On Interpretation

Today I was reading Michael Walzer's Interpretation and Social Criticism, which I like a lot. Something that really stuck out to me this time through was his telling of a Talmudic story, which comes from Deuteronomy 30:11-14:

"For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it."

In this story, some rabbis are interpreting the law. One calls for divine help to prove his point. He prays that a carob tree will be lifted into the air, that a stream of water will flow backward, that a building will fall, and then that God Himself will speak from heaven. All of these things happen when rabbi asks for them. The other rabbi, however, responds, "It is not in heaven!"

Walzer explains: "Morality, in other words, is something we have to argue about. ... There is a tradition, a body of moral knowledge; and there is this group of sages, arguing. There isn't anything else. No discovery or invention can end the argument; no 'proof' precedence over the (temporary) majority of sages. That is the meaning of 'It is not in heaven.' We have to continue the argument: perhaps for that reason, the story doesn't tell us whether, on the substantive issue, Rabbi Eliezer or Rabbi Joshua was right."

I'm not sure if this is right or not, but there's something true about this--and it answers the question I've had since I was fairly young about why God just doesn't speak and say who's right or wrong, particularly about divisions in the Church. He has spoken. And "the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it."