SUBBTO 61, no. 1 (2016): 147-179 [614732]

SUBBTO 61, no. 1 (2016): 147-179
(RECOMMENDED CITATION)
GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS:
‘ABBA’ (THE ELDER), ‘THEŌRIA’ AND ‘PHRONÊMA EKKLÊSIAS ’,
A ‘HERMENEUTICAL SPIRAL’ DE RIVED FROM THE ASCETICAL
‘PRAXIS’ OF THE WORD
NICHIFOR T ĂNASE*
ABSTRACT. It is argued that the “return” to the “biblical” faith should find a
parallel in a “Return to the Fathers”. Early Christian thought was biblical, and
one of the lasting accomplishments of the patristic period was to forge a way
of thinking which was scriptural in language and inspiration. Forgetful of this
truth, the Holy Fathers have been isolated from the Scripture and there is
therefore an imperative to seek to relate more closely the two . A particular
hermeneutical perspective called theoria – an “inspired vision” o f t h e D i v i n e
Truth, shaped their works. For Holy Fathers exegesis never had a purpose in
itself ; rather patristic hermeneutics directly addressed the reader's life situation.
As an antidote to the chasm between modern and pre-modern exege sis we
propose the advice of Christopher A. Hall: “Read the Bible holi stically” with the
Fathers, which if actualized, would mean that the Church would recognize that it
possesses a living Truth, one that cannot be limited purely to the biblical text.
Further, it is proposed that Christ Himself is to be the “herme neutic” principle
or the principle of interpretation. The Bible does not contain its own principle
of interpretation Orthodoxy operates in a closed “hermeneutic c ircle” through
the dynamic that exists between Scripture and Tradition (the permanent presence
of God). Unlike some former approaches to biblical interpretati on, many of
today’s scholars do not see this circular process as an obstacl e to biblical
exegesis, but understand it in terms of a “hermeneutical spiral ” (G. Osborne),
which describes the interaction between text and interpreter. T he “hermeneutical
spiral” takes place via the interaction of inductive and deduct ive research and via
the movement from biblical to systematic and to homiletical the ology. Finally, it
is argued that the “hermeneutical bridge” between the word of Scripture and
the present life of the Church as thus understood could be strengthened by
rediscovering the “hermeneutic function” of the Holy Spirit, His continuing work
of inspiration that allows the Word of God to be interpreted again, in any ti me
and for each new generation.
Keywords : Asceticism and Scripture, Patristic Hermeneutic, Spiritual Au thority,
Theoria , Isaac of Nineveh
* Eftimie Murgu University of Reș ița, Romania. Email: [anonimizat].

NICHIFOR TĂNASE
14
8 1. Seeing and Saying. Re
ading the Scripture with the Church Fathers
Personal
methodologies can easily lead us astray to the extent that we
b e l i e v e t h a t w e c a n m a i n t a i n c o h e s i o n b e t w e e n o b j e c t i v e a n d s u b jective
readings, that is, a critical reading of God’s Word, against a spiritual approach
of the Bible that can easily produce an arbitrarily subjective reading.1 T h e
better alternative is by means of the rediscovery of the Holy F athers2 whose
critical gift of discerning multiple layers of meaning in the biblical text makes
possible a hermeneutics in which the literal and historical meaning, as the
a u t h o r u n d e r s t o o d i t , i s b r o u g h t i n t o c l o s e r e l a t i o n w i t h t h e s piritual level of
1 The “return” to the “biblical” faith [cf. Peter Zimmerling, Evangelische Spiritualität. Wurzeln und
Zugänge, (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2003), 32; Christo Lombaar d, The Old Testament
and Christian Spirituality . Theoretical and Practical Essays from a South African Perspec tive,
Society of Biblical Literature, (Atlanta: Society of Biblical L iterature, 2012), especially this two
Chapters: Four South African Proposals for a Central Theme to “Scriptural Spirituality” 27-53,
Exegesis and Spirituality 7 1 – 9 1 ] s h o u l d b e c o r r e l a t e d t o “ R e t u r n t o t h e F a t h e r s ” [ c f . I o a nnis
Zizioulas, “Patristic Theology in the Modern World,” Revista Ortodoxă 24 (2010): 7]. There is a
tendency to repeat Fathers almost literally what they said or wrote, we are dealing increasingly
with so-called "patristic fundamentalism", something like Protestant biblical fundamentalism –
we are behaving toward to the Fa thers as the archaeological obj ects on which we are trying to
conserving. That is why „ we need, says Zizioulas , to ‘inculturate’ the Holy Fathers in our time, that
is to bring in contemporary culture, contemporary to do with us. Return to the Fathers in Orthodox
theology created another problem: we isolated th e Holy Fathers from the Scripture and we are not
trying to relate them to it. Thus, on the one ha nd, the Fathers are not placed in a relation with
Scripture and, on the other hand, th ey are not linked to contemporary culture (and reflected in it).
It almost threatens to suffocate patristic message, ca ncel the Holy Fathers and make them irrelevant. To
correct this, we must take the Holy Fathers as gu ides. In other words, today we can’t truly be
Christians unless we let ourselves to be guided by the Holy Fathers. In this case, we must creatively
interpret what the Fathers said for ou r time. So, we need creative freedom ” (Zizioulas, “Patristic
Theology,” 7).
2 Bertrand Jacquin de Margerie, An Introduction to the History of Exegesis: Greek Fathers v. 1
(Petersham, Massachusetts: St. Bede’s Publications, 2002); Manl io Simonetti, Biblical Interpretation
in the Early Church: an Historical Introduction to Patristic Exegesis , trans. John A. Hughes (Edinburgh:
T&T. Clark, 1994); J. van Oort and U. Wickert, eds., Christliche Exegese wunschen Nicaea und
Chalcedon (Kampen: KokPharos, 1992); Paul Blowers, ed., The Bible in Greek Christian Antiquity
( N o t r e D a m e , I n d . : U n i v e r s i t y o f N o t r e D a m e P r e s s , 1 9 9 7 ) ; C . M o ndésert, ed., Le monde grec
a n c i e n e t l a B i b l e ( P a r i s : B e a u c h e s n e , 1 9 8 4 ) ; M a r c H i r s h m a n , A Rivalry of Genius: jewish and
Christian Biblical Interpretation in Late Antiquity , trans. Batya Stein (Albany: State University of
New York Press, 1996); Karlfried Froehlich, Biblical Interpretation in the Early Church (Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1984); Frances Young, Biblical Exegesis and the Formation of Christian Culture
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997); David Dawson, Allegorical Readers and Cultural
Revision in Ancient Alexandria (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992); Elizabeth A. Clark,
Reading Renunciation. Asceticism an d Scripture in Early Christianity (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1999); Marie-Josèphe Rondeau, Les commentaires patristi ques du Psautier (III-Ve siècles) ,
Orientalia Christiana Analecta 219 and 220 (Rome: Pontificium I nstitutum Studium Orientalium,
1982-1985).

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

149 meaning, which directly addresses to the reader's life situatio n.3 Recent researches
in the history of exegesis have pointed to such a direction, as The American Catholic
theologian, Brian E. Daley notes: “ Patristic exegesis has become almost fashionable
again. After centuries of neglect, even ho stile dismissal on the part of Christian
preachers and scholars of virtually every theo logical hue and stripe, the efforts of early
Christian writers to interpret the Bible have recently been watered into life again ”.4
He also speaks of an atheistic-modern methodology which is oppo sed to
the patristic “pre-critical” app roach: “Historical criticism, i ncluding the criticism
of Biblical texts, is methodolog ically atheistic, even if what i t s t u d i e s i s s o m e
f o r m o r f a c e t o f r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f , a n d e v e n i f i t i s p r a c t i c e d by believers. Only
“natural,” inner-worldly explanations of why or how thing s happ en, explanations
that could be acceptable to believers and unbelievers alike, ar e taken as historically
admissible. So God is not normally understood to count as an ac tor on the stage
of history; God’s providence in history, the divine inspiration of Scriptural
authors and texts, even the miracles narrated in the Bible, are a s s u m e d t o b e
private human interpretations of events, interior and non- demo nstrable, rather
than events or historical forces in themselves”.5
Orthodox biblical interpretation has traditionally opted for a homiletic
approach in preference to a purely exegetical one: The link bet ween early
Christian ascetical practices an d the Fathers’ non-historical m ode of Scriptural
interpretation prompted the 19th -century Anglican writer, John Keble, to offer
an early modern defence of patristic exegesis.6 More recently, Robert Louis Wilken,
Professor of the History of Chri stianity at the University of V irginia, has sought to
show that Christianity is “inesc apably ritualistic,” “uncomprom isingly moral,”
and “unapologetically intellectual.”
He has challenged Adolf von Harn ack's idea of the “Hellenizatio n of
Christianity” that has been so influential in the interpretatio n of early Christian
thought: “The notion that the development of early Christian th ought represented
a Hellenization of Christianity has outlived its usefulness”. I n its place, he

3 S e e R o b e r t L o u i s W i l k e n , The Spirit of Early Christian Th ought: Seeking the Face of God ( N e w
Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2004) 50-110. Chapters deal with how God is known
( “ F o u n d e d o n t h e C r o s s o f C h r i s t ” ) , w o r s h i p a n d s a c r a m e n t s ( “ A n Awesome and Unbloody
Sacrifice”), the Holy Scriptures (“The Face of God for Now”), a n d t h e T r i n i t y ( “ S e e k H i s F a c e
Always”) through faithful thinking into the revealed Word by Or igen, Justin, Augustine, Ignatius,
Chrysostom, Clement, Irenaeus, or Cyril of Alexandria. But alwa ys so important to Wilken’s
depiction of such patristic reflection on Scripture, within the developing faith ( regula ) of the
church, is that it be narratively seen and heard within the cir cumstances and relations in which
the Fathers worked and lived.
4 Brian E. Daley, S.J., “Is patristic exegesis still usable?: Re flections on early Christian interpretation
of the Psalms” Communio , 29, 1 (2002): 185-216, here 185.
5 Daley, “Patristic exegesis,” 191.
6 E p h r a i m R a d n e r , “ T h e D i s c r e p a n c i e s o f T w o A g e s . T h o u g h t s o n K e ble’s ‘Mysticism of the Fathers’,”
The Anglican 29, no. 2 (2000): 10-15; Cf. Daley, “Patristic exegesis,” 216.

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

150 advocates a more appropriate expr ession, namely “Christianizati on of Hellenism”.
Yet neither does this phrase capture the Christian originality, which affirms that
life and doctrine are strictly one. Nevertheless, Wilken captur es an essential
point when he writes, “ But what has impressed me most is the omnipresence of
the Bible in early Christian writings. Early Christian thought is biblical, and one of the lasting accomplishments of the patristic period was to forge a way of thinking, scriptural in language and inspiration, that gave to the church and to Western civilization a unified and coherent interpretation of the Bible as a whole. Needless to say, this means that any effort to mount an interpretation of the Bible that ignores its first readers is doomed to end up with a bouquet of fragments ”.
7
There are numerous biblical commentaries in later Orthodox trad ition
as well, although they are commonly passed over today because t hey assume
what is often called (pejoratively) a “pre-critical”8 attitude to the biblical narrative.
For the Holy Fathers exegesis never had a purpose enclosed within itself , unlike
the Catholic approach.9 David C. Steinmetz arguing for “ the superiority of pre-critical

7 W i l k e n , The Spirit of Early Christian Thought, 6 – 7 . I n t h e C h a p t e r 2 , o n C h r i s t i a n w o r s h i p , h e
shows that early Christian thinkers were men of prayer who knew the person of Christ not only
as a historical memory, but as a fact of experience in the litu rgy, in which the events recorded in
the gospels, particularly the death and Resurrection of Christ, were ‘‘made present’’. The subtitle
Seeking the Face of God is based on Psalm 105:4 in the Latin version, ‘‘Seek his face always’’ ( Quaerite
faciem eius semper ). This verse is cited four time s by Saint Augustine in his wor k The Trinity.
8 After a closer examination of t he makers of this early ‘inner- biblical exegesis’, M. Sæbø says: “First, a
History of biblical interpretation may have an appropriate starting-point in its own basis, which is the
H e b r e w B i b l e / O l d T e s t a m e n t , t h e H o l y S c r i p t u r e o f J e w s a n d C h ristians. Since it was within the
scriptures that became the Scripture that a process of inner, scriptural interpretation really started, a
description of the interpretation history should not ignore thi s early beginning although it also,
for certain reasons, may be called the ‘pre-history’ of biblica l interpretation”; cf., Magne Sæbø,
“ C h u r c h a n d S y n a g o g e a s t h e R e s p e c t i v e M a t r i x o f t h e D e v e l o p m e n t of an Authoritative Bible
Interpretation,” in Hebrew Bible, Old Testament: The History of Its Interpretation . Vol. 1: From the
Beginnings to the Middle Ages (Until 1300). Part 1: Antiquity , ed. C Brekelmans, Menahem Haran
and Magne Saebo (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996) 731-7 4 8 , h e r e 7 3 1 . T h e r i s i n g
Christianity ‘doubled’ the traditional Judaism in a way that ca used a fundamental “shift of paradigm"
(Sæbø, “Church and Synagoge,” 736) . The ‘intrinsic’ cultural el ements became not least at the
transition the ‘inner-biblical’ interpretation to a broad ‘extr a-canonical’ literary activity (ibid., 733).
9 A C a t h o l i c u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f p r e -critical method gives us Thoma s O ’ L o u g h l i n , “ C h r i s t a n d t h e
Scriptures: the chasm between modern and pre-modern exegesis,” The Month 31 (1998): 475-85: “ A
more adequate way to describe pre-modern exegesis, than of seeing method as characteristic, is to note
what exactly the exegete wanted to find – ‘the fina l cause’ of search to use scholastic terms. One
thread running right through patristic and medieval exegesis is that every single line in the
scriptures tells us something about Christ – althou gh to get at this one had to use an armoury of
methods strategies, and skills. Th e common element between modern an d past exegesis is that for
both the meaning of the text was not always obvi ous and had to be uncovered using a variety of
methods (many of which are far older than their modern practitioners realise); what separates
them is the object that is obscure. To the modern exegete it is the meaning of a text written at a

