Patristic Exegesis Research Articles

La luce della luna: lucifluus in Zenone di Verona (Tract. 1.2.19) e Isidoro di Siviglia (Nat. 18.1; Etym. 3.53.1)

Abstract In Etym. 3.53.1 and Nat. 18.1, Isidore of Seville describes the nature of moonlight, primarily drawing on Augustine’s commentary on Psalm 10. In the chapter of De natura rerum, he also explores specific allegorical meanings of the moon, already established in patristic exegesis, particularly referencing the symbolism of the resurrection of the dead. To indicate the shining part of the moon’s surface, Isidore employs the rare adjectival compound lucifluus, first attested in Juvencus’ Evangeliorum libri with reference to the sun and, metaphorically, to the Gospel. Significantly, this adjective is already used in a context similar to Isidore’s, in the second sermon (De resurrectione) of the first book of the Tractatus by Zeno of Verona (Tract. 1.2.19). In this sermon, the author offers a brief allegorical excursus on the moon, interpreting it as a symbol of mortal man and his future resurrection at the end of time. With some distinctions, he uses the same adjective to describe the brightness of the sun in relation to that of the moon. This close analogy in context and content suggests that Isidore, particularly in the passage from De natura rerum, might have considered Zeno’s sermon when reusing the term lucifluus.

Between Alexandria and Antioch: the Diverse Sources of Basil’s Homiliae super psalmos 45

Abstract Patristic exegesis is often still viewed as a binary: Alexandria vs. Antioch, allegory vs. literal. While there are clear examples of interpreters who adhered to one school’s approach, there were many who sat somewhere between these two extremes. One notable example of this is Basil of Caesarea, who, when actually studied as an exegete, has often been miscast as a student of Antioch or Alexandria. An examination of Basil’s Homiliae super psalmos 45, however, demonstrates that the sources behind Basil’s interpretive efforts cannot be limited to one exegetical ‘school’ or another, but actually represent a diverse range of readings, from Origen of Alexandria to Eusebius of Caesarea to Diodore of Tarsus. In his christological reading of this psalm, Basil resembles the Antiochenes, while in his overall spiritual vision and penchant for allegory, he draws on Origen. The example of Basil demonstrates the complexity of the exegetical world of the early church and the non-binary lines of influence, as well as the need for scholars of patristic exegesis to recognize nuance and complexity in their treatments of these writers.

The Gospel of Matthew and the Pesher Interpretation

This study explores the pesher interpretation, a method of biblical exegesis used by the Qumran community, and whether early Christians like the author of Matthew's Gospel employed similar techniques. Since the 1950s, scholars have analysed the so-called “formula quotations” in Matthew, finding parallels with the pesharim commentaries found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Krister Stendahl argued Matthew comes from a “school” using pesher to radically reinterpret Old Testament passages as fulfilled in Jesus. Others like Richard Longenecker also find Matthew employing this Second Temple Jewish method, especially in texts with “fulfilment formulae”. However, objections have been raised. Joseph Fitzmyer notes the differences between Qumran pesharim and Matthew's use of scripture. Norman Hillyer wonders if the fulfilment formula indicates a distinct hermeneutic, not pesher. Ulrich Luz stresses Matthew proclaims fulfilment, not hidden meanings like pesharim. In conclusion, applying the ideas of pesher from Qumran to the New Testament raises problems. Similarities between pesher and Patristic exegesis are noted, but determining dependence requires examining the original historical meaning versus the contemporary application of prophecies. More analysis of whether early Christian use of scripture mirrors Qumran pesher or develops its fulfilment hermeneutic is needed. Keywords: pesher, fulfilment, formula quotations, Midrash, exegesis, Qumran, Eschatology, Second Temple, Matthew's Gospel, hermeneutics

Letters as a School of the Christian Exegesis. A Study of the Selected Early Christian Latin Letters of the 4th and 5th Century (Augustine, Jerome, and Paulinus of Nola)

Letters are often treated as a secondary literary genre, serving only to convey information and maintain relationships between people. But Christianity, which has been called the religion of the book, can also be described as the religion of the letter. In fact, from the very beginning, it was mainly through the letters (e.g., of Paul the Apostle) that the faith and the doctrinal, moral, and disciplinary instructions were transmitted. Of course, the authors of the early Christian letters also referenced biblical themes and the Bible itself. Following the ancient rules of rhetoric, they also implemented the postulate of didacticism (docere) by making the Scriptures and their exegesis more widely known. This article aims to show how this postulate is put into practice in Latin letters written by three great patristic figures: Saint Augustine, Saint Jerome, and Saint Paulinus of Nola, the most important representatives of the golden patristic age. These outstanding early Christian pastors and writers are considered to have created a kind of “virtual school” of biblical exegesis in their letters. This article presents how this “school” functioned, from the invitation to participate, through the methods and the study program, to the praise that good students earned. It can be an excellent model for our current age, marked by online education. This can also be applied to biblical studies and the study of biblical and patristic exegesis.

