Hello George,
-----Original Message-----
From: george murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
[portions deleted]
Having said that - sure, the church is an institution of human
beings who are tempted to use scripture to defend the status quo. It's
significant though that the primary challenge to such a tendency, the
Reformation of the 16th century, was based on an appeal to scripture against
those who thought that the church had other sources of authority.
The primary concern is not challenges to the boundaries of the canon
itself: Luther's opinions about James or Revelation & differences about the
status of the Apocrypha, e.g., don't really matter very much. What is of
greater concern is core teachings of the church - Christ, justification,
Trinity, &c. If there is no canon then one can invoke any texts or
"experiences" one wishes on the same level as John or Romans.
Appeal to "our experience of the Sacred" can be disastrous. That's
just what the Deutsche Christen did - & if there is no canon, who is to deny
them the sacredness of Blut und Boden?
------------------------------
Technically, any personal interpretation of Scripture is an "appeal to our
experience of the sacred". Does it not follow that this is precisely why
there are so many Christian factions around today, and seemingly growing?
And if so, the canon doesn't completely solve the problem of appealing to
experience, although it may serve to keep things partially under control.
Adrian.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Apr 09 2002 - 14:29:59 EDT