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

151 exegesis ”,10 has suggested an alternative hypothesis. First, he notes the l imitations
of the medieval theory of levels of meaning in the biblical tex t (distinction between
“things” and “signs” made by Augustine, or that of a double lit eral sense: a literal-
historical sense and a literal-prophetic ), which he regards as possessing undoubted
defects, but even more constricting is the modern theory of a s ingle meaning,
which Steinmetz treats as simply false.
This attempt to capture the meaning that the author initially i ntended,
from the biblical text, is viewed by the pre-critical exegetical tradition as a
decided obstacle to the correct deciphering of the true sense of text , and the
historical-critical method, on the other hand, is the key that can unlock this
primitive meaning of the text. I n the complex phenomenon of the meaning of a
text, where the question of truth can endlessly be deferred, wh at is required is a
hermeneutical theory capable of avoiding “ the Scylla of extreme subjectivism”, on
the one hand, and “the Charybdis of historical positivism ”, on the other. Illustrating
the theory of four senses of Scripture (Jerusalem as: city in t he Middle East (literal
sense) the church (allegorical), the faithful soul (tropologica l), and the centre of
God's new creation (anagogical), Steinmetz makes reference to J ohn Cassian: “ From
the time of John Cassian, the church subscrib ed to a theory of the fourfold sense of
Scripture. The literal sense of Scriptur e could and usually did nurture the three
theological virtues, but when it did not, th e exegete could appeal to three additional
spiritual senses, each sense corresponding to one of the virtues. The allegorical sense
taught about the church and what it should believe, and so it corresponded to the
virtue of faith. The tropological sense taught about individuals and what they should do, and so it corresponded to the virtue of love. The anagogical sense pointed to the future and wakened expectation, and so it corresponded to the virtue of hope ”.
11
Holding that ‘pre-critical exegesis’ is not monolith , Daniel J. Treier challenges
the approach of Steinmetz, drawing attention to some of the dif ficulties that had to
be faced in reading the Old Testament Christianly in the early Patristic exegesis.12

particular time in a specific culture; to the earlie r exegete all the texts have as their true object the
incarnate Word ” (O’ Loughlin, “Christ and the Scriptures,” 477). Notice here the summing of
Augustinian understanding of rev elation as a transmission of “s cholastic” concepts and the idea
of continuous development of the doctrine that makes the biblic al exegesis to discover obscure
senses, rationing the revelation into knowledge of God fuller t han in the time when it was
initially offered in an obscure form.
10 David C. Steinmetz, “The Superiority of Pre-Critical Exegesis, ” Theology Today 37, no. 1 (1980):
27-38.
11 Steinmetz, “The Superiority of Pre-Critical Exegesis,” 28, 30, 38 and 40. For St. John Cassian see,
also, George Demacopoulos, Five Models of Spiritual Direction in the Early Church (University of
Notre Dame, 2007) 107-126.
12 Daniel J. Treier, “The superiority of Pre-Critical Exegesis? S ic Et Non,” Trinity Journal 24 (2003)
77-103: “First of all, ‘pre-criti cal exegesis’ is no monolith. It is, rather, an unfolding story, a quest
full of twists and turns, even substantial disagreements. The N T itself manifests the challenges of
reading the OT Christianly” (Treier, “The superiority of Pre-Cr itical Exegesis?,” 79).

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

152 Christopher A. Hall’s phrase – “Read the Bible holistically” – t a l k s a b o u t t h e
unifying message on which the Fathers insist, that is, that “the narrative of the Bible
is a continuous” .13
In the next chapter, our aim is to show that the complementarit y between the
Word and the Sacraments is the only way to avoid the first symp tom of crisis in the
hermeneutical approach, namely, “pseudomorphosis of biblical sp irit” (objectifying
Scripture). Therefore, the sacramental continuity of the living Truth is a ‘hermeneutic
spiral’ between Scripture and Tradition.

2. The Hermeneutic Spiral and/or “Continuous Revelation” ( theoria )?

The exegetical vision of the Holy Fathers was one inspired by a desire
for a deeper understanding of God, a vision which was called theoria .14 Avoiding
the difficulties associated with a “verbal inerrancy” approach, they held that every
word of the biblical text was created through “ synergy”, a mutual effort between
human author and the Holy Spirit. The ancient Christian exegesi s of East and
West as evidenced in the writing s of the Fathers, approached th e problem from
a holistic point of view. The Church defined the “canon”, not t o compose inspired
writings, because she never believed in any „continuous revelat ion” (as a direct
inspiration to write books that communicate a biblical, additio nal revelation), but in
the unique historical act of God: “ Tradition , says Meyendorff, is the sacramental
continuity in history of the communion of saints, in a way it is the Church itself ”.15
Another function of holy Traditi on is to make Scripture availab le and understandable
to a changing and imperfect world.

13 Christopher A. Hall, Reading the Scripture with the Church Fathers (New York, InterVarsity Press:
1998): “ Read the Bible holistically . The fathers insist that the narrative of the Bible is a conti nuous,
deeply connected story from Genesis through Revelation. The Old Testament is not discontinuous
w i t h t h e N e w . R a t h e r t h e t h e m e s p r e s e n t e d i n t h e O l d T e s t a m e n t f i n d t h e i r f u l f i l l m e n t i n t h e
narrative structure of the New Testament. Continuity and fulfil lment characterize the entire story.
Most importantly, the fathers in sist that the biblical narrativ e reaches its culmination, its
thematic climax, with the incarnation, crucifixion and resurrec tion of the Son of God. Indeed, the
incarnational, soteriological an d eschatological foci of the Ne w Testament further clarify and
deep the Old Testament witness itself. We will read the Bible i neffectively and incorrectly, the
fathers warn, if we fail to read its individual parts in the li ght of its overarching, unifying message”
(Hall, Reading the Scripture , 191).
14 Modern commentators starting from the synthesis of Language, h ermeneutic and Word of God,
want to study more recently the way in which phenomenology of l anguage attends in particular
to the voice of Jesus as exemplified by the parable and the voi ce of Paul as expressed in the letter.
See Robert W. Funk, “Saying and Seeing: Phenomenology of Langua g e a n d t h e N e w T e s t a m e n t , ”
Journal of Bible and Religion 3, no. 34 (1966): 197-213: “The voice of man of his linguistic nexus is
the focal interest of phenomenology of language, as well as of some recent theology” (Funk,
“Saying and Seeing,” 197).
15 John Meyendorff, Living Tradition: Orthodox Witness in the Contemporary World (New York: St.
Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1978), 14.

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

153 Therefore the word homoousios expressed, in a language understandable in
i t s t i m e , a t r u t h w h i c h S c r i p t u r e p r e s u p p o s e d . T h i s e x a m p l e c l e arly illustrates
„the Church’s awareness that she possessed a living Truth which cannot be limited
simply to the biblical text. The verbal fr eedom which the Nicene Fathers demonstrated
was not, however, an internal liberty in relation to the content of Scripture. The Orthodox Church has never proclaimed dogmas which are not direct interpretations of historical facts related in the Bible ”.
16 This illustrates the Orthodox approach
to the problem of „doctrinal development”, whose meaning consis ts „neither in a
sort of continuous revelation, nor in making additions to Scripture, but in solving concrete problems related to the one eternal Truth ”, the latter remaining essentially
the same before and after the definition. These definitions are final and cannot
be changed inasmuch as they express the absolute Truth of Chris t, living in His
Church. Since “ Tradition is an expression of the permanent presence of God in the
community of the New Israel ”
17 any “new theology”, break ing with Tradition and
continuity, would be meaningless.
T h e H o l y S c r i p t u r e s t o o k s h a p e i n the matrix of the early Tradi tion of
the Church, but without any notion that Tradition and Scripture were to be viewed
as either complementary or mutually exclusive . Orthodoxy sees the relationship
between the two in a way that can be described not by “Scriptur e or Tradition”,
nor by “Scripture and Tradition”, but by the phrase “Holy Scrip ture in the Tradition
of the Church”, because Scripture is Tradition, the latter seen as a true “spiritual”
reading of the Scriptures : a reading based on the work of the Holy Spirit who is
the source of inspiration in the Church.18
Given that “all Scripture is God -breathed” (2 Timothy 3, 16), t his work of
inspiration involves synergy between the Holy Spirit and the ma n who receives
divine revelation and translates it into the announcing of the gospel. Tradition
can be equated with “apostolic g ospel”; another description is “Church's living
memory” (S. Bulgakov).
The biblical writings can only b e interpreted correctly in the light of
Holy Tradition. Tradition presents the original content of Scri pture, but it also
contains the oral and written paradosis , that is, all “that is sent/transmitted “from
the beginning revelation began as Christian reflection on the m ystery of Christ.
Christ Himself is the “hermeneutic” principle or the principle of interpretation.
The Bible does not contain its own interpretation within itself .19
Orthodoxy operates in a “hermeneutic circle” expressed in an enduring
dynamic relating Scripture and Tradition . Today’s biblical scholars do not see
this circular process as an obstacle to the activity of biblica l exegesis, but as an

16 Meyendorff, Living Tradition , 17-18.
17 Meyendorff, Living Tradition , 18.
18 J o h n B r e c k , Sfânta Scriptur ă în Tradiția Bisericii , trans. Ioana Tămăian (Cluj-Napoca: Patmos,
2008), 17.
19 Breck, Sfânta Scriptur ă în Tradiția Bisericii , 23-24.

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

154 “hermeneutic spiral” (G. Osborne) , which describes the interact ion between text
and interpreter. According to Gr ant Osborne’s understanding: a . “hermeneutical
spiral” like comprehension up (interaction between inductive and deductive) but
also, b. so-called upward spirals of application and contextualization for Christian
life today.
The movement is from biblical th eology to historical theology t o systematic
theology to homiletics: Biblical theology integrates individual passages of Scripture
into an archetypal “theology”; H istorical theology studies how the Church has
historically contextualized biblical theology; systematic theol ogy draws on
b ib l i ca l the o log y in the l ig ht of hi s to r ic a l re sea r c h s o as t o recontextualize the
S c r i p t u r e s f o r t h e c u r r e n t g e n e r a t i o n ; B o t h t h e o l o g i c a l d i s c i p l ines and that of
homiletics are then employed to make use of the results of each of these stages.20
The Complementarity between the Word and Sacraments is expresse d
in the Road to Emmaus episode(Lk 24, 13-35), Taking the narrati ve as a whole,
we can see that the Word must be celebrated in order for it to be fully heard . The
conviction that God’s Word is fulfilled through liturgical cele bration marks the
unique character of Orthodox hermeneutics.21

20 Grant Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation ,
(Westmont: Intervarsity Press, 1991). The „hermeneutical spiral ” take place: via the interaction
o f i n d u c t i v e a n d d e d u c t i v e r e s e a r c h a n d v i a t h e m o v e m e n t f r o m b iblical to systematic to
homiletical theology. “ Biblical theology collates the partial theology of individual passages and
books into an archetypal „theology” of Israel and the early church (thus integrating the Testaments).
Historical theology studies the way the church throughout history has contextualized biblical
theology to meet the challenges and needs of the chur ch at various stages of its historical development.
Systematic theology recontextualizes biblical theo logy to address current problems and to summarize
theological truth for the current generation. Finally, homiletical theology (so called to stress that
the sermon preparation is part of the hermeneutical ta sk) applies the results of ea ch of these steps to the
practical needs of the Christians today ” (cf. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral , 14). Osborne
refers to the fact of ignoring the understanding of the Early C hurch: “ While the hermeneutic of
the early church cannot be determinative for th e modern methods, since we are hardly bound to
their modes of thinking, it is worthwhile to note th at de earliest universally considered the biblical
stories to be historical ” (Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral , 167). The hermeneutical circle has a
pre-heideggerian sense: the issue of circularity in the process of understanding: “the term
‘hermeneutical circle’, for the classical formulation of the he rmeneutical circle got its form for
the first time in Johann Gustav Droysen’s work [ The Hermeneutics Reader : Texts of the German
Tradition from the Enlightenment to the Present (New York: Continuum, 1985) 119-131] and this
form was repeated by others writers. It consist in the tule tha t ‘the whole can be understood only
through its parts, but the parts can be understood only through the whole ’.” For scholars such as
Humboldt, Boeck, Palmer and Lone rgan, the hermeneutical circle seems to be a vicious circle. In
contrast, for some other scholars such as Schleiermacher, Heide gger and Gadamer, there is no real
circularity in the process of understanding; apud , Mohammad Motahari, “The Hermeneutical
Circle or the Hermeneutical Spiral?” The International Journal of Humanities 2, no. 15 (2008): 99-
111, for here 100 and 103.
21 Michael Pasquarello, “Doxological Reading and Eschatological I magination,” Liturgy. A Journal of
The Liturgical Conference 2, no. 28 (2013): 58-67;

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

155 By preaching the gospel and liturgical celebration , the believers celebrate
the Liturgy through which the Word, as with the Eucharist gift, is received and
given back to God as a sacrifice of praise. The only way to avo id “pseudomorphosis
of biblical spirit” (objectifyin g Scripture) is to ensure that the Word of God be
placed within its own ecclesial and liturgical context , where it is “updated”,
internalized and assimilated. The first symptom of crisis in the hermeneutical
approach described here appears when few of today's biblical researches are seen to directly address the spiritual needs of the believers . As John Breck notes “ we
contented ourselves with questioning the biblical text instead of letting the living and life-giving Word of God speak to us and call us ”.
22 In a pre-critical culture
such as that of early monastic biblical students, allegory rema ined very important:
“To interpret allegorically is to read expectantly, to listen to the text with a
certainty that it will carry meaning for the reader. It is a hermeneutical strategy based upon not suspicion but critical trust of the text. The practice of allegorical reading requires the reader's receptivity to the text's continual ability to generate
meaning in the present. Such an interpretation need not, of course, be uncritical ”.
23
Hillel’s second rule, gezera shawa (‘analogy’), is abundantly illustrated
by Paul’s frequently recurring p ractice of ‘pearl stringing’, M idrashic exegesis
characterizes the Apostle’s her meneutical procedures more than any other style.
Having been trained as a Pharise e, Paul shared with the Judaism of his day many
of the then current hermeneutical conventions and procedures: “ The earliest
believers, following the teaching and exeget ical procedures of their Master, seem to
have placed the revelation of God in Jesus the Messiah ‘ neben dem Text,’ so that both
stood starkly side-by-side. Paul’s treatment of the Old Testament, however, evidences
not quite such a simple juxtaposition, but, rather, a more nuanced exposition of the

