CREEDE HINSHAW: The nuclear option

Every church has disagreements. Church folk can get testy over carpets, church committees and other cataclysms. While some church fights are unnecessary, others pack more weight: slavery, ordination, abortion, gay marriage, war and peace, a woman’s place in church, etc.

The unwritten rules of church combat dictate that the contest begin on a small scale. One doesn’t throw a haymaker at the opening bell in round one. The dispute might begin with gentle conversation. Logic or personal witness will be employed to make a point. Things may get warmer as Bible verses, often taken out of context by both persons, are cited.

But eventually, when some disputants get cornered or fear they’re on the verge of losing the argument, they resort to clearing the throat, throwing back the shoulders, mustering every ounce of pharisaic piety and intoning, “This fight is really about The Authority of The Bible.” (Those who marshal this argument really do speak in capital letters.)

This phrase — “the authority of scripture” — is the nuclear option when it comes to a good church fight. It is an evasive, slippery tactic that suggests only one person in this fight really grasps the nature of the argument. It employs a double-edged sword: “I am defending the ramparts of God and the Bible and you, my faithless opponent, border on heresy.”

Search your Bible concordance in vain: “the authority of scripture” is nowhere found in the book it purports to protect. This tactic is a rearguard action, and while those who use it profess to be defending the sacred writing, they are instead undermining the truth they think they are protecting. Even a passing study of church history, the Bible and society will reveal that “the authority of scripture” has often been employed to defend the indefensible: It has propped up slavery, justified segregation, denied women rightful places of church leadership and forbidden weddings to divorced people … all in the cause of “protecting” the Bible.

In my own denomination, John Wesley, Methodism’s founder, held a high view of the Bible and often referred to “scriptural Christianity.” Methodists take the Bible seriously, but not all take it literally, nor are they required to do so. For centuries, Methodism has afforded a refreshing oasis where people could accept each other’s approach to scripture. Thus, the “authority of scripture” argument feels almost like an invasive species in Methodism, imported from elsewhere and taking root in Methodist soil to harmful effect. The Methodist Articles of Religion, borrowed from the Church of England, simply and modestly affirm, “ … Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation …” (Article V).

Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892), an English Baptist preacher who was converted in a Methodist Church, spoke in 1886 about how he would go about defending the gospel. His reply is inspiring and speaks directly to those who would protect holy writ. Spurgeon mused, “Defend the gospel? I’d just as soon defend a wild lion. Turn that lion loose and he’ll take care of himself.”