Deep Church and Bible Reading
21 May 2007
Remembering Our Future
‘Deep Church’ is about remembering our past in order to face our future. At the heart of the ‘Deep Church’ conversation lies the attempt to reconnect with “a common Christian tradition from the apostles to the councils, creeds, and writings of the fathers of the early church” (Remembering Our Future, xvi). But, very importantly, “The vision for a deep church is neither an attempt to simply restate or repristinate the Christian tradition, this is tantamount to ancestor worship; nor does it take its bearings from the emerging culture, to do this is simply to assimilate the prevailing hegemony; rather, to be a deep church means to stand on the cusp or the breaking point of both the Christian tradition and the emerging culture, deeply rooted in the former while fully engaged in the latter” (Remembering Our Future, xviii).
To a charismatic evangelical, such as myself, this is an incredibly exciting vision. I was trained, as many good charismatics are, to reject anything to do with tradition (we follow the Spirit, not the traditions of men!) and as a good evangelical I saw no point in getting to grips with the story of the Church – all I needed was the Bible. If I read the Bible and was full of the Spirit what else could I need? Thank God that many charismatic evangelicals are now coming to see just how naïve and shallow such thinking is. If we are to read Scripture aright we most certainly do need to be led by the Spirit but we need to learn how to do this by learning from the past.
Reading the Bible With Giants
So what might the ‘Deep Church’ conversation contribute to the renewal of Scripture reading? The book, Remembering Our Future, suggested four things to me.
1. Reading with the Rule of Faith
(Andrew Walker’s essay, “Deep Church as Paradosis: On Relating Scripture and Tradition” and D.H. Williams’ book, Evangelicals and Tradition)The early Christians very quickly learned that having the right scriptures was no guarantee that what one ‘got out of them’ was from God. Various Gnostic groups arose and they used the same scriptural texts as the proto-orthodox and yet drew radically different conclusions from them. Charismatics should pay close attention! The Church saw that reading the texts aright was as important as having the right texts. The common mind of the proto-orthodox Christians was that Scripture should be interpreted according to ‘the Rule of Faith’. The Rule of Faith was simply a summary of the key Christian beliefs that had been passed down through the churches set up by the apostles. It was the common faith of the Church. Its shape was configured around the triune God – Father, Son and Spirit – as revealed in the story of Jesus: born, crucified, buried, resurrected and ascended. Any interpretation of Scripture that does not accord with this Christian revelation of God is ruled out. But, lest anyone think such a hermeneutic stifling, this still leaves plenty of scope for many diverse Christian readings of the Bible.
Reading Scripture through tradition is a safeguard against error but, more than that, it can actually open up texts in amazing new ways. Consider the following example (not from the book):
There is an ancient service performed in the Western Church during Holy Week called Tenebrae (meaning ‘shadows’). It is a very solemn service remembering and lamenting the death and burial of Christ. During Tenebrae there are several Bible readings from the book of Lamentations. Now Lamentations is all about lamenting the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in the 6th Century BC. It is about siege, famine, massacre, exile, and profound grief. Jesus is not the city of Jerusalem so why on earth did the Church come to link Lamentations with Christ’s death and burial? I suggest that they were reading the book with the Rule of Faith and this allowed the text to have applications beyond those imagined by the original author(s). And I think they were right. If, as the NT declares, Jesus is the Jewish Messiah and thus represents the story of Israel, Jerusalem and its Temple in his own story, then to see the death of Jesus as linked to the ‘death’ of Israel, Jerusalem and the Temple makes sense. It opens up new ways of seeing Lamentations (through the cross) and new ways of seeing the cross (through Lamentations). Lamentations becomes, as in the Tenebrae service, Holy Saturday literature. No biblical critic would think to read Lamentations in that way and yet it is just one example of how the Rule of Faith might open old texts in fresh ways.
2. Reading with the Giants
Increasing numbers of Christians are rediscovering what our ancestors knew well – that Church history is full of inspiring examples of how biblical texts were interpreted. Whilst we must not simply replicate the ways in which, say, Irenaeus, Origen, Chrysostom, Aquinas, Luther, or Calvin read texts we would be extremely arrogant if we thought we had nothing to learn from them. These men, and many others, were prayerfully immersed in the biblical text and in the history of its interpretation. God spoke to his people through their expositions of the Bible. (The most helpful, accessible and practical introduction to getting into this is David Parris’ new book Reading the Bible With Giants: How 2000 Years of Biblical Interpretation Can Shed New Light on Old Texts.)
Perhaps I can illustrate this with Lamentations. Lamentations 3:1-18 contains the gritty lament of an individual man who is participating in the exilic sufferings of Jerusalem. In the sixteenth century St. John of the Cross saw it as the perfect description of what he called “the dark night of the soul” – times of extreme spiritual despair that believers can face. This very helpfully allows Christian believers to map their own experiences onto those of this ancient resident of Jerusalem.
