I have blogged several times on “Tradition” in Orthodoxy: its essence, origin, and function in the Church of Jesus Christ. I’ve not blogged quite as much, specifically, about the same aspects of Scripture. Partly, that is because as an Orthodox Christian, Scripture is part of Holy Tradition, and so is necessarily included in what I say about Tradition. Further, it is because as I have returned to the Apostolic Church, I have not discarded my high view of Scripture as the Word of God. I have had to expand my view of and respect for “Tradition” as a whole, as it was something I had been taught to view warily at best, and scornfully in more typical moments. So, I naturally have blogged more (and thought more) about the element of my Faith that required greater conversion of thought and life.
However, my wife and I have received concerned warnings at times in the past year from well meaning, sincere friends regarding the importance of Holy Scripture. From reading some of these warnings we have received, it has begun to dawn on me that many people see Tradition and Scripture as still inherently opposed to one another. Or, at least they hold the view that those who esteem Holy Tradition as authoritative and necessary must necessarily devalue Holy Scripture. And, regarding Orthodoxy, it seems to be assumed, again, by some, that we simply don’t believe in the authority of Holy Scripture for our lives, our worship, and our prayer. There appear to be only two options: Either one can be Orthodoxy, or one can follow Scripture. The question begged by this approach is fairly obvious: why not both?
There are plenty of good essays that have been written by Orthodox Theologians that address the Eastern (Greek) Orthodox view of Scripture. You can find many of them in my “Orthodox Links” section. But, if you don’t care to follow all the links, following are some summary points of what we, as Orthodox Christian, believe and confess regarding Holy Scripture.
- The Scriptures were written with the inspiration of God.
- The Scriptures are a necessary component of “the Faith” or “Apostolic Tradition” which make known to us God’s saving acts, promises, covenants, and especially the Truth of the Incarnation.
- Any part of Holy Tradition must be in agreement with Scripture and, in particular, with the Gospel of Jesus Christ (though this does not mean that everything in the Apostolic Faith will be explained in equal detail in Scripture). Put another way, Holy Tradition cannot be in disagreement with the divine truths of Scripture.
- Holy Scripture is necessary in order to know how to live for and worship the One True God, who is revealed to us in Christ. As St. Jerome said, “Ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ.”
- While a person can become a Christian and live as a Christian without access to Scriptures, this is not the normative and divinely instituted situation and would prove very difficult without some sort of access to Scripture.
- Scripture makes us “wise unto salvation.” It equips us to live godly lives, and makes us “thoroughly furnished” for all good works.
- Holy Scripture must not only be understood as divinely inspired; it must also be interpreted correctly, according to the “rule of faith” (St. Irenaeus, etc.). Holy Scripture makes us wise unto salvation only insofar as it is “handled correctly.” Misinterpreted Scripture can, and sometimes does, lead to spiritual destruction
Those are a few salient points of what we, as Orthodox, believe regarding Holy Scripture.
In summary, then, the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church has always held Scripture in high esteem, not as the sole pinnacle of God’s revelation to man — for that spot is held for Jesus Christ, the “Word made flesh” — but as an integral and necessary underpinning of our Faith. Scripture gives us hope, instructs in our Faith in Jesus Christ, teaches us to pray, and gives us guidance in moral and ethical behavior. However, Scripture is ultimately the book of the Church, not a bestseller to be marketed as a do-it-yourself guide to a personal relationship with Jesus, or as a personal “blueprint” to rebuild the Church every generation.
So, when someone “reminds me” that Jesus appealed to Scripture, I can only agree. Of course he did! And, of course, so do we! Scripture is the book of the Church; we hear it read, prayed, and sung every Sunday during Liturgy. We read from it every morning and every night during Matins and Vespers with our families. It is the Word of God. But, we do so as Christians, not as journalists or as investigative scripture-scientists, making and testing hypotheses at every turn. We read it in the mind of the Church, the mind of Christ, the mind of the Apostles and of the Patristics. In other words, I believe we read it in its natural and divinely created and sustained context.
From that perspective, it is very interesting to look at some of the texts often appealed to by “sola-Scriptura” advocates, and to find that, within those passages, what is actually occurring is not what is often claimed. Matthew 22 is a good example, but that’s the subject of the next entry…
I don’t think I’ve posted here yet. I hope you don’t mind. I wrote you a while back and didn’t hear from you (the internet eats many words, so you might not have gotten it).
