No matter how differently modern interpreters assess the subject
matter of the Bible, or its religious significance, there exists a united front
among them. [To the modern interpreter] the Bible is important in light of its
capacity to refer to some “x”, i.e. what
really happened, or certain timeless truths. To our surprise, these views about
the Bible’s meaning were not held by premodern readers.
Premodern readers assumed that events depicted in the Bible
actually occurred as described, but surprisingly little of their interpretation
depended on this assumption. They simply did not ask: “What is the event or truth
to which the Bible refers?” For them, the text was woven into the fabric of
truth by virtue of being scripture.
As Irenaeus affirmed, “the scriptures are indeed perfect,
since they were spoken by the Word of God and His spirit.” For Irenaeus and for
the patristic tradition in general, the Bible was not a perfect historical
record. Scripture was, for them, the orienting, luminous center of a highly varied
and complex reality, shaped by divine providence. It was true not by virtue of
successfully or accurately representing any one event or part of this divinely
ordained reality. Rather, the truth rested in the scripture’s power to illuminate
and disclose the order and pattern of all things.
The fathers differ from modern readers, not in any
particular assumption about a verse or episode, or in any specific method, but
in their overall assumptions. Modern readers assume that the Bible means by
accurately referring to an “x”, whether event, mode of consciousness, or theological
truth. For the fathers, the Bible is the array of words, sentences, laws,
images, episodes, and narratives that does not acquire meaning because of its
connection to an “x”; it confers meaning because it is divine revelation.
Scripture is ordained by God to edify, and that power of edification is
intrinsic to scripture.
The image of direction illuminates the difference we
discovered in the fathers. Ancient readers of scripture moved within, across,
and through the text, exploring its orienting, unifying potency. Modern readers of scripture move in the
reverse direction, adopting techniques that lead out of what seems a confusing,
inaccurate, and contradictory text and into a realm of history or theological
ideas. [The fathers] did not ask, “What gives meaning to the story of Moses’
ascent of Mount Sinai ?” They assumed the
authority of the dual accounts in Exodus and Deuteronomy, and they sought to
order their interpretations accordingly. Instead of looking behind the text to
the events, they looked into the text for clues and solutions. The precritical
presumption that the meaning of scripture is in the words and not behind them explains
why modern readers find patristic exegesis so unfathomable.
Extracts from
SANCTIFIED VISION:
AN
INTRODUCTION TO EARLY CHRISTIAN INTERPRETATION OF THE BIBLE
John J O’Keefe and R
R Reno
No comments:
Post a Comment