James Pate asked a question related to my post History and Narrative. His question, simply put, is how can the Bible function authoritatively if there is nothing authoritative about the text itself. He says that Barth seems to suggest that there is something authoritative in the text when Barth says that God chooses to reveal himself in the text.
Before addressing the question, I wanted to clarify something about Barth’s position. When Barth says that God chooses to reveal himself in the text, he means that such a revelation occurs when the readers reads the text. The revelation is not embedded in the text, so that it might be considered part of the character of the text. Instead, it is something that happens when the text is read. It has less to do with the author of the text than the reader.
To answer the question of how something can be functionally authoritative without having authority in itself, I would point to any number of examples of such a thing in the real world. The President of the United States exercises power by virtue of his office, not because of anything inherent in the person elected. We have certainly had examples of people in the White House who hardly had anything within them to suggest authority (e.g., James Buchanan), but they still had the authority of the office.
One of the plus sides to dealing with a functional description of authority rather than talking about a text be authoritative a se is that it moves the center of the discussion to the place where it actually matters. We can present as many arguments as we want about the Bible being authoritative, but if people don’t accept it as authoritative then it hardly matters. On the other hand, if people reject all our arguments about the nature of the text but still treat it as authoritative, then the text will in fact be authoritative.
On June 10th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
Thanks for addressing my question.
I took a class this last semester on Text and Theory at Hebrew Union College, and one topic that arose was the foundation of morality (Is there a foundation?). Someone suggested that there may not be a foundation (as in a thus saith the Lord), but a community can decide to live a certain way, a way that is just. Would this be relevant to seeing the text as functionally authoritative?
Personally, when I read the biblical text, I see in it the idea that the text (or the message that came to be in the text) is an authority in reference to all people, whether they accept it as authoritative or not. It is an authority in the sense that it is God’s message and should be followed. The prophets say that those who disregard their message will be punished. Jesus and Paul have the same attitude toward those who reject their message. Indeed, the text is authoritative in a special way to those who actually recognize its value, but those who do not recognize the text as authoritative are still under the text’s authority, the same way that those who disobey the law of the State are under the State’s authority.
On June 11th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
I agree with James that a text is authoritative irrespective of whether someone recognizes it as such.
But it is interesting to look at how the Bible actually functions as authority in the life and practice of those who cherish it.
You might want to join in the discussion on canon taking place. Check out my blog.
John Hobbins
http://www.ancienthebrewpoetry.typepad.com
On July 2nd, 2007 at 7:48 pm
The Bible provides for such an authority, calling in the pillar and foundation of the truth–the Church!! And the Church fathers when attempting to decide important issues, like whether the Patriarch of Alexander has primacy over certain districts, yet could find no written document for such, referred to the tradition of one See, the See of Peter, the Roman Bishop, whose custom was that the Patriarch did have that authority. The Bible cannot be an authority as it does not have any title to do so save that it is the tradition of that same See, that See of Peter, which holds the Tradition handed on by Sts. Peter and Paul. The Scriptures have the authority of the Roman Bishop when they are interpreted according to the Apostolic Tradition handed on to the Roman Bishop. As St. Augustine would have it: save for the Catholic Church, (vested in the authority of the Roman Bishop,) he would not believe the Scriptures. The (Roman Bishop) appeal results being final, the case is concluded.