WHAT EVANGELICALS AND LIBERALS CAN LEARN FROM THE CHURCH FATHERS

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Mar 2006 by Hall, Christopher A

We might sum up by thinking of the varied canonical traditions as different elements in the production of a grand symphony. The music which results is the music of salvation which naturally transposes itself into hymns of praise. Some of the canonical traditions, like the water, oil, bread, and wine of the sacraments, represent various instruments in the orchestra of the Church. Some, like Fathers and bishops, represent various players. Some, like liturgical material, represent the scores, which are best followed according to the programme notes which accompany them. Everyone involved in the orchestra must approach his or her role in a spirit of humility and dependence, of joy and praise. Most important of all, everyone must heed and be open to the leading of the great conductor, the Holy Spirit, who, through the use of the canonical traditions of the Church, creates within the participants the melody of Christ the Saviour, a music which leads ineluctably into the unfathomable, unspeakable mystery of the living God.27

These diverse elements together make up the tradition of the Church, and we will want to attend to the whole as we proceed to investigate other matters.

2. The authority of tradition. The importance of authority structures outside the canon of Scripture, yet supporting and subservient to that same canon, became increasingly clear as various groups such as the Gnostics proposed ideas and practices that threatened the heart of the gospel. Indeed, many of our greatest heretics were committed Bible thumpers. Irenaeus's Gnostic opponents, for example, were more than willing to interpret canonical texts, but their interpretations effectively scrambled the gospel message, making it almost unrecognizable.

As we have seen, Irenaeus was convinced the Gnostics "disregard the order and connection of the Scriptures, destroying the truth" (1.8.1).28 Imagine, Daniel Williams comments, "a beautiful mosaic of a king studded with jewels (i.e. the Bible) which is then perversely dismembered and rearranged to look like a dog or fox (Gnostic interpretations)."29 Irenaeus believed the only way to insure that the Church discerned such distortions in biblical interpretation was by broadening the Church's authoritative interpretive grid. In Williams's words, "Irenaeus concludes that one cannot proceed with proofs from Scripture without resorting to a reference outside of it."30

Athanasius, for instance, turned to the worship of the Church-part of the rule of faith-as he debated with his Arian opponents concerning the Bible's teaching regarding the deity of Christ. Athanasius contended the Arian interpretation of Scripture failed to integrate plausibly with Arian practices in worship. How could Arian Christians worship Christ, an act that was "indeed blasphemous, if Christ is a creature, however elevated he may be. Yet Christ must be worshiped," Athanasius insisted, as the Ariane themselves acknowledged. Thus, the Church's worship and liturgy provided an indispensable lens for discerning the cracks in the Arian interpretation of Scripture, the same interpretation the Arians were relying on for their theological model.31