83
Institute for Christian Teaching
Education Department of Seventh-Day Adventists
SEEKING WISDOM FROM THE PAST
IN CHURCH HISTORY
By
Pietro
Ciavarella
Villa Aurora Seminary
533-03 Institute for
Christian Teaching 12501 Old Columbia Pike Silver Spring, MD 20904
USA
Prepared for the
International Seminar on the Integration
of Faith and Learning
July 2003
84
OUTLINE
IN CHURCH HISTORY”
I. Introduction
II. Why we should learn from the past: Some
principles
1. The
past is like a booster-seat. It helps us see farther than we could on our own.
2. We
need not re-invent the wheel.
3. We
can use the past as a filter or grid for present reflection and theologizing.
III. How we can learn from the past: Some
criteria
1. A
Basic Procedural Guideline: Read sympathetically.
2. An
Essential Doctrinal Criterion: Sola
scriptura
3. A
Valuative Principle: Philippians 4:8
4. A
Common Sense Dictum: Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater.
IV. What we can learn from the past: Two
examples
1.
Learning Humility from the Benedictine Rule (6th century)
2.
Learning What Really Matters from Thomas à Kempis (15th century)
V. Conclusion
85
I. Introduction
This essay seeks to explore
learning from the past. One of my premises is that we can learn from the past.
Another is that there will be much from the past that we will not find
particularly useful.[1] In
regard to prophecy, Paul told the Thessalonians: “Test everything. Hold on to
the good” (1 Thessalonians
It goes without saying that looking
for wisdom from the past is no easy matter. In fact Wilfred M. McClay in his
recent essay, “Tradition, History, and Sequoias”, has stated frankly: “Looking
for wisdom in the past is a very complicated matter”.[3]
Nonetheless McClay believes that the enterprise is possible and worthwhile. I
concur.
86
Anglican
historian
In the body of this essay I will
survey three main issues: (1) Why we should learn from the past: Some
Principles; (2) How we can learn from the past: Some Criteria; and (3) What we
can learn from the past: Two Examples.
II. Why we should learn from the
past: Some principles
Some people have no patience with
the past. After all the past is past. But such a
perspective is unfortunate. An understanding of the past is vitally relevant to
our present and future. In this regard Arthur W. Holmes argues that a “[c]ritical appreciation of the past ... will free us from the
present to see creative possibilities for the future.”[5] The
past will help us ‘get past’ our sectarian vision and enable us to get a truer
perspective on things.[6] In
this regard perhaps we might coin an historical corollary to Holmes’s
oft-repeated adage, “All Truth is God’s Truth”: All Christian History
Belongs to All of the Church.
87
Here are
three additional principles as to why we should seek wisdom from the past.
1. The past is like a booster-seat. It helps us see farther than we
could on our own. In this
regard our approach to the past should be that of Bernard of Chartes (died c. 1130):
We are like
dwarfs sitting on the shoulders of giants. We see more than they do, indeed
even farther; but not because our sight is better than theirs or because we are
taller than they. Our sight is enhanced because they raise us up and increase
our stature by their enormous height.[7]
In every human undertaking we learn
from others. Mentors, internships, apprenticeships, and similar all exist so we
can learn from those who have more experience than we do. It certainly may
happen that some day in the future we will disagree with our mentors. But at
least in the early phases of our inquiry we rely on others to help us see more
clearly. History can have such a function in the acquisition of wisdom.
2. We need not re-invent the wheel. It goes without saying that every generation must evaluate what it
inherits from those who have gone before them. But adhering to sola scriptura doesn’t necessitate that we
approach every issue from scratch. Others have done spadework which we can
benefit from. Others have developed doctrinal formulations which may very well
be useful to us.
Inquiring into the work done by
those who have gone before us will help us ration our energy wisely. In this
regard, a knowledge of Church History will help us to
‘redeem the time’. Appropriating wisdom from the past in a discerning manner
will enable us to expend our scholarly efforts on those things which most
urgently merit our attention.
