In light of today's extraordinarily politicized sermon in chapel, I thought I'd copy and paste Brevard Childs' criteria for a good Bible commentary which I stumbled across at Inhabitatio Dei:
- Does the commentator do justice to the coercion of the biblical text, or does the author’s private agenda overshadow the text itself?
- Does the creative imagination of the commentator lead the reader back to the biblical text or away from it?
- Does the interpretation reflect the needed patience and empathy to wrestle with the elements of the Bible that at first seem strange, distant, and even offensive to modern sensibilities?
- Has the commentator learned enough from the history of interpretation to retain a sense of modesty regarding his or her efforts and a critical respect for those who have illuminated the way in the past?
What makes for a good commentary makes also for a good sermon.
Mind you, I disagreed with nothing that the preacher said. But if I'd wanted to hear/read a manifesto for a New Eco-friendly World Order, I could have stayed holed up in my carrel and read some blogs. More Jesus in chapel, please.
Forunately there was the Lord's Supper--which I trust Jesus showed up for.
Posted by: |