An interpretative practice working within the world of the text may offer many insightful observations about the workings of that world. But it will tell us nothing at all about the one thing that actually matters, the relation of that imagined world to reality. If it wishes to engage responsibly in theological construction, biblical interpretation must there abandon the myth of the self-enclosed text and learn to correlate the text with the reality to which it bears witness, understanding the text as located primarily within the church which is itself located within the world. Interpretation must take the more demanding but also more rewarding way of seeking to discern the truth mediated in the texts of holy scripture. And it must not be deterred by the skepticism that such a project is sure to evoke.
Francis Watson, Text, Church and World p. 293
The temptation for conservative interpreters has been to cordon off the scriptures from the more ornery questions of its existence in the world – the questions that historians might ask, for example. However, (and I am sure Watson would agree), the text has something to say about the world which changes it. If the text is in the world, then it is also true that the world is in the (this) text. Can both be held without compromise?
1 comment:
Michael is a question about "compromise" a helpful way to frame the issue here?
The word is understood in a purely negative sense in our tradition --- as weakness, backsliding, betrayal --- and the form of your question does nothing to contradict this. (Cf. O'Donovan locating the term in practice: in bringing ideals and reflection to action in a particular place and time.)
Ask certain people whether such-and-such a task can be performed without compromise, and they will recoil in fear into their shells. I am thinking here of ClergyBibleWorld (TM) exposition, something Watson also seems to criticise: we must never compromise on Scripture (or on a list of shibboleths), so instead of engaging with the world we project a travesty of it from our accustomed reading of the Scripture ...
I think faithfulness is a better way to approach the matter. Are you being faithful to God; to the Scripture; to the church before you; to the world in which we live?
Post a Comment