In fact the past has much guidance
to give us regarding present challenges. As we begin to read Church History, we
have the pleasant—-and for some people unexpected—-realization that the past is
replete with the same types of things we face in the present. But should this surprise
us? Did not Solomon state plainly that “What has been will be again, what has
been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun” (Ecclesiastes
1:9).
88
3. We can use the past as a filter or grid for present reflection and
theologizing. Suppose, for
example, we are interested in understanding the relationship between faith and
‘pagan’ learning. The issue is no doubt important. But it is not a new issue
for the Church. Many of our predecessors have struggled with this same issue
and, as one can imagine, they have come up with a wide range of proposed
solutions. Be this as it may, Justin Martyr’s (c. 110-165) affirmation of pagan learning and Tertullian’s
(c. 160-240) rejection of pagan
learning set the two poles within which our reflection can fruitfully take
place.
We also know
that the Jehovah’s Witnesses deny the deity of our Lord Jesus. But this problem
did not first originate in a late nineteenth century American sectarian
movement. The Church has already seen and dealt with such an approach to the
person of Christ. This being so, wouldn’t it be wise to look into the
arguments, Scriptural and related, that our ‘Fathers’ used in combating Arianism in the fourth century? Perhaps we might be able to
glean wisdom from them. The wisdom we find in the past, in these and other
cases, can act as a grid for our present theologizing.
In this section we’ve seen that
there are many reasons for paying attention to the past. The past helps us see
better, enables us to direct efficiently our limited energies, and provides a
filter for our present reflection. Far from being outdated, the past can be a
valid guide to helping us keep up to date in our present task of truth-seeking.
This being so, I don’t consider the following to be an overstatement: Should
we choose to turn a deaf ear to the past, we would do so at our own risk.
III. How we can learn from the
past: Some criteria
Having discussed why we should learn from the past, we
now turn to consider how we can learn
from the past. In this section we will briefly present the following items: (1)
a basic procedural guideline; (2) an essential doctrinal criterion; (3) a valuative principle which will guide us to concentrate on
the useful elements of the past; and (4) a common sense dictum.
89
1. A Basic Procedural Guideline: Read
sympathetically.
Earlier we mentioned that there are
many things in the past we don’t agree with and we don’t like. This fact could
cause us to be biased, unless we adopt a guideline for our first encounter with
all historical theology. Such a guideline might be formulated as an answer to
the question, What is our first task in reading
history? Our first task in reading
history is to understand whom or what it is we are dealing with. This means
we must read history ‘sympathetically’.
In other words, in this phase we
want to give the benefit of the doubt to the ancient authors in question.
Before proceeding, we must understand their
thought. This means we must suspend judgment, at least for now. In addition, we
must also be sure to contexualize the document we are
reading. The questions: “What called this document forth?” “Was it written as a
reaction to something?” “How was it seen at the time of writing” “Are there
things we need to understand from the document’s original language?” and
related questions will be useful during this phase.
This all means that even when studying Arius’s (c. 250 336) reprehensible Christology or Pelagius’s tragically deficient anthropology and doctrine
of grace, we must listen ‘sympathetically.’ Only in this way can we have an
accurate picture of the person or movement under examination.
Once we’ve understood the
historical personages or questions on their own terms, we are able to begin our
task of critique and/or appropriation.
2. An Essential Doctrinal Criterion: Sola Scriptura
This is the point where the study
of Church History intersects most closely with the discipline of Systematic
Theology. The Christian historian is not a clinical, dispassionate observer.[8]
Certainly the Christian historian’s task entails no less than accurate
description of historical-theological phenomena. We’ve already stated above
that the first task of the historian is to get the facts straight. But the
Christian historian’s task, while including this, goes beyond it as well.
Following the initial stage of understanding, the Christian historian will
proceed to the stage of critique and/or appropriation.
90
At this point the
question is no longer, What happened? Now the question
becomes, Of the things that happened, which ones are
true according to Holy Scripture. We
are referring, of course, to the need of applying at this point the doctrine of
sola scriptura. The Christian historian
cannot shirk his or her duty of examining the writings of the past on the basis of The Writing par excellence.