22 Breck, Sfânta Scriptur ă în Tradiția Bisericii , 28-30, 33-35. As a reaction appeared after disintegrator
initiative of modern biblical criticism, the new literary criti cism, in a particularly way the narrative
and reception theories, however, m a n i f e s t s a t e n d e n c y t o w a r d s r elativism. As structuralists, they
a b a n d o n t h e i n t e r e s t f o r t h e l i t e r a l s e n s e o f t h e b i b l i c a l t e x t , stopping rather on the meaning
established by the reader, the so-called “aesthetic pole”. In a n attempt to determine the literal
meaning, the text is drawn from the historical context in which it was produced, and “exegesis”
is reduced to a modern and sophisticated form of allegorizing. Grant R. Osborne enumerate the
weaknesses of the methodology of narrative criticism : 1 . A d e h i s t o r i c i z i n g t e n d e n c y ; 2 . S e t t i n g
aside the author; 3. A denial of intended or referential meanin g; 4. Reductionistic and disjunctive
thinking; 5. The imposition of m odern literary categories on an cient genres; 6. A preoccupation with
obscure theories; 7. Ignoring the understanding of the early ch urch; cf. Osborne, The Hermeneutical
Spiral , 212-216.
23 Mark S. Burrows, “‘To Taste with the Heart’: Allegory, Poetics , and the Deep Reading of Scripture,”
Interpretation (2002):168-180, here 171. See also: Karen B. Westerfield Tucker , “Scriptural
Typology and Allegory in Liturgical Prayer” Liturgy. A Journal of The Liturgical Conference 28, no.
2 (2013): 4-13.

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

156 Jewish scriptures within a larger context of Christological awareness… Paul in his
major letters usually begins with the biblical text itself and then seeks by means of
a midrashic explication to demons trate Christological significance ”.24
D u e t o t h e p e r m a n e n t h e r m e n e u t i c a l w o r k o f t h e H o l y S p i r i t , J e s us
continues “to speak” to the Church through the voice of the Spi rit (John 16:13).
Tradition is a living reality in which the Spirit brings into the Church all ( panta )
t h a t J e s u s t a u g h t H i s d i s c i p l e s u p t o H i s p a s s i o n s a n d H i s d e a t h , b u t H e a l s o
speaks about the fullness of truth ( aletheia pase ) which represents nothing less
than the words of Christ who is resurrected, rai sed and glorifi ed/praised (John
16, 13-15).
Seeking ipsissima verba Jesus in studies which are “in search of the
historical Jesus” becomes a nonsense. Through the dynamic quality of the work
o f t h e H o l y S p i r i t i n t h e s p a c e b e t w e e n t h e t e x t a n d t h e r e a d e r , the Bible
becomes a living book, a place/m edium for sharing the life-givi ng knowledge or
communion with God that reveals Him self in and through it.25
W e ’ l l c o n t i n u e o u r a p p r o a c h b y p o i n t i n g t h a t t h e H o l y S p i r i t , as the
Spirit of Truth, is the only One who can break the “hermeneutic circle”, serving
as a hermeneutic ‘bridge’. Thus, theoria , is not a method of exegesis, but rather a
‘vision’ of the divine truth communicated by the Holy Spirit to the Church. As a
spiritual vision, theoria can provide us one single hermeneutical program for
removing the modern divorce between biblical exegesis, systemat ic theology
and spiritual praxis.

3. Phronêma ekklêsias (“the Mind of the Church”) is,
at the Same Time, “the Mind of Scripture”

A principle promoted by The Holy Fathers taken directly from He brew
r a b b i s , i s t h a t o f a n e x e g e t i c a l r e c i p r o c i t y w h i c h a s s u m e s t h a t all Scripture is
entirely inspired . Old Testament and New Testament can be interpreted only by

24 R i c h a r d N . L o n g e n e c k e r , “ E a r l y C h u r c h I n t e r p r e t a t i o n ” , i n Dictionary of Biblical Criticism and
Interpretation , ed. Stanley E. Porter (Mondon and New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group,
2007) 78-89, here 81-82; see chap.7.1 “Phenomena of biblical us age” (Longenecker, “Early
Church Interpretation”, 87).
25 Breck, Sfânta Scriptur ă în Tradiția Bisericii , 36-38. In De Doctrina Christiana , Augustine draws
the distinction between the mode of understanding ( modus inueniendi ) and the mode of
communicating ( modus proferendi ) S c r i p t u r e ; c f . , M i c h a e l C . M c C a r t h y , “ W e A r e Y o u r B o o k s :
Augustine, the Bible, and the Practice of Authority,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion
2, no. 75 (2007): 324-352, here 322. There’s not such a distinc tion in orthodox view. The Bible,
says McCarthy, is not conceived as an object of formal study: “ Rather, scripture is inhabited, and
Augustine’s comment that “we are your books” suggests precisely the dynamism he thought
scripture ought to have within his congregation as well” (McCar thy, “We Are Your Books,” 333).
This is what McCarthy call s “embodied exegesis”.

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

157 reciprocal reference to each other, since they together form an inner and organic
unity. Only a spiritual vision, a theoria, unites, in one hermeneutical program, both
typology and a certain allegorical perspective . Typology marks the connections
between parallel realit ies (the relationship of promise to fulf illment), while allegory
involves the search for “hidden” or symbolic meaning, the latte r representing a
higher spiritual signification than that discerned from typolog y.
Allegorical exegesis does not fo cus upon historical events as s uch, but
rather the deeper spiritual sign ificance of those events. Howev er, in reaction to
radical trends towards de-historicization in the method as practiced at the
e x e g e t i c a l s c h o o l o f A l e x a n d r i a , t h e e x e g e t e s f r o m t h e r i v a l s c hool in Antioch
claimed that the ultimate meaning of any story or reality must be based on the
event itself, that is, in history . The search for an inspired vision of divine truth
(theoria ) had led them to the identification not of two meanings, but o f a double
meaning : both literal (namely historical) and spiritual. However, Anti ochene
typology knows only a unidirectional movement, from past to fut ure or from earth
t o h e a v e n , w h i l e t h e t y p o l o g y i n v o l v e s a double movement : from past to future,
certainly, but also from future to past. Thus, the antitype and archetype which
a r e a l r e a d y , i n a p r o p h e t i c w a y , p r e s e n t i n t y p e s , a r e p r e s e n t by anticipation
(“the rock was Christ” – the type already contains and manifests antitype ). Fathers of
the Church argued that every theophany, every work of God in th e Old Testament
must be understood as a theophany of God the Sun, rather than G od the Father.26
Frances Young believes that the ancient scholars did not make a distinction
between the two methods categorical and exegetical typology as such is a “modern
building”: “ The modern divorce between biblical exegesis and systematic theology,
or indeed between biblical exegesis and praxis, would have been unthinkable in the day of the Fathers ”.
27 A type contains “a mimetic seal” so that the antitype is

26 Breck, Sfânta Scriptur ă în Tradiția Bisericii , 40-43, 67.
27 F r a n c e s M . Y o u n g , Biblical Exegesis and the Formation of Christian Culture ( C a m b r i d g e : U n i v e r s i t y
Press, 1997) 7: “To deplore the i nfluence of Greek philosophy o r contrast the Hellenic and Hebraic
a p p r o a c h e s , a s s c h o l a r s h a v e d o n e i n t h i s c e n t u r y , i s t o d o l e s s than justice to the fascinating
cultural interpenetrat ion which took place as the Bible become the literary foundation of a new
‘totalizing discourse’”. Young, also, says: “To discern the min d o f s c r i p t u r e d i d i n v o l v e t w o
things: (1) the assembly of texts pointing to the same conclusi on, and (2) respect for the normal
‘earthly’ meaning od words, appropriately modified, or perhaps I should say ‘elevated’, for their
theological context. The interpretation may not be literal, but in the majority of cases, it is also
far from allegorical. The categor ies usually used to discuss pa tristic exegesis are inadequate to
the task” (Young, Biblical Exegesis , 35) and they learn to read properly ( kalos ) w i t h t h e ‘ s e n s e’
(dianoia ) right (ibid., p. 38). The Athanasius exegetical strategies an d hermeneutical principles was
“neither literal, nor typological, nor allegorical. Rather it i s deductive. The deductive process involves
attention to the meaning of the words, their particular biblica l sense, the syntax and the context of the
text in question – the basic techniques of the grammaticus attending to the verbal configuration of a
passage… demands innovative exegesis” (Young, Biblical Exegesis , 40).

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

158 already mirrored in “ content into ” the type. Although rooted in history, the type
transcends history to the extent that it bears the “seal” of hi s own eschatological
perfection.28
For correctly interpreting the Scriptures and understanding the profundity
of the truth contained within them, the exegete must interpret them from the
inside . In other words, Scripture prescribes a way of life – “Christ in us”, as the
Apostle expresses it. Or, according to the patristic tradition, we cannot correctly
interpret Scripture if we do not live according to it, that is, t o l i v e “ i n C h r i s t ” .
To correctly understand and explain the Scriptures from inside requires of the
interpreter asceticism and prayer in order to “ walk in truth ” (3 John 1:3), to
have “ the mind of Christ ” ( 1 C o r i n t h i a n s 2 : 1 6 ) o r t o “ know the mystery of the
kingdom ” (Mark 4:11). Exeg esis is a fun ction of worship, a testimony t o ?? the
community of faith; as such the Church is the place most fully suited to liturgical
interpretation, annunciation and celebration of the Word of God . Orthodox
exegetes claim the absolute necessity that in their reflections they subscribe to
the “ phrônema ekklesias ”, the “thinking of the church”, based upon the conviction
that the work of exegesis is diakonia , a service to the Church.29
How might one describe the “herm eneutical bridge” between the w ord
of Scripture and the present life of the Church? This can be an swered only by
rediscovering the “hermeneutic f u n c t i o n ” o f t h e H o l y S p i r i t , w h ich involves
three inter-related elements: 1) historical event, 2) preaching the soteriological
significance of that e vent, through the biblical authors, and 3 ) interpretation and
updating of the preaching of the Church to each new generation. The Holy Spirit's
work consists in loading the historical event with a typologica l significance and
in the guidance of the prophetic, apostolic or future witnesses to a discernment
of that signification in order that they might preach it and th en transmit it as an
element of Church’s Tradition. Holy Scripture cannot be underst ood, therefore,
in vacuo , apart from the illumination provided by the whole Church’s tr adition,
because only within Church does the Holy Spirit “ update” the Word during the
Holy Liturgy, in the sacraments and in the preaching of the Hol y Gospel. He does
this under “his hermeneutic function”, under His continuing work of inspiration
which allows the Word of God to be re-interpreted again and aga in, in every
time and for every new generation.

28 Breck, Sfânta Scriptur ă în Tradiția Bisericii , 48, 51. Therefore Diodorus had to maintain that type
contains a double meaning, historical and transcendent at the s ame time, literally and spiritually
(interpretation has here priority over the event). Therefore, t he type is ‘double’: grounded in
historical reality where the salvation is realized, he wears an d reveals eternal truth and eternal
reality.
29 Ibid., 52, 64, 72.

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

159 The Holy Spirit’s work of inspiration is not only limited to Sc ripture since
all authentic tradition ( paradosis ) is in some way “inspired”: “ Thus, we are forced ,
says John Breck, to distinguish two levels or degrees of inspiration: that of Scripture
and that of the Tradition … To distinguis h Scripture from Tradition in terms of the
Spirit's work, we could talk about reve aling inspiration and about the anamnesis
inspiration .”30
The Holy Spirit, as the Spirit of Truth, is the only One who ca n break the
“hermeneutic circle”, serving as a “bridge” or a hermeneutic co nnection which
updates and makes available the Word of God at every moment of the Church’s life,
through her liturgical preaching and ministry. Thus, theoria , is to be understood
not so much as a method of exegesis, but rather as a “view” of the divine truth
c o m m u n i c a t e d b y t h e H o l y S p i r i t t o t h e C h u r c h . W h i l e t h e H e b r e w p r o p h e t
received his revelatory vision in a state of ecstasy, the Chris tian exegete becomes
an instrument of the Spirit through contemplation, an opening t o God's grace
both at the level of heart and mind. Exegesis, as well as preac hing the Word or
painting of icons, says John Breck, is in the fullest sense a “ vocation” or a calling:
“the closed connection between Scripture and Holy Tradition of the apostolic
testimony and its interpretation can be illustrated by comparing the Tradition with the icon. The Word and the icon have four common elements. First: the event
itself, representative and represented, through which Revelation is being shared to the Church. The second elemen t is the inspirational work of the Spirit, which gives
to the biblical author and to the iconogra pher a view (theandria) of eternal reality
or of eternal truth which lies at the he art of events. The third element is the
material expression of that truth in huma n language of words or in a graphic form
and in color. The fourth element is the act of internalization of this truth by the believer, as it is being revealed by word or icon. It is being left entirely legal or
canonical. The Word is being illuminated by icon as He is being illuminated by the Holy Tradition … icon is actually a part of the tradition, as the biblical Word ”.
31
Furthermore, it is extremely important to add that the truth wh ich is being
communicated by the Spirit is more than information, it involve s participation and
communion. No formal technique, nor a systematic methodology is r e q u i r e d t o
understand it. Thus, according to the ascetic tradition, Script ure and prayer
e n l i g h t e n s e a c h o t h e r . T h i s m e a n s t h a t t h e “ p r a y e r o f t h e S c r i p tures” is not a
closed circle, but rather an upwa rd spiral. That is why we will skip from biblical
exegesis to “the prayer of Scriptures”, using in this endeavor the Syrian spirituality.

