Notes

[1]

Ochs, P. SSR: The Rules for Scriptural Reasoning, p. 1.

[2]

ibid, p. 2.

[3]

Ibid. p. 2.

[4]

Ibid.

[5]

Ibid, p. 5.

[6]

ibid, p. 7.

[7]

Note: For readers new to the Society for Scriptural Reasoning, it is worth noting that this essay and many of the responses build upon Ochs' reflections in Peirce, Pragmatism and the Logic of Scripture (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998).

[8]

A Rabbinic Pragmatism, in B. Marshall, Theology and Dialogue (University of Notre Dame Press, 1990).

[9]

Sadly, if not tragically, this prayer has been omitted from the Reform prayer book; a bad decision that postmodern Jews must repair.

[10]

Most recently in Revelation Restored (Westview, 1998).

[11]

Reasoning After Revelation (Westview, 1998).

[12]

Returning to Scripture, Cross Currents (1994); Cf. The Return to Scripture in Judaism and Christianity (Paulist Press, 1993).

[13]

Josiah Royce, The Problem of Christianity, introduced by John E. Smith (Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 1968).

[14]

See Stephen Fowl s previously published works: Stephen E. Fowl and L. Gregory Jones, Reading in Communion: Scripture and Ethics in the Christian Life (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans Press, 1991) and Engaging Scripture (Oxford, Blackwell Publishers, 1998).

[15]

Cf. rules 3 & 4.

[16]

A rough but not inaccurate way to characterize this relation is: A B C, where B interprets A to C. For Royce the significance of this interpretative triad is that it is a model of the time process. As such there is no unique (B) interpreting the past (A) to the future (C).

[17]

See the analysis of Paul Ricoeur in Toward of Hermeneutic of Revelation in Essays on Biblical Interpretation, edited by Lewis S. Mudge (Philadelphia, Fortress Press), 1980 and Manifestation and Proclamation in Figuring the Sacred: Religion, Narrative and Imagination, Edited by Mark I. Wallace, Translated by David Pellauer (Philadelphia, Fortress Press, 1995).

[18]

Paul Ricoeur, Philosophical and Biblical Hermeneutics in Paul Ricoeur, From Text to Action : Essays in Hermeneutics II, translated by Kathleen Blamey and John B. Thompson (Evanston, Northwestern University Press, 1991) p. 90.

[19]

This might be the sense of Christian's occasion comprehensive use of scripture, as James Buckley contends in his response.

[20]

George A. Lindbeck, The Nature of Doctrine (Philadelphia: Westminister, 1984), p.118)

[21]

This metaphor is derived from the detailed analysis of Paul Ricoeur in The Model of the Text: Meaningful Action Considered as a Text in Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences: Essays on Language, Action and Interpretation, edited J.P Thompson (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1981).

[22]

In the context of a discussion of the rules of scriptural reasoning Jean Calvin s assertion: Our wisdom, in so far as it ought to be true and solid wisdom, consists almost entirely of two parts: the knowledge of God and of ourselves. Jean Calvin, The Institutes of the Christian Religion, translated by Henry Beveridge (Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Press, 1989).

[23]

Royce, The Problem of Christianity.

[24]

This is a simple but not inaccurate way of summarizing the Jungel s analysis of Luther on metaphorical truth. See Theological Essays, translated and edited by J.B. Webster (Edinburgh, T & T Clark, 1989) pp. 50-52.

[25]

This may be, according to James Buckley, a Christian's occasion specific use of scripture.

[26]

Translated (revised) by Charles A. Kelbley (New York, Fordham University Press, 1986) section 4.

[27]

Confession of Sins, The Book of Common Prayer.

[28]

See John Macmurray, The Form of the Personal, volume II: Persons in Relation, introduction by Frank G. Kirkpatrick (London, Faber and Faber, 1995).

[29]

God raises up prophets to call, constitute and save Israel. Christ is raised up to call, constitue and save the church.

[30]

This is, of course, a metaphoric way of summarizing the detailed analysis of Ochs paper. A full analysis of the relation of A and B reasonings as an aspect of Scriptural Pragmatism is detailed in Ochs Peirce, Pragmatism and the Logic of Scripture (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998) See in particular the section Christain Pragmatism , pp 305-316.

[31]

Cf. N. Lash and other scriptural pragmatists.

[32]

Yale Press, 1987.

[33]

Religious Reading (Oxford, 1999).

[34]

This is not quite the same as Vanhoozers' objections to The Users: Neo-pragmatism in Is There a Meaning in This Text? (pp. 55f) but it is related. See Fowl's review in Modern Theology.

[35]

Cf. Ochs, Peirce, Pragmatism and the Logic of Scripture (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998).

[36]

Peirce, Pragmatism and the Logic of Scripture, pp. 284 - 285. [37]

Peirce, Pragmatism and the Logic of Scripture, p. 288.

[38]

Karen Armstrong, A History of God: The 4,000 Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam (New York: Alfred K. Knopf), 143ff.

[39]

Wolin, S. Max Weber: Legitimation, Method and the Politics of Theory in Political Theory, vol. 9, no. 3 August, 1981. P. 402.

[40]

Ibid. 403.