Here the historian will set the
findings of the past next to the Bible to see how they stand up. Some things,
such as Arius’s Christology, will be found to
constitute error. Others will be held to be accurate, that is, in accord with
Scripture. While yet others will be found to be a mixture of truth and error.
The critique effected at this point by the principle
of sola scriptura will determine what from the
past is truly wisdom and, thus, can be appropriated by Christians today.
3. A Valuative Principle: Philippians 4:8
Here I
propose a principle which can be employed in regard to the multifaceted
‘non-doctrinal’ material found in the writings of the past. At times, in their
reflections on Christian truth, writers employ creative metaphors, suggestive
images, and other such devices. In these cases it may not be so easy to assess
their production on the basis of the essential (evaluative) Scripture-principle
which we just now discussed. The things that some writers say certainly aren’t
found in Scripture, but neither do they seem to go against Scripture. We might
say that these things are extra-Scriptural though not anti-Scriptural.
What do we do with such material? Should it be appropriated or discarded?
My suggestion is that material such
as this be seen and subsequently appropriated
for what it is: useful reflection from the past which may contain edifying
insights for the present.[9] In
this regard I propose we apply the principle found in Philippians 4:8. Here
Paul writes:
91
Whatever is true, whatever is
honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is
of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise,
let your mind dwell on these things.
This
principle will aide us in appropriating edifying material from the
past—material which may not lend itself to ready examination by the
Scripture-principle.
Two examples should help clarify
what I mean. In the Western Church Ephraem Syrus (c. 306-373) is not a well
known personage on par with figures such as Augustine of Hippo (354-430) or
Martin Luther (1483-1546). Nonetheless this fourth century Syrian Christian was
a Biblical exegete and ecclesiastical writer whose influence was felt on both
Syrian and Greek Hymnology. So gifted was Ephraem Syrus, in fact, that he
earned the epithet the Lyre of the Holy
Spirit. Below I quote a beautiful passage from one of his homilies. I feel
that his reflections can be appropriated, even though they are not--strictly
speaking--entirely Scriptural. Some (I believe) are extra-Scriptural without
being, however, anti-Scriptural.
This is the
Son of the carpenter, Who skillfully made His cross
a bridge over Sheol that swallows up all, and brought over mankind into the
dwelling of life. And because it was through the tree
that mankind had fallen into Sheol, so upon the tree they passed over
into the dwelling of life. Through the tree then in which
bitterness was tasted, through it also sweetness was tasted; that we
might learn of Him that among the creatures nothing resists Him. Glory be to You, Who did lay Your cross as a bridge over
death, that souls might pass over upon it from the dwelling of the dead to the
dwelling of life![10]
Here Ephraem
Syrus strings together things associated with wood: Jesus was the son of a
carpenter, he died on a cross, the Fall came about
through a tree. And in so doing, he and creates a pleasing meditation on the
beauty and excellency of Christ. The concatenation is
not found in Scripture; it is Ephraem Syrus’s
creation. Nonetheless it doesn’t strike me as going against Scripture. The
Philippians 4:8 Principle enables us to appropriate this passage as past
reflection useful for our present edification.
92
A second example
might be taken from texts that center on topics about which Scripture does not
abound. Fasting is one such topic. As we search the Scripture, we don’t find as
many practical guidelines on fasting as we might desire. But is it wrong to
inquire into what other Christians have said on this important topic? What tips
and practical insights might we glean from them?
My assumption is that we have much
to learn from them--things that will be extra-Scriptural, though not
necessarily anti-Scriptural. Thus, it isn’t surprising that in a recent book on
fasting, written by rigorous Biblical theologian John Piper,[11] we
find an appendix which includes material on fasting taken from various figures
of Church History (e.g., Ignatius, late first century Bishop of Antioch;
Augustine of Hippo [354-430]; Cyril of Jerusalem [315-386]; Martin Luther [1483-1546];
and John Calvin [1509-1564]). By applying the Philippians 4:8
Principle to these texts, we will be able to benefit from the insights of other
Christians in regard to non-essential matters.
