They are quoted here, there, and everywhere. They are never sourced, but no one
seems to doubt that the rules are his. Stendahl is reported to have enunciated
them at a 1985 press conference in Stockholm, Sweden – he was bishop of
Stockholm at the time – in response to opposition to the building of a temple
there by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. His rules are as
follows:
(1) When you are trying
to understand another religion, you should ask the adherents of that religion
and not its enemies.
(2) Don't compare your
best to their worst.
(3) Leave room for “holy
envy.” (By this Stendahl meant that you should be willing to recognize elements
in the other religious tradition or faith that you admire and wish could, in
some way, be reflected in your own religious tradition or faith.)
It is possible to put
all three rules into practice, I submit, and still argue that not all religions
are created equal, that a particular faith, from more than one point of view, is
to be preferred above all others. It is an additional sign of respect of
a religion not one’s own to be clear about competing truth-claims that divide. Stendahl’s
rules are a point of departure, not the end of a journey.
Krister Stendahl had a
long career at Harvard Divinity School. Note this potpourri
of an archive maintained by the HDS library; published and unpublished items
thereof can be obtained via InterLibrary Loan. His scholarship was never dry or irrelevant to
contemporary life. Two examples which deserve a wide reading:
“The Apostle Paul and
the Introspective Conscience of the West,” Harvard Theological Review 56
(1963) 199-215. First published in Swedish, “Paulus och Samvetet,” Svensk
Exegetisk Ǻrsbok 25 (1960) 62-77. Republished in Paul Among Jews and
Gentiles and Other Essays (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1976) 78-96. Via
Google books, much of the article can be read online.
The full article is available through JSTOR.
Ernst Käsemann heatedly replied to Stendahl’s proposal in “Rechtfertigung und
Heilsgeschichte im Römerbrief,” Paulinische Perspektiven (Tübingen: Mohr,
1972 [1969]) 108-139 = “Justification and Salvation History in the Epistle to
the Romans,” in Perspectives on Paul (Margaret Kohl, tr.; Philadelphia: Fortress;
London: SCM, 1971) 59-78. Stendahl replied to Käsemann in “Sources and
Critiques” Paul
Among Jews and Gentiles, 129-131. It deserves
to be noted that the great exegete C[harles] K[ingsley] Barrett dismantled the pars destruens
of Stendahl’s argument (but not the pars construens).
See “Paul and the Introspective Conscience,” in The Bible, the Reformation,
and the Church – Essays in Honour of James Atkinson (J. P. Stephens, ed.; JSNTSup
105; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,1995) 36-48, reprinted in C. K. Barrett,
On Paul (London: T & T Clark, 2003) 227-240.
Why
I Love the Bible, Harvard Divinity Bulletin 35 (2007). The essay was adapted from an
address delivered in 2001 as the Edward L. Mark Lecture at the Harvard-Epworth
United Methodist Church –an annual event in the life of Harvard
Divinity School United Methodists.
Stendahl has reiterated his comments, as a participant in a short film about LDS temples, found here, among other places.
http://www.templestudy.com/multimedia/videos/
Posted by: Ben S | May 07, 2010 at 03:22 PM
That's helpful, Ben.
It would be easy to dismiss the rules because they are unsourced whenever they are attributed to Stendahl. Still, those of us who have read a bit of S have never doubted that the words reflect his distinctive voice.
Posted by: JohnFH | May 07, 2010 at 05:21 PM