The writers of the first centuries faced many difficulties. They didn't have an established canon of either the Old or the New Testament. They had known only the rules of interpretation of the Rabbinical schools and, therefore, had to free themselves from its extreme literalness. They were surrounded by Judaism, paganism and all sorts of heresy. Out of all this came three different exegetical schools. Farrar says:
The Fathers of the third and later centuries may be divided into three exegetical schools. Those schools are the Literal and Realistic as represented predominantly by Tertullian; the Allegorical, of which Origen is the foremost exponent; and the Historical and Grammatical, which flourished chiefly in Antioch, and of which Theodore of Mopsuestia was the acknowledged chief.
In tracing the rise of the allegorical school, Farrar goes back to Philo and ultimately to Aristobulus, saying that his...
...actual work was of very great importance for the History of Interpretation. He is one of the precursors whom Philo used though he did not name, and he is the first to enunciate two theses which were destined to find wide acceptance, and to lead to many false conclusions in the sphere of exegesis.
The first of these is the statement that Greek philosophy is borrowed from the Old Testament, and especially from the Law of Moses; the other that all the tenets of the Greek philosophers, and especially of Aristotle, are to be found in Moses and the Prophets by those who use the right method of inquiry.
Philo liked Aristobulus's concept and tried to merge Mosaic law and Greek philosophy in order to make it more acceptable to the Greek. G.H. Gilbert explains it this way:
[To Philo] Greek philosophy was the same as the philosophy of Moses...And the aim of Philo was to set forth and illustrate this harmony between the Jewish religion and classic philosophy, or, ultimately, it was to commend the Jewish religion to the educated Greek world. This was the high mission to which he felt called, the purpose with which he expounded the Hebrew laws in the language of the world's culture and philosophy.
The only way Philo could make this work was to use an allegorizing method of interpreting Scripture. Particularly influenced by this harmonization was the school of Alexandria. Farrar further explains:
It was in the great catechetical school of Alexandria, founded, as tradition says, by St. Mark, that there sprang up the chief school of Christian Exegesis. Its object, like that of Philo, was to unite philosophy with revelation, and thus to use the borrowed jewels of Egypt to adorn the sanctuary of God. Hence, Clement of Alexandria and Origen furnished the direct antithesis of Tertullian and Irenaeus...
The first teacher of the school who rose to fame was the venerable Pantaenus, a converted Stoic, of whose writings only a few fragments remain. He was succeeded by Clement of Alexandria, who, believing in the divine origin of Greek philosophy, openly propounded the principle that all Scripture must be allegorically understood.
It was in this school that Origen further developed the allegorical method of interpretation. Origen believed Scripture presented a threefold sense: (1) a literal or historical meaning, but only as a stepping stone to a higher idea; (2) a psychic or moral meaning, for the general teaching of the vast majority of men; and (3) a mystic or ideal meaning, for those who knew how to understand the hidden meaning of Scripture. (Rather arrogant, wasn't he?) Origen's three-fold meaning theory accomplished basically the same thing as Philo's harmonization — to spiritualize away the letter of Scripture. Instead of simply bringing out the sense of the Bible, he put into it all sorts of foreign ideas and irrelevant fancies. But, this was what the people of his time wanted to hear. And because Origen was brilliant and extremely knowledgeable, he gathered a large following, until some of his more extreme ideas caused him to fall out of favor.
(to be continued)
The Fathers of the third and later centuries may be divided into three exegetical schools. Those schools are the Literal and Realistic as represented predominantly by Tertullian; the Allegorical, of which Origen is the foremost exponent; and the Historical and Grammatical, which flourished chiefly in Antioch, and of which Theodore of Mopsuestia was the acknowledged chief.
In tracing the rise of the allegorical school, Farrar goes back to Philo and ultimately to Aristobulus, saying that his...
...actual work was of very great importance for the History of Interpretation. He is one of the precursors whom Philo used though he did not name, and he is the first to enunciate two theses which were destined to find wide acceptance, and to lead to many false conclusions in the sphere of exegesis.
The first of these is the statement that Greek philosophy is borrowed from the Old Testament, and especially from the Law of Moses; the other that all the tenets of the Greek philosophers, and especially of Aristotle, are to be found in Moses and the Prophets by those who use the right method of inquiry.
Philo liked Aristobulus's concept and tried to merge Mosaic law and Greek philosophy in order to make it more acceptable to the Greek. G.H. Gilbert explains it this way:
[To Philo] Greek philosophy was the same as the philosophy of Moses...And the aim of Philo was to set forth and illustrate this harmony between the Jewish religion and classic philosophy, or, ultimately, it was to commend the Jewish religion to the educated Greek world. This was the high mission to which he felt called, the purpose with which he expounded the Hebrew laws in the language of the world's culture and philosophy.
The only way Philo could make this work was to use an allegorizing method of interpreting Scripture. Particularly influenced by this harmonization was the school of Alexandria. Farrar further explains:
It was in the great catechetical school of Alexandria, founded, as tradition says, by St. Mark, that there sprang up the chief school of Christian Exegesis. Its object, like that of Philo, was to unite philosophy with revelation, and thus to use the borrowed jewels of Egypt to adorn the sanctuary of God. Hence, Clement of Alexandria and Origen furnished the direct antithesis of Tertullian and Irenaeus...
The first teacher of the school who rose to fame was the venerable Pantaenus, a converted Stoic, of whose writings only a few fragments remain. He was succeeded by Clement of Alexandria, who, believing in the divine origin of Greek philosophy, openly propounded the principle that all Scripture must be allegorically understood.
It was in this school that Origen further developed the allegorical method of interpretation. Origen believed Scripture presented a threefold sense: (1) a literal or historical meaning, but only as a stepping stone to a higher idea; (2) a psychic or moral meaning, for the general teaching of the vast majority of men; and (3) a mystic or ideal meaning, for those who knew how to understand the hidden meaning of Scripture. (Rather arrogant, wasn't he?) Origen's three-fold meaning theory accomplished basically the same thing as Philo's harmonization — to spiritualize away the letter of Scripture. Instead of simply bringing out the sense of the Bible, he put into it all sorts of foreign ideas and irrelevant fancies. But, this was what the people of his time wanted to hear. And because Origen was brilliant and extremely knowledgeable, he gathered a large following, until some of his more extreme ideas caused him to fall out of favor.
(to be continued)
No comments:
Post a Comment