Theological
Authority and the Role of Tradition
How do we understand Scriptural authority in light
of the received Catholic creeds and ecumenical councils, confessions, and
particular opinions of theologians? The
Scriptures are of primary importance for the believer and rest of the lot, including
creeds, councils, and confessions are subsumed under this head, but how does
all this work? Oliver Crisp, in his book
God Incarnation: Explorations in Christology (17), brings to the foreground
these issues as he writes,
1.
“Scripture
is the norma normans, the principium theologiae. It is the final arbiter of matters
theological for Christians as the particular place in which God reveals himself
to his people. This is the first-order
authority in all matters of Christian doctrine.
2. Catholic
creeds, as defined by an ecumenical council of the Church, constitute a
first-tier norma normata, which have
second-order authority in matters touching Christian doctrine. Such norms derive their authority from
Scripture to which they bear witness.
3.
Confessional
and conciliar statements of particular ecclesial bodies are a second tier of norma normata, which have third-order
authority in matters touching Christian doctrine. They also derive their authority from
Scripture to the extent that they faithfully reflect the teaching of Scripture.
4.
The
particular doctrines espoused by theologians including those individuals
accorded the title Doctor of the Church which are not reiterations of matters
that are de fide, or entailed by something
de fide, constitute theologoumena, or theological opinions, which
are not binding upon the Church, but which may be offered up for legitimate
discussion within the Church.”
First, Scripture is the primary resting place for
all matters of theological import for the believer, yet this does not mean that
Scripture is alone, for it is “always read within the context of a given
ecclesial community, which is, as it were, surrounded by a great cloud of
theological witnesses and informed by the Christian tradition (17-18).”
Second, Catholic creeds (Nicene, Apostles’,
Chalcedonian, and Athanasian Creeds) derive their authority from the Scriptures
but speak as authoritative as they reflect the Scriptures. On some occasions, the creeds are
distillations of biblical teaching on what a person is to believe in order to
be a Christian and the basic tenets of the faith, but do not encapsulate a
robust teaching on fullness of Christian doctrine. Ex. We learn in the Apostles’ Creed that
Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit and that the Christian reciting the
Creed is to believe in the Holy Spirit, but we are not left with anything else concerning
the Spirit. Therefore, the Creed points
us back to the Scriptures to learn more about the Spirit, his work, and our
role in the work of the Spirit.
Third, confessional and conciliar statements are of
use to their particular denominations and serve as a third-order authority as
they faithfully reflect the teaching of Scripture and of the creeds. One thinks of such confessions as the
Westminster Confession of Faith, the Three Forms of Unity (Belgic Confession,
Canons of Dort, and Heidelberg Catechism), but also documents like the Book of
Concord (Lutheran), and the 39 Articles (Anglican), and the 1689 Baptist
Confession of Faith.
Fourth, the doctrines of particular theologians are
of importance but mainly to spur discussion on theological issues, even church
and ethical matters. One might study
Calvin on the sacraments, Luther on marriage, or Wesley on preaching and find
much to commend to faithful believers. Yet,
their specific opinions on matters doctrinal and theological are not to cage
believers in theological wrestling matches that end up being more about opinions
and less about Scripture.
This model is beautiful in that it captures the
top-down hierarchy of Scripture – Creed – Confession – theologians in a
succinct and clear manner. Crisp writes,
“For the Church catholic, dogmatic authority is top-down affair, generated by
Scripture…It is not something generated from the bottom-up, that is, from the
opinions of private individuals (18).”
We feel the urge to start with the most popular or provocative display
of writing, whether it be a preacher of professor and tag along for the ride in
their discovery of theology. Yet, for
all our strivings, we often find no new model of theology but a rehashing and
reshaping of the old beliefs of the past.
This model at least gives us pause to think Scripturally first, and then
gauge the rest of our studies upon this firm ladder which rests firmly on the
ground.
Two books that engage these matters are:
Oliver Crisp, God Incarnate: Explorations in Theology, Edinburgh, U.K.: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2009.
John Webster, Holy Scripture: A Dogmatic Sketch (Current Issues in Theology), Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Comments
Post a Comment