Fabricating the Fall of Satan: Revelation 12:7–9 and its Interpretation in Early Christianity

Abstract Some interpreters understand Rev. 12:7–9 as a depiction of (1) a primeval literal war between Michael and Satan that resulted in the subsequent expulsion of Satan from heaven or (2) Satan’s defeat (represented metaphorically as an expulsion) at Jesus’ death. Although these interpretations are common in contemporary exegetical works, early interpreters of Revelation explained these verses differently. This prompts the question of who were the innovative interpreters who first read the texts as we do today? Accordingly, tracing a history of interpretation of the passage, in this article I will argue that (1) Oecumenius was the first interpreter who understood Rev. 12:7–9 as a portrayal of a primeval war between Michael and Satan which resulted in the expulsion of the devil from heaven because of his pride and apostasy. (2) Oecumenius did not reach this conclusion by exegeting Rev. 12:7–9. Rather, he connected traditional patristic exegesis and reflection on Satan—condensed mainly from interpretations of texts like Ezek. 28:11–19, Isa. 14:12–15, and Luke 10:18—with Revelation 12. (3) Andrew of Caesarea not only replicated Oecumenius’ exegesis of the pericope but argued that this passage also portrayed Satan’s defeat at the cross of Jesus, due to the influence of the patristic exegesis of John 12:31. (4) Given that Andrew’s commentary was widely copied (whereas Oecumenius’ was not), Andrew is ultimately the catalyst for the dissemination of Oecumenius’ exegesis of this pericope as well as his own. (5) Therefore, Oecumenius and Andrew are the originators of the explanations of Rev. 12:7–9 present in many contemporary exegetical works.

“Concerning That Day and Hour”: In Defense of Patristic Exegesis

Abstract Since the fourth century, Mark 13:32/Matt 24:36 have regularly been taken in hand as evidence of Jesus’s ignorance and used to advance subordinationist, kenotic, or Ebionite christological agendas. Meanwhile, modern biblical scholars regularly use patristic commentary on this passage as evidence that the classical Christian tradition advanced ahistorical, docetic eisegesis. In this essay, I consider patristic commentary on this pericope to show that these criticisms are unwarranted. The church fathers did not consider Jesus’s humanity to be an abstract, philosophical conundrum. Rather, their approach was driven by intertextual concerns set within a theistic metaphysical framework. They did not resolve a competition between Jesus’s humanity and divinity in favor of his divinity but upheld the confession that he was fully God and fully man in the face of a variety of approaches that threatened to corrupt or relinquish his humanity. I suggest that certain philosophical developments in the thought of Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) allow us to make distinctions that both uphold the patristic exegetical tradition and extend it in ways that do greater justice to the passage.

Review: Singer of the Word of God: Ephrem the Syrian and His Significance in Late Antiquity, by Sebastian P. Brock

Review: <i>Singer of the Word of God: Ephrem the Syrian and His Significance in Late Antiquity</i>, by Sebastian P. Brock

Case-Precedent in John Chrysostom's Interpretation of "Plucking Grain on the Sabbath" (Matt 12.1–8)

In his homily on the story of the disciples plucking grain on the Sabbath in Matthew 12, John Chrysostom analyzes a rare instance of argument from precedent. Greek forensic rhetoric and Roman law made little use of case-precedent. The concept played a more significant role in rabbinic writings, although not in the form where one starts with a problem case and resolves it by analogizing to a case-precedent. John Chrysostom gives a keen analysis of the logic of the latter in Jesus's appeals to the case precedents of David eating the shewbread and the priests serving in the temple on the Sabbath as justifications for his disciples' plucking and eating grain on the Sabbath. Although the rhetorical tradition did not supply him with ready tools of analysis, he adapted terms and concepts found in the standard handbooks to explain the progression of argument. John's masterful analysis is another proof of what patristic exegesis can offer to any serious student of the New Testament, including the modern scholar.