While there are plenty of limited-minded folks who parrot slogans (mind you, I’m being much to hard on them, as I too feel the siren’s song that comes from such “certainty”), many, like myself, take a more thoughtful approach to sola Scriptura.
There is no way to say “sola” in a literal sense. We must depend on scholars to translate (and therein interpret) the scriptures. We must decide on a hermeneutic. We have to recognize that the word “fear” in our Bibles actually represents as many as 14 different Hebrew and Greek words (so I’m told).
At one end, the hard Calvinists that seem to view scriptures as some sort of equation. You take all the verses with the keyword “X” and gather them in one place, add them up and you have the Biblical view of “X”.
At the other end, the Bishop Spongs of the world who see the scriptures as nothing more than metaphorical imagery, a sort of sandbox of spiritual ideas which are coherent enough to form a language of experience only.
I suppose Orthodoxy (and to some extent the RCC) take a third approach, sort of defying my metaphor of a “spectrum” of approaches.
Any which way, I’ve begun to use the phrase “prima scriptura”. That is, I’ll listen to any spiritual wisdom from just about anyone, but I’m going to hold it to the scriptures. I think it’s important to do this because I can (to those much has been given, much will be expected). I’m fine if the Dali Lama is right, but he’s only right to the extent he agrees with scripture.
Does every Christian need to read their Bible? I suppose the answer is (by my own interpretation above), if they can. I think we are expect to know it as well as we can know it. If we want to be a part of preserving the Gospel message (note, I say “be a part of” not “be responsible for” God will preserve His message with or without us), we must study.
I don’t think I’m excused from holding Irenaeus to the very scripture he held himself to. I think it’s a huge mistake that Protestants are so afraid of error that they refuse to read the apocryphal literature or the words of the apostolic fathers. They are over-worried that the errors which exist there (errors must exist in everything outside of scripture) are going to corrupt them.
They miss out on the fact that there are also very important truths there which can inform, develop and empower their understanding of scripture.
Somehow they “trust” their local preacher, but forget that he too is expanding and interpreting scripture. I know of no church that actually has nothing but the reading of scripture from the pulpit without commentary.
Unfortunately, I cannot equate these other sources (tradition included) with scripture. When people say sola scriptura, I think it’s unfair to setup the straw man that they can’t be “literal” about it. I think what thinking people mean is that nothing else can be used as a standard for judging truth.
David,
You’re correct; there is no simple definition of “sola Scriptura.” Rather, there are various levels. However, I believe that when all is said and done, the basic outcome is the same.
Whether a person *uses* tradition or not, does not affect the bottom line of “sola” OR “prima” Scriptura. I do respect those more historically aware Protestants who use and appreciate the Creeds, etc. Yet, at the end of the day, they will only adhere to the Creeds to the extent that the Creeds “agree with” their own understanding of Scripture. You made this point yourself, in your comment.
Orthodoxy says, “Yes, hold all things to Scripture.” But, where they differ from you is that they mean, by “Scripture,” the CHURCH’S understanding of Scripture. What you mean by “Scripture” is how YOU understand Scripture. It’s admirable that you are as open and broadminded as you are, but ultimately, you still must rely on your own interpretation of Scripture, no matter how much you utilize “Tradition” (and, if we use “Tradition” as the Fathers did, there is no real “use” of Scripture without being inside it and subject to it, in the Apostolic sense).
What Orthodoxy says is, “yes, Scripture is the yardstick for judging all opinions, all speculations.” But, what they mean by that is *Scripture rightly understood*, according to the “Rule of Faith” (St. Irenaeus, et al).
David, I think you are very close to the Orthodox mind here. I will be praying for you. I know this stretch of the journey is difficult. Be assured of my admiration for your honesty, courage to ask difficult questions, etc. I can see that you’re genuinely seeking the truth, no matter how messy and personally “unfulfilling” it may be. May our Lord bless and keep you.
a sinner,
Kevin
As I have said on Fr Stephen’s blog. I am, in a word, *trapped*.
I have found the only standard for understanding I could find and by that standard I can’t trade for another standard.
I try to hope in two things, first, that the Spirit is alive and well within me guiding me in spite of myself, and second (and more importantly) that God’s grace is so much greater than all my failures.