Carol Swenson
Admin
Member # 6929
|
posted
Basic Theology
The Question of Authority
Authority constitutes the foundational principle in the study of theology. Presumably all who operate within the broadest concept of “Christian” theology would acknowledge the authority of God as the supreme norm for truth. However, how the authority of God is conceived and expressed varies considerably within the “Christian” spectrum.
AUTHORITY IN CONSERVATISM
In conservatism the basis of authority is external to man and objective.
A. Conservative Catholicism
In Roman Catholicism authority ultimately rests in the church itself. To be sure the Bible is believed, but it must be interpreted by the church. Furthermore, the traditions of the church are, along with the Bible, a source of divine revelation. Ecumenical councils and popes have from time to time made pronouncements that are considered infallible and therefore binding on church members.
The Eastern church is similar as far as finding its authority in tradition, the church itself, and the Bible. Even though evangelicals reject tradition as authoritative, it should be recognized that Catholicism’s authority is not found in man, as liberalism teaches.
B. ![[Smile]](smile.gif) Conservative Protestantism
“Conservative” eliminates liberalism’s humanistic and subjective bases of authority, and “protestantism” removes the church as a base of authority. So one would agree that “orthodoxy is that branch of Christendom which limits the ground of religious authority to the Bible” (Edward John Carnell, The Case for Orthodox Theology [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969], p. 13). The Scriptures contain the objective revelation of God and are therefore the basis of authority for the conservative Protestant.
To be sure, understanding God’s revelation in the Bible involves using the rational processes of a redeemed mind, a commitment of faith in matters not revealed or not understood, a dependence on the teaching ministry of the Holy Spirit, a conscience clear before God, and some insight into the lessons of history.
Sometimes in practice, though not in theory, conservatives can and do deny that the Bible is their sole basis of authority.
(1) In practice, some traditions or denominations give their creeds coordinate authority with the Bible. Creeds can provide helpful statements of truth; but creeds can never be the authoritative judge of truth. Credal statements must always be considered fallible, in need of possible revision, and subservient to biblical authority.
(2) In practice, some groups give tradition and accepted practice coordinate authority with the Bible. A church has a divine mandate to set authoritative guidelines for its members (Heb. 13:7, 17), but these too are fallible, in need of periodic revision, and always subservient to biblical authority.
(3) In practice, some conservatives make religious experience authoritative. Healthy experience is the fruit of allegiance to biblical authority, but all experiences must be guided, governed, and guarded by the Bible. To make experience normative and authoritative is to commit the same error as liberalism by replacing an objective criterion with subjective existentialism.
AUTHORITY IN LIBERALISM
Subjectivism stands as the hallmark of liberalism though the focus of that subjectivism may vary with different people. The Word of God includes “any act of God by which communication occurs between God and man” (L. Harold DeWolf, The Case for Theology in Liberal Perspective [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1959], p. 17). That communication comes through human reason, feelings, or conscience.
A. Reason
Reason has always occupied a dominant place in liberal thought. Of course it is within the sphere of reason that concepts are formed which are the basis of communication from one person to another. Reason is a necessary channel for giving and receiving truth, and the evangelical recognizes that. But liberalism has certainly made human reason the judge of truth, and often the creator of truth. Reason becomes autonomous, governed by no higher or outside authority, but also severely limited by its finitude and fallibility.
B. Feelings
As a reaction against rationalism, Schleiermacher (1768-1834) developed his theology of feeling. He emphasized the analysis of religious experience and based religion on feeling or awareness. In effect, theology became anthropology and psychology. Because of this, Karl Barth considered Schleiermacher to be the epitome of religious liberalism.
C. Conscience
This form of liberalism emphasizes conscience as the basis of authority. Our knowledge is unreliable and limited, so the basic moral instincts of the human soul become the basis for authority. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was the leader in this form of thought. Once again, theology had become anthropology.
In all forms of liberalism, human nature in one aspect or another is the source of religious truth. The Bible, then, is viewed as the product of human reasoning containing man’s thoughts about God, himself, and this world. It records the historical development of man’s religious experiences and beliefs, and is not, as conservatives believe, the record of a message from a transcendent God who broke into the course of history.
AUTHORITY IN NEOORTHODOXY
Neoorthodoxy has sometimes been classed with liberalism and sometimes with conservatism. The reason for this confusion is that, on the one hand, it broke with liberalism by insisting that God, not man, must initiate revelation (and thus seemed to be conservative); while, on the other hand, it continued to teach liberal views concerning the Bible (and thus seemed to be liberal).
The basis of authority in neoorthodoxy, at least as expressed by Karl Barth (1886-1968), is the Word. However, the Word is mainly Christ. The Bible witnesses to the Word, and does so fallibly, and Christian proclamation is a word about the Word.
The sovereign God took the initiative in revealing Himself, centering primarily in the revelation in Christ. The years of Christ’s life exhibited the epitome of revelation, and His death was the climax of revelation. The Bible witnesses to the revelation of God, even though it is interpreted by all the canons of liberalism. The Bible, then, has no absolute authority, but only instrumental authority, since it serves as the fallible instrument by which we encounter Christ the Word. And it is that encounter of faith at the point of “crisis” in which God communicates Himself. That is absolute truth.
Though neoorthodoxy seeks objectivity in God’s sovereign initiative, it practices subjectivism in the experiences of faith’s encounters. Even though the Bible is involved in those experiences, it is not allowed to be the ultimate judge of those experiences. Neoorthodoxy lacks an external, objective standard of authority.
Posts: 6787 | From: Colorado | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged | 
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
