Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
understand • • •
- Mark 13:14
A statement
ofinterpretative principles
by which we understand
the Holy Scriptures
Developed at the
request ofthe
in response to actions
ofthe Lambeth
Conference 1998
Philip asked the Ethiopian, "Do you understand what you are
reading?" He replied, "How can I, unless someone guides me?"
- Acts 8:30-31
Members of the
Hermeneutics Study Group
It is such deep engagement that is called for at this time in the Church’s life,
and the task we set for the members of the committee who prepared this
document was to outline as clearly as possible the means by which many of
us, in our particular part of the Anglican Tradition, understand, interpret,
and apply the Holy Scriptures. The Principles of Interpretation that follow
provide an outline of a method for, and the limits to, our understanding of
God’s Word Written. The commentaries seek to expand and explain some of
the thinking behind this method, and to provide examples of how the Church
has, over time, understood Scripture in different ways. We offer it now to
our brothers and sisters in this Diocese as well as in other parts of our
Communion as a means of further conversations, understanding, and
reconciliation.
We in this part of the Communion have profound respect for the Holy
Scripture as the Word of God. It is our hope that this document will assure
those with whom we disagree of this, and perhaps assist them in seeing how
it is we have reached those conclusions in keeping with sound principles of
scriptural interpretation.
5 The New Testament itself interprets and Matthew 26:54; Luke 4:21, 24:27;
Acts 8:35, 18:28
applies the texts of the Old Testament as “The Old Testament is not contrary to
pointing to and revealing the Christ. Thus, the the New: for both in the Old and New
revelation of God in Christ is the key to the Testament everlasting life is offered to
Mankind by Christ, who is the only
Church’s understanding of the Scriptures as a Mediator between God and Man, being
whole. both God and Man.”
The VII Article of Religion, the Book of
Common Prayer (American), p. 869
mandments which are called Moral” — unlike The VII Article of Religion, the Book of
its jurisdiction in “ceremonies and rites” — the Common Prayer (American), p. 869
true moral significance of any commandment is
not simply given but must be discerned.
8
Commentary 4, Applications of
Thus, for the Church’s judgment of the Principles of Interpretation, Tobias
morality of actions and dispositions to be Haller
authoritative, it is insufficient simply to con-
demn those things that are condemned some-
where in Scripture, or to approve those things
that are somewhere approved.
A note on Experience
Experience is not a source of authority, but — like
Reason — is a “necessary implement” without
which the Scripture itself cannot be comprehended.
For example, the Church’s decision to admit Gen-
tiles to its fellowship rested initially not on Scrip-
ture, but on Peter’s vision of the sheet let down from
heaven and his experience with Cornelius’ family Peter offers his “witness” in
when the Spirit descended upon them. Only later Acts 11:1-18
did the Church come to recognize that Isaiah’s
Acts 13:46-48
prophecy in Scripture was thus fulfilled. Similarly,
it is only the experience of the Risen Christ (in
person or in the preaching of the Good News) that John 20:9,20; Luke 24:25-29, 41-49;
empowers understanding the Scriptures that were Acts 8:30-39, 13:46-49
there all along.
Early Church canons continued the ban, and it is While the Eastern Orthodox collection
of church law, the Pedalion (“Rudder” ),
maintained in the Eastern Churches: “If any bishop, includes this prohibition, it is doubtful
or presbyter, or deacon, or indeed any one of the as to whether it is observed with great
sacerdotal catalogue, eats flesh with the blood of its strictness even in the East.
life… let him be deprived; for this the law itself has
forbidden. But if he be one of the laity, let him be Constitutions of the Holy Apostles
suspended.” “If anyone henceforth venture to eat in VIII.63
any way the blood of an animal, if he be a clergy-
men, let him be deposed; if a layman, let him be cut Quinisext Council, Canon 67
off.” Eusebius records the defense of a Christian
against accusations of infanticide: “‘How,’ she said,
‘could those eat children who do not think it lawful The testimony of the martyr Biblias,
to taste the blood even of irrational animals?’” Ecclesiastical History 5.1
This raises an important question: even if the Ironically, Augustine uses Noah’s ark
as a type for the apostolic Church,
Council was held to have erred, or its regulations to including both Gentiles and Jews, in
have lapsed by virtue of a change in circumstances, the very passage in which he discounts
how does one address the clear prohibition given to the relevance of the commandment
Noah? Though the Mosaic Law included the given to Noah concerning blood.
prohibition, the Jerusalem Council did not hold it to
be on the same level as the dietary regulations that
they believed to have been set aside by Jesus. Even
Paul, while he disagreed with the Council on the
Slavery
The institution of chattel slavery is mandated in the
Hebrew Scriptures and tolerated in the New Testa-
ment. Interestingly enough, Scripture also traces
slavery back to the time of Noah. After Ham sinned
against his father Noah, Noah cursed Ham’s son
Canaan to slavery. Leviticus 25 set out the rules for
slaveholding to be practiced by the Israelites, and
slavery became and remained a well-established
institution. The New Testament shows remarkable
toleration for slavery as a part of the social fabric,
and while Paul called for good treatment of slaves, Ephesians 6:9, Colossians 4:1
he nowhere suggested that slavery in itself was 1 Corinthians 7:23
sinful (though he did speak against voluntary Colossians 3:22, Titus 2:9, cp. 1 Peter
enslavement). He called upon slaves to be obedient 2:18; Philemon
and compliant, and personally returned a slave to
his master.
It is certainly a matter of faith (de fide) that this sort of Leander, Quaestiones Morales
slavery in which a man serves his master as his slave, is Theologicae, Lyons 1668-1692,
altogether lawful. This is proved from Holy Scripture, Lev Tome VIII, De Quarto Decalogi
25:39-55; 1 Pet 2:8; 1 Cor 7:20-24; Col 3:11-22; 1 Tim 6:1- Praecepto, Tract. IV, Disp. I, Q. 3.
10... It is also proved from reason for it is not unreasonable
that just as things which are captured in a just war pass into This was Augustine’s opinion in
the power and ownership of the victors, so persons captured Civ. Dei 19.15
in war pass into the ownership of the captors... All theolo-
gians are unanimous on this.
Both the Rabbi and the Bishop felt that the division
of the Union was a far greater evil than the continu-
ance of slavery, as unpalatable as slavery might be.
And since the Bible did not say slavery was a sin, it
was purely (and presumptuously) human judgment
to declare it so.