Evans - The Language And Logic Of The Bible

Front 1

Evans (who)

Back 1

A.B. St. Anne's College
Diploma in Education from Oxford
PhD, Oxford, 1974
2 D.Litts, from Oxford and Cambridge, 1983

Professor emerita of medieval theology and intellectual history at Cambridge.

PhD on Anselm,

Work in ecumenicism and educational theory/practice

Front 2

Evans (thesis)

Back 2

Despite naively assuming the literal inspiration of the biblical text, early Middle Ages exegetes “helped form and direct the principles of modern criticism” by applying “new skills in grammar and logic” to the Bible in order to understand “the nature of the [its] language and its ways of conveying meaning” (10, 166–68, back cover)

Front 3

Evans (medieval system of interpretation)

Back 3

Peter the Chanter systematized methods that had been developed over hundreds of years.

-“Lectio is the reading of the text with a commentary. . . .

-Disputatio is the discussion of the questions which arise in the exposition of difficult passages, . . .

-Predicatio . . . is a method of teaching by preaching” (8-9).

Evans books traces the developments of lectio and its significance to disputatio leading up to the thirteen century.

Front 4

Evans (introduction)

Back 4

Augustine and Gregory the Great imparted to medieval exegetes views of Scripture that influence medieval interpretation:

-Sin interrupts man's communication with God
-God condescends to man through creation, incarnation, and in the words of the Bible
-God condescension in the Biblical text elevates man through perfectly inspired texts.
-Belief in biblical inspiration and growing literacy in the Roman world highlighted abnormalities in the text
-Belief in biblical inspiration imparted a high view of literal interpretation.

Front 5

Evans (chapter 1) [Background]

Back 5

Two broad approaches to interpretation fueled early medieval interpretation. Theses coincide with the distinction between literal and spiritual interpretation:

-"Holy Reading" (Rupert of Deutz): Scripture is mysterious and only accessed through “the cultivation of a quiet receptiveness which allows the Holy Spirit to speak in a man’s heart as it will” (13). Patients, prayer and meditation needed. Roots in the Fathers. Seeing the relationship between figurative and meanings.

-Rigorous and Rational Study (Anselm): Joining with "holy reading" A. brings classical and literary categories to bear on the Bible. Begins looking for the relationship sign and thing signified. Meaning found in this pursuit and potential inconsistencies in the text explained.

Front 6

Evans (chapter 2) [Background]

Back 6

Additional factors increased awareness to the language and logic of the Bible:

-Academic school, not monastic schools, encouraged the study of the Bible based on curiosity, not ministry.
-Introductory material on the author, date, structure of the book began to be composed as commentary before biblical study
-Application of grammar, the foundation of the artes, to the Bible further the exploration into the inconsistencies between the Latin versions of the Bible and contemporary patterns of grammar.

Front 7

Evans (chapter 3) [Background]

Back 7

The Glossa Ordinaria included discussions on textual criticism (38–39), teachings of patristic writers (e.g., Augustine and Ambrose, 39, 42), the meaning of words as signs (39), and resolutions to exegetical terminology as it relates to God (e.g., the double signification of the Verbum in John 1:1). It aimed at brevity and conciseness, and required “a competent master to develop its implications for the reader” (47).

Front 8

Evans (chapter 4) [lectio]

Back 8

Foundation of lectio--Signification--the relationship between words and the things they signify.

Aristotle, Augustine, Hugh of St. Victor all noted this reality. Also noted that the "thing" is greater than the "sign." Therefore, whether figurative or literal interpretation, the goal is to understand the "thing."

With figurative language, the exegete needs to be concerned with the signification of things, as well as words. For example, Christ -->Lion-->"Lion"

This includes words as well as numbers.

Front 9

Evans (chapter 5) [lectio]

Back 9

Increased value for the literal sense of the Bible. Hugh says it provides the foundation on which the spiritual rests. This lead to painstaking exegesis.

Literal and historical meanings were distinct. History was the narration of events; literal was the broader relationship between words and things.

Front 10

Evans (chapter 6) [lectio]

Back 10

Signification was explored further using Boethius and Aristotle.

B. chain link between thing-->understanding of thing-->words/signs. This chain is arbitrary, not self-evident, which conflicted with Aristotle's definition of a science, namely that science is ultimately self-evident.

Kilwardby proposed that "words in mind" facilitates the self-evident component of grammar. While this failed, it proved that early middle age exegetes thought of grammar (and therefore, biblical interoperation) in philosophical terms.

Dictionaries were written cataloging the usage of words and their meanings in context. Words ended up not having meaning on their own.

Front 11

Evans (chapter 7) [lectio]

Back 11

God uses similitudes to bridge the gap between the sign and thing for the sake of comparison. Analogy, metaphor, hyperbole draws attention the thing, and helps fallen humanity understand what is intending to be communicated.

Front 12

Evans (four-senses and language)*

Back 12

*The interpreter, therefore, needed to employ the four senses of interpretation espoused by Clement of Alexandria and Origen—the literal, the allegorical, the anagogical, and the tropological (114–15). Despite their differences they became unified as the exegete moved from the literal to the various stages of the figurative. Evans explains, “History [i.e., literal interpretation] deals with the recognition (agnitio) of things visible and things past, allegory with those things . . . which have really taken place, but which prefigure the form of some other mysterious thing. The tropological is a moral explanation to help us in living a better life in a practical way. The anagogical sends us on a journey ‘from spiritual mysteries to certain more sublime and more holy secrets of the heavens.’ ” (121). All four are interconnected and are developed through the application of skills in grammar and logic in order to understand the language of the Bible and its meaning.

Front 13

Evans (chapter 8) [disputatio]

Back 13

Questions arose in the process of interpretation, which were resolved by "debate" with a master.

As time progressed masters simply advanced their agendas, rather than answering their pupils questions. Their words was to be authoritative.

Front 14

*Evans (chapter 9) [disputatio]

Back 14

Conflicting authorities appealed to the application of grammar and logic to defend their interpretation.

While all appealed to the authorities of the Fathers, the problem of language removed the Fathers's authority. Unfamiliar language and different signification weakened orthodox interpretation. Exploration of biblical meaning, for Abelard, fundamentally became a product of correct methodology (136-37).

Abelard, through the recognition of the copious problems of words and their meanings (especially in the context of understanding the Fathers's interpretation) leads him to depart from a doctrine of inspiration of every minute detail of the text (138). [This was a key point of discussion for Bingham]. Evans says when you maintain the method over the faith, it leads to the questions that are opposition to the faith.

Front 15

Evans (chapter 10) [disputatio]

Back 15

New Approaches to Resolving Contradictions:

-Narrow the scope of inspiration
-Accept the error of the interpreter, not the text
-Understand if literal language is being used in unexpected ways (e.g., figuratively)

Front 16

Evans (conclusion)

Back 16

General contributions of medieval exegesis:
-more objective and exegetically grounded view of the literal interpretation of the Bible, the result of which compensated for “earlier preoccupation with figurative interpretation” (166)
-contributed to advances in other aspects of thinking and scholarship (165).
-most importantly, “new skills in grammar and logic” provided solutions, however contrived, to the perplexing language that pressed the belief in God’s inspiration of every word of the text (166). [Although Evans believes this assumption impedes growth, she recognizes that it drove the development of these exegetical methods that offered “sensible suggestions” to textual inconsistencies (167).]

Regarding modern critical method, medieval exegesis:
-stripped of biblical inspiration, problems in the text were described with greater precision and clarity
-provided a single method that acknowledged the status to the Bible, and gave a way to be certain of its interpretation
-gave critical procedures for studying the text that are still present in modern criticism.