4. A Common Sense Dictum.
But what are we to do when we find
ridiculous, objectionable, or even heretical material in our reading of
history, as we certainly will? If it is wrong for us to ignore the past, and
thus prove to be arrogant and overly self-reliant, God certainly doesn’t want
us to be gullible and believe everything we read. Here we should surely apply
to the historical-theological task John’s admonition to ‘test the spirits to
see whether they are from God’ (1 John 4:1). We are certainly not obligated to
appropriate everything we find in the past. Nor do we want to sugarcoat the
past and present it as something other than what it is. Gary Land writes:
We need to
demonstrate to our classes that history is not a cut-and-dried collection of
facts, but a multi-faceted story whose meaning is much contested and therefore
open to continued discovery and critical scrutiny. (Land, p
20.)
93
History is
multi-faceted and its protagonists are not lacking skeletons in their closets
(are any of our closets empty?). If we were to seek wisdom from the past only
in perfect persons, my estimate is that we’d end up with very little wisdom
indeed. The pool from which to draw would be miserly, not to say non-existent.
But we need not despair. A common
sense dictum can get us past this impasse. The dictum is this: We need not throw out the baby with the
bathwater. Church History is filled to overflowing with people who have
said marvelous things who have also said ridiculous[12] or
tragic things.[13] We can appropriate the
good and discard the rest. We need not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
In this section we have considered how we can learn from the past. Our
discussion has been guided by the following elements.
·
First, we
must suspend judgment in our initial approach to the reading of history. By
giving our sources ‘the benefit of the doubt’ in this way, our initial contact
with the sources of the past can be a ‘sympathetic’ reading.
·
From here,
however, we must move to the evaluative stage. Here the principle of sola scriptura enables us to discern truth
from error. It is in this stage that the task of the Christian historian and
Systematic theologian meet.
·
In the
third place we considered the application of Philippians 4:8 to help find
useful non-doctrinal material from Church History. This Pauline text will guide
us in gleaning edifying extra-Scriptural
material, which is not, however, anti-Scriptural.[14]
·
94
Lastly, we
discussed how to implement a common sense dictum to our task. In the History of
the Church, as in modern life, our criterion for usefulness can’t be
perfection. Thus we do well not to throw out the baby with the bathwater in our
appropriation of wisdom from the past.[15]
It might be useful to recap before
moving in to our third section. Our first two sections discussed, respectively,
why we should learn from the past, and
how do go about doing this. In this
final section we want to give concrete examples of some of the gems of wisdom
(the what) that can be ours from the past.[16]
We’ll limit ourselves to two examples. These examples will be taken from
influential sources which we, however, may not be used to frequenting.
IV. What we can learn from the
past: Two examples
1. Learning Humility from the Benedictine Rule
Can Protestants learn something
from Benedict of Nursia (
95
Benedict was a
Christian who was disgusted by the immorality he found when studying at
The Rule that Benedict composed for
his followers is not only the most famous Monastic Rule; it is also considered
‘one of the most influential documents in the history of
It goes without saying that from a
Protestant point of view the Benedictine Rule has not a few problems. One
example is in regard to the issues of personal freedom and authority in the
monastery. The monk is allowed no personal possessions, not even books or
writing materials, unless the Abott has given his
approval (chapter 33). In fact, one has the distinct impression that in this
Rule, as in the larger monastic movement, the Abott
has come dangerously close to requiring the full obedience that is due only to
Christ. In addition the document itself comes dangerously close to taking
Scripture’s authoritative place.[18]
Thus here we are certainly not
advocating a return to the anti-Scriptural principles found in this Rule.
Nevertheless, I am convinced that there is wisdom in this document that we can
appropriate for our spiritual edification. Several emphases found in the Twelve
Stages of Humility (a sub-section of the larger Rule) are an example of this.
