Clarity of Scripture: History, Theology & Contemporary Literary Studies, The

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Dec 2002 by Edwards, Richard M

The Clarity of Scripture: History, Theology & Contemporary Literary Studies. By James Patrick Callahan. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2001, 272 pp., $18.00 paper.

The perspicuity or clarity of Scripture has been discussed and disputed since the first century, but the Protestant Reformation asserted Scripture to be innately perspicuous and perspicuously understandable as the sole rule of faith and practice preeminent over the Church. By contrast, the Roman Catholic Church, via its commitment to an authoritative allegorical interpretive methodology interactive with its theological and philosophical "Tradition," asserted Scripture to be imperspicuous apart from the interpretive framework that was the Catholic Church itself, thereby affirming the preeminence of the Church over Scripture. By the seventeenth century, however, the burgeoning diversity of competing Protestant theologies arising from perspicuous Scripture made clear the irony of variant theologies uniformly arguing for scriptural perspicuity in the midst of their contrasting and even contradictory positions. The Clarity of Scripture rehearses these and other developments in its historical survey of the doctrine of scriptural perspicuity (part one), then attempts to develop a contemporary statement of scriptural perspicuity (part two).

James Callahan's development of this irony begins with an attempt to clarify clarity by clearly defining his terms; this includes an excellent analysis and later critique of the concept of authorial intent. He argues for an interactive and interlocking unity of text, reader, and reading that rejects the innate perspicuity of the text-what he terms "textual clarity." For Callahan, the original meaning-what Scripture meant-is no more important than what Scripture means to the reader. With the truths of Scripture not resident solely in Scripture but dependent on Christian readers ("one finds clearly in Scripture what is most congenial to the reader"; p. 207) and their varying perspectives ("our reading circumstances"; p. 207), Callahan's "clear" definition of terms results in a statement of scriptural perspicuity that is so obfuscated that each verse of Scripture may have an infinite number of meanings and truths all relative to the readers and the readers' response. Obviously, Callahan rejects the medieval and Reformation conviction that meaning and clarity reside innately in Scripture independent of its readers.

Callahan's historical survey provides a much-needed framework for the theological study of the doctrine of scriptural perspicuity. The weakness of this survey is that it is written in such a way as to obscure the differences and emphasize the correlatives that support Callahan's opaque contemporary statement of scriptural perspicuity. Although the perspectival and selective use of historical theology to prepare the ground on which one builds a doctrinal position is not new to theology, this approach lessens the usefulness of Callahan's historical survey as a framework for understanding the development of claritas Scripturae Sacrae and the role it played in the development of variant dogmatic, biblical, and systematic theologies within Christendom in general and Protestantism in particular.

An example of Callahan's selective history is seen in his discussion of the "letter" sense of Scripture versus the "spirit" sense of Scripture. He sees a growing de-emphasis on the "literal" or "plain" sense of Scripture and a growing emphasis on the reader's perspectival understanding of Scripture. Historians like Callahan not only filter their information and views through their personal worldview or historical paradigm, but they see or read the present in the past. From this perspective, current events are inevitable in light of the past; in other words, the effect interprets the cause. For Callahan, the effeet is a perspectival perspicuity, and the cause is a growing rejection of an innately perspicuous Scripture containing innate discoverable divine truths in favor of the truths discoverable only in the interplay of the text, the reader, and the reader's circumstances, i.e. perspectival perspicuity.

Callahan's summary of the competing interpretive methodologies of the Syrian School at Antioch (literal) and the Alexandrian School (allegorical) is quite good. His synopsis of Augustine focuses on the theoretical views of Augustine concerning the "letter and spirit" of Scripture while virtually ignoring Augustine's development of the interpretive principles (e.g. favoring clearer passages over obscure passages) used to achieve and enhance corporate clarity. Furthermore, Callahan's medieval history is woefully lacking with only a short and overly simplified reference to Aquinas. The discussion of Zwingli's position is adequate, but Callahan's review of Erasmus and Luther is an oversimplification of both the issues on which they disputed and Luther's doctrine of perspicuity. Callahan does not mention Luther's "propositional perspicuity," gives short shrift to the indigenous English development of this propositional perspicuity (although he tangentially refers to Tyndale and the Westminster Confession of Faith [WCF]), and mentions Calvin only in passing.