Biblical Interpretation and Doctrine in Early Christianity: Collected Essays (Brian E. Daley, SJ) - A Review
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION AND DOCTRINE IN EARLY CHRISTIANITY: Collected Essays. By Brian E. Daley, SJ. Edited by Andrew Hofer, OP. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2025. 503 pages.
For many Protestants, there is a
belief that sometime during or after the second century, people gave up on the
Bible and turned to human philosophy (especially Greek philosophy) to define
doctrine. Fortunately, at the time of the Protestant Reformation, the Reformers
reclaimed the Bible. Restorationists—from Anabaptists to the Stone-Campbell
Restoration Movement to Pentecostals—pushed things even further, claiming that
they had reclaimed New Testament Christianity after centuries of corruption. Of
course, a fully canonical New Testament didn't come into existence, or at least
in terms of canonical recognition, until the fourth century. It was only then
that Athanasius offered a canonical list of New Testament books that reflects
what contemporary Protestants would recognize as the New Testament. The truth
is, that early Christian leaders, from Origen to Athanasius and beyond, did
engage with Scripture. They read it through particular lenses—often using Greek
philosophical tools—so they could understand and apply what they found in these
texts. The good news is that a growing number of scholars are bringing this
truth to light. Among them is Brian E. Daley, SJ.
In his book Biblical Interpretation and Doctrine in Early Christianity, Daley addresses the
question of how early Christians interpreted the Bible as they formulated their
doctrinal positions. This book is one of two collections of essays that draws on years of
scholarly work. The other volume, which I have yet to read is titled Christology in Early Christianity: Collected Essays. As to why one might be interested in
these volumes, I will note that Daley is a noted scholar of early Christianity,
especially concerning eschatology. As I have read his works, especially on
eschatology, I have found him to be an insightful scholar.
In terms of his credentials, Daley
is Catherine F. Huisking Professor of Theology Emeritus at the University of
Notre Dame. He is, of course, a member of the Jesuit order. He is also the
recipient of the Johannes Quasten Medal and the Ratzinger Prize for theology. Brian Dunkle, SJ, writes in the introduction
to this volume about Daley and his scholarship: "Throughout his treatments of this
wide-ranging literature, Brian gently but firmly challenges a century of
scholarly prejudice against the early Church's approach to the Bible. While
acknowledging both the achievements of modern critical scholarship and the
limits of the Fathers' precritical assumptions about texts and history, he
demonstrates in these papers the enduring relevance of patristic exegesis for
the life and faith of the Church today" (p. 1).
This collection of essays is
divided into six parts. Each of the essays in the six sections covers several
areas of Daley’s interest. Most of these essays focus on the way early
Christians interpreted and applied scripture as they developed their
theological positions. The essays also demonstrate Daley’s concern about
showing the relevance of these efforts for contemporary Christians.
The first section of Daley’s book
is titled "Fundamental Issues in Scriptural Interpretation and
Doctrine." The essays in this section cover several more generalized
topics centered on biblical interpretation and the development of Christian
doctrine. The first four essays will be especially helpful to readers in that
they draw out some of the areas of theological concern, centering on how the
early Fathers (and Mothers), engaged with Scripture, and whether we can learn
something from them. In the opening chapter, titled "Christ, the Church,
and the Shape of Scripture," Daley acknowledges that early Christian
exegesis can be puzzling and even arbitrary. That is because modern
interpreters view the task of exegesis very differently from their ancient
counterparts. Thus, it's not that they didn't have the proper linguistic skills
or lacked a sense of literary or historical context. They simply viewed their
task differently. There is also a chapter in this section on the way Mary is
viewed in Orthodox and Catholic theology.
Part 2 focuses on "Origen's
Scriptural Interpretation and Doctrine." In the two chapters in this
section, Daley acknowledges Origen's role as one of the earliest biblical
scholars, while examining his methodologies and principles, especially as found
in De Principiis. The second of the two chapters is titled “Incorporeality
and ‘Divine Sensibility,’” in which Daley focuses on De Principis 4.4,
in which Origen lifts up the spiritual dimensions of Scripture. Part 3 takes us to the fourth century, with a
focus on the three Cappadocian theologians. He offers two chapters on Gregory
Nazianzus’s biblical interpretation and two examining that of Gregory of Nyssa.
