operates out of the modernist paradigm which holds that the truth of Scripture is primarily a matter of correct facts, information, doctrine and ethical rules. In this paradigm, Scripture is a doctrinal and ethical textbook to which we refer for answers to questions. Much of "liberal" Christianity, on the other hand, operates out of the postmodern paradigm which is suspicious of all authorities and wishes to configure all of reality into a set of potential resources which can be used by the self to aid in the ongoing project of self-identification. For "liberal" Christianity, then, Scripture is not an objective authority but a resource to help people on their own "spiritual journey". Both the modern and postmodern paradigms have numerous variations but we have reached the point where the polarizations are so great that neither paradigm really understands, or really listens to, the other. The tragedy, for Wright, is that both these paradigms are essentially wrong and not very biblical. Each represents the triumph of culture over the Church, a triumph in which the Church is seriously disabled.

Wright proposes a fresh way of thinking about what the authority of Scripture means: "the phrase 'authority of Scripture' can make Christian sense only if it is a shorthand for 'the authority of the triune God, exercised somehow through scripture'." The "authority of Scripture" does not consist primarily in the fact that it proposes the right doctrines to be believed and the right ethical rules to live by nor does it consist primarily in the fact that it provides individual spiritual guidance, affirming what people have already decided is true. Rather, we must see Scripture as part of the economy of salvation, one of the means that God has provided for his purposes to be fulfilled. Through Scripture, God enacts and realizes his Kingdom among his people and in his world. Scripture is authoritative because through it the power of God comes sweeping into creation to heal, transform, forgive, reconcile and sanctify. This, Wright contends, is precisely what Paul means when he speaks of the Gospel as "the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes" (Romans 1:16). The Gospel is not merely believed (accepted as a true religious idea) but enacted.

The bulk of the book (chapters 2 through 7) provides a sketch of how Scripture has been understood to be authoritative from ancient Israel up to modern (and postmodern) times. This sketch helps the reader to see just how tradition shaped even the most "biblical" of Christianities are. One of the theses of this sketch is that over time Christian interpretation steadily lost sight of the narrative dimension of Scripture, the fact that it provides the narrative or story within which the Church understands her very existence and purpose. The loss of Scripture's narrative dimension meant that in post-Reformation Christianity it increasingly became a source to be mined for proof texts to support certain confessional emphases while in modern Christianity it came under increasing attack by rationalism and by scholars who considered Scripture to be inadequate because it was "pre-scientific". What remained was Scripture as devotional literature. In this process whole aspects of Scripture were simply screened out, particularly the emphasis (at the heart of Jesus' ministry!) on the kingdom of God or God's power to transform the world and re-order human life. The way for the current polarities was opened up: on one hand a "conservative" Christianity which focuses on individual salvation and piety apart from politics and economics and (sometimes) even from history and on the other hand a "liberal" Christianity which focuses on politics and economics but appears to be unaware of the power of God. The final result of all this is, for Wright, that the Church is now trapped in a series of unedifying, dead-end and debilitating "Bible wars" in which the controlling question for interpretation is whether Scripture is to be interpreted "literally" or "metaphorically". For Wright, this is the way of death. For the Church in North America the situation is even worse since to this poisonous mix we have added the "creation--evolution debate," with some Christians expecting Scripture to solve the problem and other Christians having long ago given the world over to "science".

In the final chapter of the book, Wright offers an alternative way of understanding "the authority of Scripture". An extended quotation will give an adequate idea of what he wishes to do: "We read scripture in order to be refreshed in our memory and understanding of the story within which we ourselves are actors, to be reminded where it has come from and where it is going to, and hence what our own part within it ought to be. This means that 'the authority of Scripture' is most truly put into operation as the church goes to work in the world on behalf of the gospel, the good news that in Jesus Christ the living God has defeated the powers of evil and begun the work of new creation." Scripture is a means of grace, a means through which God works to shape the hearts and minds of his people, fit them for their mission in the world and so enact his kingdom.