30 J o h n B r e c k , Puterea Cuvântului în Biserica dreptm ăritoare , trans. Monica E. Herghelegiu
(Bucharest: EIBMBOR, 1999), 43-47, 109-110: Tradition, is the C hurch’s own testimony about
Jesus and of the meaning of life, death and resurrection. It is , however, an inspired testimony: a
remembrance (anamnesis) and interpretation (hermeneut), a true lighting (“light/photismon
g l o r i o u s g o s p e l o f C h r i s t , ” I I C o r . 4 : 4 ) t o i n c a r n a t e t h e o n e t r u t h r e v e a l e d i n t h e p e r s o n G o d ’ s
Word.
31 Breck, Puterea Cuvântului , 110-112.

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

160 4. Swallowing the Scroll (‘ manducation de la Parole ’) –
“inner reading” of Scriptures

The biblical-patristic hermeneutic principle refers therefore t o the
necessity of reading the Scriptur es “from inside” .32 The word should be “lived”, as
in biblical language “to hear” implies “to obey” ( shamea, akouô / hypakouô ), and
this obedience in turn leads to a real prayer of the Word, mean ing to open up to
h i m , a t t h e l e v e l o f h e a r t a n d m i n d . Lectio divina c a n b e u s e d t o r e c o v e r t h e
contemplative reading of Scripture.33 Therefore, any “individual” reading of
Scripture takes place in the Church and is a ministry/service i n the life of the
Church. Like prayer, it strength ens our participation in the ec clesial Body. Scripture
is a fundamental environment for revelation . The process that leads from reading
a n d s t u d y i n g t h e b i b l i c a l t e x t t o “ i n t e r n a l i z a t i o n ” o f t e x t t h r ough meditation,
was named by the French “ la manducation de la Parole ” or “consumption” of
God’s Word.34 The ultimate purpose in lectio was to reach to illuminatio , or even
deificatio , that is, theosis , or human participation in God's life. For lectio to reach
contemplatio , the inner struggle of reader m ust be accompanied by a ministr y/
serving which is full of humility, an operatio or a pure diakonia .

32 Craig G. Bartholomew and C. Stephen Evans (ed.), “Behind” the Text: History and Biblical Interpretation.
Vol. 4 of Scripture and Hermeneutics Series (London: Paternoster Press, 2003), 5-12.
33 Mark Christopher Gorman, “Reading with the Spirit: Scripture, Confession, and Liturgical
Imagination”, in Liturgy. A Journal of The Liturgical Conference 2, no. 28 (2013), 14-22.
34 The name “manducation” comes from spiritual anthropology of Ma rcel Jousse, presuming an
“internalization” of the Word. Joseph Morlaas, in the preface d escribes the foundation’s methodology M.
Jousse, as follows: “ acte concret où se manipule une réalité transcendante la réalité concrète de
l'Enseigneur se donnant, corps et doctrine, à l'ense igné. Il marque la stabilité, l'immutabilité des
éléments fondamentaux de la civilisation pa lestinienne depuis ses commencements jusqu'à
l'avènement messianique de Iéshoua de Nazare th… c’est le fondement de la méthodologie
joussienne ”, cf. Marcel Jousse, La Manducation de la Parole (Gallimard: Paris, 1975) 17. Also he
continues: “ comme une fusion cosmique dans un contex te mystique, la manducation pédagogique
comporte la comunion de l'enseigneur et de l'e nseigné, l'enseigneur étant nécessairement, de par
les mécanismes psychophysiologiques, lui-même indi ssociable de son enseignement. D'où l'unité du
diptyque composant le présent ouvrage: la manducation de l'enseignement et la manducation de l'Enseigneur ” (Jousse, La Manducation , 1 2 ) . A c l o s e e x p r e s s i o n “ M a n d u c a t i o n d e l a P a r o l e ” b y
Marcel Jousse is that of Ellen Davis’ “swallowing the Scroll”: “Several aspects of the figure are
suggestive of the milieu in which Ezekiel called to prophesy. The first is the notion of ingestion as a
means of appropriating the divine word. In an anthropological study contrasting the passive
pedagogical systems of modern society with the “rhythmo-catechetical” system of the Palestinian rabbis, Jousse emphasizes the importance of memorable gesture and figures ” , c f . E l l e n F . D a v i s ,
Swallowing the Scroll: Textuality and the Dy namics of Discourse in Ezekiel’s Prophecy , Bible and
L i t e r a t u r e S e r i e s , n o . 2 1 o f t h e C o l u m b i a T h e o l o g i c a l S e m i n a r y , Georgia (New York: Sheffied
Academic Press, 1989) 52 and 62. See also: Eugene H. Peterson, “Eat This Book: The Holy
Community at table with the Holy Scripture,” Theology Today 56, no. 1 (1999): 5-17.

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

161 The process described here begin s with biblical exegesis and en ds with
“the prayer of Scriptures”. Thus, in Western tradition, lectio divina involved the
progressive transition from the proper reading ( lectio ) to a profound reflection
on the given portion ( meditatio ) in order to achieve the goal, meaning prayer
(oratio ), a “prayer of the Scriptures”.35 Allegory, as a common mode of reading
the biblical text in this tradition, was never intended as a me ans of abstract
interpretation; rather it was always grounded in spiritual prac tice: “ In the
Western church this approach came to be known as lectio divina, the slow and meditative practice in the monasteries of a «deep reading» advocated already by St. Benedict in his Rule Such reading was the dominant means of encountering scripture as a living word from antiquity until the dawning of early modernity ”.
36
M o n a s t i c r e a d e r s p r e s e r v e d t h e B i b l e ' s c e n t r a l p o s i t i o n t h r o u g h t h e w o r k o f
copying, this labor merely providing “ the dry bones upon which they enfleshed
the text through a spirituality of reading ”.37
Eastern Fathers nowhere present accounts of any systematic tech nique
for reading Scripture. In story of the Transfiguration, the “ bleached clothes [of
Christ] are a symbol of the words of Scri pture, which became bright, clear, pure
and understandable without any enigmatic implication and symbolic shadow and they revealed their reason within themselv es and covered by them, as they came to
the smooth and straight knowledge from God and were freed from passion to the world and the flesh .”
38

35 Breck, Sfânta Scriptur ă în Tradiția Bisericii , 107.
36 M a r k S . B u r r o w s , “ ‘ T o T a s t e w i t h t h e H e a r t ’ A l l e g o r y , P o e t i c s , a n d t h e D e e p R e a d i n g o f
Scripture”, Interpretation 56, no. 2 (2002): 168-180, here 170. A meditative reading and prayer
of God’s Word was practiced in Judaism. Nehemiah d e s c r i b e s t h e p o s t – e x i l i c s e t t i n g o f t h e
L i t u r g y o f t h e W o r d , w h i l e r e c i t i n g a w e e k “ B o o k o f t h e L a w o f Moses”, accompanied by
homiletic interpretation of the seventh day of the year. Then Q umran community law stipulates
that a third of the night to be devoted to reading from the Tor ah and prayer. Origen we find the
first reference at exactly spiritual reading as such ( theia anagnosis ).
37 Ibid., 170-171.
38 Paul Marion Blowers, “Exegesis of Scripture,” in Oxford Handbook to Maximus the Confessor , ed.
Pauline Allen and Bronwen Neil (Oxford: Oxford University Press , 2015), 253-273; P.M. Blowers,
“A Psalm ‘Unto the End’: Eschatology and Anthropology in Maximu s the Confessor’s Commentary on
Psalm 59,” in The Harp of Prophecy: Early Christian Interpretation of the Psalms , ed. Brian Daley
and Paul Kolbet (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press , 2014), 257-283; Blowers,
“Eastern Orthodox Inte rpretation,” in Oxford Encyclopedia of Bi blical Interpretation, vol. 1, ed. Steven
McKenzie (New York: Oxford Uni versity Press, 2014) 241-249. Blo wers, “Patristic Interpretation,” in
Oxford Encyclopedia of Biblical Interpretation , vol. 2, ed. Steven McKenzie (New York: Oxford
University Press, 2014), 81-89. In the studies based on the exe getical method of St. Maximus,
Blowers examines three Incarnations of the Logos: in creation, in Scripture and in the body
taken from Virgin Mary. Christ incarnates Himself in the Script ures as the eternal Logos, and
Christ Himself reveals a deeper meaning, and symbolic eschatolo gical Scripture, “symbols of its
mysteries”. Christ is his “hermeneutical principle” since it is both the content of Scripture and
her interpreter.

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

162 Father John Breck gives some indication of the significance of the
meditative reading of Scripture and its relationship to the pra y e r o f t h e H o l y
Eastern Fathers:
1) Liturgy is the context in which God's Word is being expresse d. Thus,
there is no such thing as a strictly “personal” reading, for re ceiving the Word of
God is always an ecclesial act. Phronêma ekklêsias or “thought of the Church” is
at the same time “thought of the Scripture”. As Frances M. Youn g says “ discerning
the unitive ‘mind’ ( dianoia ) of scripture was seen as essential to reaching o proper
interpretation ”;39
2) There is an intimate relation between the holistic reading o f Scripture
a n d c o n t e m p l a t i v e p r a y e r . B y o p e n i n g t h e h e a r t t o t h e m y s t e r y o f the divine
presence, a presence which is both hidden and revealed in the S criptures, we read
and internalize the Wo rd of God in order to pray to God with “his own words” ,
3) The movement which occurs from lectio to oratio , from a meditative
r e a d i n g o f t h e S c r i p t u r e s t o a p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i o n w i t h G o d t h r o ugh the
“prayer of the Scriptures” is a gift, an epiklesis of the Spirit;
4) Saint Maximus, together with the whole ascetic tradition, st rongly
emphasizes that meditative spiritual reading of Scripture helps us to pursue an
inner pilgrimage and this, in tu rn, leads us both towards? glor ification and, at
the same time, to an update of the Scriptures;
5) according to the ascetic tr adition, Scripture and prayer enlighten each
other . This means that the “prayer of the Scriptures” is not a close d circle, but
rather an upward spiral ,40
In the hermeneutics employed by the Fathers, “the Prayer of the Scriptures”
involves Christological, ecclesiological and Trinitarian readin gs of Bible. The Spirit
transforms an allegorical picture from a simple sign into? a sy mbol, an environment
of participation. Starting from the study of the phenomenon of division, from a
communication failure, of the “di vided sensitivity” that charac terizes much of
contemporary consciousness, Andrew Louth insists on the the val ue of ?? allegory
which “ enables us to restore through her in us the unity and simplicity lost by the
fall, and so to come back to love . ” A l l e g o r y i s a w a y o f p r a y e r , i t i s a t h o m e
especially in the Liturgy: “ Allegory is firmly connected to the mystery of Christ, it
is a way to tie the whole Scripture of this mystery, a way to make a synthetic vision of the biblical narrative images and events .”
41

39 Young, Biblical Exegesis , 29.
40 Breck, Sfânta Scriptur ă în Tradiția Bisericii , 114-117. Each lectio divina can become a reality for
us, ‘Today’: “Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your e ars” (Luke 4:21).
41 A n d r e w L o u t h , Deslușirea Tainei. Despre natura teologiei , translation and afterword by M. Neamțu,
preface by Ioan Ică jr. (Sibiu: Deisis, 1999) 169-170, 159-160. “The seduction of allegory path –
o r a w a r e n e s s o f m u l t i p l e m e a n i n g o f S c r i p t u r e – c o m e s f r o m t h e recognition of this great
‘profoundness’, mira profunditas, of the Holy Scriptures” (Lout h, Deslușirea Tainei , 159).

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

163 It is the experience of teachers, saints and ascetics of the Ch urch that the
H o l y S p i r i t g u i d e s t h e r e a d e r o f t h e S c r i p t u r e f r o m t h e l i t e r a l to the spiritual
meaning of the text, and thus through to inner contemplative pr ayer, this being
a n a c t o f l o v e o f t h e H o l y S p i r i t . T h e t r u t h t h a t i s b e i n g c o m m unicated by the
Spirit is more than information, it involves participation and communion, an
inner journey from contemplatio to meditatio : “Therefore , says John Breck, there
is no formal technique, nor a systematic methodology to enable us to pass from a
literal reading of the text to a purely spiritual reading or from knowledge of God
to communion with God, the attempt to hear the voice of God in Scripture… ”.42
Following the Holy Virgin’s example, we first receive in oursel ves the
g i f t a n d t h e p o w e r o f t h e H o l y W o r d , w e r e a d i t , w e m e d i t a t e u p on it and we
internalize it in order for it to come to fruition in us, for o ur spiritual perfection.
L e c t i o d i v i n a i s a q u a l i t y a n d a w a y o f r e a d i n g t h e S c r i p t u r e , possible only
through the work of God's Spirit in us: “ The transition from exegesis to lectio and
the transition from the literal to the spirit ual meaning of a passage is accomplished
less through our human effort and more through the Holy Spirit. Consequently, every
authentic spiritual reading of Scripture should start with a triple epiklesis: an
invocation addressed to the Father to send upon us the gift of the Spirit, for the
Spirit to transform our reading into a deep and constant communion with Jesus
Christ, God’s eternal Word .”43
In our last chapter, the continuous synergy between reading and prayer
i s e n l i g h t e n e d b y t h e f i g u r e o f t h e e l d e r w h o c o m m u n i c a t e s u s a l i v e d
experience of the Word. As we shall see, the desert hermeneutic i n t h i s s e n s e
involved a hermeneutical circle or spiral – interpretation both derived from and
led toward praxis. Thus, in the following, we emphasize that th e reading
requires spiritual asceticism, hu mility and purity of heart, be cause “truth” cannot be
reduced to an object of discussion, but demands the role of the Spirit as the inner
teacher. Therefore, the Saint Is aac the Syrian will be our prac tice teacher (born of
silence) of the word through our sanctification and astonishmen t.

