Appealing to Scripture in Moral Debate: Five Hermeneutical Rules

Charles H. Cosgrove’s Appealing to Scripture in Moral Debate: Five HermeneuticalRules is a successful attempt to demonstrate that contemporary-era Christianinterpretative schemata do not preclude a “valid use of scripture in moral argument.” Thiswork is neither an exhaustive study of either contemporary hermeneutics or moral theorynor a setting forth of a case for any particular ethical theory. For Cosgrove and mostcontemporary moral theorists, the use of Scripture in moral debate is not “prescriptive” orrule based; rather, “scripture speaks to the moral life at the level of basic values andprinciples, not at the level of moral rules” (5). The rules that Cosgrove defines in thiswork are not moral rules but rules that “state certain norms for the valid use of scripturein moral argument” (3) in the contemporary era.Cosgrove’s hermeneutical rules assume a lowest common denominator or “bareminimum” theory of scriptural authority in which the weight given to Scripture in moraldebate is whatever weight the interpreter chooses to ascribe to it, with the one restrictionthat Scripture does carry some weight. For Cosgrove, the authority of Scripture is notabsolutistic (Scripture is the absolute authority with no exceptions) or presumptive(Scriptural authority is presumed but may be abandoned in particular cases) butrelativistic (scriptural authority is given whatever weight one wishes to ascribe to it). [Full Review]