Although there is not a chapter on the work of Basil of Caesarea, he also
figures in these chapters. Among the essays in this section, the one that stood
out to me was the one titled Walking through the Word of God" Gregory of
Nazianzus as a Biblical Interpreter." Daley notes that while Gregory did not
write biblical commentaries or even deliver a sermon series, that may be due to
his training as a rhetor rather than as a grammarian, such was true of Origen
or Jerome. However, Daley writes that Gregory was deeply rooted in Scripture, as
he focused his attention on the incarnation and the Trinity. Regarding Gregory
of Nyssa, his chapter on Nyssa's eschatology is quite helpful as well (Chapter
10). Titled “Growth towards Final Freedom: Gregory of Nyssa on Death and
Eternal Life,” the chapter explores the various ways that Gregory understood
death, eternal life, and salvation. Daley writes that “Gregory’s use of Scripture
certainly recognizes its normativity for faith, but also shows a freedom of
interpretation, especially in dealing with certain passages, that can surprise
us” (p. 229). In Part 4 we jump to the Sixth Century with two essays focusing
on the "Theological Method in the Sixth Century." Here Daley's essays
focus on "Boethius's Theological Tracts and Early Byzantine
Scholasticism." The second looks at "The Origenism of Leontius of
Byzantium." While Boethius is better known as a philosopher, Leontius is a
major adherent of Origen's theology at a time when Origen's works were being
condemned.
Since Brian Daley has written
widely on eschatology, it is not surprising that we find a section focused on
eschatology. Thus, Part 5 is titled "Scriptural Interpretation of
Redemption and Eschatology." Here we find three chapters focusing on these
two related topics. One chapter deals with early views of redemption in Christ
(Chapter 13). The second is focused on the "Hope of the resurrection in
the Early Church." Both of these chapters interact with different figures,
including Athanasius, Anselm, and Augustine among others. My attention was
drawn to Chapter 15, where Daley takes a look at "Apokastasis and
'Honorable Silence" in the Eschatology of Maximus the Confessor." One
of the questions that contemporary interpreters have been interested in has
centered on early Christian theologians who might have embraced forms of
universal salvation. While Origen and Gregory of Nyssa appear to embrace some
form of the restoration of all things (apokastasis), the question is
whether Maximus was also in that camp. While Daley acknowledges that there are
pieces of that theology in Maximus' writings, in the end, he does not believe
Maximus embraced this idea. Whether one agrees with Daley's assessment, this is
an important essay since Maximus is a key figure in conversations about
eschatology.
While the first five sections deal
with early Christian theologians and their use of the Bible, Part 6, which is titled
“Retrievals of Patristic Scriptural Interpretation,” brings into the
conversation more recent theologians (nineteenth and twentieth-century figures),
but in doing so focuses on their engagement with early Christians and their
interpretation of the Bible. The first of the chapters engages with John Henry
Newman and his embrace of the Alexandrian tradition connected with Cyril, thus
we see him trending toward a miaphysite view of Christ’s nature. The other two
chapters focus on the emergence in the twentieth century of the Nouvelle
Theologie, which is connected with figures such as Yves Congar and Henri de
Lubac. This movement sought to break free of more medieval, Thomistic views of
theology, by drawing upon Patristic resources. One of these chapters focuses on
the document Dei Verbum from Vatican II, which was influenced by Nouvelle
Theologie, despite significant opposition to the movement by
traditionalists, in large part because it challenged the two source theory of revelation
(Scripture and Tradition) suggesting that revelation is “a living chain of
communication, rather than as a two-fold body of information” (p. 475).
In all, the essays contained in
this collection—Biblical Interpretation and Doctrine in Early Christianity—cover
a variety of topics and individuals. As such, they give us both a good sense of
Daley's views on biblical interpretation and theology as well as helpful
introductions to these topics and individuals. As with any collection of
essays, some of the essays will be of greater interest to some readers than to others.
Nevertheless, this volume should serve as an important resource for
conversations about how early Christian theologians can serve as important
dialogue partners in the present as we engage with Scripture. We needn’t agree
with those dialogue partners on every matter, but we would be wise, as Daley
demonstrates, to engage with them, for they did consider Scripture to be
foundational to their doctrinal work.
This book may be purchased at several outlets, including:
Comments