Bridging the Ancient and Modern: The Example of Thomas Oden

There is without question a renewed interest in our times of exploring the patristic heritage. While such interest might seem to be a positive development to traditional patristic scholars, many have critiqued the new movement as prone to a selective reading strategy for approaching the ancient texts. In some quarters, this critique is developed further to suggest that any Protestant or Christian not associated with the ancient churches (Catholic or Orthodox) must, by default, embrace some form of selective reading. I would like to answer this critique by holding up the example of Thomas Oden. In Classical Christianity, a revision of Oden’s three volume systematic theology, he proposes a consensual theological method based on widely agreed upon figures and theological statements. In his scheme, greatest preference is given to scripture followed by patristic sources, then medieval theologians, reformation figures, and finally modern interpreters. Oden’s method attempts to be authentically ecumenical in its reading of sources, searching continuously for consensus and complementarity. He is aware of his locatedness as an interpreter in the Methodist tradition, which makes his interpretation of the ancient texts all the more careful.

Taking into consideration Oden’s example, perhaps those traditional patristic scholars, who are disappointed with the treatment of ancient texts by post-modern Christian interpreters should acknowledge that there exists a continuum of selective reading. Some groups and individuals like Oden are committed to an in-depth, careful, reading of the texts (even if from a Protestant ecclesial context) whereas others may in fact be more inclined to take only those things from the patristic texts that they agree with or like, leaving the rest (this is sometimes charged against certain emergent church approaches). Acknowledging an interpretive continuum also highlights that, in some sense, all of the Christian traditions read the church fathers selectively depending on their point of reference. For example, some Orthodox might feel this way toward some Catholics when discussing issues like Papal primacy and vice versa.

If the problem with new approaches to patristic texts is their allegedly arbitrary picking and choosing, where should the line be drawn for traditional approaches, which also can read these same texts selectively? In ecumenical dialogues, it is common to see the Catholic and Orthodox Churches acknowledging their profound closeness, rooted in their ancient, undivided heritage. Oden’s approach seeks to draw on this ancient, undivided heritage in a way that is faithful and authentic. One can see quickly that the Nicene Creed serves as the orienting motif of his entire work. Some traditional patristic scholars may questions whether he has gone far enough beyond the bounds of his particular confessional context, but others will see in his method a genuine and responsible approach. From my perspective, it is impressive to see the degree to which Oden has built bridges between ancient and modern forms of Christianity.

As appreciation grows for the patristic literature in popular Christian circles I believe that we will be seeing other approaches similar to Oden’s. In the end, this could create renewal of the larger Christian communities as greater numbers of people become aware of the ancient heritage of the Church. It is good that more popular discussion is happening related to ancient figures and ideas because modern Christian communities can learn valuable lessons from the history of those who have gone before them in Christ.

This is certainly Oden's vision for all Christians for he writes: "all of these traditions have an equal right to appeal to the early history of Christian exegesis...Protestants have a right to the Fathers. Athanasius is not owned by Copts, nor is Augustine owned by North Africans. These minds are the common possession of the whole church. The Orthodox do not have exclusive rights over Basil, nor do the Romans over Gregory the Great. Christians everywhere have equal claim to these riches and are discovering them and glimpsing their unity in the body of Christ" (Matthew 1-13, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture; InterVarsity Press, 2001, xvii).