A Modest Proposal

I had a rather sobering experience the other day, and it kind of highlights the tensions that we often face as Christian academics. I was writing a proposal for a general English graduate conference that our university participates in every year. I usually find paper proposals particularly difficult, since they involves a seemingly egocentric promotion of one's own subject; I am much more comfortable treating my work in an impersonal, demi-objective manner. However, this proposal was giving me an excessive amount of trouble, and I wasn't able to understand why until I reflected on it afterwards. My problem with the proposal was that, in it, I promoted my work on grounds that did not reflect what I consider my primary interest in the proposal's topic.

My proposal basically urges academics to pursue further study of early modern biblical commentaries. Such a proposal is, academically speaking, a tough sell. Most English scholars would prefer to study something "interesting" and "relevant;" something that once again rehashes issues pertaining to gender, class, race, or postmodernity in relation to a marginal text that was oppressed by white, colonial, aristocratic, modernity driven males. Most historians possess the work ethic necessary to undertake the painstaking and often thankless task of analysing old commentaries, but they often focus on texts that have a more direct relation to "important" historical events and trends. Since Religious Studies emerged from the Enlightenment rebellion against medieval and early modern biblical interpretation in favour of "natural" religion, members of this field would probably enter such a study with a skeptical, modernity driven bias that would cloud a historically sensitive study of the commentaries. Thus, my work lies in a middengeard (middle earth) between three fields, which explains why there is so little secondary literature on it.

In any case, I promoted the study of these commentaries on a somewhat old fashioned historicist basis; we need to study these texts because they will aid us in interpreting biblical quotations in other texts. Because of the prevalent usage of the bible in the early modern period, a sensitive reading of biblical references, solidly grounded in early modern commentaries, will be useful for early modern scholars in any field. However, after I finished writing this proposal, I felt somewhat unhappy with it. It was not that I disagreed with my grounds for the promotion of these commentaries; I think that historical reconstruction is an immensely noble and useful task. Rather, I felt that, in this proposal, I was only able to skirt my real reasons for interest in these texts.

In actuality, I am interested in early modern biblical commentaries because they are written by brothers (I do not use this term in a sexist fashion; I simply have not yet found a commentary by a woman) in Christ about the revealed word of God. Our contemporary churches often act as though our generation is the only one to which Christ has been revealed, and preach with a disturbing ignorance of the vast riches of Christian history. In many ways, I consider my study of these commentaries as one way of partaking in the communion of saints; just as I can attend a bible study and discuss, argue, and pray over the scriptures as I learn to interpret and apply them through the encouragement and fellowship of other Christians, so I find that my dialogue with early modern commentaries written by fellow believers can humble me, challenge me, and sharpen both my analysis and application of scripture. I do not, of course, believe everything asserted by these commentaries, just as I do not believe everything contained in contemporary Christian subculture; the early modern period was no less impervious to fallen biblical misinterpretation and appropriation than is our contemporary society. However, as I read the bible and interpret it through humble and spirit led dialogue with both ancient and contemporary Christians, I trust that God will lead both myself and others to glorify Him in our lives. Obviously, I am much more excited by what I wrote in this paragraph than by the purely academic historical reconstruction of biblical interpretation. Tragically, however, I feel (probably accurately) that I will rarely, if ever, be able to confess in a secular academic forum, these deepest roots of my interest in medieval and early modern Christianity.

Of course, I don't mind being an "undercover" Christian in the academy. In order to remain healthy, however, I would like to find forums in which I can treat topics like the Trinity and Incarnation as basic facts rather than tenuous propositions. I have been recently inspired by the sort of books which I found at Regent College on our recent honeymoon, and wish that I could write essays like those found in these books. Somewhere in Proberbs Solomon says that "hope deferred maketh the heart sick." This is how I feel about my passion for writing and talking simultaneously about Christ and the issues and stories in the world that surrounds; keeping this passion bottled up inside of me makes me cynical and bitter, and makes my "heart sick." I do not mind doing menial academic tasks (St. Paul urges us to do them well) such as historical reconstruction - I think they are, in a secondary academic sense, very important - but alongside this work, I need a space where I can safely speak of the more important issue of my work in relation to Christ and the world that he came to save.