The Bible and Catholic Ressourcement: Essays on Scripture and Theology by William M. Wright IV

Reviewed by: The Bible and Catholic Ressourcement: Essays on Scripture and Theology by William M. Wright IV Jeffrey L. Morrow william m. wright iv, The Bible and Catholic Ressourcement: Essays on Scripture and Theology (Renewal within Tradition; Steubenville, OH: Emmaus Academic, 2020). Pp. 250. $43. William Wright has published a wonderful collection of essays that are concerned with reading the Bible both historically and theologically. The majority of the essays focus more on method, whereas the last three engage the biblical texts themselves. W. divides his work [End Page 167] into roughly three parts: the first three chapters examine the biblical thinking and work of three Catholic theologians whom W. identifies as Ressourcement theologians but who are more often referred to as informal members of La Nouvelle théologie, the term first used of them by Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange: Henri de Lubac, Yves Congar, and Joseph Ratzinger/ Pope Benedict XVI. Chapters 4–7 focus more exclusively on Ratzinger/Benedict's Jesus of Nazareth trilogy. The final three chapters apply the sort of biblical hermeneutics covered thus far, represented by de Lubac, Congar, and Ratzinger/Benedict, to specific texts: John 6:1–21 (chap. 8); the use of Psalm 69 in John's Gospel (chap. 9); and John 8:12–20. This focus on John's Gospel is not surprising since W. wrote his Emory University doctoral dissertation on John 9 (published as Rhetoric and Theology: Figural Reading of John 9 [BZNW 165; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2009]). Wright articulates the theme of his volume as "the interpretation of Scripture in relation to the movement in recent Catholic theology known as the Ressourcement" (p. 1). The figures in this movement were the thinkers involved in the liturgical, patristic, and biblical renewal efforts that played a foundational role in the work of ressourcement, or retrieval, a going back to the sources, that led to the Second Vatican Council, which was also known for its other emphasis on aggiornamento (updating). In chap. 1 ("Patristic Exegetical Theory and Practice in de Lubac and Congar"), W. examines how de Lubac and Congar approached patristic exegesis as having perennial value. In chap. 2 ("The Literal Sense of Scripture according to Henri de Lubac: Insights from Patristic Exegesis of the Transfiguration"), W. looks more closely at de Lubac's discussion of patristic exegesis, focusing on the concrete example of the Gospel accounts of Jesus's transfiguration. W. describes the way de Lubac engaged the early Christian exegesis of Origen, Jerome, and Augustine. Important for W. is understanding de Lubac's nuanced appreciation for the work of historical biblical criticism while at the same time embracing Maurice Blondel's critique of such exegesis. In chap. 3 ("Echoes of Biblical Apocalyptic in the Encyclical Teaching of Benedict XVI"), W. looks to Ratzinger/Benedict, drawing attention to what he refers to as Ratzinger/ Benedict's "biblical apocalypticism" in his papal encyclicals: "Benedict's analysis of the Church's present moment echoes the apocalyptic motif of a present crisis in which the people of God are caught up in a dramatic conflict with an antagonizing opposition. . . . Benedict positions atheistic humanism as instantiating the apocalyptic figure of the false prophet. . . . Benedict emphasizes the Church's Christoform witness of charity-in-truth as the way to confront these antagonistic accounts of humanism" (pp. 61–62). The significance that Ratzinger/Benedict clearly holds for W. is most evident in the four chapters (4–7) he devotes to the three volumes of Jesus of Nazareth: chap. 4, "A 'New Synthesis': Benedict XVI's Jesus of Nazareth: Volume 1"; chap. 5, "Pre-Gospel Traditions and Post-Critical Interpretation in Benedict XVI's Jesus of Nazareth: Volume 2; chap. 6, "Living with the Word of God: The Holy Family in Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives"; chap. 7, "Patristic Biblical Hermeneutics in Benedist XVI's Jesus of Nazareth." W. argues that Jesus of Nazareth demonstrates the kind of exegesis Ratzinger/Benedict thinks should be done. W.'s comment about vol. 1 applies just as well as to how he views the entire trilogy: "It is a genuine exercise in Ressourcement theology" (p. 113), wherein, as he explains in chap. 7, "Benedict's theological presentation . . . is identical with his...

