Program / Course 22: Christian Ethics / Lesson 2.4
What you will learn
- Identify common ways Scripture is misused in moral argument.
- Describe the steps of careful interpretation: context, genre, canon and tradition.
- Explain how Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant traditions differ on the authority of Scripture and tradition in ethics.
- Apply a checklist to a verse cited in a moral debate.
The big idea
Christians of every tradition hold that Scripture is a central source for moral teaching. Using it well is harder than it looks. A verse can be quoted without its context, a command can be applied without asking whom it addressed, and a debate can be settled by choosing the texts that suit one side. Careful use asks what the text meant, what kind of writing it is, how it fits the whole Bible, how the church has read it and what a faithful application would be today. Traditions differ on the weight of tradition in this process.
Key terms
- Proof-texting
- Citing isolated verses to support a position without regard to their setting or the rest of Scripture.
- Genre
- The kind of writing a passage is, such as law, narrative, poetry, proverb, prophecy, parable or letter. Each is read according to its nature.
- Canon
- The list of books recognized by a church as Scripture. The whole canon is the context for any single text.
- Descriptive and prescriptive
- A descriptive passage tells what happened or what people did. A prescriptive passage commands what should be done. Narrative often describes without approving.
- Analogy of Scripture
- The principle that Scripture interprets Scripture, so that clearer passages guide the understanding of obscure ones.
- Sola scriptura
- A Reformation principle that Scripture alone is the final authority for faith and life, with creeds and tradition as subordinate guides.
- Tradition
- In Catholic and Orthodox use, the living handing on of the faith in the church, which includes the Fathers, councils and liturgy and which, with Scripture, forms one source of revelation.
Background
Almost every moral movement in history has appealed to the Bible, including movements that later Christians regard as wrong. Defenders of slavery quoted texts such as Ephesians 6:5 and Leviticus 25:44-46. Abolitionists quoted Galatians 3:28, Exodus 21:16 and the narrative of the Exodus. Pacifists and soldiers have cited the same Gospels. Because people on both sides cited Scripture, it is clear that appeal alone does not settle a question. The method of reading matters.
All major traditions teach that interpretation must be disciplined. They differ on what disciplines it. Protestant traditions emphasize the plain sense of the text, the analogy of Scripture and the work of the Holy Spirit, with confessions as guides. Catholic teaching holds that Scripture is rightly read within the living tradition and under the teaching authority of the church. Orthodox tradition reads Scripture in the church, with the Fathers and the liturgy as its interpreters. These differences affect ethical questions, and the lesson on disagreement among Christians returns to them.
Step-by-step explanation
Step 1: Common misuses
Several errors recur. The first is proof-texting: taking a verse out of its context. A familiar example is quoting “Judge not” (Matthew 7:1) to end any moral criticism, or quoting a proverb as a divine promise. The second is ignoring genre. A proverb states a general pattern, not a guarantee. A narrative may report a deed, such as a patriarch’s polygamy, without commending it. A psalm may express an angry prayer, and a prophet may speak in hyperbole.
The third is anachronism, reading modern categories into an ancient text. The fourth is selectivity: citing the verses that support a view and ignoring those that complicate it, or applying some commands strictly and others not at all. The fifth is treating Scripture as a source of quick answers to modern technical questions that it does not address, such as many questions about medicine or technology. In such cases it provides principles but not direct rulings.
Step 2: Careful reading
A common set of steps is used across traditions, though with different emphases. Ask first what the text says, using a reliable translation and, where possible, comparing others. Ask what it meant to its first audience: who was addressed, in what circumstances, and with what words. Ask what kind of writing it is. Ask how it fits the larger story of the Bible, from creation through covenant to Christ, and how other passages treat the same subject. Ask how the church has read it over time, especially the Fathers and the great teachers, and where traditions disagree. Only then ask how it applies today, and what principles remain when the circumstances differ.
