6 - Christian Patristic Fathers
December 08, 2004 | Comments: 2SYS 501 – Hermeneutics – Lecture 6 – Historical Schools of Interpretation – Christian Patristic Fathers
I. Characteristics of Christian Patristic Fathers
A. Allegorical method was prevalent
B. OT viewed as Christian document
C. Emphasized truths of the gospel in their interpretations
D. Focused on Christ as the center of Scripture
II. Problems with Allegorical methods employed
A. Lost Historical context
B. Failed to comprehend progressive revelation
C. Sought to find parables everywhere
D. Mistook the typical for allegorical
E. Looked for Greek philosophy in OT, in allegorical form
F. Fostered dogmatic interpretation
III. Patristic Hermeneutical theories which developed
A. Clement of Alexandria taught 5 possible meanings
1. Historical – actual events
2. Doctrinal – didactic discourse
3. Prophetical – foretelling of events
4. Philosophical – moral and metaphysical meanings
5. Mystical – hidden spiritual meaning
B. Origen was deeply influenced by the Jewish allegorist Philo
1. Sought to make Scripture acceptable to the philosophical mind
2. Considered uneducated men incapable of understanding
3. Held four principles of interpretation
a. Literal meaning is the body, not the soul
b. Grace of Christ is necessary to understanding
c. True exegesis is spiritualizing – Scripture is one large allegory
d. Old Testament is the preparation for the New
4. Tended toward Montanism, a heresy which was later condemned
C. Augustine and Jerome emphasized historical and literal interpretation
1. Jerome was great scholar of his day, translator of the Latin Vulgate
2. Augustine wrote handbook of hermeneutics and homiletics – De Doctrina Christianaa. Some words literal, some allegorical (spiritual)
b. Supported allegorical approach (2 Cor. 3.6)
3. Augustine’s principles of interpretation
a. Faith necessary to understanding (1 Cor. 2)
b. Literal and historical meaning to be held in regard
c. Scriptures have more than one meaning – allegorical to be built on literal meaning. Love is the governing principle
d. Biblical numbers are significant
e. Old Testament is a christological document
f. Expositor’s task is to exegete, not eisegete
g. Love is necessary (with faith) to comprehend true spiritual meaning
h. No verse should be studied in isolation
i. Passages which cannot be clearly understood cannot be made a test of orthodox faith
j. Education is necessary
k. Obscure passages must yield to clear passages
l. No scripture can be construed so that it contradicts other scripture
Comments
very good to learn from the past. better yet to learn that we are part of a stream swelling to a river. Origen was part of the Church, right? What kind of space do we make available today for scholars and students of the Word, who don’t do it exactly as we do it? Sometimes it is easier for us to make space and thus listen and learn from someone who is dead and thus removed from our present context. For example, isn’t it amazing how much Augustine got right even though his hermeneutics were a mixed bag? Should we learn from him? Calvin learned a whole lot from this guy! Augustine is a true Calvinist. But with our contemporaries, we label them so that we might ignore their contributions, even demonize them, rather than learning from them. Can we learn anything from a neo-orthodox? from a liberation theologian? from a Roman Catholic? Nathan.
nathan on December 15, 2004 at 06:58 AM
Yes, I believe Origen was part of the Church, and I agree with you. However in “making space” which I think we should to a point, ought we not be good stewards of the time and energy God has given us? We can save ourselves a lot of time if we recognize formulations and perspectives which have already been dealt with in the history of the church, and not spend our resources in rehashing them. Thus we will proceed onward in the stream swelling to a river, and not become a piece of flotsam caught in an eddy.
We must maintain the non-negotiables. But given that, yes, we can learn from the neo-orthodox, perhaps in gaining greater insight into the immediate work of the Spirit, and the power of the kerygma. Yes, we can learn from a liberation theologian, perhaps in application of the all-encompassing redemption of Christ in human society. And yes, we can learn from a Roman-Catholic, both positively and negatively. Test all things, hold that which is good.
What you say seems to me directly applicable to the current Auburn Avenue controversy. Do we have anything to learn from these men? Are they, at minimum, asking good questions? Do they have anything to contribute?
andrew on December 15, 2004 at 09:19 AM