Scriptural Exegesis or Speculative Philosophy

Summary Dogmatic debates in early Christianity shaped philosophical discourse just as Greek philosophy offered the conceptual tools to engage and, accordingly to crystalize early Christian practice, into a formal system of belief. Thus, in the recently-published The Rise of Christian Theology and the End of Ancient Metaphysics, Johannes Zachhuber notes that “Patristic thought as a whole can be identified as a Christian philosophy.” Following suit – though not without nuance – this paper suggests treating Patristic scriptural exegesis as an exercise of speculative philosophy, as evidenced in Augustine’s interpretation of the figure of the cross at Eph 3.18, where the cross progressively becomes a simple yet compelling paradigm of divine manifestation. This paradigm can be framed according to Augustine’s mature articulation of the ‘ontological principle’ of manifestation in s. 165: “From the depth which you cannot see rises everything that you can see.” By engaging in scriptural exegesis, within a gestalt where Wisdom, sacred and profane alike, merge in the incarnate God manifest in Christ, Augustine articulates unprecedented philosophical principles.

Early Christian Readings of Genesis One: Patristic Exegesis and Literal Interpretation

Early Christian Readings of Genesis One: Patristic Exegesis and Literal Interpretation

“Jonah’s gourd” and its early Byzantine interpretations

Many modern scholars consider the Old Testament book of Jonah being written in a boldly parodic manner. The narrative engages many details that sound humorous for a modern reader. However, from the standpoint of late Antique and early Medieval patristic exegesis, it is often unclear whether Byzantine interpreters perceived such passages laughable or at least inappropriate for a prophetic writing. This study presents a few examples of early Byzantine commentaries to the episode with Jonah and a gourd (Jonah 4:6–11). None of the commentaries expresses any explicit amusement caused by the discussed text. However, the style, method, or context of each commentary appears to be passing the traditional bounds of Bible interpretation. The earlier interpreters adhere to the most expected moral reading of Jonah 4, but they use epithets, metaphors, or omissions, which produce the effect of paradox comparable to the biblical wording itself. The later commentaries tend to involve unexpected and even provocative senses. In such interpretations, God can be thought of as being able to play with a human or even to fool and deceive. What seems us humorous in the Bible, Byzantine commentators take primarily as a paradox, which they did not explain or remove but elaborate further paradoxically. The later an interpreter is, the bolder his paradoxical approach appears. The results of the study provide some clues to understanding how the interpretation of humorous, parodic, or ironical passages were developing in the history of Byzantine intellectual culture.

Divine Discourse in the Epistle to the Hebrews: The Recontextualization of Spoken Quotations of Scripture. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph 178

Divine Discourse in the Epistle to the Hebrews: The Recontextualization of Spoken Quotations of Scripture. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph 178

Dante’s theology and contemporary thought: Recovering transcendence?

This article outlines how Dante’s philosophy and theology turn on issues that are being debated in broader philosophical, theological, and theoretical milieus today. It emphasizes, in particular, how the new horizon opened by certain postmodern—and more specifically post-secular—turns in philosophy shifts the light falling on the interface between the concepts of transcendence and immanence. As a result, Dante’s attempt, in the twilight of the Middle Ages, to renegotiate the relations between the two shows up as acutely relevant and potentially groundbreaking for current philosophical and theological inquiry. The areas of inquiry traversed include realized eschatology as theorized by Agamben; Foucault’s archeological model of knowledge; Patristic and medieval hexameral exegesis; the tension between hermeneutics and deconstruction; political theology; the theological turn in phenomenology; secularism and humanities as crypto-theological forms of thought. All are examined as prefigured in embryo by Dante’s comprehensive, poetic approach to knowing.

XLVII Incontro di studiosi dell’antichità cristiana (Roma, 9-11 maggio 2019). Nota d’insieme sui paradigmi patristici di “maschile” e “femminile”e del perché del loro interesse

The patristic period is of particular interest for the theme of “masculine” and “feminine” given the interconnection between the patristic exegesis of the two stories of creation (Gn 1:26-27 and 2:7) and the religious and social culture of the time. Late antiquity parameters of masculine and feminine, however although they are placed beyond the modern questions, cannot be considered completely extraneous from modernity for that path of history that connects human epochs beyond their own determined period. In this note we attempt to summarize the patristic approaches with an overall view, having both, a not too dispersive picture, and also to obtain some elements for further reflections, keeping in mind what Freud already observed «that the concepts “masculine” and “feminine”, whose content appears so devoid of ambiguity to common opinion, belong to the most confused concepts in science».

