Unleashing the Scripture: Freeing the Bible from Captivity to America

by Stanley Hauerwas

This provocative critique of the uses and abuses of Scripture in the American church shows how liberal (historical-critical) and fundamentalist (literal) approaches to biblical scholarship have corrupted our use of the Bible. Hauerwas argues that the Bible can only be understood in the midst of a disciplined community of people, where the story is actually lived out by dedicated practitioners.

Genres: Theology, Nonfiction, Christianity, Christian, Religion, Politics, Spirituality

160 pages, Paperback

First published October 1, 1993

About the author

Stanley Hauerwas (PhD, Yale University) is the Gilbert T. Rowe Professor of Theological Ethics at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. He is the author of numerous books, including Cross-Shattered Christ, A Cross-Shattered Church, War and the American Difference, and Matthew in the Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible.

America's Best Theologian according to Time Magazine (2001), though he rejected the title saying, "Best is not a theological category."

Reviews

[Marty Solomon · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have engaged with Hauerwas' work before, but this is the first book that I have taken possession of, a gift from a fellow thinker of mine. This was a great gift.

The collection of sermons (the second part of the book) was relentlessly and beautifully challenging, refusing to let me think I had things settled. It was provocative and directly pushed back against convictions that I had, but not in a way that was coming from the "other side" of an issue. Instead, it was coming from somebody that shared my perspectives, just thought I had settled for easy answers.

The book is full of post-conventional wisdom and thought. For the person that has (and is) deconstructed, and then subsequently reconstructed, this book will insist that you keep questioning whether what you are reconstructing is actually what you need. It will push you further.

In so many ways, this book criticizes some of my personal favorite taglines or ideas, but they must be criticized so that become more robust and more true. And this book helped to do that for me.

[Shawn Enright · Rating 4 out of 5]

Basically the worst thing you can do is have private convictions about your personal relationship with Jesus, unmediated by the gathered church and her clergy. And to be a middle class American. And to own a gun.

Do I agree? I’d say [redacted]…

[Abby · Rating 5 out of 5]

Incendiary and sharp. Five stars for the pleasure of reading such a bold, unflinching theologian, calling America to task for its misinterpretation of scripture and the gospel on the whole. I don’t think I necessarily agree with all of Hauerwas’ theology, but he is a compelling firebrand who is a great deal of fun to read.

[Adam Ross · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a wonderful, disturbing book this was. If you want to be thoroughly shaken up, this is a book to read and to savor.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

DOES THE BIBLE ONLY MAKE SENSE AS “THE BOOK OF THE CHURCH”?

Stanley Hauerwas (born 1940) is an American theologian who was a longtime professor at Duke University. He has written many books, such as Resident Aliens; After Christendom; Unleashing the Scripture; Wilderness Wanderings; With the Grain of the Universe: The Church's Witness and Natural Theology; A Better Hope; Hannah's Child: A Theologian's Memoir, etc.

He wrote in the Foreword to this 1993 book, “Because this book resists the higher-critical method as the method for study of Scripture, it will earn … easy dismissals… I certainly have learned from historical-critics, whose work I often think better than their theory... Yet one of the purposes of this book is to free those who preach and those who hear from thinking that we must rely on the latest biblical study if we are to proclaim the gospel.” (Pg. 7) He continues, “I know it will come as a shock to most readers that our fundamental problem with hearing the Bible can be attributed to our having accommodated our lives to the presuppositions of liberal democracies… I do not apologize for that kind of shock. Thus the primary contention of this book: The Bible is not and should not be accessible to merely anyone, but rather it should only be made available to those who have undergone the hard discipline of existing as part of God’s people.” (Pg. 9)

He observes, “The reformation doctrine of ‘sola scriptura,’ joined to the invention of the printing press and underwritten by the democratic trust in the intelligence of the ‘common person,’ has created the situation that now makes people believe that they can read the Bible ‘on their own.’ The presumption must be challenged, and that is why the Scripture should be taken away from Christians in North America. I am aware that this suggestion cannot help appearing authoritarian and elitist… From the perspective of liberal political practice, any authority appears ‘authoritarian.’ By offering a different account of how Scripture resides within a different practice of authority, I hope to avoid the unhappy alternative assumption that all exercises of power are ‘authoritarian.’” (Pg. 17-18)

He notes, “Therefore the rest of this book consists of sermons… They are perhaps best thought of as biblical lectures or readings, presupposing as they do a people who still care about the use of the Bible for their lives together… The practice of preaching is just that---disciplined practice. I make no claims to be interpreting the Scripture in order to get at the ‘real meaning.’ The ‘meaning’ is that use to which I put these texts for the upbuilding of the church. The common theme running through these sermons is that Scripture only makes sense as the book of the Church. Thus… I argue that discipleship is required for the right reading of Scripture.” (Pg. 41-42)

