Comments by Ulrich Luz on Reception History

Studies in MatthewIn his book Studies on Matthew, Ulrich Luz has five essays at the end of the book that address questions of interpretation, and the primary interest with most of these is Reception History or how has the Bible been understood throughout the centuries. The following is a longer quote that I found thought-provoking from his essay entitled "The Significance of the Church Fathers for Biblical Interpretation in Western Protestant Perspective". The essay was originally published as "Die Bedeutung der Kirchenväter für die Auslegung der Biblel. Eine westlich protestantische Sicht", in : James D.G.d Dunn, Hans Klein, Ulrich Luz, and Vasile Mihoc (eds.), Auslegung der Bibel in orthodoxer und westlicher Perspektive, WUNT I/130 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000), pp. 29-52.

"...we are reminded by the patristic interpretations that behind the plurality of voices in the Bible itself and behind all the interpretations there is an interpretative community of which we ourselves are part, that is: the Church. For me the importance attached by the Eastern churches to patristic interpretation is a significant hermeneutic indicator of how fundamental the Church as interpretative community is for the reading of the Bible. I emphasize this as a Protestant, well aware that the Church as interpretative community carries little weight with us. Many of our clergy tend to preach their own Word of God; many of our theologians would like to see their own theology as gospel. Many of our exegetes, glad not to have an ecclesial magisterium set over them, are content with their own authority. I insist however that interpreting and understanding the Bible is a community process, and that in the end the Church and not the individual is the interpreting subject. This does not mean I am seeking to restrict or standardize interpretation. As a Protestant, regarded by most Christian churches as being outside the 'true' church right up to the twentieth century, it is not for me to say where the limits of what God will recognize as 'church' are. I am also aware how important it is that many people read the Bible and regard it as their heritage without having any desire to belong to a church. For me any theological 'canon within the canon' which narrows down and standardizes, no longer allowing itself to be questioned by the wealth of the Bible, and a magisterium which decrees what correct interpretation of the Bible is, without allowing itself to be qualified and corrected by the Bible, are not true to the gospel. As a Protestant exegete I want to give the biblical texts the opportunity to say all that they have to say, even if it goes against us and our churches." (pp. 305-306)

Popular posts from this blog

A Hitchhiker's Guide to Jesus, Bruce Fisk

Image
I have just finished Bruce Fisk's enjoyable and fun A Hitchhiker's Guide to Jesus: Reading the Gospels on the Ground (Baker Academic, 2011). I saw the book in a Baker Academic announcement a couple weeks ago, and since I am teaching a course on Jesus and the Synoptic Tradition this coming fall, I thought I should check it out (not to mention that Bruce Fisk teaches at my alma mater Westmont College). After reading the first chapter, I was hooked and knew that I would be placing the book on the required reading list for my course. When my copy first arrived, I read through the comments from an impressive list of academics and was a bit skeptical of what seemed like overly positive praise. Rereading those comments now, they are right on. For example, Gary Burge states: "Bruce Fisk has possibly written the most creative, fascinating, and informed book on the Gospels in a generation..." For me, what makes this book so appealing is the way in which Fisk weaves together
Read more

Enoch Seminar 2011, Milan: 2 Baruch and 4 Ezra: Final Schedule

The finalized schedule for the Enoch Seminar in Milan has recently been posted. Links to most of the papers have been made available, although access is restricted to attendees. One of the Enoch Seminar traditions is that no papers are read at the conference. The attendees are to read all of the papers (yes, all of the papers) ahead of time. The sessions at the conference sessions are given to a brief summary of the papers and to significant discussion. Seems like a much more enjoyable and interesting way to run a conference, especially one located in Italy.
Read more