The question of interpretation in the ancient Church.
On this point, St. Vincent was in full agreement with the established tradition. As was beautifully says Hilary of Poitiers : "The Scriptures are not the text that reads, but the meaning is understandable [7] . The issue of good exegesis remained a burning issue in the Fourth Century, in the debate of the Church with the Arians, as she had already been in the second century, during the struggle against the Gnostics, and Sabellians Montanists. All parties in attendance were using the Scriptures. Heretics, as the Gnostics and Manichaean, gladly quoted texts and scriptural passages and they invoked the authority of Holy Scripture. In addition, exegesis was at that time, the main if not the only method of theology ; the authority of Scripture reigned supreme. The Orthodox were thus raising the crucial question of interpretation: What was the basic principle?
You should know that Second Century, the term referred mainly to the Scriptures of the Old Testament and that, moreover, the authority of Scripture was violently attacked, and concrete rejected the doctrine of Marcion . The unity of the Bible, that's what he had to defend and demonstrate. What was the principle and the guarantee of the Christian and Christological understanding of what was called the "Prophecy", ie the Old Testament? This is the historical context in which, for the first time, invoked the tradition .
It said that Scripture belonged to the Church and it was inside the church, the community of faith right, that Scripture could be properly understood and justly interpreted. Heretics, that is to say, those who were outside the Church had not the key to the meaning of Scripture . It was not enough to read and quote the words taken from Scripture, he still had to clearly communicate the true meaning, true about Scripture as a whole as an inseparable whole. We had to somehow know in advance the outline of biblical revelation, the great redemptive purpose of God's Providence, which was possible only eyes of faith.
It is faith that enabled him to discern the testimony about Christ ( Christuszeugniss ) in the Old Testament. It is faith that makes known the proper unit of the four Gospels. But this faith was not arbitrary and subjective belief of individuals, was the faith of the Church, rooted in the apostolic message, the kerygma , which gave it its authenticity . What was missing for those outside the Church, it was precisely the message first, fundamental and crucial true heart of the Gospel. For these outsiders, Scripture was a dead letter, or at most a collection of essays and stories unrelated, they tried to order or reorder according to their own schemes, from foreign sources. They had a different faith. This is the main argument used by Tertullian in his treatise inflamed " On the Prescription of Heretics .
He would not discuss the Scriptures with heretics: they were not allowed to use it, because the scriptures do not belong to them. They were the good of the Church . Tertullian insisted strongly on the priority given to the "rule of faith," regula fidei . She was the only key to understanding Scripture. And this "rule" was apostolic, rooted in and arising from the teaching of the Apostles.
CH Turner has characterized the meaning and intent of this appeal or reference to the "rule of faith" in the early church. "When Christians speak of the" rule of faith, "calling "Apostolic" they would not say that the Apostles had discovered and formulated ... What they meant by that is that the profession of faith recited each catechumen before baptism contained a summary of the faith the Apostles had taught and entrusted to their disciples to teach it to their suite. " This confession was the same everywhere, although it was likely in his speech, local variations . She was always in close association with the formula of baptism [8] . Outside this "rule", Scripture does that could be misinterpreted. Scripture and Tradition, for Tertullian, were inextricably intertwined. "This is the place to reveal the true doctrine and true Christian faith, we also find truth of Scripture, interpretations and traditions of all Christians" [9] . The tradition of the apostolic faith was the indispensable guide to the understanding of Scripture and the ultimate guarantee of the correct interpretation. Church, far from being an outside authority, which would have to judge Scripture était plutôt le dépositaire et le gardien de la Vérité Divine, contenue et conservée dans la Sainte Ecriture [10] .
[7] Scripturae enim non in legendo sunt, sed in intelligendo , phrase tirée de l’Ad Constantium Aug ., lib. II, cap. 9, ML X, 570 ; reprise par saint Jérôme, Dial. c. Lucifer ., cap. 28, ML XXIII, 190-191.
[8] C.H. Turner, « Apostolic Succession », Essays on the Early History of the Church and the Ministry , edited by H.B. Swete, London 1918, p.101-102. Voir aussi Yves M.J. Congar, o.p., La Tradition et les traditions , II. Essai Théologique , Paris 1963, p. 21 sqq.
[9] Ubi enim apparuerit esse veritatem disciplinae et fidei christianae, illic erit veritas scipturarum et expositionum et omnium traditionum christianarum , texte cité, 19,3.
[10] Cf. E. Flesseman-van-Leer, Tradition and Scripture in the Early Church , Assen 1954, p.145-185, Damien van den Eynde, Standards of Christian Education in the patristic literature of the first three centuries , Gembloux-Paris 1933, p. 197-212; Stirniman JK, im Lichte Die Praescriptio Tertullian of Römischen Rechts und der Theologie , Freiburg 1949, and the instruction notes and RF Repressed, op, in the publication "Christian Sources" From the Praescriptione , Volume 46 of this collection, Paris 1957.
0 comments:
Post a Comment