He states, “I maintain that the Sermon on the Mount presupposes the existence of a community constituted by the practice of nonviolence, and it is unintelligible divorced from such a community… you cannot rightly read the Sermon on the Mount unless you are a pacifist. I know that sounds threatening to many of you who think of yourselves as generally nonviolent but with exceptions---defense of family, nation, and so on.” (Pg. 64) He adds, “The Christians who remembered the Sermon did not know they were pacifists. Rather, they knew as a community they were part of a new way of resolving disputes---through confrontation, forgiveness, and reconciliation. Peacemaking is not an abstract principle but rather the practice of a community made possible by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.” (Pg. 71)

He points out, “we cannot try to be saints. God produces the saints, and they are reproduced through us… we thus are surprised to discover that we, the rememberers, have been made into the Church. Through remembering the saints we have become part of the cosmic conflict, but we can rejoice because we know the hope to which we have been called through the glorious inheritance of the saints. Saints… are people like us who have been made more than we are by being engrafted into God’s kingdom that is rules by the power of forgiveness and love.” (Pg. 103)

He acknowledges, “Yet I do not wish to seek the humility to which Jesus calls us, for it requires that I acknowledge a far too horrible truth. The cause of war---the cause of the brutal killing of thousands of women and children, the cause of the devastation of the country that is almost worse than the killing itself---is nothing less than my desire and my covetousness. Surely this is wrong. I desire not war. But the uncompromising, simple answer comes back: ‘Of course you do not desire war, but what you desire makes war inevitable.’” (Pg. 115)

He says, “our loves rightly build Christ’s kingdom, which is the only alternative to this world’s kingdom of war. This is the gospel. This is what makes it possible for us to be at peace, to be a peaceable people, in a world at war. For we Christians do not believe that we should be peaceable because our peace is a political strategy for freeing the world from war. Rather we Christians know that we must be peaceable, not because our peaceableness will free the world from war, but because our peace is the only way that we can live in a world at war.” (Pg. 122)

This book will be of great interest to those studying contemporary theology (e.g., “Neoliberal”).

[Ben Fredrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Some quotes:

"The gospel must produce itself through enactment, or it will lack the power to form and move lives."

"The Sermon [on the mount] is the constitution of God's Kingdom people for their journey between the ages...Jesus is not teaching an 'interim ethic' but rather is providing a new ordering for his followers. Such an ordering provides the skills for survival for those whose lives reflect the New Age but who will continue to live amid the realities of the Old Age."

"God's grace is not about acceptance; it is about judgment, it is about a kingdom that the world does not want. It is about a God who makes a difference, and that difference mans that our lives must be transformed, or we will indeed be cast into outer darkness."

"After the gospel is reduced to the formula of John 3:16 one wonders why we need Jesus at all and in particular, why anyone would have ever bothered to have put him to death....why would anyone ever have gotten upset with Jesus if all he had to tell us is that God loves us and does not want us to perish."

"We come to Jesus seeking meaning for our lives, and we discover this Jesus business is about power and conflict on a scale so vast that we hardly seem to matter. Yet matter we do because we must be capable of remembering, and perhaps even being, saints."

"Augustin argued that it is incompatible for Christians to ever use violence to protect ourselves. Thus, his defense of the just war was never on grounds that it was analogous to self-defense...the Christian justification of violence derives not from the assumption that we must at times defend ourselves, but rather from the idea that violence is necessary if we are charitably to protect the innocent."

"...we have first learned to follow this Lord and thus have been trained to know how he wills to be present. Namely, he is Lord who presence provides forgiveness and creates a community of forgiveness, for if we have received the Holy Spirit, his continuing presence, he tells us that we have the power to forgive sins. And we have such power because, through his cross and resurrection, we know we have been forgiven. No small matter, to be sure, for it is exactly the power of God that allows us to allow ourselves to be forgiven--much more than to forgive."

[Philip Sitterding]

It feels somehow improper to be critical of this book, because it is very profound, and there is great and helpful wisdom in it. I am glad to have read it and plan to seek out more of Hauerwas's work. With that acknowledged, I must add that there were many points in this book where I felt that Hauerwas wasn't really saying anything. Maybe I currently lack the discipline to read philosophical texts with sufficient sophistication, but it seemed that I repeatedly came to points where the text would present a problem, say it was a problem, and then seemingly veer wildly off topic without ever returning. It made for unsatisfying reading.

Perhaps that was intentional? After all, if I have a hard time with Hauerwas, then what sort of a time will I have with Scripture? It is a point for his assertion that I, as a lay person, should not have access to Scripture except via a clerical intermediary, so maybe the wandering was a conscious artistic decision. Even if it was, though, I didn't appreciate it. I prefer my unsettling theology to be acknowledged as such by the author and still presented with as close to clarity as they can manage.