5. “The Elder” (Old Man) Comm unicates a Lived Experience –
the “Practice” of the Word

T h e C h u r c h i n P e r s i a o w e s m u c h t o A n t i o c h i a n t h e o l o g i c a l i n f l u e nces,
the theological orientation of Alexandrian Cyril (412-444) bein g perceived as
foreign to the East Syriac Church tradition. In its theological schools many scholars
monks translated into Syriac a number of Greek philosophical an d scientific texts,
which were in turn studied by the Arabs. These peoples then bro ught the material
t o E u r o p e v i a S p a i n . B a s e d o n t h e t r a d i t i o n o f t h e S y r o – O r i e n t a l schools, the

42 Ibid., 122.
43 Ibid., 127.

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

164 Arab academies were developed.44 Between 471 and 489, the Bishop Barsaûma
(† about 496), disciple of Iba of Edessa enabled the Persian sc hool of Narsai to
construct its first establishment.
The Syro-Oriental Church, now cl osed off from Persia, was willi ng to offer to
persecuted Edessenes a place where they could reorganize their school which, based
on Antiochene theology, was viewed with suspicion by the Byzant ines. Following a
decision to seek independence from the Catholicos of Seleucia-C tesiphon, Babowai
( 4 5 7 – 4 8 4 ) , a n d t h o s e o p p o s e d t o “ m i a p h y s i t i s m ” , i n 4 8 4 B a r s a u m a convened
the Synod of Beth Lapat , at which Antiochene theology was recognized as the basis of
the Syro-Oriental Church and wit h it, Narsai’s exegetico-theolo gical approach which
involved acceptance of theological positions condemned at the C ouncil of Ephesus in
431? and later at the second Council of Constantinople in 553 ( condemnation of
Theodore of Mopsuestia, Diodorus of Tarsus and Iba of Edessa).45 U n d e r t h e
regulations of the school of Nisibis,46 the members of the school, who called

44 Adam H. Becker, Fear of God And the Beginning of Wisdom: Th e School of Nisibis And the Beginning of
Wisdom. The School of Nisibis and the Development of Scholastic Culture in Late Antique Mesopotamia
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006), 24. Lik e Becker examined the earliest Syriac
Sources attest to an understandi ng of Christianity as a form of learning. Some of the earliest explicit
examples in Syriac literature of the tendency to employ pedagog ical terms can be found in Peshitta.
The Syriac equivalent of the Hebrew root y-š-b (lit „to sit”, w as translated as „to live”) it is shift in „to
sit in study”. The closure of the School of the Persians in 489 for being a strong-hold of Nestorianism
w o u l d a l s o h a v e a f f e c t e d t h e v a r i o u s s o u r c e s f o r t h e S c h o o l t h a t were composed after this date. In
reality, the theology of the School in the mid-fifth century, i f it even had a distinct ive theology, was not
n e c e s s a r e l y e q u i v a l e n t t o a l a t e r E a s t – S y r i a c o n e , e v e n i f A n t i ochene writers, such as Diodore of
Tarsus, were read there. The ethnic appelation „of the Persians ” may be relevant to the origins of the
Shool, but it does not have continuing significance throught th e fifth century (Becker, Fear of God , 45).
On the other hand, Theodore’s influence on the Church of the Ea st, including in Christology, exegesis
and sacramental theology, was immense (Becker, Fear of God , 117).
45 Barsaûma didn’t hesitate to use political power, obtaining fro m the “king of kings” Peroz (457-484)
the expulsion of "miaphysitists" in Persia. He tried to do the same and in Armenia, but there, in 491,
the Catholicos Babken, together with Albanian and Iberian bisho ps, convened a council at Valarshapat
which condemned the Council of Chalcedon, Leo's Tome and Barsaû ma. See Sabino Chialà, Isaac
Sirianul – ascez ă singuratic ă și milă fără sfârșit, trans. Cornelia Maria and Deacon Ioan I. Ică jr (Sibiu:
Deisis, 2012), 32.
46 T h e w h o l e d a y w a s d i v i d e d b e t w e e n s t u d y a n d p r a y e r , a n d d u r i n g t h e s c h o o l y e a r a n y w o r k i n g
activity was forbidden outside of school. Students were housed in small residential units where they
were provided with food and accommodation. The headmaster, call ed “Rabban ” was responsible for
the Department of exegesis ( kursyâ da-mpshshqânâ ), while “ rabbaitâ ” with the functions of a deputy
director in charge of discipline, library and economy. There we re foreseen: a teacher of reading (to
whom was entrusted the teaching of grammar, reading and composi tion), a professor of writing and
calligraphy and a “ bâduqâ ” (researcher), which deals with non-religious subjects. Beside s Scripture,
they taught Aristotle and some e lements of history, geography, natural science rhetoric. Provide two
years study program: teaching first book of Psalms, the student had to memorize them, the second
book of the Old and New Testamen t study by Ephrem and comments of Theodore of Mopsuestia; see
Arthur Vööbus, The Statutes of the School of Nisibis , Volumul 12 din Pa pers of the Estonian Theological
Society in Exile (Stockholm: E STE, 1962) and Raymond Le Coz, Histoire de l’Église d’Orient , Chrétiens
d’Irak, d’Iran et de Turquie (Paris: Cerf, 1995), 89-105, 311- 336, both quoted in S. Chialà , Isaac Sirianul ,
34-35.

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

165 e a c h o t h e r “ b r o t h e r s ” , w e r e a c o m m u n i t y ( knushyâ ) of semi-monastic type,
remaining in the same time stu dying in a state of celibacy.
St. Isaac the Syrian, Bishop of Nineveh, lived in the 7th-centu ry. He and his
brother joined the ascetic monastery of Mar Matthew, near Ninev eh as monks. His
passion for reading led him to become blind, says Isho'denah. But the source of his
knowledge was threefold : first the Scripture or rather “ contemplation of Scripture ”,
then, the teaching of the Fathers, whom he calls “ true men ”, and finally his own
experience . Scripture, the primary source of revelation for Isaac, needs to be
investigated, questioned, interpreted, and sometimes even excee ded.
The Fathers are to be read, assimilated, interiorized and re-ex pressed.
Even though accepting the Antiochene methods of exegesis, the S yro-Oriental
tradition has not departed from the ancient Syri ac tradition, b ut it has been able
to rediscover within the tradition of Antioch elements which we can call typical
of the exegesis of Afrah and Ephrem. That is, while it does not use Alexandrian
allegorical method, it does employ the category of symbol and mystery . This agreement
between the oldest Syriac tradit ion and Antiochian exegesis is not due so much
to the historical contacts as to “ the success of the same style in different cultural
environments ” (edessano-nisibian of Antiochian and Syriac language and Gree k
language). The common elements are: an historic interpretation b u t w i t h a n
affinity for the Jewish mode of exegesis and the discrete use of typology .47
Dadisho 'Qatraya recognizes in the work of Theodore of Mopsuest ia48
(350-428) what he calls “spiritua l exegesis” different from the exegesis as “historic”
and as “homiletics”.49 For Theodore, the Logos does not manifest itself clearly in

47 Chialà, Isaac Sirianul , 122.
48 Not only the School of Nisibis helped to propagate the ideas o f Theodore. Thomas of Edessa,
P o s i , C y r u s o f E d e s s a , I š a i a n d H e n a n a o f A d i a b e n e , s h o w h o w f a ithfully East-Syrian teachers
reproduced Theodore’ ideas. The 6th century was a period of a great exegetical activity (exegetica l
works of Elisa bar Quzbaye, Abraham and John of Bet-Rabban, Mar Aba, Henana of Adiabene and
Michael Badoqa, have not been preserved). Apud, Lucas Van Rompa y, “The Christian Syriac
Tradition of Interpretation,” in Hebrew Bible, Old Testament: the history of its interpretation. I/1:
Antiquity , ed. Magne Sæbø (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1996), 6 12-641, here 636. See,
also, Dimitri Zaharopoulos, “Theodore of Mopsuestia, view on Pr ophetic Inspiration,” Greek
Orthodox Theological Review 23, no. 1 (1978): 42-52.
49 See, Luise Abramowski, “Dadisho Qatraya and his Commentary on the Book of the Abbas Isaiah,”
The Harp. A Review of Syriac and Oriental Ecumenical Studies 4 (1991): 67-83; Paolo Bettiolo,
“Esegesi e purezza di cuore. La testimonianza di Dadišo‘ Qatray a (VII sec.), nestoriano e solitario,”
Annali di Stor ia dell’Esegesi 3 (1986): 201-213; Robert A. Kitchen, “Dadisho Qatraya’s Comme ntary
on Abba Isaiah: The Apophth egmata Patrum Connection,” Studia Patristica 41 (2006): 35-50; Lucas
van Rompay, “La littérature exég étique syriaque et le rapproche m e n t d e s t r a d i t i o n s s y r i e n n e –
orientale et syrienne-occidentale,” Parole de l’Orient 20 (1995): 221-235; Antoine Guillaumont,
“Dadisho Qatraya,” Annuaire de l’École Pratique des Hautes Ét udes, Ve Section: Sciences Religieuses
87 (1978-1979): 327-329; Sebastian P. Brock, Prière et vie spirituelle. Textes des Pères syriaques .
Spiritualité orientale 90, Translated by Didier Rance, and André Joly (Bégrolles-en-M auges: Abbaye
de Bellefontaine, 2011).

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

166 the Old Testament, but presents itself in what he refers to as “prophecy” which
manifests as “symbol” and “sign” and it is thus different from allegory.50
The Gnostic Century of Evagrius was adapted to a “Theodorian” environment.51
It is indeed surprising that Isaac, and not only him, was able to bring together
two approaches who were consider ed in interpretation/exegesis a nd in theology
as notoriously opposed to each ot her : the Antiochene and Alexa ndrian schools.
John the Solitary (in Apamea, mentioned by Babai the Great) is among the first in
the Syriac environment to provide an ascetic and spiritual over view, as Evagrius
had done within the Helenophone and Egyptian monasticism in gen eral.
Isaac pays great attention to the topic of reading and sometime s argues
strongly against those who despise it ( Discours 29, Part Two ).52 The reading which
St. Isaac invites us to engage in is actually a “hermeneutic” p rocess of disclosure
and of perception with the help of the Intellect ( hawnâ ). It is a spiritual reading
i n w h i c h t h e S p i r i t e n l i g h t e n s t h e i n t e l l e c t s o t h a t i t m i g h t e m b r a c e t h e d e e p
s e n s e o f s c r i p t u r a l t e x t s . I s a a c i n v i t e s a r e a d i n g t h a t c o u l d b e categorized as
allegorical, typological, symbolic, anagogic but by “ dilation of the heart ”, the
intention being to pursue an understanding of Scripture that go es to the heart of
the text and to the author's intent.
In this regard this approach is Evagrian. Isaac’s aim is not so much to seek
f r o m t h e t e x t a c o h e r e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n b u t r a t h e r f o r t h e r e a d er to discern the
“exteriority of the Scripture” i n its intimate significance, th at is, a word which is
beyond Scripture, but yet still in Scripture, in its most secre t heart. This is called
by Isaac “inner reading”; Dadish o 'Quatraya prefers the term “s piritual reading.”53

50 Chialà, Isaac Sirianul , 125-126.
51 P h i l o xe n u s o f M a b b u g († 5 2 3) i n ϐ i f t h c e n t u r y a n d S e r g i u s R e sh ’aina in VI-VII century are the two
Syriac translations. Evagrius cannot be considered as an exeget e, but, through his Scholias , trying to
t e x t o u t o f w h a t h e c a l l s t h e ‘ i n t e l l i g i b l e r e a l i t i e s ’ ( pragmata no ēta) w h o h i d e u n d e r t h e ‘ s e n s i b l e
r e a l i t i e s ’ e x p r e s s e d i n S c r i p t u r e a n d h e i n v i t e s u s t o u n d e r s t a nd Scripture into a ‘intelligible mode’
(noētōs) and ‘spiritual way’ ( pneumatik ōs), but here the “spiritual” is n ot conjugated with the “allegor ical”
but with “intelligible” ( noētōs) . H i s i n t e r e s t i s n o t t o g i v e a n e w m e a n i n g t o t h e c u r r e n t t e x t, but a
noetic spiritual sense, but with a sense that has to do with th e nous of the reader. “Do not allegorize
words of blamable people” ( Gnostic 2 1 ) , “ D o n o t e x p l a i n s p i r i t u a l l y a l l t h a t n a t u r a l l y l e n d s i t s e lf to
allegory … you’ll spend more time on Jonah’s ship” ( Gnostic 34). The literal meaning still has value to
the reader through a “large heart” will be reached through pure heart full understanding of the words
of God; apud, Chialà, Isaac the Syrian , 145.
52 St. Isaac the Syrian, Cuvinte către singuratici. Partea a II-a, recent descoperit ă, introductory study
and translation by Ioan I. Ică jr. (Sibiu: Deisis, 2003), 339-4 42. His constant prayer was, “ Make us
worthy of the truth that is within the Scriptures .”
53 Chialà, Isaac Sirianul , 160-164. Scripture as a mirror and as an inexhaustible source are two images
used by Ephraim. Isaac expresses the same images as ‘sipped’ th e meaning of words and ‘swimming’
in the ocean texts. The reader is continually seems to float in an ocean that does not leave broke, you
must descend into the abyss, it means moving from “simple form” outside to deep waters. Dadisho
‘Quatraya lists three types of exegesis: one that sheds light o n the of “historical” meaning ( tashcitânâyâ )

