Blue Cord

While we are on the subject of frivolous lawsuits, I thought I would mention a story that happened down in my home state of Tennessee.

At Lakewind Church in Knoxville, a man claims he was so filled with the Holy Spirit during a service that he fell and hit his head. He is suing the church for $2.5 million for “medical bills, lost income, and pain and suffering.”

This story seems like something you would see at The Onion, but since the story was reported by the AP I am assuming it is reliable. Of course, if The Onion were making this up, they would have said that the man was suing the Holy Spirit.

Let’s think about this theologically for a second. If you believe that the Spirit of God takes over your body and causes you to fall down (something the NT associates more with demon possession), then you have a big question to ask before giving yourself over to such an experience: Do I believe that the Holy Spirit will handle my body responsibly? That is, will the Holy Spirit prevent my head from hitting the pew when causing me to fall? At the very least, will God cause one of the other church members to catch me when God hurls me to the floor?

If your answer is no, then you had better look around you to make sure you have a safe fall zone before this irresponsible God gets a hold of you.

Of course, Paul says that Christians should not take each other to court (1 Cor 6:1-8), but apparently this man was concentrating on esoteric experiences instead of listening to that part of the sermon.

I have not really been following the kerfuffle at Westinster Theological Seminary. I have not read Peter Enns’s book Inspiration and Incarnation, but the seminary announced on Wednesday that they were suspending from the seminary faculty because of views expressed in this book. Enns has the support of the majority of the faculty at the seminary, which voted 12-8 against suspending him, and a web site has been set up by those who support him.

The issue comes down to the fact that Enns approach to the Scriptures does not line up with traditional Reformed theology, as is recognized by De Regno Christi, a web site set up by Reformed Christian Witness (the author’s of the site seem to approve of Enns’s suspension). My purpose in discussing this issue is not to debate whether Enns should or should not have been suspended. While I generally err on the side of academic freedom, a seminary can have a reasonable expectation that its faculty will teach from the point-of-view of the tradition of the seminary. Any good seminary will have professors from multiple denominations on their faculty, but if they are to serve their primary mission the majority should represent the tradition of the seminary.

My purpose for discussing Enns’s suspension, however, is to point out that this is in fact a Scripture vs. tradition debate. Enns has been suspended not because he has put forth an interpretation of the Bible which is unfaithful to the Scriptures, but because he has put forth an interpretation that is unfaithful to the Reformed tradition. The ironic thing is that this is being done at a Protestant seminary. One of Protestantism founding ideas during the Reformation was that our traditions should never take primacy over Scripture. Enns’s ideas may not be in line with Reformed traditions, but they are certainly in line with Reformation principles of Scripture being allowed to critique tradition.

What this should point out is that there is no such thing as a “Bible only” denomination. We all interpret Scripture within our traditions. This is, of course, how it should be. Scripture and tradition both have a role to play in our theology. It is either intellectually dishonest or just plain arrogant to claim that your church is faithful to the Bible alone while other churches rely on “man-made” traditions. It is never ever an either/or proposition.

We should all continue to interpret the Bible within our own traditions, while at the same time allowing our interpretation of the Bible to critique those traditions. Tradition can never be allowed to become a static entity. It must always be open to revision and — dare I say? — reformation.

Westminster’s “About Us” page contains this paragraph at the top:

Westminster is committed to Scripture and to the systematic exposition of biblical truth known as the Reformed faith. The very name of the institution signals clearly that our systematic theology has been and remains an outworking of the theological documents known as the Westminster Standards. In addition to the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms, the Seminary treasures the rich and harmonious diversity of creeds and confessions within the historic Reformed tradition. In particular, it recognizes that the system of doctrine contained in Scripture is also confessed in the Three Forms of Unity (the Belgic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, and the Canons of Dort).

While their statement beings by noting that they are committed to Scripture, they immediately turn to enumerating the documents that inform their tradition. They are up front about the fact that theology at Westminster is done within the boundaries of these confessions. Their suspension of Enns, however, suggests that theology can never be allowed to go outside of these bounds, even when led there through the study of the Bible.

Update: Nick Norelli has a round up of bloggings pertaining to the Peter Enns situation at WTS at Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth.

I have been tagged in the Zwingli Meme by Chris Brady at Targuman. The entire purpose of this meme is to annoy Jim West, who has threatened to remove anyone who participates in the meme from his blogroll. I was removed from Jim’s blogroll about a year ago for sins unknown, so I risk little by participating. Besides, Jim’s blogroll is down to single digits at this point, so I am not sure how big of a threat that is.

The rules of this meme are simple:

1. Post something rude about Zwingli. (Outrageous slander especially welcome.)
2. Tag someone who is not Jim West.

Personally, I was under the impression that zwingli was a type of pasta.¹ The meme seems to suggest that he was a theologian, so I looked him up. I tried most standard theological reference books, but he doesn’t seem to have been important enough to have been included in any of those works. I loaned someone my copy of Irrelevant Theologians of the 16th Century last week, so I had no choice but to head to Wikipedia.

I learned from Wikipedia that Zwingli was actually a stand-up comedian known primarily for doing a passable impersonation of Martin Luther. Although his impersonation gained him a good deal of popularity in Reformation circles, he stopped doing it after the Diet of Worms over fear of how it might hurt his standing with the Catholic church. This effectively ended his show business career, although his twin brother Elmer Fudd — a well-known actor — was able to get him cameo appearances in films from time to time. Years later, Zwingli was able to meet his hero Martin Luther while Zwingli was working as a bus boy at the Marburg Colloquy.²

I hereby tag Jim Getz.

1. They used to serve a baked zwingli casserole at seminary that was to die for! [back]
2. Zwingli’s role in the colloquy has been greatly exaggerated in subsequent accounts. [back]

A colleague here at Wartburg pointed me to this video on YouTube. It’s an interesting deconstruction of the American Jesus.