The question of application is the hardest. Interpreters sometimes distinguish between the principle that a text expresses and the form in which it was applied in a culture. The command to put a parapet on a roof (Deuteronomy 22:8) expresses a principle of care for life. Scholars disagree about how to distinguish principle from cultural form, for example in Paul’s instructions on women’s roles and head coverings. Care and humility are needed here.
Step 3: Scripture and tradition
The traditions give different accounts of how Scripture relates to the church’s teaching. Protestants classically hold that Scripture is the norm, and that tradition is valuable but fallible. The Reformers did not reject the Fathers; Calvin and Luther cite Augustine often. They held that the church’s teaching must be tested by Scripture. Many Protestants, including Anglicans, add reason and tradition as aids, as in the Anglican idea of Scripture, tradition and reason, with Scripture first.
The Catholic Church teaches that Scripture and sacred tradition flow from the same divine source and form one deposit of faith, which the teaching office of the church, the magisterium, interprets authentically. The Second Vatican Council’s constitution on revelation, Dei Verbum, states this. The Orthodox Church holds that Scripture is the church’s book and is rightly read in the mind of the church, as expressed by the Fathers and councils, and that tradition is the life of the Spirit in the church. These differences mean that Christians can agree that Scripture is authoritative and still differ about how to interpret it on a given moral question.
Step 4: Using Scripture in public
A further question is how Christians should use Scripture when arguing with people who do not accept its authority. Some, in the natural law tradition, recommend arguments from reason and shared experience, while using Scripture to inform one’s own convictions. Others hold that Christians should speak openly from their sources, and trust that others can understand the reasons. A third position says that the church’s witness is not an argument at all but a way of life. These approaches can be combined.
In any setting, honesty requires stating what a text says, admitting where it is unclear, and conceding where Christians disagree. It also requires the willingness to be corrected by the text and to recognize that one’s own interests may influence what one finds in it.
- What does the passage say in its own setting, before it is applied to a modern question?
- What kind of writing is it, and does it command, describe or express?
- How do other parts of Scripture speak about the same subject?
- How have different Christian traditions read this passage?
- Is the application a principle that carries over or a cultural form that does not?
- Is this text being used because it supports a view already held, and would a similar text on the other side be treated in the same way?
Examples
Slavery texts and the abolitionists
In the nineteenth century, defenders of slavery in America cited Old and New Testament texts that regulated slavery. Abolitionists responded with the creation of all people in the image of God, the Exodus and the command against man-stealing (Exodus 21:16; 1 Timothy 1:10). The argument shows both the danger of selective reading and the way that a reading attentive to the whole canon, and to the direction of its moral trajectory, can correct a misreading.
A proverb is not a promise
Proverbs 22:6 says, “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.” Parents of children who leave the faith sometimes take it as a broken promise. Interpreters note that proverbs state general patterns, not guarantees, and the book of Job and Ecclesiastes show that wisdom literature also records exceptions.
Narrative and approval
The book of Judges records stories of violence and betrayal, and ends by saying that every man did what was right in his own eyes (Judges 21:25). A reader who treats each story as a model would misread the book, which presents these actions as signs of Israel’s disorder.
Different perspectives
Protestant
Protestants classically hold that Scripture is the final authority in faith and morals, clear in what is necessary for salvation, and interpreted by Scripture itself in the church. Confessions such as the Westminster Confession and the Augsburg Confession are subordinate standards. Protestants differ on how much weight to give tradition, and evangelicals, mainline Protestants and Anabaptists differ in practice.
Catholic
Catholic teaching holds that Scripture and tradition together transmit revelation, and that the magisterium has the task of authentically interpreting the word of God. Catholic exegesis since Dei Verbum encourages scholarly study of the text in its setting, together with attention to the unity of the whole Scripture and the living tradition of the church.
Orthodox
Orthodox tradition holds that Scripture is the written part of the church’s tradition and cannot be rightly understood apart from it. The Fathers and the liturgy show how Scripture was read. Orthodox writers caution against private interpretation that departs from the church’s mind and also hold that no single person or office alone gives the final reading.
