“All human knowledge takes the form of interpretation.” (Walter Benjamin) I had a conversation with a pastor yesterday on this very subject. Is it not the role of the pastor to be an interpreter? Surprisingly, some would have the pastor keep his interpretations to himself. The doctor, the lawyer and the politician are interpreters. I would try to explain the background of Benjamin’s quote, but that would be interpretation. ;-) Jack
FROM B.M. IN MI: Awesome! winning words.
FROM MOLINER G.S.: Pastors are essential to explaining the Bible.
FROM L.K. IN OH: ...and, I suppose, if you don't like your pastor's interpretation of things, find one more agreeable (if that's what it takes).....
FROM J.L. IN MI: It's the job of the pastor to be God's spokesperson. If that mean interpretations, so be it. It's very hard for congregation members to interpret their pastors sometimes. Actually, I think most of us are intrepreters everyday...try to intrepret the wants and needs of an infant, 3 year olds, a crabby teen, a salesperson, a stock market, retirement needs, insurance policies, doctor's RX's, a tired spouse....I could go on and on, but I too would be making interpretations.
FROM P.O. IN MI: Interesting --- I'm going to be rolling this one around in my head all day.....And you can explain the background to me --- I'll make 'allowances' for interpretation
FROM B.G. IN MI: Today’s WW would be an interesting one to process in a course on the bible. If, as WB asserts, all human knowledge takes the form of interpretation, how do we handle the question of inspiration? I happen to agree with WB, as did Luther (e.g. his derogatory comments re: Revelation and James). Does today’s WW imply that the question of interpretation is one with which every generation must wrestle? (e.g. the role of women in scripture; homosexuality; slavery; etc.) Certainly a different perspective than a rigid fundamentalism.
FROM M.L. IN IL: interpret on
FROM PR J.S. IN MI: The pastor needs to be an interpreter....but not a freelancer. I think we have had a plethora of the latter in recent years and their "free lancing" has led us to some strange conclusions. Interpretation needs to be within the traditionn of Irenaeus, Augustine, Anselm, Abelard (an interesting choice but nonetheless a valid party of the Christian tradition), Luther, Edwards, Niebuhr, etc. Tradiiton is not something to be just chucked aside for the sake of a loosey goosey idea.....
FROM MOLINER C.F.: Ofttimes interpreters speak a foreign language.
FROM D.S. IN SAN DIEGO: Jack, you hit on one that fits right in with our bible study group. When I read certain things in the bible I find that my interpretation initially may be totally different from those that have much more knowledge of the bible’s writings, and in most cases the “real” meaning is totally different from what I thought. That is what makes my bible study group so important to me.
FROM L&MS IN MI: Hence, the existance of so many different religions ect. (all depending on the subject) (different view points) The reason we're Lutheran today rather than Catholics!
1 comment:
I think that first and foremost the pastor and the lay person have to be in the cradle together where the Word and Sacraments are nestled in there with them. And further I think that first and foremost they both have to be humbly seeking the Will of God. And finally I think that I need to be where the pastor is especially we might be thinking differently because what is really necessary is reconciliation in the truth and not moving around from pastor to pastor to find the one that agrees with me. I believe interpretation is communal and over time. And I don't believe in the infallibility of the Pope either. I wouldn't let him interpret for me all by himself.
Always reforming,
Sharon
Post a Comment