[Liz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hauerwas writes in the forward, "My work is often described as provocative, outrageous, and sometimes careless" and he is correct. His first paragraph stating that "..no task is more important than for the Church to take the Bible out of the hands of individual Christians in North America" is proof positive of this. Arguing that extreme fundamentalists and extreme progressives suffer the same problem of grossly misinterpreting Scripture, Hauerwas claims Scripture cannot be interpreted out of a communal context and must be morally and socially transformative in its interpretation.

He then follows the first half of philosophy with a series of transcribed sermons, which were just ok. And they seemed to contradict his point about Scripture interpreted in community, since as an individual reader reads the sermons, they are subject to the reader's interpretation.

[Benjamin Sauers · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this book to be somewhat disappointing. I enjoyed the first section of the book which consisted of a number of essays. The second part was a collection of transcribed sermons. I don't much enjoy reading sermons or lectures which have been transcribed into book form. I often find them lacking in depth. I guess there is a reason this book has not found itself in subsequent editions and reprints.

[Sergio Chois · Rating 3 out of 5]

So, I didn’t technically finish this book but I’m logging it regardless. The book is divided into two parts essay and sermons with the former being the real meat and potatoes. Great read. But I just couldn’t read anymore sermons. (Stopped at Chap 8/16)

[Shaun · Rating 3 out of 5]

Thought-provoking & disturbing

[marcus miller · Rating 4 out of 5]

When I was in Poland a summer ago I met a former Polish diplomat who had been involved in the Solidarity movement. When we were talking he mentioned that he was reading Hauerwas, something I had not yet done. Visiting my wife at her seminary this book was on her shelf so I thought I would give it a try.
The title sums up the intention of the book,"Freeing the Bible form Captivity to America." In the opening chapters Hauerwas discusses how the Bible has generally been interpreted in the United States. Hauerwas makes the provocative argument that most Americans should not be allowed to read the Bible. As he puts it, "North American Christians are trained to believe that they are capable of reading the Bible without spiritual and moral transformation. They read the Bible not as Christians, not as a people set apart, but as democratic citizens who think their "common sense" is sufficient for "understanding" the Scripture.They feel no need to stand under the authority of truthful community to be told two read." This is the other part of Hauerwas's argument, that if Americans are going to read the Bible, they should do it within the context of a believing community, in other words, the church.
Later Hauerwas argues that to properly understand and interpret scripture, one must first be committed to transforming ones life. Or as he writes, "You cannot rightly read the Sermon on the Mount unless you are a pacifist."
In the second part of the book Hauwerwas shares examples of sermons which might be preached based on his understandings of Scripture and Biblical interpretation. I found these to be thought provoking and interesting.

[Paul Batz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hauerwas is ridiculous. Really, what are we supposed to do with opening statements like this: "No task is more important than for the Church to take the Bible out of the hands of individual Christians in North America" (15). Or better yet, "you do not have or need "a meaning" of the text when you understand that Church is more determinative than text" (23). As North American Protestants, such statements rattle us to our core. Is it not disturbing that within the span of his first two chapters, Hauerwas has already challenged the doctrine of sola scriptura and spoken of the validity of the Catholic Church's approach to scripture?
Although I am not an American, to whom Hauerwas is speaking to primarily, as a Canadian I am still deeply challenged by this book. His critique that fundamentalists and biblical critics hold the same fundamental presuppositions is piercing. His argument that moral and transformation is required to read scripture is penetrating. Finally, his suggestion that faithful readers of the Bible must place themselves under the authority of the Church is persuasive.
For North American Protestants, this will be a difficult read.

[Doug · Rating 5 out of 5]

Like a growing number of folks, I've greatly appreciated Hauerwas's work. But it's hard to find something that captures what I found most helpful in him. Many of his essay collections are unbalanced (for the questions I might be pursuing at that moment). Others go off on tangents that would alienate readers in my circle. But this one, an older text, seems to hit it on the head on so many fronts. It might be my favorite of his. In it, he's wonderfully ruthless in going after several deep American assumptions.

[Chet Duke · Rating 5 out of 5]

I don't give five stars because I agree with Hauerwas on everything; I give five stars because I believe every Christian, particularly those with rather firm convictions about violence, should confront the material in this book. Hauerwas is a trailblazer who is unafraid to speak from his experience and personal theological reflection. This is one of those books you read and never quite view the world in the same way.

[Matthew · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great read from Hauerwas. The first part of the book contains several essays which challenge us to think about the way we read the bible, especially as Americans. Neither fundamentalists nor liberals are spared Hauerwas' withering and critical eye. The back half of the book is a collection of sermons, all of which are convicting and powerful.