The Marriage of Scripture and Reason: THe Pope Reflects on the Church Fathers

The Church Fathers: From Clement to Augustine by Pope Benedict XVI (Ignatius Press, 2008)

This book is a collection of talks which Pope Benedict XVI gave between March of 2007 and February of 2008. Each talk deals with one of the Church Fathers, that group of seminal early Christian figures whose achievement is difficult to over-estimate: nothing less than a marriage between Scripture and reason. The first talk is devoted to St. Clement of Rome, one of the most important Christian figures of the first century, while the final five talks are devoted to St. Augustine of Hippo (d. 430), generally acknowledged to be the greatest of the Church Fathers. In between there are talks on such important figures as Origen of Alexandria (the Church's first systematic theologian), St. Athanasius of Alexandria, St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory the Theologian, St. Gregory of Nyssa, St. John Chrysostom and St. Jerome.

This book can be read profitably on three distinct levels. First, it can be read as an introduction to the men who quite literally made Christian theology and Christian biblical interpretation. In each talk, Benedict is focused on telling his audience why these figures are not simply "dead white men" (of course, while they are all dead they were not all "white") but, rather, part of the Church's living connection to the apostles. For Benedict, these ancient bishops and teachers are not mere museum piece curiosities to be gawked at; they are, rather, integral to the living mind of the Church. In this book, Benedict subtly reminds us that biblically rooted theology and theologically oriented biblical interpretation did not begin with Luther or Calvin or even (this will come as a shock to some) the twentieth century. Here is an introduction to the Church Fathers from a mind which has pondered them long and deeply and understands their significance.

Second, this book can be read as Benedict's attempt to enrich Christian theology by bringing it back into contact with its living source. As he discusses each Church Father, he is careful to show ways in which contemporary theology can be reoriented and renewed (and it desperately needs both). A few examples will make the point. Speaking of St. Ireneaus of Lyons (d. 202-203), he draws this lesson: "There is no superior Christianity for intellectuals. The faith publicly confessed by the Church is the common faith of all. This faith alone is apostolic". Benedict is an intellectual who refuses to allow any intellectual elite to create its own "superior" form of Christianity, one which is (pick your phrase) "more spiritual," "more relevant" or "more biblical". In commenting on Origen of Alexandria, Benedict sees the whole method and substance of theology already laid out: "Theology to him [Origen] was essentially explaining, understanding Scripture." As it turns out, this is what theology essentially is for Benedict as well. It is more than suggested here that there is a point on which Roman Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant theology may converge, if they are willing to put aside their prejudices: "He [Origen] reminds us with deep insight that in the prayerful reading of Scripture and in consistent commitment to life, the Church is ever renewed and rejuvenated." In the context of reflecting on the important figure of Tertullian (d. 225) there is this comment about theologians (possibly directed at Hans Kung and some of the more strident Protestant voices): "The essential characteristic of a great theologian is the humility to remain with the Church, to accept his own and others' weaknesses, because actually only God is all holy. We, instead, always need forgiveness." In an incisive discussion of St. Cyril of Jerusalem (d. 387), whose catechetical lectures allow us to see how seriously the early church took her teaching mission, Benedict comments upon St. Cyril's method of instruction that it reflects the fact that the relationship between the Old Testament and the New Testament is symphonic.

Third, these talks can be read as a window into the mind of Benedict himself. In the talk on the crucial figure of St. Basil the Great (revered by Roman Catholics and Orthodox), Benedict offers this interpretation of St. Basil's ministry as a bishop/theologian: "As the Bishop and Pastor of is vast Diocese, Basil was constantly concerned with the difficult material conditions in which his faithful lived; he firmly denounced the evils; he did all he could on behalf of the poorest and most marginalized people; he also intervened with rulers to alleviate the sufferings of the population...he watched over the Church's freedom, opposing even the powerful in order to defend the right profess the true faith" One could, without too much effort, simply substitute "Benedict" or "Basil" here with little change in meaning. But the most revealing statements come in the five talks on St. Augustine, who is clearly Benedict's spiritual and intellectual model (he wrote a doctoral dissertation on Augustine's doctrine of the Church). What does Benedict see as central to his own work? His summary of Augustine's work provides the answer: "The harmony between faith and reason means above all that God is not remote: he is not far from our reason and our life; he is close to every human being, close to our hearts and to our reason, if we truly set out on the journey." Joseph Ratzinger, Benedict XVI, has clearly set out on the journey.

