These essays address the crisis of biblical authority and interpretation in the church, focusing in particular on the inadequacy of the historical-critical method of hermeneutics, addressing from various perspectives the notorious gap between the historical-critical approach to the study of the Bible and the church's liturgical and dogmatic transmission of biblical faith. The authors, following Childs' "canonical method" of biblical interpretation, argue that the historical-critical method should not of itself set the agenda for biblical reading. Contributors: Robert W. Jenson, Carl E. Braaten, Elizabeth Achtemeier, Brevard S. Childs, Karl P. Donfried, Roy A. Harrisville, Thomas Hopko, Aidan J. Kavanaugh, Alister E. McGrath.
I keeping going back to some of these older collections addressing biblical criticism and the recovery of theological interpretation, and my perception is that though these collections are nearly thirty years old, the concerns expressed in them are still relevant and that this conversation ought to be picked up anew. Childs and his canonical approach need to make a comeback.