The Bible was written, across the board, by humans with
psychologies. So Scripture will per force
touch upon topics represented by, but hardly limited to, the human psyche. The
transformation of the mind which Paul refers to in Romans certainly includes
what we would today name psychological concerns. But it also refers to the
transformation of one’s virtue or character, concern for one’s body, and the
orientation of one’s entire life toward God in peaceable service to the
neighbor.
So the Pauline transformation of the mind must
surely be as holistic as the Pauline notion of putting away childish things.
And as life passage, the newness of Christ concerns all of us, from head to toe
and heart to mind. Such holism is precisely what some Christian and Hebrew
scholars have considered when interpreting the Scriptures as a valid therapeutic
partner.
So when I speak of the psychological contents of
Scripture, I mean to address a very specific thing: Scripture’s “sacramental”
power to address psychological experience. The word of God possesses its own merits,
and these certainly extend to all the concerns addressed by contemporary
psychology. Scripture’s psychological content powerfully expresses, explains,
and directs all the varying phenomena of the human psyche.
So if we are to hear Scripture’s healing voice, it
clearly will not suffice to only export our own understanding of psychology
into biblical texts. The best scholars of faith understand Scripture as the
word of God, and listen to it as one would listen to a loving authority. They import
Scripture’s understanding of psychology and allow it to speak to our more
contemporary concerns. They assume, along with myself and other readers of
ancient literature, that while human culture
may have changed considerably in some few thousand years, human nature may not have changed nearly so
much as that. The Scriptures that once addressed the ancients may now address
themselves to us.
Yet, owing to their cultural distance, as well as the
nature of their composition, the Scriptures will speak to us with authority
that sounds manifestly different from our own. One will find few university
researchers in the Bible, and fewer double-blind studies. So the authority of
the Bible to speak to psychological concerns may take a somewhat different
shape than we might expect.
We may be surprised, for example, to find that
Scripture is so multi-faceted. On one level, Christians of faith who read the
Scriptures ultimately understand and trust them as words flowing from the
authorship of the one and only loving God who created all the universe, and
wants us to be well. But, on another level, Christians of faith who read the
Scriptures can also understand them as the intermediary work of a seeming
cacophony of authors with diverse goals and sometimes contradictory
perspectives and agendas.
Such texts do not espouse a unifying theory, nor a cohesive
synthesis of varying perspectives on what it means to be human. What they do
offer is a composite portrait of the human psyche that, owing to its varying
elements, exists in constant tension with both itself and our final
understanding of it. And that tension provides Scripture with an explicatory
power that both visits us anew, speaking freshly to our changing concerns and
shifting understandings, and resists a certain death in our hands as either
abstraction or dogmatic theorization.
So far from portraying a masterful unity, the
inter-textual tension of the Bible’s various books can serve as a comprehensive
critique of all human cultures, perhaps particularly the ones that wrote it. As
such, Scripture can become a dialogue that offers us a more complex, nuanced,
and holistic view of the human mind than any one culture or author could
provide alone. In very modern terms, we might say that it offers us the wisdom
of the crowd rather than the solitary expert, and a plurality of tools rather
than one prescription for a lone remedy.
Such resistance to homogenization maybe even be
descriptive of the power or authority of Scripture as a whole. It
circumscribes, for the purposes of aiding our understanding, broad swaths of
human experience and then structurally implies that this understanding is not
sufficient. As we will see, not only will one psychology of origin not suffice;
Scripture circumscribes and, by doing so, critiques, many cultures of
composition. Not only will one religious or human experience not suffice;
Scripture includes, and explores in theological terms, a vast array of psychic
events, maladies, and cures both conscious and unconscious.
And not only will one
psychological theory not suffice; Scripture, in its focus on personalities,
particularities, and passages in context assures that all psychological theories fail to delimit or describe the ongoing
work of God. Psychology itself will not suffice, as Scripture intends
transformations of character and virtue, of ethics, as well as the healing of
emotional well-being. Yet even morality will not suffice, for the healing
Scripture would speak to concerns ontological reality beyond the ethical. Made
in the image of God, Christians of faith would be re-made in the image of
Christ. Always, at every level, our best understanding regarding Scripture
seems both helpful and insufficient. But that is just the shape of the authority of Scripture.
1 comment:
The nature of man and the rational mind is indeed a consistent part of what it means for us to be made through the Word in the image of God. Scripture is given to us by God's grace so that we might know and see God, so that we might experience healing through learning to be a better reflection of God's grace and justice and learn what it means to achieve an Anselmian rectitude of the will. Keep up the good conversation. I look forward to hearing your voice on Scripture and healing. Peace be upon your reflections.
Post a Comment