(From this point on, please keep your eye on what I enclose or do not enclose
in parentheses.)
96
The first
stage of humility reminds us of the importance of the ‘fear of the Lord’. The second
stage exhorts us not to love our own will nor to seek
to satisfy our own desires. (The third stage requires obedience to one’s
superior.) The fourth stage encourages us not to give up our
discipleship when we encounter difficulties or opposition from others. (The fifth
stage requires confession to the Abott.)
The sixth stage is
practically an application of Jesus’ words in Luke
The ninth stage wisely
exhorts us to hold our tongue (yet goes too far when it encourages speech which
is only in response to being spoken). The tenth stage has produced
anything but its desired effect when I’ve read it with my seminary students. A
monk is not to laugh easily or quickly. One is certainly curious as to what
historical circumstances elicited this specific prohibition. Whatever they may
be, in and of itself this counsel isn’t all wrong.
Aside from another reference to
refrain from laughter, the eleventh stage of humility contains much
wisdom. Indeed, if we applied it, it could greatly benefit both our
interpersonal relationships within the Christian community as well as our
Evangelistic witness without. In addition, it could probably also shorter and
cause to be more productive our committee meetings.
The eleventh
stage of humility for a monk is this: that, when he speaks, he does so with
kindness, without laughing, in a humble and serious manner. His words should be
few and reasonable and he should avoid raising his voice ... (cited in Lane
114).
I have put in parentheses, based on
the principle of sola scriptura, what I consider to be
negative aspects of the Twelve Stages of Humility of the Benedictine Rule. The
other items--those not found in parentheses--strike me as containing much
wisdom for us. And, in fact, one would have little trouble finding Biblical
references to support these strong
points, found--we must not
forget--in the Rule of ‘The Patriarch of Western Monasticism’. Thus we
certainly have things to learn from this highly influential document, even
though we find much in it we do not agree with. Nevertheless, there is no
reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
97
2. Learning What Really Matters from Thomas à
Kempis
I love learning and I don’t agree
with those who think research is detrimental to the spiritual life. If pursued
correctly, learning can facilitate our walk with Christ. If it becomes an idol
or a source of pride, however, it certainly can cause us to stumble. Perhaps we
can find wisdom from the past to help us keep learning it its rightful place.
In the century prior to the
Protestant Reformation Thomas à Kempis (c. 1380-1471) studied in
The Imitation of Christ is one of Christianity’s all time bestsellers.
By the end of the fifteenth century it had already gone through ninety-nine
editions and by now it has been reprinted more than two thousand times.[21] This
work is composed of four books. The first three will be more useful to
Protestants. They will be less attracted, however, to Book Four which speaks of
the ‘Sacrament of Holy Communion’ in a specifically Roman Catholic manner.
I feel The Imitation of Christ
is particularly useful in helping us ‘major on the majors’ in the spiritual
life. For example, it tells us how to live out our Christian spirituality in
practical ways. We must (1) be more interested in a sincere love for God and
not get excessively caught up in proper definition of terms (which certainly
has its rightful place!). And we must (2) correct our own faults and not be
overly interested in those of other people. The two quotations which follow
illustrate respectively these two gems of wisdom.
[1] What good can come from a discussion of God as a Trinity in learned
terms, if you lack humility and thus grieve God? Learning arguments doesn’t
cause a person to be holy and righteous, while a good life causes one to be
dear to God. I would rather feel conviction in my heart than be able to define
it. If you know the whole Bible by heart and all of the opinions of the various
scholars, what good would it do you without the love and grace of God? (Imitation 1:1; cited in Lane p 161).
[2] Try to be patient in putting up with the shortcomings and weaknesses of
other people, whatever they may be. You too have shortcomings that other people
have to put up with. If you aren’t able to make yourself the person you would
like to be, how can you expect others to be as you would want? We want
perfection in other people, yet we don’t correct our own defects.... It is
clear how rarely we apply to our neighbor the same standards which we use for
ourselves.
