[Image]  [Hi-Res Image]

Page 241

corresponding to the trichotomy of man, the sense is threefold. The sense of the words is the flesh of Scripture (for simple men), the soul is the moral sense (I Cor. ix. 9), while still beyond is a pneumatic sense (I Cor. ii. fj-7). This is what became known as the " theory " in exegesis or the " allegorical method." In this method Origen was the follower of Philo (whom he would enroll among the Church Fathers). Philo's starting-point was the same and his idea of a hidden sense the same. But his idea was in turn borrowed from the Greeks, since Plato had already conceived the same method in treating Homer, and the Stoics had developed the system. Whether Phffo was influenced by the rules of exegesis of the Palestinian schools is an open question; Origen could hardly have been decided by this influence. Two principles rule the exegesis of Origen. via view of Scripture is correct; and where he follows this alone, his exegesis is keen yet delicate. But he further insists that Scripture must say what the exegete decides is worthy of deity. When the literal sense seems unworthy, he seeks a "mystic, tropical, analogical, or concealed " sense by means of " theory."

In opposition to Origen the Antiochiaa school of exegesis sought to be fair to historical results both through " theory " and explanation. Euatathius of Antioch (c. 325, De Engastrimytho,

Its dogmatic and practical usefulness secured to the " theory " of Origen its influence, and its subjective character favored correction in the interest of ecclesiasticism. This last was continually advancing both in the Eastern and the Western Church. The tendency induced eisegesis, but was now in the direction of illustrations and proofs of

IV.-18

the grace of the spiritual intelligence. Far superior to him in deep insight and clearness is Augustine, who works out his ideal of an exegete (in De doctrines Christimao) and shows that he informs the results of scientific exegesis with a fine rhetorical sense (on Augustine cf. R. Simon, Hint. critique des . . . commentateurs du Nouveau Testament, p. 250, Paris, 1693). The writers on exegesis continued to formulate rules by which to derive a multiple sense from Scripture. Such a one was Eucherius of Lyons (d. about 452), whose Formula spiritualia intetligentice divides " contemplative theology "into historical discussion and the " interpretation of spiritual knowledge," which last is arbitrary allegorizing, turning all figurative language to dogmatic, religious, _ or ethical purposes. Yet in the " historical discussion " he produces valuable comments upon Scripture passages. Thus there is produced a compromise between the school of Antioch and Origen. Junilius (d. about 552) speaks for the exegetical tradition of the school of Nisibis (in his Inat"a regularict divince legis, ed. H. Kihn, Freiburg, 1880). He would have Scripture so explained that the explanation shall accord with the writer's individuality and with the environment of time, place, order, and intention. Thus patristic exegesis involved on one side historical explanation, on the other dogmatic, allegorizing attempts to determine an inner sense.

The exegesis of the Middle Ages rested upon the principles already in existence, except that the tendency was toward an increase of eisegeais in the interest of building up an ecclesiastical tradition

of interpretation. Its cause is well g. The stated by Vincent of Lerins (d. about Middle 450), when he says: "Every one inAges. terprets Scripture differently; Nova-

tian has one interpretation, Sabellius another, Donates another, still others are by Aries, Eunomius, Macedonius, etc.,, Faith founded itself upon the authority of the divine law and upon the tradition of the Church Catholic. Thomas Aquinas speaks not only for the exegesis of the Middle Ages but for Catholicism when he says: " The author of Sacred Scripture is God, in whose power it is to fit not only words to meanings (which man can do), but even things themselves." And then he proceeds to develop a fourfold exegesis, literal, figurative, moral, and anagogical, in which the figurative and anagogical are arbitrarily distinguished. Thus

i, Jerusalem signifies the city, the Church, a settled and moral order, and the everlasting life.

The Reformation drew a stroke through all these refinements and returned to the sources,

i discovering anew the word of God beneath the mounds of ecclesiastical tradition. It pronounced the dictum: The Church is not to determine what

Scripture teaches, but Scripture deb. The Ref- termines what ought to be taught in

with Erasmus as its spokesman. Luther declared it his task to translate the Scripture in its simple sense. But the orientation of exegesis was still religious, Scripture proving itself to be a book of testimonies for the reality of the