Image via Wikipedia
This is the tenth in a sequence about ecumenical formation.
So, what is the nature of the Bible? People were quick to lay claim to the Bible once the printing press was invented. It is easy claim the Catholic Church kept the texts from the people but we have to allow they did not have the technology to do anything else. The text was inevitably out of reach, there were few copies and they would have been in Latin. But the Church was threatened by the new access to the texts in the vernacular.
What was the Bible like before the invention of printing? Today we glibly speak of the Bible as a library but what we forget is that is exactly what it was. Each book in the Bible was a separate volume in a library. So, even scholars never experienced it as a single volume with books in a particular order.
How many libraries held the entire canon of scripture? How many other texts were interpolated or alongside? Clearly the Canon evolved and presumably most libraries valued the complete set. There never was complete agreement about its content. Hence there is apocrypha and deutero-canonical scriptures.
On top of this there will have been many translations of the same scriptures. Whilst the Roman Catholic Church maintained the Latin Vulgate as the primary source, there were always other translations into other languages, especially in the East.
Printing brought together an opportunity not only to translate scriptures into the vernacular but also to collect them into one place and into (more or less) a single coherent narrative.
This relatively recent development forms the context in which we experience formation today. The very fact of a single volume Bible makes an immense difference in that it implies greater coherence to scripture than the old libraries ever could.
The covers of the printed library make the content both easier and harder to share. Easier because it means everyone can have a copy. Harder because the covers are round a body of writing sometimes seen as under threat and so in need of protection.
An open library has been replaced by a closed book.
I picked you up on Methodist Ecumenism. Sorry to see you are ending it. But this is OK. I'm finding there is too much more ecumenism information than I can absorb. But I want to cut to the chase with the idea that one can have joint membership. (Show me why not.) That resolves much. I discuss it in my blog "Extreme Ecumenism."
Also, I am a Catholic who is a Lay Minister in my local Methodist parish. P.S. Help me find the report of the 2011 C-M Dialogue. My email: [email protected] Carry on.
Posted by: Geoff Proud | Saturday, 08 October 2011 at 03:49 PM
The decision to end Methodist E News was not mine. It is possible someone else will take it up in the future.
I'm not sure where you are finding the ecumenical information. I've been amazed at how few blogs about ecumenism there are - although there are plenty of blog posts.
The British Methodist Church does permit joint membership. I don't know what the UMC's position is. The RCC I would have thought would have more problems with the idea. The reason why not from a British Methodist perspective would be a matter of protocol I suppose. We have a positive relationship with the RCC in Britain and so would not encourage people to break their rules.
I've had a look at ExE - its a pity you don't have a RSS feed as it is not possible to follow you. I'll do my best to keep an eye on it.
The 2011 dialogue report can be found here - http://worldmethodistcouncil.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=87&Itemid=96 - I hope to blog about it soon , when I've had time to read it properly.
Posted by: Chris Sissons | Saturday, 08 October 2011 at 06:30 PM