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

167 Isaac sees the “other” as a possible place of revelation. In th is context he
calls the old man’s figure and ro le as the one who initiates in to the lo ne ly l i fe
and therefore introduces into knowledge.54 Himself fulfils the role of “elder” for
t h e s o l i t a r y o n e s , a n d t h e e p i s t o l a r y g e n r e o f s o m e o f h i s s p e e ches reveals an
activity of a spiritual accompanying.55 An entire journey of initiation glimpse
f r o m h i s w o r k , a j o u r n e y w h i c h i s b e i n g m a d e b y t h e l o n e l y o n e under the
g uidance of an “old man”, of which he remains linked throug hout his spiritual
journey.56
Between reading and prayer Isaac sees a continuous synergy with each
feeding each other.57 In illustrating this process, Isaac compares it to the figure
of a solitary old man who leads us to knowledge. Gaining a cert ain amount of
d i s c e r n m e n t , t h e o l d m a n i s t h e r e t o s h o w , t o a c c o m p a n y , b u t n o t to replace.
“The Elder” (old man) communicates, therefore, a lived experien ce, a necessary
addition of the Word in Scripture, meaning the “practice” of th e Word.58
The desert fathers recognized th at in order to appropriate the words of
Scripture and weave them into the fabric of their lives. Those who came to the
elders seeking “a word” did so not because they wanted or neede d an extended
spiritual discourse. They sought instead to have their very par ticular needs and

who are interested in “school people” that the meaning of a sec ond “homiletic” ( mtargmânâyâ )
way Saints Basil the Great and John Chrysostom is addressed to the world, and, finally, a “spiritual
explanation” ( pushâqâ ruhânâyâ ) f o r t h e s o l i t a r y a n d t h e s a i n t s . The historical reading and
homiletics, fully legitimate, do not cover reading Scripture . Reading requires spiritual asceticism,
h u m i l i t y a n d p u r i t y o f h e a r t , j u s t a s t h e W o r d w i l l l i g h t i n t h e depths of the reader, making his
spiritual spurting m ore hidden meaning.
54 Guy G. Stroumsa, “Du maître de sagesse au maître spiritual”, Giovanni Filoramo (ed.), Maestro e
Discepolo. Temi e problem della direzione spiritual tra VI secolo a.C. e VII secolo d.C. (Brescia: Morcelliana,
2002): 13-24; Kallistos Ware, “The Spiritual Guide in Orthodox Christianity”, The Inner Kingdom
(Crestwood, New York: St Vladimi r’s Seminary Press, 2001), John Sommerfeldt (ed.), Abba. Guides
to Wholeness and Holl iness East and West ( M i c h i g a n : C i s t e r c i a n P u b l i c a t i o n s K a l a m a z o o , 1 9 8 2 ) ,
Derek Krueger, Writing and Holiness. The Practice of Authorship in the Early Christian East (Philadelphia:
University pf Pennsylvania Press, 2004), J. Behr, A. Louth (eds .), Abba. The Tradition of Orthodoxy in
the West. Festschrift for Bishop Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia (Crestwood, New York: St Vladimir’s
Seminary Press, 2003), Douglas Burton-Christie, The Word in the Desert: Scripture and the Quest for
Holiness in early Christian Monasticism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993).
55 Isaac, Part III, Discours 12.
56 Isaac, Part II, Discours 3, cap. IV, 71.
57 Chialà, Isaac Sirianul , 164. Isaac draws parallels between Scripture and creation: th e physis has a
didactic and therapeutic function ascribing to beings revelator y function, that despite their lack
of reason, make them mediators of knowledge.
58 Ibid., 172-173. There is a contemplation of Scripture and one of the created realities, but there is
a also a contemplation of the pr actical work. Image of the sun or the water painted on a wall, are
associated with knowing the‚ «truth», that can be acquired only by «tasting the spiritual carrying
out of» , «trying mysteries with their own life» because they cannot be understood „in teaching of a
man or by researching books”. The simplicity of the words toget her with the knowledge coming
from inner experience and shall be more valuable than teaching from one sharpness mind or by
hearing and in the ink.

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

168 concerns addressed by direct, immediate words of salvation.59 T h e c a r e f u l
attention given to words in the desert was complemented by the importance
attributed to praxis. The question of how to bring one’s life i nto conformity with
Scripture became a burning question: “They were convinced that only through
doing w h a t t h e t e x t e n j o i n e d c o u l d o n e h o p e t o g a i n a n y u n d e r s t a n d i n g of its
meaning”.60
The elders discouraged attempts to inquire into the meaning of a particular
text, because for the desert fathers, Scripture existed in orde r to be put into
practice. This practical appropri ation of Scripture was seen as a “ p r o c e s s o f
c om in g t r u ly t o un d er s tan d an d re a liz e t he mean ing t he S c r ip tu r e. Attaining a
s a y i n g f r o m S c r i p t u r e , r e a l i z i n g i t s t r u t h w i t h i n o n e s e l f , i m p l ied a deep moral
and spiritual transformation”.61 S o , t h e r e i s a h e r m e n e u t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e o f
praxis. The monks’ insistence on the importance of praxis had a direct influence
on the way they approached the interpretation of Scripture.
By incorporating the teaching of a particular text into one’s l ife “reveals
t h e e n d o f t h e h e r m e n e u t i c a l p r o c e s s a s f a r a s t h e m o n k s w e r e c oncerned:
fulfillment or incorporation of the text in a life”.62 In short, the monks’ practical
orientation to Scripture provide d the key which opened up its w orlds of meaning:
“The desert hermeneutic in this sense involved a hermeneutical circle or spiral –
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n b o t h d e r i v e d f r o m a n d l e d t o w a r d p r a x i s . T o u n d e rstand the
Scriptures, it was necessary to make some attempt to put them i nto practice”.63
“Practice” is not opposed to “knowledge”.64 T h u s , praktikē, askesis a n d
keeping/guarding the commandments, is itself a way of knowledge or a “place

59 D o u g l a s B u r t o n – C h r i s t i e , Word in The Desert. Scripture and the Quest for Holiness in Early
Christian Monasticism (New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 134: “Two c onstantly
r e c u r r i n g q u e s t i o n s f o u n d i n t h e Sayings r e m i n d u s o f t h e i n e x t r i c a b l e b o n d s t h a t c o n n e c t e d
words and praxis for the desert monks. The first – “Abba, give me a word ” – is more of a plea
than a question, but neverthele ss implies a multitude of questi ons. The other – “Abba, what should I
do? ” – r e v e a l s t h e c o n c r e t e a n d p r a c t i c a l c h a r a c t e r o f t h e m o n k s ’ concerns and complements the
first.”
60 Ibid., 135.
61 Ibid., 153-5. The reas ons for their refusal to discuss the tex ts were that: excessive speculation on
Scripture would inevitably lead one away from the simple exerci se of putting the commands of
the text into practice.
62 Ibid., 160.
63 I b i d . , 1 6 5 . S e e a l s o , L . R o g e r O w e n s , A b b a , G i v e M e a W o r d : T h e P a t h o f S p i r i t u a l D i r e c t i o n
(Brewster, Massachusetts: Paraclete Press, 2012).
64 About the idea of a pedagogical sufferings or a “conversion of asceticism” to St. Isaac, see Ioniță
Apostolache, Hristologie și Mistică în Teologia Sirian ă, (Craiova: Editura Mitropolia Olteniei/
Cetatea de Scaun, 2014) 279-300, în mod special p. 284-290. And a b o u t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between
Praxis and the spiritual vision, see, also: Valentin Vesa, Cunoașterea lui Dumnezeu la Sfântul Isaac
Sirul (Cluj-Napoca: Editura Renașterea, 2013), 211-215.

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

169 of knowledge”.65 K n o w i n g t h e t r u t h c a n o n l y b e a c h i e v e d “ b y t a s t i n g t h e
spiritual deeds”, “trying mystery with one’s own life”, because t h e y c a n ’ t b e
understood “from a person’s teaching or from researching of boo ks”.66 Isaac
distinguishes between “knowledge from deeds” and “idle wisdom”, resembled
with a painter who paints a wall with water that can’t relieve his thirst.
So, the “experience of things” that this ordinary man has it ma kes much
more than the knowledge of the “wise who speakes because he stu died but
without having the experience of things”.67 „Reading of Scripture” ( qeryana – a
syrian term that refers to both to Bible and the Holly Fathers) banishes despair
f r o m t h e s o u l o f t h e o n e w h o c h o s e t o l i v e i n xeniteia ( s y r . askesayuta ).
„ R e a d i n g ” i s n o t a s t u d y o f t h e b i b l i c a l t e x t w i t h a c o g n i t i v e purpose, but a
mystical meeting, the direct experience of conversation with Go d. Scripture is
t h e m a i n w a y f o r s p i r i t u a l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f h u m a n a n d t h e r e j e ction of his
sinful life.68 It is not necessary that the monk to be an erudite, he rather must
have a pure mind.69 According to Isaac, true faith is not achieved from books but
from experience; it emanates from the purity of mind rather tha n from reading.
„The one who has tasted the tr uth no longer argues for it”.70
Alfeyev makes some suggestions on how to read the Scripture („p raying
reading”) to capture mystical understandings ( sukkale ) of the spiritual significance
that arise in the mind of the ascetic: 1) silently and quietly 2) by gathering of
mind and absence of thoughts from outside 3) praying before rea ding. Not every
word of Scripture has the same meaning for every reader.

65 Patrick Hagman, The Asceticism of Isaac of Nineveh (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 112-
173, 213-221. See also: Adam H. Becker, Fear of God and the Beginning of Wisdom: The School of
Nisibis and the Christian Scholastic Culture in Late Antique Mesopotamia (Philadelphia: University
of Pennsylvania, 2006), Elizabeth A. Clark, Reading Renunciation: Asceticism and Scripture in
Early Christianity (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), Richard Finn, Asceticism in the
Graeco-Roman World (Cambridge: Cambridge Universi ty Press, 2009), Gavin Flood, The Ascetic
Self: Subjectivity, Memory and tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge Univer sity Press, 2004), Sidney
H. Griffith, “Asceticism in the Church of Syria: The Hermeneuti cs of Early Syrian Monasticism,” in
Asceticism , ed. Vincent L. Wimbush and Richard Valantasis (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1995), 220-245, Constantine N. Tsirpanlis, “Praxis and Theoria: T h e H e a r t , L o v e a n d L i g h t
M y s t i c i s m i n S a i n t I s a a c t h e S y r i a n , ” Patristic and Byzantine Review 6 (1987): 93-120, Leif E.
V a a g e , “ A s c e t i c M o o d s , H e r m e n e u t i c s , a n d B o d i l y D e c o n s t r u c t i o n , ” in Asceticism , ed. V.L. Wimbush
and R. Valantasis (1995), 246-63, Richard Valantasis, The Making of the Self: Ancient and Modern
Asceticism (Eugen, Oregon: Casc ade Books, 2008).
66 Discours 3, IV, 1, cf. Isaac, Cuvinte către singuratici. Part II, 200.
67 Discours 1, 39 and 53: „Love the simplicity of words accompanied by the knowledge that comes
f r o m e x p e r i e n c e r a t h e r t h a n l o o k i n g i n w a r d a r i v e r G h i s o n i ( c f . G e n . 2 : 1 3 ) c o m i n g f r o m t h e
teaching of the sharpness mind , from hearing and from ink”.
68 I / 1 ( 3 – 5 ) = P R 1 ( 2 – 5 ) [ p p . 2 6 – 2 8 ] . C f . I l a r i o n A l f e y e v , Lumea duhovniceasca a Sfântului Isaac
Sirul , trans. Dragoș Dâscă (Iași: Doxologia, 2014), 107, 173.
69 I/64 (307) = PR 65 (446-447) [pp. 452-453]. Cf. Alfeyev, Lumea duhovniceasca a Sfântului Isaac
Sirul , 176-8.
70 Chapters on knowledge IV, 77 (p. 227); cf. Alfeyev, Lumea duhovniceasca a Sfântului Isaac Sirul , 178.

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

170 When the man receives the Paraclete, he no longer needs divine Scriptures,
„ h e a r t l e a r n s i n a h i d d e n w a y f r o m t h e S p i r i t ” .71 T h u s , s a y s A l f e y e v , „ I s a a c
emphasizes the primacy of spiritual experience towards any form al expression of
t h i s e x p e r i e n c e , w h e t h e r i t i s t h e r e a d i n g o f s c r i p t u r a l a n d a s cetic texts”. In
Discours 19 of Part I, St. Isaac speaks about six kinds of discoveries mentioned in
Scripture: through the senses (burning bush, cloud of glory, Ab raham’s receiving
o f t h e t h r e e m e n g i v e t o , J a c o b ’ s ladder), through bodily seein g, through ecstatic
rapture of spirit (Isaiah’s and Paul’s visions), „the stage of prophecy”, „thought
in a certain way” (dogmas) and „as in a dream”.72
The “crucifixion” of man is the primary way to knowledge: conte mplating
the cross, “the sipped” of the Scriptures, but also to draw the life from the mystery
of Christ’s death. Cross is a receptacle of power, of the glory or the “ shekinah of
God”, the place of divine mysteries and knowledge, “Christ's ro be.”73 I t i s
revelation which encapsulates in itself the dynamics of salvati on, the “emptying
out” of the love of both the Son and the Father. The gift of co ntemplation is given
to the one who dies with “the death of Christ.” Contemplation a nd “practice” of
the cross are described by Isaac in terms of “crucifying the fl esh” and “crucifixion of
the intellect”. The Cross is twofold: patience of sorrows and t he pain of mind in
unceasing prayer and in other an d it is called “contemplation”.74
There is one last way of knowing, namely, discoveries or revela tions
(ghelyâne) , in which one distinguishes between “material” discoveries or revelations,
m e a n i n g those perceived by the senses, and discovery or “spirit ual” revelation.
Of the first type of events Isaac says that we observe them in Scripture or in the
Fathers and they typically occur through the mediation of angel s; thus they are
called “angelical discoveries / revelations”. The second type, “spiritual discoveries”
are gained through the revelations of the Holy Spirit which per ceived in the
inner man ???: “in the feeling of heart, a hidden discovery, wi thout the mediation of
external senses.” It is the perception that there is no involve ment of him who
receives it is but simply a “work of the Spirit”, the man being in “astonishment”,
in non-prayer.75

71 I/6 (58) = PR 6 (91) [56, pp. 286-287]; apud Alfeyev, Lumea duhovniceasca a Sfântului Isaac Sirul , 182.
72 Alfeyev, Lumea duhovniceasca a Sfântului Isaac Sirul , 230-3. The term „understandings” (Sukkale) is
therefore semantically close to the term of „discovery”.
73 A b o u t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e k n o w l e d g e f r o m e x p e r i e n c e o f asceticism, and the
knowledge from contemplation of the Cross (the “ shekinah of God”), see: Brenda Fitch Farady,
„Isaac of Niniveh’s typology of the Cross” Studia Patristica 35 (2001): 385-390.
74 Chialà, Isaac Sirianul , 175-176: St. Isaac quotes here from Abba Isaiah who said, „if the intellect wants
to climb the cross before to be calmed the waywardness of sense s comes upon him the wrath of God”
[Abba Isaiah, Asketikon 26 (gr.1 7) 4], i.e. w itho u t being healed t he weakness of his t houghts by the
patience and shame of the cross, dared to imagine its glory in the cross intellect (n. 84).
75 Chialà, Isaac Sirianul , 1 7 7 – 1 7 8 . W i t h t h e i r d i s c o v e r i e s / r e v e l a t i o n s a n g e l s c l e a n s t h e m a n i n
o r d e r t o m a k e s h i m a t e m p l e o f t h e H o l y S p i r i t , W h o , i n H i s t u r n, sanctifies man with the
discovery / revelation of Him. Revelation are therefore aimed a t cleansing and sanctification of
man, in order for it, remembering God unceasingly to become the temple of the Trinity.

