From an essay (sermon?) [UPDATE: parish newsletter; thanks to Kendall Harmon] attributed to The Rev. Dr. Michael L. Carreker, rector, Saint John’s, Savannah, posted at TitusOneNine:
The historic Church has believed and shall always believe that in the Scripture God has spoken definitively for all times and places.
(Emphasis added.) Some observations:
1. This is nothing short of blasphemy. Can Dr. Carreker really declare so categorically that God would never supplement or amend his prior teachings?
Consider an analogy. When our kids are toddlers, we teach them a simple rule that they're capable of understanding: "Don't hit." But that's not our final word on the subject. As the kids get older and more able to deal with nuance, our teachings get more sophisticated: "Don't hit -- unless it's in legitimate self-defense and you have to fight back." When our kids reach young adulthood, we get still more sophisticated, e.g., by teaching them about the doctrine of just war. We would do our children a serious disservice by insisting that the simple message of toddlerhood was final and definitive.
Dr. Carreker calmly denies that God might likewise be teaching us his children gradually, as (individually and collectively) we become more capable of understanding God's message. One wonders just how Dr. Carreker knows this with such assurance.
(More about the possibility of gradual divine revelation at this posting.)
2. It's one thing to acknowledge Scripture as a powerful and even primary record of God's past revelations to us. It's entirely another to claim that Scripture trumps everything else, for all times and places. Were that true, we might as well shove aside the golden calf and elevate the Bible in its place.
3. I'm no psychologist, other than what I've learned on the job as a parent. But I do wonder whether this kind of bibliolatry might be based on anxiety about whether God really loves us. Such an insistence on the supremacy of Scripture could represent a desperate, unconscious effort to earn God's love by proclaiming the supremacy of his (supposedly) final and definitive word.
4. Jesus, on the other hand, trusted in God and his love. He took Scripture seriously, but he did not treat it as an idol, an object of worship and slavish adherence at all times and in all circumstances. (Witness his attitude about healing the sick or picking grain on the Sabbath, or about divorce.) His trust in God led him to pursue the truth no matter where the search led him; to seek to do God's will, as best he could discern it -- even unto death. Would that we could do the same.
The article is from the parish newsletter of the parish Father Carreker serves. For the record, the blog I host is Titusonenine.
Thanks for taking the time to respond.
Posted by: Kendall Harmon | June 30, 2004 at 10:05 PM
Samuel Taylor Coleridge offers much interesting matter regarding revelation and reason asserting in fact that they are precisely related to one another and that therefore "revelation" must continue in reason which is "subjective revelation." He was very much a progressivist seeing that humanity is learning and acquiring new capacities -- I use the term guardedly -- over time. He says somewhere that even in his time some people understand the gospel better than some of the apostles. And in another place something like this, everything Christian is contained in scriptures, but not everything in scriptures should be considered Christian.
Coleridge is an excellent starting point in looking at a dynamic scriptural attitude and developmental learnings of humanity in its relationship to the Word.
Posted by: Mark | July 05, 2004 at 12:47 PM
Your post made me sad...I think it is wrong to accuse someone of "blasphemy" when YOU cannot cagtegorically say they are wrong; furthermore, you ARE instructed by Scripture not to judge and to use words wisely, for by them, you will be judged.
If God created, knew the purpose and path of the world and even its eventual restoration to heaven--how could He NOT intend Scripture to be for all times?
I will use your own example.
God told us of just war--an eye for an eye. Certainly I would defend myself if attacked. Yet God also said to leave justice to him. And Jesus said turn the other cheek. Its funny; he said that later, yet it is a command given to children, where as "an eye for an eye" is what you teach young adults. Perhaps Jesus knew we were not adult or advanced enough to truly engage in "just war". At the SAME time, he teaches mercy--an incredibly advanced path.
Mercy and justice go side-by-side: we may choose which will be our sword, but God will use that same sword on us.
IS it a diservice to tell your children not to hit? If your child never struck someone, they might be beaten, they might be killed. Jesus was willing to make that sacrifice--so was his Father willing to let him. Would you say that Jesus and God are fools or wrong?
You tell your child to hit back out of selfishness--you don't want to lose your child. The child fights back out of survival--the fear they will lose something...a drop of blood or THIS life.
Jesus was not ammending God's word, by saving a lamb on the Sabbath. God say, remember the Sabbath and keep it holy. It was man who ammended the word, saying holiness is rest; not cooking or saving lambs--Jesus knew compassion and charity is the essence of holiness. Saving the lamb, made the day holy!
Nor did he ammend God's word on marraige. Jesus said that when a MAN breaks the bond of marraige, there is no longer a marraige. Why then, should a woman be bond to a contract that no longer EXISTS?
The golden calf comment is just...silly and awful. I don't know who your spiritual advisors are but I would consider finding new ones. Who says the bible "Trumps" all? I would say, it has ALL wisdom and instruction for a happy, peaceful life.
Also...I don't know about your children...but I never obeyed my mother's word to win her love. Out of respect or fear of a spanking, yeah. Mostly--and especially now that I'm older, I obeyed her because I desired to...because I knew it was right. My mother loves me NO MATTER WHAT. As does God.
As my personal note, none of us knows the mind of God. Not theology teachers in college, not priests, not the Pope. By asking them questions such as "Should we adhere to the Bible always?" or "How do we know there is a God"--we will get an answer, but it is not (necessarily) God's answer. Don't be suprised if you aren't satisfied.
Spiritual leaders and religion site posters alike would do well not to advise or critisize others, until they are free of doubt, confusion, motive, etc. If you are unsure, you are still learning. The thing to do is "Be seen, and not heard."
Posted by: Amy Lemco | October 29, 2005 at 02:50 PM
Thank you so much for posting this! I was going to write about this very subject this morning on my blog, so I looked up bibliolatry in Google and there was your link. Excellently said!
Posted by: Ann | October 05, 2006 at 07:52 AM
If the Holy Bible is in fact, 100% infallible as you suggest, then why does paul say Judas died differently than it says in the gospels?
Why did Elisha curse 40 something children for calling him a bald man and God smote them all?
Please tell me, how can you believe in such a book filled with contradictions and lies?
I was a Christian and believed in Jesus (still do actually) but I lost a lot of faith after noticing all the contradictions in the bible.
I cant really consider myself a Christian anymore mainly because I do not follow or believe the Holy Bible is actually God's word. If it were, then there wouldnt be any contradictions or moral injustices committed by the God of the Jews. Its really that simple.
Posted by: Matt | October 11, 2006 at 02:11 PM
It was wonderfully refreshing to read an intelligent Christian counterpoint to this bizarre phenomenon-- bibliolatry-- that has taken the Christian community by storm during the last century!
I am saddened (though not surprised) that at least one proponent of this form of idolatry has seen fit to attack you for addressing this issue by posting an angry message here. However, this person's reaction has only serves to strengthen your argument, in my opinion.
Idolatry is indeed a sin-- even if one is worshiping what one believes to be the "Word of God."
Posted by: Sarah Westfield | August 05, 2009 at 04:07 PM
Hi Michael,
as I am editing the Studia Patristica texts of your Oxford 2007 contribution, could you get back to me and provide me with your email, please to send you through the proofs, thanks
yours Markus
Posted by: Professor Markus Vinzent | November 06, 2009 at 12:45 PM