3. Reading with Prayer
(Ben Quash’s essay, “‘Deep Calls to Deep’: Reading Scripture in a Multi-Faith Society”)
Ben Quash reminds us of classical Christian methods of engaging the Bible and these can be deeply revitalizing to evangelicals brought up with the more ‘intellectual’ approach of daily Bible notes and expository sermons (though I am not knocking those approaches). Quash reminds us of the Benedictine practise of Lectio Divina in which a Bible passage is read slowly, meditatively, repetitively and prayerfully. In this way it is allowed to sink in to the soul and to spark off prayer. Such ancient ways of hearing God’s address are ripe for revival amongst evangelicals – not to replace but to supplement traditional evangelical ways of reading.
4. Reading in Contemporary Community
(Andrew Rogers’ essay, “Reading Scripture in Congregations: Towards an Ordinary Hermeneutics”)
Tradition can fossilize and die and is kept fresh and alive through a never-ending engagement with concrete, contemporary contexts (Hey Mum! I can alliterate!). Living tradition, as Paul Ricoeur noted, has an aspect of sedimentation as each generation adds to the story but, if it is to remain alive, each generation must receive the tradition in innovative ways. Andrew Roger’s chapter very helpfully illustrates this dynamic. So our Bible reading must engage with contemporary culture and the lives of ordinary contemporary Christians. If it does not, it will die.
To illustrate, one last time, with Lamentations: some contemporary Christians have used the book of Lamentations to try and reinvigorate the practise of lament within the Church. The brutal, in your face, honesty of the book has proved a spiritual life-saver for some who find that at times Christian worship can tend towards the unreality of wonderland and fail to embrace the reality of pain.
Personal reponse
My response, then, to the ‘Deep Church’ vision explored in Walker and Bretherton’s excellent new book is, ‘Thank God!’
Dr Robin Parry is Editorial Director for Paternoster, publishers of Remembering our Future
Your response:
- what do you think of Robin’s piece – what inspires/excites you?
- do you follow any of these practices already? Any similarities/differences you would draw out?If so what impact has it had on your communities journey of faith? What advice would you give?
- Would you like to start trying anythin Robin suggests? If so what questions/thoughts do you have?
- What other practices do you engage in reading the bible from your own tradition? What is their origin/context? How does that practice impact/affect community?
- Any resources, books, blogs, websites etc you would suggest?
Tagged: bible, spiritual practice
10 comments
Trackback
Comment by Marc
10.56 am on 21 May 2007
I have always found reading the bible difficult for a couple reasons:
Understanding the meaning correctly, even one verse may need investigating and then i’m into who has written what about this verse, then how does that tie in with this passage and relate to this book of the bible.
So I tend to read books about certain aspects of the bible by Authors both old and new that have been recomended or that I trust, this of course means that I do not find myself locked into one tradition and then this of course leads me into other traditions and I feel gives me a wider experience of the body of Christ which if I am really honest I love.
Being non-denominational has its advangtages, I don’t close my mind to somethging because it’s catholic or anglican. It seems to me that if we are to explore deep church we must go forward with an open mind and try to put any preconcieved ideas aside.
At my home church we use many different aspects of the wider church tradition, especially within our services that fall outside sundays. Good friday, ash wednesday and I believe more and more people are connecting to God through these practices, we use liturgy, imaginative reflection, worship both sung and spoken and much more.
Comment by steven hamilton
11.42 am on 21 May 2007
…they could never quite ‘train/indoctrinate’ me enough to stop engaging with tradition, so i went wandering into the wilderness for a while. i love what is flourishing in digging into deep church. lectio divina is something i picked up and held close and in balance with practicing the more academic and expository side of exploring our scriptures. it keeps me balanced, and that is a dunamic in my life that God has indeed blessed. as several of us have begun doing this together, i see it spreading into the local church here…and i see prayer and worship emerging…
peace
Comment by D.G. Hollums
12.02 pm on 21 May 2007
It is interesting that i just heard a pod/net cast from Wired parish of an interview with Peter Rollins (northern Ireland) author of the new book, “How (not) To Speak Of God”. And in the podcast he talks about being in Geneva last year at some square in the city. At one end of the square there is this great church…the church of St. Peter: a symbol of the institution, creeds, doctrine, and tradition of Christianity. But on the other side of the square was a statue of Jeremiah who was turning away from the church in shame and disgust……and when one stands in the center of the square, one must ask yourself, “whom do I run too?” It is in this center that we find ourselves in as pilgrims in this current age.
this is why I find myself drawn to deep church. It is wiling to not just stand in the center, but passionate about living there, growing there, and encouraging the universal church to struggle in that place.