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

171 Isaac discovered the relationship between d i s c o v e r y / r e v e l a t i o n a n d
truth: “In this way these should be understood: one is the disc overy and the
work [of God] and the other is truth and knowledge. Because the d is c ove ry is
not the accuracy of the truth, although it’s showing some with signs [ remze ] and
clues [ ’âtwâtâ ] suitable for human powers. So, to the work [of God] and to th e
wonder of discoveries are not given the name of knowledge and t ruth. […]
Therefore one who receives a discovery or in which a work is be en worked
[divine] will not necessarily kno w truth and accurate knowledge o f G o d :
b e c a u s e m a n y a r e t h o s e w h o r e c e i v e g i f t s l i k e t h o u g h t h e y k n o w God like
children [cf Heb 5 , 1 3 ] . ”76 S o , e v e n i n d i s c o v e r y , w h i c h i s a p r i v i l e g e d p a t h o f
knowledge, the experience of it does not guarantee its truth. T hose who master
knowledge through their own endeavors are also prone to being c aught up and
blinded by pride and the more they study, the more darkened their understanding
can become . Isaac notes that “truth” cannot be reduced to an object of di scussion, but
must first be received and then offered, wrapped in his natural garment which
is discretion.
In the Discourse 1 3 o f t h e Third Part , h e s p e a k s o f “ t h r e e p l a c e s o f
knowledge” in nature (meditation), apart from nature (mind), an d beyond nature
(faith).77 In the third ‘place’, knowledge ends, facts come to an end and senses
b e c o m e s u p e r f l u o u s . H e r e , t h e o b j e c t o f k n o w l e d g e i s B e i n g i t s e lf; the senses
become useless because what is already discovered by the one wh o perceives is
not something unknown to him, and the only author of the discov ery /
revelation is Holy. The usually term for knowledge used by Isaa c is the Syriac
te'oryâ which transliterates the Greek theoria (contemplation),78 and indicates
“deep understanding” of a reality that is born of silence, that is, contemplation
as “spiritual vision”79, where the exact and intimate knowledge of the examined
reality must be generically understood.
Words have limits. Isaac asks God for the gift to “hear the wor d of silence”,
a ‘word’ which rises “in the heart without being written beddin g”, which moves
“the intellect without expressing itself” and is a word “upon t he lips of the Spirit”.

76 St. Isaac the Syrian, Discours 19 in Cuvinte către singuratici. Part II , 415.
77 S t . I s a a c t h e S y r i a n , Cuvinte către singuratici. Partea a III-a, recent reg ăsită, Foreword, introduction
and text Sabino Chialà, trans. Ioan I. Ică jr. (Sibiu: Deisis, 2007), 160-168.
78 Sebastian Brock, „Some Uses of the Term theoria in the Writings of Isaac of Niniveh”, Parole de
l’Orient 20 (1995): 407-419, here 408-410.
79 St. Isaac uses a concept, precio us to John Dalyatha also, that of the glory of the divine nature. He
d i s t i n g u i s h e s b e t w e e n t w o v i s i o n s , f o r w h i c h w e p o s s e s s t w o e y e s : t h e c o n t e m p l a t i o n o f t h e
glory of God concealed in created natures and that of the glory t o H i s d i v i n e n a t u r e . A p u d , R o b e r t
Beulay, La Lumière sans forme. Introduction à l’étude de la mystique chréti enne syro-orieniale (Editions
de Chevetogne: Chevetogne, 1987), 206-210, here 201. See, also, Robert Beulay, L’enseignement
spirituel de Jean de Dalyatha, mystique syro-oriental du VIIIe siècle ( B e a u c h e s n e : P a r i s , 1 9 9 0 ) ,
386-463, in particular 447-455.

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

172 T h u s t h e t r u t h i n i t s f u l l n e s s “ w i l l b e r e v e a l e d a t t h e p r o p e r time from itself,”
while the depth of the mysteries is yet guarded by silence. In this, Isaac seems to
show himself as belonging to the ancient tradition of apophatic t h e o l o g y .
However, one can recognize a difference of emphasis in Isaac, b ecause, although
the knowledge he speaks of is beyond nature, it does not leave nature behind.
Rather, for him, the Spirit desc ends into nature and works with in her heart.
In Isaac's thinking it is not a matter ecstasy, but of astonish ment ( tehrâ )
as a sign of lack of knowledge and non-prayer. We have already seen how the
S p i r i t i s a c t i v e o n l y i n t h e t h i r d s t a g e o f s p i r i t u a l l i f e , o f which Isaac speaks,
where there is no human work: the lack of knowledge (surprise), as in the non-
prayer. He sees the role of the Spirit in ? discovery, which me ans to live in constant
remembrance of God. In Isaac's v ision, however, the Spirit has other functions, such
as that of “inner teacher.” The Spirit works deep down the “sha ding” ( maggnânutâ )
in two forms: sanctification received through the grace of God and “ astonishment ”
or the power of understanding by which the intellect receives d ivine revelations.80

Conclusions
In this study we wanted to emphasize the link between asceticis m and
the interpretation of Scripture and, for this reason, we turned t o t h e m o s t
popular ascetic experience of the Church, namely the Syrian spi rituality, taking
St. Isaac the Syrian as a model. But the stages of the study we re dictated also by
t h e s e v e r a l a d j a c e n t r e a d i n g s , l i k e t h a t o f : N . B e r d y a e v ( a b o u t t h e r e l a t i o n
between revelation and truth
81), Christopher Veniamin („cloud of witnesses”82),
Norman Russell83 (link between theoria and theosis in Scriptures and the living
experience of deification – “do you live it?”84) and Dumitru Staniloae (“Holy Fathers

80 Chialà, Isaac Sirianul , 182-186, 194-195.
81 Nicholas Berdyaev, Truth and Revelation (New York: Collier Books, 1962).
82 C h r i s t o p h e r V e n i a m i n , The Orthodox Understanding of Salvation. “Theosis” in Scripture and
Tradition (Dalton, PA: Mount Thabor Publi shing, 2014), 66: “As great Pau l himself proclaims in
the epistle reading for Orthodoxy Sunday, we have a ‘cloud of w itnesses’ (Hebr. 12:1), who
testify to the Truth”. This will be the orthodox interpretation of Holy Scripture.
83 Norman Russell, Fellow Workers With God: Orthodox Thinking on Theosis (Crestwood, New York:
St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2009), 55-72.
84 Russell, Fellow Workers , 169: “When my book on theosis in the Greek Fathers was published a
few years ago, I showed a copy to a Jewish friend, a student of the Kabbala. He looked through it
intently for some minutes, then said, ‘Yes, but do you live it? ’. A humbling question. Theosis is not
a subject of study. If it does not affect us personally, it doe s not become the context in which we
lead our Christian lives, it has no more value than any other t opic of intellectual curiosity”.

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

173 may still be”85) . A l l i n a n a t t e m p t t o h i g h l i g h t t h e v e r y i m p o r t a n t contributi on of
biblical studies, that can bring an awaited ‘corrective’ to the twentieth century
neo-patristic theology.
Therefore, in this study we have established the link between e arly Christian
ascetical practices and the Holy Fathers’ mode of Scriptural in terpretation, their
critical gift of discerning multiple layers of meaning in the b iblical text, making
possible a hermeneutics in which the literal and historical mea ning is brought
into close relation with the spiritual level of meaning, which directly addresses
to the reader’s life situation.
The desert father’s hermeneutic in this sense involved a hermen eutical
circle or spiral – interpretation both derived from and led tow ard praxis. We
can, also, make reference to John Cassian’s theory of Scripture ’s four senses
(literal, allegorical, thropological and anagogical). For St. I s a a c t h e S y r i a n ,
Bishop of Ninevehthe, the source of his knowledge was threefold : “contemplation
of Scripture”, teachings of the Fathers, and his own experience . He was able to
bring together two approaches opposed to each other: that of An tiochene and
A l e x a n d r i a n s c h o o l s . T h e r e a d i n g w h i c h S t . I s a a c i n v i t e s u s i s actually a
“hermeneutic” process of disclosure and perception with the hel p of the Intellect
(hawnâ ).
Isaac discovered the relationship between revelation and truth. We may
now “read the Bible holistically” starting from the unifying me ssage on which
the Fathers insist that “the narrative of the Bible is a contin uous”. So, we have to
let the living and life-giving Word of God speak to us instead of questioning the
biblical text itself. For tasting the Word with the Heart we ca n’t ignore the
understanding of the early church. This is the way of a pre-cri tical culture such
as that of early monastic biblica l school. For them Scripture p rescribes a way of
life – “Christ in us”.
B u t , f o r a l o n g t i m e t h e p r e – c r i t i c a l e x e g e t i c a l t r a d i t i o n w a s seen as a
decided obstacle to the correct d eciphering of the true sense o f text, and the
historical-critical method, on the other hand, is the key that can unlock this
p r i m i t i v e m e a n i n g o f t h e t e x t . T h e O r t h o d o x a p p r o a c h t o t h e p r o blem of
“doctrinal development” consists n e i t h e r i n a s o r t o f c o n t i n u o u s revelation,
nor in making additions to Scripture, but in solving concrete p roblems. The
movement is from biblical theolo gy, to historical theology, to systematic
theology, to homiletics. Thus, the atheistic-modern methodology is opposed to

85 Dumitru Stăniloae, „Sfânta Trad iție. Definirea noțiunii și înt inderii ei,” Ortodoxia 16, no. 1 (1964): 102-
103. To say that there can be „fathers” anymore is to suggest t hat the Holy Spirit left the Church. The
neo-patristic syntagma „Back to the Fathers” involved a creativ e interpretation of their experience
which is the „practice of the Wo rd” or the „enfleshed Scripture s” in their own lives.

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

174 the patristic “pre-critical” approach, because, for the Holy Fa thers, exegesis
never had a purpose enclosed wit hin itself. Orthodox biblical i nterpretation has
traditionally opted for a homilet ic approach instead of a purel y exegetical one.
The exegetical vision of the Holy Fathers was one inspired by a desire
for a deeper understanding of God, a vision which was called th eoria and was
achieved through “synergy”, a mutual effort between human autho r and the
Holy Spirit. A principle promoted by The Holy Fathers taken dir ectly from
Hebrew rabbis, is that of an exegetical reciprocity which assum es that all
Scripture is entirely inspired. Thus, the search for an inspire d vision of divine
truth ( theoria ) had led them to the identification not of two meanings, but o f a
double meaning: both literal (namely historical) and spiritual. Also, the antitype
and archetype are already, in a prophetic way, present in types . Church Fathers
argued that every God’s theophany in the Old Testament must be understood as
a theophany of God the Son (the type already contains and manif ests antitype).
In story of the Transfiguration, the bleached clothes of Christ are a symbol of the
words of Scripture, which became bright, clear, pure and unders tandable.
Holy Scripture cannot be understood, therefore, in vacuo , apart from the
illumination provided by the whole Church’s t radition. The biblical-patrist ic
hermeneutic principle refers therefore to the necessity of read ing the Scriptures
“from inside”. The ultimate purpose in lectio w a s t o r e a c h t o illuminatio a n d
deificatio (theosis ) as human participation in God’s life. The process begins with
b i b l i c a l e x e g e s i s a n d e n d s w i t h “ t h e p r a y e r o f S c r i p t u r e s ” . E a s tern Fathers
present accounts of any systemati c technique for reading Script ure. Phronêma
ekklêsias o r “ t h o u g h t o f t h e C h u r c h ” m u s t b e a b l e t o “ d i s c e r n i n g t h e u n i tive
‘mind’ ( dianoia ) o f S c r i p t u r e ” ( F . Y o u n g ) w h i c h i s e s s e n t i a l f o r r e a c h i n g t o a
proper interpretation. We have to to distinguish, also, two lev els of inspiration:
that of Scripture (revealing inspiration) and that of Tradition (anamnesis
inspiration).

REFERENCES

A b r a m o w s k i L u i s e . “ D a d i s h o Q a t r a y a a n d h i s C o m m e n t a r y o n t h e B o ok of the Abbas
Isaiah.” The Harp. A Review of Syriac and Oriental Ecumenical Studies 4 (1991):
67-83.
Alfeyev Ilarion. Lumea duhovniceasca a Sfântului Isaac Sirul. Translated by Dragoș Dâscă.
Iași: Doxologia, 2014.
Apostolache Ioniță, Hristologie și Mistică în Teologia Sirian ă. Craiova: Editura Mitropolia
Olteniei, Cetatea de Scaun, 2014.

