Thoughts on the Nature of the New Testament

The New Testament is not a monolith. Rather, the New Testament is a collection of writings. Whatever we say about the New Testament (or the Bible as a whole), we should be clear that Scriptures, not Scripture, is the more technical, as well as the more traditional, term. With hesitation I use the pronoun it when referring to the New Testament according to modern convention and in the interest of convenience.

The New Testament is not a book of dogma, nor is it a Systematic Theology. Rather, these writings were addressed to different people in different contexts responding to very different, very specific situations. When we read an imperative in the New Testament, we should not automatically assume that we are receiving a direct command. In other words, the New Testament is occasionally descriptive with no thought of being prescriptive.

The New Testament is not exhaustive. It does not, nor does it attempt to, speak to every potential issue, whether ethical, liturgical, or doctrinal, that the Catholic Church will encounter. The New Testament assumes as much as it communicates. To take but one example, when Paul addresses the abuses of the Table in 1 Corinthians 11, there is much left unspoken that his audience would have already known. We can hardly hope to understand all of his instructions or to build a complete theology of the Table without a knowledge of the historical details that underlie his letter to these rascally Corinthian Christians.

Nevertheless...

The New Testament is authoritative. It is authoritative because it is Apostolic. Different theories of inspiration have been assumed and/or expounded throughout Church history, but the New Testament should hold weight even for those who view it as merely the writings of men. After all, the writings of men like Peter, Paul, and John should be highly prized by any follower of Christ. If you claim the name of Christ, you are obliged to heed his Apostles.

The New Testament is prescriptive. It gives us no set of case laws, such as we find in the Pentateuch, but it does a) make universal ethical statements based on specific situations that had arisen in the Primitive Church and b) propound principles that we may glean and apply in our own contexts.

The New Testament is organic and situational, but that does not give us warrant to ignore or to rationalize away the doctrinal, ethical, and ecclesiastical statements we find therein. Paul, for instance, is addressing specific Christians who have specific issues when he writes to the Galatians or the Ephesians, but this does not mean that his statements have no bearing on our behavior as Christians in the 21st Century. Moreover, we are not free to ignore uncomfortable precepts or to update old-fashioned ideas.

The bottom line is...

We must find a balance in how we view and read the New Testament. It was not written directly to us, but to Christians in various places in the 1st Century. We must acknowledge the context in which it was written and the historical development of interpretation since it was written, and we absolutely must rid ourselves of this just me and my Bible notion.

On the other hand, we must not approach the New Testament with disinterested minds or dispassionate hearts. These writings are not mere historical oddities, to be poked and prodded by historical scientists. They are writings from the Apostolic and Primitive Church, written by men who were guided by the Holy Spirit and chosen by our Savior to establish His Church and to disseminate His Gospel. Accordingly, we ought to read the New Testament with an eye to glean as much as possible to apply to our own day. In this sense we should be maximalists--we should desire to maximize our application of the New Testament, not figure out loopholes that enable us to ignore it says.

This process will, of course, require Spirit-led discernment and discretion. How certain passages apply to our lives will not always be black and white, which means that we will have to seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the historical consensus of the Catholic Church, and the wisdom of Godly clergy. When we find ourselves in a gray area, we should seek to maintain an attitude of grace with those with whom we disagree. We should not pander to liberals who wish to destroy our foundation for truth, but, when we find ourselves genuinely disagreeing with sincere brethren, we should seek to live in peace and maintain fellowship.

"Father, Forgive Them"

“Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” Forgiveness is hard. Forgiveness is really, really hard. It’s difficult to forgive others who have genuinely harmed or offended us. It’s easy to say , “I forgive you,” but it’s extremely difficult to feel it–to make peace in our hearts with the injustices that others have perpetrated against us. It just doesn’t feel right. Sin should be punished! Wrongs should be righted! Right?! It’s difficult to forgive others when they ask for it. It’s even more difficult to forgive them when they haven’t asked for it–when they don’t even recognize what they’ve done to hurt us. As our Savior hung upon His Cross, He asked the Father to forgive those nearby–those who were unwittingly contributing to the greatest injustice in the history of the world. These thieves, soldiers, and standers-by had no idea what was happening. They had no idea that the jealousy of the Jews had placed Christ on that Cross...

The Real Presence & Paedocommunion: A Deeper Rift Between Reformed Churches

You're going back to Rome! Theological disagreements within the Reformed world, especially those of the last half century, often devolve into these sorts of accusations. As controversialists like Doug Wilson and Peter Leithart began to break away from the larger conservative Presbyterian and Reformed denominations, it became clear that the rift was deeper than semantics and systematic minutiae. Much like the Reformation four centuries before, the Table was a primary point of conflict. What does it mean? Who may partake? What do we call it? These questions, along with a few more, divided Reformed brethren as the physical elements of our religion reflected deeper conflicts. Good men began to understand that the problem wasn't just in our logos, but in our pathos and ethos, as well. Paedocommunion (hereafter PC) has been one of the hottest points of contention. PC has always been normal to me as I grew up with it. I underst...

"The More Things Change..." or "Joe Biden Doing Joe Biden Things"

1 Samuel 2 relates the story of Eli, the well-meaning high priest whose only flaw (apparently) was his refusal to discipline his sons. These sons, described as worthless men , utilized their position to abuse the people and indulge their lusts with impunity. Eli's dereliction of duty brought his otherwise noble career in service to God's house to an ignominious end. There are, of course, important differences between Eli and Joe Biden. Joe Biden is not a religious leader (though he is a practicing Roman Catholic ), nor would I consider his record to be otherwise spotless. However, similarly to Eli, Biden's pardoning of his own worthless son, Hunter, will prove to be his legacy. His long (and I mean loooong) career in politics will likely be overshadowed, even in the eyes of those who previously respected him, by this one shameless act. By pardoning his son despite promising not to, Biden has yet again demonstrate...

Always Reforming

Search This Blog