Thanks Robin.
Comment by Marc
3.49 pm on 22 May 2007
DG – it is that centre ground that can be so confusing for some. People have a habit of seeing the Christian faith denominationally for instance.
I was told at a previous church that I should really make my mind up, amke a commitment to one or the other.
I was doing evening song with my father at his Anglican church and attending an evangelical church with my girlfriend on sundays.
Needless to say I didn’t choose. You see I am a Christian, I am not a Catholic or Evangelical. If the evangelical church suddenly dissapeared would I no longer be a Christian? no.
I am just a Christian, influenced by the wider body of Christ and I love it!
Comment by Robin Parry
4.14 pm on 22 May 2007
Marc
Thanks – I appreciate where you are coming from. There is something deeper – more fundamental – beneath our denominational differences. “Mere Christianity” as C.S. Lewis called it. And yet I am also happy for people to embrace the specific version of Christianity represented by their own tradition (Anglican, Baptist or whatever). I am sure that you would agree. Each tradition has its own distinctives and these can be very valuable. For me the question is whether these diverse traditions are open to learn from each other and, more importantly, from the Early Church. Such openness enriches denominational versions of the faith rather than turning everything into a murky grey. Deep Church Baptists will not be identical with Deep Church Anglicans or Deep Church Pentecostals! It also keeps denominational traditions open to critique so that they are never made impervious to correction.
Robin
Comment by Marc
1.41 pm on 24 May 2007
“Each tradition has its own distinctives and these can be very valuable. For me the question is whether these diverse traditions are open to learn from each other and, more importantly, from the Early Church. Such openness enriches denominational versions of the faith rather than turning everything into a murky grey.”
I tend to agree. The distinctiveness adds to the wider Body of Christ, and as you say enriches it. Yet I have come across prejudice and misunderstanding from most denominations to a degree and sadly this seems to prevent exploration and involvment in the wider body of Christ.
Comment by Robin Parry
2.37 pm on 24 May 2007
Marc
Sadly you are right although I suspect that such attitudes are becoming less frequent in this increasingly post-denominational age. My Granny would not go to any church that was not Church of England. She did not mind the others (apart from Catholics) but they did their thing and she did her thing. I have known people from different denominations (Methodist, Salvation Army, Presbyterian and House Churches) who have had similar attitudes. But I find them far less than I used to.
To my mind someone who models a desire to explore and be true to his own tradition but to do so in a way which is open to other traditions is the British theologian John Colwell. John is a Baptist and is keen to do his theology as a Baptist. But he is heavily inspired by sacramental Christian traditions such as Catholicism (Aquinas is a favourite theologian of his). His recent book “Promise and Presence” is a Baptist exploration of the seven Catholic sacraments! How crazy is THAT?! His latest book “The Rhythm of Doctrine” is a systematic theology built around the liturgical rhythms of the Christian Year (Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Lent, Easter, Pemtecost and All Saints Day) rather than the creeds (the normal basis for systematic theologies). Not many Baptists would think of doing THAT! Cool!
Robin
Comments won’t nest below this level.
Reply here
Pingback by We missed you all « a conversation on church
2.16 pm on 21 May 2007
[...] vows. It would’ve been nice if I didn’t CRY LIKE A LITTLE GIRL. Ah well. Ran across an good article (book promo really) talking about reading the bible “deeply”. They talk about Reading [...]
Comment by Dan Wilt
11.24 pm on 22 May 2007
Robin, it was a privilege to read this article, and a joy to find such resonance with what we do here in our essential work (I only reference it to say, bravo, and on with the tribe!). From the study of the scriptures, to Lectio Divine, to Ignatian prayer, to mining the riches of both church and cultural history, and its mothers and fathers, our results tell us that deepening work is beginning to yield a fresh vision of faith in postmodernity that could literally change the world – by the power of love and Holy Spirit enlivening that love with impacting power.
I appreciate the simple approach to complex ideas you present, and it makes me want to consider the book referenced as an introduction to new students to re-thinking our approach to the scriptures, and to historical process in the Body of Christ, with open arms.
Related to worship, we are using this sentence… “We exist to reinvest the energy of the contemporary worship leader with the riches of the ancient past, toward our emerging future.”
Remembering The Future resonates with these ideas.
It recalls to mind a favorite Madeleine L’Engel quote, “I can’t wait until I remember how to walk on water.” Eldredge suggested a few years ago that to “forget” is one of the clearest evidences that the world is fallen.
Thank you for calling us to remember.
Pingback by DanWilt.com :: Conversations On Emerging Worship
11.31 pm on 22 May 2007
[...] Deep Church and Bible Reading at Deep Church No Comments so far Leave a comment RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI Leave a comment Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong> [...]
Comments are now closed.