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

175 B a r t h o l o m e w C r a i g G . a n d E v a n s C . S t e p h e n . “Behind” the Text: History and Biblical
Interpretation. Vol. 4 of Scripture and Hermeneutics Series. London: Paternoster
Press, 2003.
Becker H. Adam. Fear of God and the Beginning of Wi sdom: The School of Nisibis and the
Christian Scholastic Culture in Late Antique Mesopotamia. Philadelphia: University
of Pennsylvania, 2006.
Behr John, Louth Andrew. Abba. The Tradition of Orthodoxy in the West. Festschrift for
Bishop Kallistos (Ware) of Diokleia. Crestwood, New York: S t Vladimir’s Seminary
Press, 2003.
Berdyaev Nicholas. Truth and Revelation. New York: Collier Books, 1962.
Bettiolo Paolo. “Esegesi e purezza di cuore. La testimonianza d i Dadišo‘ Qatraya (VII
sec.), nestorian o e solitario.” Annali di Storia dell’Esegesi 3 (1986): 201-213.
Beulay Robert. L’enseignement spirituel de Jean de Dalyatha, mystique syro-oriental du
VIIIe siècle. Paris: Beauchesne, 1990.
Beulay Robert. La Lumière sans forme. Introduction à l'étude de la mystique chrétienne
syro-orieniale. Chevetogne: Editions de Chevetogne, 1987.
Blowers M. Paul. “A Psalm ‘Unto the End’: Eschatology and Anthr opology in Maximus the
Confessor’s Commentary on Psalm 59.” In The Harp of Prophecy: Early Christian
Interpretation of the Psalms , edited by Brian Daley and Paul Kolbet, 257-283.
Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2014.
Blowers M. Paul. “Eastern Or thodox Interpretation.” In Oxford Encyclopedia of Biblical
Interpretation , vol. 1, edited by Steven McKenzie, 241-249. New York: Oxford
University Press, 2014.
Blowers M. Paul. “Exegesis of Scripture.” In Oxford Handbook to Maximus the Confessor ,
edited by Pauline Allen and Bron wen Neil 253-273. Oxford: Oxfor d University
Press, 2015.
Blowers M. Paul. “Patristic Interpretation.” In Oxford Encyclopedia of Biblical Interpretation ,
vol. 2, edited by Steven McKenzie, 81-89. New York: Oxford Univ ersity Press,
2014.
Blowers M. Paul. The Bible in Greek Christian Antiquity. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of
Notre Dame Press, 1997.
Breck John. Sfânta Scriptur ă în Tradi ția Bisericii . Translated by Ioana Tămăian. Cluj-
Napoca: Patmos, 2008.
Breck John. Puterea Cuvântului în Biserica dreptm ăritoare . Translated by Monica E.
Herghelegiu. Bucharest: EIBMBOR, 1999.
Brock P. Sebastian. „Some Uses of the Term theoria in the Writi ngs of Isaac of Niniveh.”
Parole de l’Orient 20 (1995): 407-419.
Brock P. Sebastian. Prière et vie spirituelle. Textes des Pères syriaques . Spiritualité
orientale 9 0 . T r a n s l a t e d b y D i d i e r R a n c e , a n d A n d r é J o l y . B é g r o l l e s – e n – M auges:
Abbaye de Bellefontaine, 2011.
Burrows S. Mark. “’To Taste with the Heart’ Allegory, Poetics, and the Deep Reading of
Scripture.” Interpretation 56, no. 2 (2002): 168-180.
Burton-Christie Douglas. The Word in the Desert: Scripture and the Quest for Holiness in
early Christian Monasticism. Oxford: Oxford Unive rsity Press 1993.

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

176 Chialà Sabino. Isaac Sirianul – ascez ă singuratic ă și milă fără sfârșit. Translated by Maria
Cornelia Ică jr and Ioan I. Ic ă jr. Sibiu: Deisis, 2012.
Clark A. Elizabeth. Reading Renunciation. Asceticism and Scripture in Early Christianity.
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999).
Daley E. Brian. “Is patristic exegesis still usable?: Reflectio ns on early Christian
interpretation of the Psalms.” Communio 29, no. 1 (2002): 185-216.
Davis F. Ellen. Swallowing the Scroll: Textuality and th e Dynamics of Discourse in Ezekiel’s
Prophecy . Bible and Literature Series, no. 21 of the Columbia Theologic al Seminary,
Georgia. New York: Sheffie ld Academic Press, 1989.
Dawson David. Allegorical Readers and Cultural Revision in Ancient Alexandria. Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1992.
Demacopoulos George. Five Models of Spiritual Di rection in the Early Church. C h i c a g o :
University of Notre Dame, 2007.
Droysen Johann Gustav. The Hermeneutics Reader: Texts of the German Tradition from
the Enlightenment to the Present. New York: Continuum, 1985.
F a r a d y B r e n d a F i t c h . “ I s a a c o f N i n i v e h ’ s t y p o l o g y o f t h e C r o s s . ” Studia Patristica 3 5
(2001): 385-390.
Finn Richard. Asceticism in the Graeco-Roman World. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press 2009.
Flood Gavin. The Ascetic Self: Subjectivity, Memory and tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press 2004.
Froehlich Karlfried. Biblical Interpretation in the Early Church. Philadelphia: Fortress,
1984.
Funk W. Robert. “Saying and Seeing: Phenomenology of Language a nd the New Testament.”
Journal of Bible and Religion 3, no. 34 (1966): 197-213.
G o r m a n M a r k C h r i s t o p h e r . “ R e a d i n g w i t h t h e S p i r i t : S c r i p t u r e , C onfession, and Liturgical
Imagination.” Liturgy. A Journal of Th e Liturgical Conference 28, no. 2 (2013): 14-
22.
Griffith H. Sidney. “Asceticism in the Church of Syria: The Her meneutics of Early Syrian
Monasticism.” In Asceticism , edited by Vincent L. Wimbu sh and Richard Valantasis,
220-245. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
Guillaumont Antoine. “Dadisho Qatraya.” Annuaire de l’École Pratique des Hautes Études,
Ve Section: Sciences Religieuses 87 (1978-1979): 327-329.
Hagman Patrick. The Asceticism of Isaac of Nineveh. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
Hall A. Christopher. Reading the Scripture wi th the Church Fathers. New Y ork, InterVarsity
Press: 1998.
Hirshman Marc. A Rivalry of Genius: Jewish and Christ ian Biblical Interpretation in Late
Antiquity. T r a n s l a t e d b y B a t y a S t e i n . A l b a n y : S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y o f N e w Y o r k Press,
1996.
Jousse Marcel. La Manducation de la Parole. Gallimard: Paris, 1975.
Kitchen A. Robert. “Dadisho Qatraya’s Commentary on Abba Isaiah : The Apophthegmata
Patrum Connection.” Studia Patristica 41 (2006): 35-50.
Krueger Derek. Writing and Holiness. The Practice of Authorship in the Early Christian
East. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004.

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS

177 Le Coz Raymond. Histoire de l’Église d’Orient , Chrétiens d’Irak, d’Iran et de Turquie. Paris:
Cerf, 1995.
Lombaard Christo. The Old Testament and Christian Spirituality . Theoretical and Practical
Essays from a South Perspective African, Society of Biblical Li terature. Atlanta:
Society of Biblical Literature, 2012.
Longenecker N. Richard. “Early Church Interpretation.” In Dictionary of Biblical Criticism
and Interpretation , ed. Stanley E. Porter, 78-89. London and New York: Routledge
Taylor & Francis Group, 2007.
Loughlin O’ Thomas. “Christ and the Scriptures: the chasm betwe e n m o d e r n a n d p r e –
modern exegesis.” The Month 31 (1998): 475-485.
Louth Andrew. Deslușirea Tainei. Despre natura teologiei . Translated by M. Neamțu.
Sibiu: Deisis, 1999.
Margerie Bertrand Jacquin de. An Introduction to the History of Exegesis: Greek Fathers v. 1.
Petersham, Massachusetts: St. Bede’s Publications, 2002.
M c C a r t h y C . M i c h a e l . “ W e A r e Y o u r B o o k s : A u g u s t i n e , t h e B i b l e , and the Practice of
Authority.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 2, no. 75 (2007): 324-352.
Meyendorff John. Living Tradition: Orthodox Witn ess in the Contemporary World. N e w
York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1978.
Mondésert Claude. Le monde grec ancien et la bible. Paris: Beauchesne, 1984.
Motahari Mohammad. “Th e Hermeneutical Circle or the Hermeneutic al Spiral?.” The
International Journal of Humanities 2, no. 15 (2008): 99-111.
Oort J. van and Wickert U. Christliche Exegese wunschen Nicaea und Chalcedon. Kampen:
KokPharos, 1992.
Osborne Grant. The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Compre hensive Introduction to Bibical
Interpretation . Westmont: Intervar sity Press, 1991.
Owens L. Roger. Abba, Give Me a Word: The Path of Spiritual Direction. (Brewster,
Massachusetts: Paraclete Press, 2012).
Pasquarello Michael. “Doxological R e a d i n g a n d E s c h a t o l o g i c a l I m agination.” Liturgy. A
Journal of The Liturgical Conference 2, no. 28 (2013): 58-67.
Peterson H. Eugene. “Eat This Book: The Holy Community at table with the Holy Scripture.”
Theology Today 56, no. 1 (1999): 5-17.
Radner Ephraim. “The Discrepancies of Two Ages. Thoughts on Keb le’s ‘Mysticism of the
Fathers’.” The Anglican 29, no. 2 (2000): 10-15.
Rompay Lucas van. “La littérature exégétique syriaque et le rap prochement des traditions
syrienne-orientale et syrienne-occidentale.” Parole de l’Orient 20 (1995): 221-
235;
Rompay Lucas van. “The Christian Syriac Tradition of Interpreta tion.” In Hebrew Bible,
Old Testament: the history of it s interpretation. I/1: Antiquity , edited byMagne Sæbø,
612-641. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1996.
Rondeau Marie-Josèphe. Les commentaires patristiques du P s a u t i e r ( I I I — V e s i è c l e s ) .
Orientalia Christiana Analecta 219 and 220 (Rome: Pontificium I nstitutum
Studium Orientalium, 1982-1985).
Russell Norman, Fellow Workers With God: Orth odox Thinking on Theosis. Crestwood,
New York: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2009.

NICHIFOR TĂNASE

178 Sæbø Magne. “Church and Synagoge as the Respective Matrix of th e Development of an
Authoritative Bible Interpretation.” In Hebrew Bible, Old Test ament: The History of
Its Interpretation. Vol. 1: Fr om the Beginnings to the Middle Ages (Until 1300). Part
1: Antiquity , ed. C Brekelmans, Menahem Haran and Magne Saebo, 731-748.
Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996.
Simonetti Manlio. Biblical Interpretation in the Early Ch urch: an Historical Introduction to
Patristic Exegesis . Translated by John A. Hughes. Edinburgh: T&T. Clark, 1994.
Sommerfeldt John. Abba. Guides to Wholeness and Holliness East and West. M i c h i g a n :
Cistercian Publication s Kalamazoo, 1982.
St. Isaac the Syrian. Cuvinte către singuratici. Partea a II-a, recent descoperit ă. Translated
by Ioan I. Ică jr. Sibiu: Deisis, 2003.
St. Isaac the Syrian. Cuvinte c ătre singuratici. Partea a III-a, recent reg ăsită. Foreword,
introduction and text Sabino Chialà. Translated by Ioan I. Ică jr. Sibiu: Deisis,
2007.
Stăniloae Dumitru, “Sfânta Țradiție. Definirea noțiunii și înti nderii ei.” Ortodoxia 1, no.
16 (1964): 78-103.
Steinmetz C. David. “The Superiority of Pre-Critical Exegesis.” Theology Today 37, no. 1
(1980): 27-38.
Stroumsa G. Guy. “Du maître de sagesse au maître spiritual.” In Maestro e Discepolo. Temi
e problem della direzione spiritual tra VI secolo a.C. e VII secolo d.C. , edited by
Giovanni Filoramo, 13-24. Brescia: Morcelliana, 2002.
Treier J. Daniel. “The superiority of Pre-Critical Exegesis? Sic Et Non .” Trinity Journal 24
(2003): 77-103.
Tsirpanlis N. Constantine. “Praxis and Theoria: The Heart, Love and Light Mysticism in
Saint Isaac the Syrian.” Patristic and Byzantine Review 6 (1987): 93-120.
Tucker Karen B. Westerfield. “Sc riptural Typology and Allegory in Liturgical Prayer.”
Liturgy. A Journal of The Liturgical Conference 2, no. 28 (2013): 4-13.
Vaage E. Leif. “Ascetic Moods, He rmeneutics, and Bodily Deconst ruction.” In Asceticism ,
246-263.
Valantasis Richard. The Making of the Self: Ancient and Modern Asceticism. Eugen, Oreg.:
Cascade Books, 2008.
Veniamin Christopher, The Orthodox Understanding of Salvation. “Theosis” in Scripture
and Tradition. Dalton, PA: Mount Tha bor Publishing, 2014.
Vesa Valentin. Cunoașterea lui Dumnezeu la Sfântul Isaac Sirul. Cluj-Napoca: Renașterea,
2013.
Vööbus Arthur. The Statutes of the School of Nisibis . V o l . 1 2 o f P a p e r s o f t h e E s t o n i a n
Theological Society in Exi le. Stockholm: ESTE, 1962.
Ware Kallistos. “The Spiritual G uide in Orthodox Christianity.” I n The Inner Kingdom ,
edited by Kallistos Ware, 19 3-215. Crestwood, New York: St Vladimir’s Seminary
Press, 2001.
Wilken Robert Louis. The Spirit of Early Christian Th ought: Seeking the Face of God. New
Haven and London: Yale U niversity Press, 2004.
Young M. Frances. Biblical Exegesis and the Form ation of Christian Culture. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1997.

GROWING WITH THE HOLY FATHERS
1
79 Zaharopoulos Dimitri. “Theodore of Mopsuestia, view on Prophetic Inspiration.” Greek
Orthodox Theological Review 23, no. 1 (1978): 42-52.
Zimmerling Peter. Evangelische Spiritualität. Wurzeln und Zugänge. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &
Ruprecht, 2003.
Zizioulas Ioannis. “Patristic Th eology in the M odern World.” Revista Ortodox ă 24 (2010):
1-17.