Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

FAITH AND THE HISTORICAL JESUS §5.6
preter are both part of a historical continuum (Wirkungsgeschichte, 'history of effect').
Consequently, the interpreter cannot stand above the tradition which links
him or her to the past under study, but can only begin to understand adequately as
being part of and through that tradition. 148 This solution, applied to the Gospels,
does not, of course, restore the old objectivity of the Gospels' meaning. But it does
indicate a stronger possibility of recognizing a firmness to their perceived significance;
it does prevent a falling apart into complete subjectivity and relativity; and
from a Christian perspective in particular, it does attune with the more traditional
thought of a trust-sustaining consensus (sensus communis = sensus fidelium)
within which matters of faith and conduct can be discussed and determined.
Such attempts to maintain some degree of stability in the meaning heard
from texts is regarded by the more radical postmodernists as a failure of nerve. 149
For them the challenge of postmodernism strikes more deeply. Postmodernism
questions not only the objectivity of a text's meaning but the objectivity of meaning
itself.
By sweeping away secure notions of meaning, by radically calling into question
the apparently stable foundations of meaning on which traditional interpretation
is situated, by raising doubts about the capacity to achieve ultimate
clarity about the meaning of a text, postmodern readings lay bare the contingent
and constructed character of meaning itself. 150
For deconstructionist critics there is no text, only interpretations, indeed, a 'succession
of infinitely different interpretations'. Every text falls into 'the
epistemological abyss'. 151 Moore sums up his review at this point by a fitting citation
of Troeltsch's famous remark (above at n. 11), 152 with the clear implication
that hermeneutical method is now caught in precisely the same bind as historical
method, so that the NT scholar who depends on either should abandon all
hope of producing any solid theological conclusions from either. This destabilizing
of the very concept of meaning has, it is freely acknowledged, a political
agenda: to liberate the meaning of the text from the dominant meanings (interpretations)
of the past, perceived by many (feminist and liberation readings in
particular) as oppressive and coercive. 153 Whether this line of argument leads un-
148. Gadamer, Truth 300-307; see further below §6.4e.
149. Aichele, Postmodern Bible 38-67.
150. Aichele, Postmodern Bible 2-3.
151. Moore, Literary Criticism 119-31.
152. Moore, Literary Criticism 129.
153. Aichele, Postmodern Bible 3-5 and passim. The parallel (alliance?) here with the
neo-Liberal attempt to save Jesus from institutional Christianity (§4.7 above) should not escape
notice.
96