Christian Theologies of Scripture: A Comparative Introduction

5. Theologies of Scripture in the Reformationand Counter-Reformation

5 Theologies of Scripture in the Reformation and Counter-Reformation An Introduction Michael S. Horton As with many periods in Church history, the position of the “mainstream” Reformation tradition (Lutheran and Reformed) on scripture has often been misunderstood, by friend and foe alike. At least in our North American context, sola scriptura (scripture alone) has come to mean not simply that scripture alone is master over tradition, but that it is somehow antithetical to it. As a prelude to this section, this chapter will seek to provide a general overview for the period, which includes the Reformation itself as well as the era of consolidation and refinement that followed. This latter era of both Roman Catholic and post-Reformation theologies, which spans the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, has been variously called the CounterReformation , Catholic Reform and Protestant Scholasticism, and confessional orthodoxy. The Controversy It is sometimes forgotten that the reformers faced two challenges: the Roman Catholic claim that scripture and ecclesiastical tradition were two tributaries of one deposit of divine revelation; and the position of radical Anabaptism (“enthusiasm”), which not only questioned the legitimacy of ecclesiastical tradition, but also regarded the indwelling Spirit as providing a knowledge superior to that afforded by the mere “letter” of scripture. Rather than treat “letter” and “Spirit” in ontological terms as the Bible and 83 private revelation, respectively, John Calvin insisted that “the letter which kills” is the Law apart from the Gospel, which alone gives life.1 At the heart of the Reformation concern over scripture, then, was the confidence that it was not just another word spoken by humanity, however noble and enlightened. Even the Reformation’s emphasis on scripture as a divine Word distinct from tradition was motivated by the movement’s central soteriological concern: namely, to reassert the freedom of God’s grace toward those who could not raise themselves to God. In other words, in these early Protestant treatments, the doctrine of scripture was not settled on ostensibly pretheological, philosophical foundations, but on what they believed to be the content of scripture: the God who creates and redeems by speaking. Furthermore, their concern was more practical than theoretical: assuring wavering consciences that when they hear scripture speak, they are hearing God speak. The scriptures therefore were not seen to have an independent, autonomous authority as texts, but derived their authority from the fact that they are God’s address. Elaborating the Reformation’s paradigm of divine descent (theologia crucis) over human ascent (theologia gloriae), the Protestant scholastics held that created things can be “means of grace” without being transformed or elevated from their creaturely status. Thus, for the Reformation traditions, Christian theological language is always regarded as consistent with a theology of pilgrimage, not a theology of vision—in other words, faith, not sight. In this chapter we will focus on the nature of scripture (inspiration and authority) and the relation of scripture and tradition. Nature and Authority When the Protestant scholastics took up the subject of the nature and authority of scripture, they were not merely trying to pick a fight. There was widespread agreement on these points, and the topic itself was part and parcel of medieval systems, which these theologians lavishly cited for support. Where Protestants diverged was on the point of scripture’s uniqueness as a norm. Is scripture the sole norm for the Church’s faith and practice? Or do scripture and sacred tradition both belong to a single deposit of God’s Word? The Protestants interpreted the scriptures as God’s Word in two ways: as Law and as Gospel. Scripture not only revealed God, but also God’s address, in command and judgment as well as in promise and justifica84 m i c h a e l s. h o r t o n tion. The Law commanded certain things to be done, the Gospel announced that certain things had been done, specifically, Christ’s accomplishment of redemption. Neither the reformers nor their Protestant scholastic successors regarded scripture as a book of timeless truths, a body of mere propositions to be given assent. In fact, they rejected this as the Roman Catholic doctrine of faith (namely, assent to the Church’s teaching). Rather, scripture was viewed as authoritative because it was God’s own “sermon.” Chiefly a narrative of the history of God’s redemptive work in Christ, its content and authority went hand in...