98
I think these quotations resonate
with all of us. The Imitation of Christ has the rare ability of causing
us to see the dangers of pride and arid learning. It also guides us to pursue
true spirituality and give learning its proper place of usefulness (and no more
than that).
Other examples of wisdom that we
can have from the past might be the following: (a) Doing theology with an
attitude of worship: Anselm of Aosta’s Theological
Method [1033-1109]; (b) Training children in the ways of the Lord: Martin
Luther’s Smaller Catechism; (c) Effective Church Leadership: Gregory the Great’s (c. 540-604) Pastoral
Rule; (d) Essential parameters for Orthodox reflection on the Trinity and
the Person of Christ: Wisdom from the Great Church Councils of the fourth and
fifth centuries (Nicea 325, Constantinople 381,
Ephesus 431, and Chalcedon 451); and (e) ‘What has
been believed everywhere, always, and by all’: Using the Canon of Vincent of Lérins (died before 450) as an aide in discerning the
useful from what may be merely passing spiritual fads.
V. Conclusion
At the beginning of this essay we
quoted Wilfred M. McClay: “Looking for wisdom in the past is a very complicated
matter”.[22] We also added that McClay,
nonetheless, believes that seeking wisdom from the past is possible and
worthwhile.
·
In the first
section of this essay we argued why
we should learn from the past. We might summarize this first section with the truism, the past has a lot to teach us. The past helps us
see farther and will perhaps enable us both to avoid making some mistakes in
the present as well as to plan better for the future.
·
In the second
section we sought aide as to the ‘complicated matter’ of seeking wisdom
from the past (the how). The four
principles we presented are designed to give us some guidance as we navigate in
the past. These principles should help us discern, in the lives of those who
have gone before us, what is true as opposed to false and useful as opposed to
less useful.
·
In the third
section we offered two examples of what
we can learn from the past.
o
99
Thomas à Kempis’s classic, The
Imitation of Christ, can guide us in majoring on the majors in the
spiritual life and keeping learning within its proper bounds. We saw that Book
Four of this classic, the section dealing with the Eucharist, will be less
useful to us.
o
We also
looked briefly at a document which goes back nearly a millennium before à Kempis’s classic. In the Benedictine Rule’s Twelve
Stages of Humility we found much that we did not want to appropriate. But we also saw that this Monastic Rule
contains wisdom even for those of us who are not Catholics. If we cannot
subscribe to giving full obedience to a spiritual leader, we can certainly be
enriched by regaining the Biblical emphases on obedience and humility. They too
have their rightful places alongside the great doctrines of grace and the love
of God, which we perhaps know better.
My hope is that those who read this
essay will continue to read Christian History and begin to mine for themselves jewels from a past, which belongs to all of the
church (see above). Indeed by learning from the past, as sketched above, I
suggest that we will be able to ‘test’ the past and ‘hold on to’ the much good
wisdom found in it (1 Thessalonians
Anselmo D’Aosta, S. [Anselm of Aosta, c. 1033-1109] Il Proslogio ed altri opuscoli, introduzione, traduzione e note a cura di Paolo Calliari e Luigi Ajme. Alba/Italy: Istituto Missionario Pia Società S. Paolo, 1944, pp 115-30, “Omelia IX—Assunzione di Maria Ss.a”.
Benne, Robert. Quality with Soul: How Six Premier Colleges and
Universities Keep Faith with Their Religious Traditions. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001.
Carson, D. A. The Gagging of God:
Christianity Confronts Pluralism. Leicester/England: Apollos,
1996.
Cornes, Andrew. Divorce and Remarriage: Biblical
Principles and Pastoral Practice.
Cross, F. L. and E. A.
Livingstone. The
100
Garber, Steven. Fabric
of Faithfulness: Weaving Together Belief and Behavior During
the University Years.
Holmes, Arthur F. The Idea
of a
Kaennel, Lucie. Lutero era Antisemita? [Was Luther Anti-Semitic?], with an
Introduction by Daniele Garrone.
Turin/Italy: Claudiana, 1999. (The French original is from
1997.)