Revising the Repetitions: The Relative Textual Stability of Repeated Patristic Citations as a Window into the Transmission History of Patristic Exegesis – Chrysostom’s Homilies on Romans as an Initial Test Case

Since the beginning of the discipline, New Testament textual critics have made use of the scriptural citations found in patristic homilies, commentaries, and other exegetical works. Those who use these sources commonly distinguish between the initial citation of a passage of Scripture and the repetitions of this passage in the following exposition. These repetitions are often considered less susceptible to alteration in the course of transmission and therefore more likely to provide reliable access to the form of the biblical text used by the patristic exegete in question. At the same time, in some textual traditions, both these initial citations and their repetitions show evidence of deliberate alteration in the course of transmission. Based on a full collation of the direct Greek manuscript tradition for selected test passages of Chrysostom’s Homilies on Romans (CPG 4427) this paper considers the relative textual stability of initial citations and their subsequent repetitions, opening a new window into the transmission history of patristic exegesis.

Hermeneutic Applications from the Patristic Exegetes

This paper examines modern hermeneutic approaches and how patristic exegetes can complement interpretative methods. Modern hermeneutics apply different procedures depending on the genre. Kannengiesser’s Handbook of Patristic Exegesis is used to summarize patristic views by specific book and genre, while Russell’s Playing with Fire, Klein, Blomberg and Hubbard’s Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, and Kaiser and Silva’s, Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics frame the range of modern hermeneutic approaches. Perspectives on spiritual formation are addressed per genre since it is important for biblical interrelation and application and was valued by patristic exegetes like Augustine. The paper shows how patristic exegetes focused on the spiritual and seeking the Bible’s deeper meaning. It demonstrates how Russell’s spiritual formation emphasis aligns with Augustine’s spiritual burning that transformed his life and how this emphasis aligns with the patristic exegetes’ desire to seek deeper spiritual meaning in scripture.

Библейская типология или языческая аллегореза? К вопросу об особенностях патристической экзегезы книги Бытия по материалам «Шестоднева» прп. Анастасия Синаита

Библейская типология или языческая аллегореза? К вопросу об особенностях патристической экзегезы книги Бытия по материалам «Шестоднева» прп. Анастасия Синаита

THE BEGINNINGS OF SPIRITUAL AUTOBIOGRAPHY - 2 CORINTHIANS 12, 2-5

Aim/Thesis. In this inquiry, the author examines the 12th chapter of the 2nd letter of Paul to the Corinthians in a hermeneutical way, highlighting its relevance for a Christian's spiritual autobiography and emphasizing the influence it has had on the later development of the genre.&#x0D; Concept/Methods. Using patristic exegesis (like that of Saint Chrysostom)t and also that of more recent authors dedicated to this theme, he tries not only to present and explain the event, but also to offer new interpretive keys for reading it.&#x0D; Results and conclusion. The approach focuses on keywords and phrases like "the rapture", "glimpse" or "thorn in the flesh" and it tries to presents Paul's understanding of the link between the spiritual experience of encountering God and the suffering that follows it, as a useful means of humbling a person. The research also highlights some important examples that show how the Apostle influenced the style and the way of thinking of later authors like Saint Augustine or Saint Silouan from Mount Athos.&#x0D; Originality/Cognitive value. The relevance of showing why Saint Paul's second letter to Corinthians (12, 2-) represents the beginning of the spiritual autobiography in the Christian space is a very big one due to the fact it can helps the reader to have a deeper understanding of latter spiritual autobiographies like the one of Saint Siluan, father John of Kronstadt, Teresa of Calcutta or Maria Faustina Kowalska.

Superseding Patristic Supersessionism: Hilary of Poitiers and Cyril of Alexandria on Hosea 1–3

ABSTRACT Richard Kendall Soulen holds that the major error of early Christians’ interpretation of the state of the Jewish faith in relation to Christianity is in their “flattening” of history. In this view, the Jewish faith is superseded by the Christian faith because of Christ’s rejection by the Jews and the establishment of the church. While the church fathers have received much generalized criticism due to apparent supersessionist tendencies in their exegesis, Michael Azar’s recent scholarship on Origen of Alexandria demonstrates that a closer examination of patristic exegesis is warranted. This article builds on the work of Azar by drawing attention to the interpretation of Hos 1–3 in the exegetical work of Hilary of Poitiers and Cyril of Alexandria. Both Hilary and Cyril treat Hosea’s relationship with Gomer as a synecdoche for the openness of God’s promises to all people and not as evidence that God has abandoned the Jews for the church. In light of their exegesis of Hosea, and following Azar’s work on Origen, I argue that the interpretive practice of viewing salvation history as non-linear reveals a more complex interpretive tendency in the first several centuries of the church than generalizations about supersessionism allow.