The home of Holy Scripture is worship. It is the public, not the private, reading of Scripture that is definitive for Scripture’s role in the life of the church. The assembly of the faithful gathered, in expectant silence, to hear the word of the Lord read aloud from the testimony of the apostles and prophets: that is both the initial and the enduring primary location—in reality and in doctrine—for encounter with and reception of the biblical text. […]
“Private” interpretation of Scripture, that is to say, interpretation of the text that occurs elsewhere than in the liturgy, is nevertheless always dependent upon and symbiotic with it. The further one moves away from the liturgy, the more one’s reading of the text will become detached from the nature, uses, and ends that the church confesses, by God’s gracious will, to be true of the text. Think of Scripture as a living thing: it requires its native habitat for deep roots, good light, and rich air. That habitat is the living people of God in convocation, eager to receive together the living word of God spoken aloud for all to hear. Removed from that habitat, text and reader alike grow malnourished, emaciated, desiccated. Neither can be transplanted to another environment without loss.
The problem here is not that Brad is wrong (he isn’t), but how strongly this line of thinking runs against the grain of evangelical piety. I imagine many churchgoers could begrudgingly affirm what Brad is saying here. But the reason it would be difficult for them to assent to it is because their entire practice of the faith has misled them as to the true ‘home’ of Scripture. Private interpretation, including quiet times and personal Bible reading, is not thought of as “dependent” on public reading; private interpretation is the main thing. To ask one of these churchgoers to endorse what Brad is saying is like asking a person who was taught his whole life that drinking alcohol is sinful if he wants to grab a pint with you at the local pub. Even if he can agree that the Bible does not condemn drinking as sinful, he still will be reluctant. His conscience has been malformed. I think evangelical piety creates a similar dynamic with respect to the Bible’s function within the church. If we agree with Brad that the gathered people of God is the primary location for Scripture to be read/interpreted/exegeted—and that reading it apart from that context is, at best, merely a means to serving that more primary function—then it would seem that our practice is leading us astray here.