Land, Gary. “Teaching History
Truthfully” Adventist Education February-March 2003: 17-23.
Lane, Tony. Compendio
McClay, Wilfred M. “Tradition, History, and
Sequoias” First Things March 2003: 41-46.
McGrath, Alister E. Le radici
della spiritualità
protestante [the original English title is Roots
that Refresh: A Celebration of Reformation Spirituality]. Turin/Italy:
Claudiana, 1996.
Marshall,
Master Christian Library,
The, version 5 (compact disc).
Piper, John. A Hunger for God: Desiring God
through Fasting and Prayer.
The Master Christian Library
.... See above Master
Christian Library, The.
Thomas,
[1] This means that inevitably the teacher of history will often deal with
things that he or she doesn’t like very much. Nonetheless, as Gary Land has
stated in his recent article, “Teaching History Truthfully” Adventist Education
February-March 2003: p 20: “Telling the truth about history is a moral
obligation that requires effort.” I am also assuming that, in essence,
“ancient” and “modern” human beings are no different.
[2] In his recent book, Sacred Marriage: What if God Designed Marriage
to Make Us Holy More Than to Make Us Happy? (Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), Gary Thomas has done an admirable job of showing what
the Christian tradition can teach us about the potential that marriage has for
making us more Christ-like. Thomas founded and directs a ministry called the
Center for Evangelical Spirituality. He states the mission of this ministry on
p 267 of Sacred Marriage: “My mission has been, and continues to be, to
integrate Scripture, church history, and the Christian classics, and then to
apply that wisdom to today. I am not as interested in breaking new ground as I
am in recapturing the contemporary relevance of old ground that has been forgotten .” Thomas’s book is a good example of how, why,
and what we can learn from the past.
Another example comes from a book by Alister E. McGrath, Le radici della
spiritualità protestante [the
original title in English is Roots that Refresh: A Celebration of
Reformation Spirituality] (Turin/Italy: Claudiana, 1996). McGrath believes
it is necessary for Evangelicals to re-appropriate the spirituality of the
Reformation. He guides his readers to understand Reformation spirituality by
illustrating it from the lives and writings of the major reformers.
[3] First Things March 2003: p 42.
[4] A brief note on sources is in order at this point. I often take dates
as well as historical and biographical data from the following two sources:
Tony Lane, Compendio del pensiero cristiano nei secoli [the original
title in English is The Lion Book of Christian Thought] (Formigine/Italy: Voce della Bibbia, 1994); and F. L. Cross and E. A. Livingstone, The
Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 2nd ed. (Oxford:
Oxford University, 1983). Since 1983 the
Lane discusses Barth’s view of history on pp
11-12.
[5] Arthur F. Holmes The Idea of a
[6] Perhaps this is the spirit of what Robert Benne, Quality with Soul:
How Six Premier Colleges and Universities Keep Faith with Their Religious
Traditions (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), p 203 is saying when he writes
the following in regard to three ‘Christian’ traditions: “Lutheran, Reformed,
and Catholic believers can give their own distinct twists to the tradition they
wish to pass along, but all benefit when they admit joyfully that the whole is
far richer than its parts.” Such a perspective, of course, can be affirmed,
provided that it does not promote a corollary, such as that ‘truth is arrived
at by addition’. The biblical perspective on truth is that truth is absolute,
even though our human capacity to understand and assimilate it is limited. D.
A. Carson’s The Gagging of God: Christianity Confronts Pluralism (Leicester/England:
Apollos, 1996) is very instructive on the whole issue
of post-modernism’s relativization of the truth.
[7] Lane pp 129-30 cites Bernard’s famous statement as found in John of
Salisbury (Metalogicon 3:4).