Scholarly
Historical-critical and literary scholars study the Bible in its ancient settings and offer tools such as source, form and genre analysis. Some believers find these tools valuable and others are wary of them. Scholars generally agree that texts must be read in context, and disagree about how far historical study should control theological interpretation.
Jewish
Jewish tradition reads the Bible with the Oral Torah and rabbinic commentary, and finds in this long conversation the way to apply the law. Many Jewish interpreters hold that the text needs interpretation in community and that the debates themselves are a form of faithfulness. This perspective is a useful reminder that the Hebrew Bible has a long history of interpretation that is not Christian.
Why it matters
Moral conversation among Christians, and between Christians and others, often depends on a verse. If the verse is misused, the argument fails and trust is damaged. A student who learns to ask about context, genre and tradition will be harder to mislead and more likely to understand an opponent’s reading. Careful use of Scripture is also a form of respect for it.
Common misunderstandings
Misunderstanding: Taking the Bible seriously means taking every verse literally.
Correction: Every tradition reads according to genre. Taking a poem as a poem or a parable as a parable is part of taking the text seriously. Even those who say they read literally distinguish figures of speech.
Misunderstanding: Only the Catholic and Orthodox churches use tradition.
Correction: Protestants also inherit creeds, confessions and habits of reading. The difference is how much authority tradition has and whether it is subject to correction by Scripture.
Misunderstanding: If Christians disagree, the Bible must be unclear.
Correction: Disagreement can come from differences in method, tradition, circumstances or sin. The traditions hold that the essential teaching is clear, while differing about secondary matters.
Misunderstanding: Historical study of the Bible is hostile to faith.
Correction: Some uses of it have been, but many believing scholars in every tradition use historical methods to understand the text better. The question is how the methods are used.
Knowledge check
Give two common ways Scripture is misused in moral argument.
Proof-texting takes a verse out of context, such as using Matthew 7:1 to forbid all moral judgment. Ignoring genre treats a proverb as a promise or a narrative as a model when it only reports. Others are anachronism, selective use of texts and expecting direct answers to modern technical questions.
What are the main steps of careful interpretation?
Establish what the text says, ask what it meant for its first audience, identify its genre, relate it to the rest of Scripture, consult how the church has read it, and only then ask how it applies today, distinguishing lasting principles from cultural forms.
How do Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant traditions differ on Scripture and tradition?
Protestants classically hold that Scripture is the final norm and tradition is a subordinate and correctable guide. Catholics hold that Scripture and tradition together transmit revelation, interpreted authentically by the magisterium. Orthodox hold that Scripture is read within the church’s tradition, as expressed by the Fathers, councils and liturgy.
Why does the abolitionist example matter?
It shows that both sides cited Scripture. The abolitionists appealed to the creation of all in God’s image, the Exodus and texts against man-stealing, reading the whole canon and its direction. It warns against selective use and shows how attention to the whole can correct a harmful reading.
Think it through
- Think of a verse that has been heard used in an argument. Was it used with its context?
- Which of the five misuses is hardest to avoid?
- How would you tell the difference between a principle and a cultural form in a passage you know?
- What would persuade you that your reading of a text was wrong?
Independent assignment
A verse in context
In your notebook, write 400 to 600 words. Choose a verse that is often quoted in moral debate. Copy it from the King James Version, then write its context, its genre, two other passages that bear on the same subject, and how one Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant source reads it. State what the verse can and cannot be used to prove. Do not send this to anyone or post it anywhere.
Further study
- Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth Read the chapters on the genres of the Bible and on how to read each.
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Hermeneutics Read for the philosophical background to interpretation.
- Augustine of Hippo, The City of God Read selected passages to see how Augustine reads Scripture on public questions.
- Westminster Assembly, The Westminster Confession of Faith Read the first chapter on Holy Scripture.
- 2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God.
- Matthew 22:29 Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures.
- Acts 17:11 The Bereans searched the scriptures daily.