Despite Real Human Suffering, God is (Really) Good

Book Review: If God is Good: Faith in the Midst of Suffering and Evil by Randy Alcorn (Multnomah, 2009)

To hear modern secularists and atheists talk, one would think that they discovered the "problem of suffering," a problem which Christians were too stupid or insensitive to notice. Ironically, having "discovered" the "problem of suffering and evil" these same people do not have a worldview that is capable of dealing with it. For the atheist or secularist worldview, the reality of evil and suffering is not a problem but simply part of the way the world is. Evil and suffering can only be real problems if there is some type of cosmic goodness that they apparently deny.

In this big (494 page) book, Randy Alcorn sets out to challenge what he judges to be an unexamined premise among atheists and even some Christians: the idea that an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God can not be reconciled with a world in which evil and suffering occur. Atheists assume this premise to justify their atheism and some Christians assume this premise and then proceed to limit either God's goodness or power (or both) to rescue their faith (but their faith is saved at a very high cost--a limited God). Alcorn in no way attempts to deny the existence or horror of suffering and evil; he simply argues that the fact that God permits suffering does not by itself deny God's goodness but that it only indicates that God's wisdom may be beyond our's. Alcorn has put his finger on a very important point: It is now assumed by many that suffering can have no redemptive value at all so all suffering must count against God's goodness. For Alcorn the issue comes down to this: Is the ultimate purpose of the universe short-term human happiness (in this life) or God's eternal glory which is the ultimate human good?

In the third section of the book Alcorn takes up the inability of naturalism and secularism to deal with the problem of evil and suffering. To my mind, it is one of the most helpful aspects of his argument. While lacking a foundation for an objectively valid moral philosophy which can coherently use the term "evil" (a term which presupposes some absolute goodness) and protest against suffering, naturalistic worldviews continue to use the existence of evil and suffering as an argument against God. But if the existence of evil counts against the existence of God should not the existence of real good count for it? Does not all protest against suffering and evil finally presuppose that they are not the norm but, rather, an anomaly? Alcorn's conclusion in this section seems to me to be completely true: Only the Christian worldview offers a foundation for objective morality and outrage against evil; naturalism offers support to neither.

Contrary to atheist propaganda, Christianity has never regarded suffering and evil as inconvenient facts to be passed over. The fact is that Christianity discovered the problem of suffering and it did so by insisting that despite real human pain the universe is fundamentally good. Neither Scripture nor Christian doctrine pretend to know why God permits evil and suffering; they do claim to know that God is neither indifferent nor powerless in the fact of evil and suffering. This is what is revealed in the Cross. This brings us to what I consider the book's greatest gem of an insight: "Some people can't believe God would create a world in which people would suffer so much. Isn't it more remarkable that God would create a world in which no one would suffer more than he?" The Cross does not "solve" the "problem of evil" as if it were the answer to a philosophical puzzle. What the Cross does, or should do, is to provide a context in which suffering and evil may be considered. The Cross demonstrates that God is not indifferent to human suffering. It also demonstrates that having brought immense good out of the suffering of Christ, God can bring good out of our suffering as well. While we may wish that God would demonstrate his power by instantly eliminating suffering and evil, we need to remember that on the Christian reckoning God is not the cause of human wickedness and that God may have chosen to deal with suffering and evil not by an instantaneous act of omnipotence but by a long process of purification which takes place within the lives of his human creatures.

I hope that Alcorn forces some people to re-think their presuppositions. God's ultimate purpose is not to protect us from all harm nor is it to maintain our comfort. God's ultimate purpose is, rather, to bring us back to himself which means a process of purification, character formation and humbling--none of which we will experience as things which make us happy. But God is not finally interested in our happiness; God is ultimately interested in our joy and he knows the one thing that is its source--himself.

At the end of the book we arrive at an important piece of wisdom, wisdom all but forgotten in a Christianity saturated by modern therapeutic culture: "God uses suffering to purge sin from our lives, strengthen our commitment to him, force us to depend on his grace, bind us together with other believers, produce discernment, foster sensitivity, discipline our minds, impart wisdom, stretch our hope, cause us to know Christ better, make us long for truth, lead us to repentance of sin, teach us to give thanks in times of sorrow, increase our faith, and strengthen our character...God doesn't simply want us to feel good. He wants us to be good. And very often, the road to being good involves not feeling good."