[9] This may be the place to state a basic difference of approach between
Roman Catholics and Evangelicals as to the role of the Church Fathers and other
ancient ‘authorities’. For an Evangelical, in principle, only Scripture is
fully authoritative. For Roman Catholics certain Fathers and Councils may have,
and Papal encyclicals do have, equal authority with Scripture. Thus one could
say that, in this sense, there are cases in which Roman Catholic doctrine is
not merely shaped by, but even bound
by, the past (i.e., select elements of Church History). Few of us, however,
would want to deny that Protestants are influenced by the past. The point in
question, however, is that in one case aspects of history are binding (e.g.,
Papal encyclicals for Roman Catholics), in the other aspects of history are
considered of paramount importance (e.g., many of the Trinitarian and
Christological formulations of the Ecumenical Councils of the fourth and fifth
centuries). Thus we can summarize by saying that for Protestants history can be
formative but not normative.
[10] Homily
on our Lord 4. Cited from The Master Christian Library, version 5 (compact disc) (Albany, Oregon: Ages
Software, 1997); I have modernized the language and added the underlining. Lane
p 49 also cites this text for the purposes of illustrating the thought of
Ephraem Syrus. How many of us have used, or seen used, the image of the
‘bridge’ in evangelism: Christ’s death bridges the gap between our sinfulness
and God’s holiness? Perhaps this idea isn’t as recent as we may have thought.
Ephraem Syrus was already using it in the fourth century!
[11] A Hunger for God: Desiring God
through Fasting and Prayer (Wheaton: Crossway, 1997).
The appendix is entitled “Quotes and Experiences” and is found on pp 183-210.
Piper relates the experiences of modern Christians as well.
[12] Anselm of Aosta,
[13] Martin Luther has been a help to countless Christians. We don’t ignore
the wisdom we can glean from him, even though he unfortunately said some
reprehensible things against the Jews. For discussion see Lucie Kaennel, Lutero era Antisemita? [Was Luther Anti-semitic?],
with an Introduction by Daniele Garrone
(Turin/Italy: Claudiana, 1999). The French original is from 1997.
[14] The application of these first three principles will also help us
develop a sense of discernment. We will get better and better not only at hearing and
appreciating ancient writers. We will also improve our ability to discern when
they’re on track and when they’re not.
[15] Thus while Adventists will not choose to endorse Augustine of Hippo’s
views, e.g., on predestination, they can gladly appropriate his views on moral
meaning. Steven Garber performs this operation of positive appropriation of
Augustine in regard to the notion of moral meaning on p 16 of his book Fabric
of Faithfulness: Weaving Together Belief and Behavior During
the University Years (Downers Grove: Intervarsity, 1996).
[16] In as much as twenty centuries of history have transpired since the
Ascension of Christ, it goes without saying that the following examples are
highly selective and could be multiplied. Indeed, I encourage the reading to
develop his or her own examples from the annals of Church History.
[17] In the Greek text the word translated ‘gift’ is charisma. The two ‘gifts’ in question are the married and celibate
state. If Catholics have glorified celibacy, Protestants can be guilty of
degrading it. Andrew Cornes, Divorce and
Remarriage: Biblical Principles and Pastoral Practice (Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1993) exhorts us to regain the Biblical balance. His practical
counsel for guiding young people to pursue service to God in either of the
legitimate gift-states is admirable (p 323): “[T]he Christian parent needs to
start teaching about singleness at an early age, because from our earliest
years we are taught to think that happiness can only be found in marriage.”
[18] See the third stage of humility (chapter 7): “The third stage of
humility consists in submission, for the love of God, to one’s own superior in
complete obedience”; and the eighth stage of humility (chapter 7): “The eighth
stage of humility for a monk is that he do nothing that is not authorized by
this communal ‘Rule’ nor by the example of his superiors” (cited from Lane
114).
[19] Geert de Groote
(1340-1384) was a pioneer in the Brothers of the Common Life. Thomas à Kempis
was born in Kempen (near
[20] Some contest that à Kempis wrote The Imitation of Christ.
Nonetheless, scholarly consensus is agreed in attributing this spiritual
classic to him. The document’s intrinsic value would remain, however, whether
or not the actual author was à Kempis.
[21] Lane 161. See this same page for a summary of the contents of The
Imitation of Christ.
[22] First Things March 2003: p 42.