Theodoret of Cyrus and His Exegetical Predecessors: A Study of His Biblical Commentary Prefaces
In this article, I examine the biblical commentary prefaces of Theodoret of Cyrus (d. 458), particularly the exegete’s presentation of his self-image in relation to his predecessors in the Greek exegetical tradition. I contend that in addition to its introductory function, the biblical commentary pr...
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
De Gruyter
2021
|
| Dans: |
Open theology
Année: 2021, Volume: 7, Numéro: 1, Pages: 445-460 |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
biblical commentary prefaces
B Theodoret of Cyrus B Patristic Exegesis |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Résumé: | In this article, I examine the biblical commentary prefaces of Theodoret of Cyrus (d. 458), particularly the exegete’s presentation of his self-image in relation to his predecessors in the Greek exegetical tradition. I contend that in addition to its introductory function, the biblical commentary preface provided the context in which the exegete could rhetorically style himself vis-à-vis the prior tradition, articulating his own skills, credentials, and distinctive interpretive approach. Of Theodoret’s nine biblical commentaries, I focus particularly on the prefaces of his Commentary on the Song of Songs , Commentary on Daniel , Commentary on the Twelve Prophets , Questions on the Octateuch , and Commentary on the Psalms , given that in these five, we find Theodoret remarking explicitly on the prior interpretive tradition. I demonstrate that at times Theodoret engages with the prior tradition with a critical tone, and at others, he shows respectful deference to his predecessors. In every case, however, his comments serve the rhetorical end of presenting himself as both an authoritative exegetical inheritor and curator of the prior interpretive tradition. The overarching argument of this article then is that Theodoret fashions his own identity as an exegete by making his relative late appearance on the exegetical scene work to his advantage, claiming that an authoritative interpreter of scripture is one who inherits and curates the exegetical legacy and traditions of the prior tradition. In other words, Theodoret overcomes the (rhetorical) problem that others have previously produced commentaries on the biblical book by claiming that the true authoritative interpreter is in fact one who knows both scripture and the prior tradition intimately, and that the exegete’s role at this stage in the tradition is to faithfully transmit the most fitting comments of others. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2300-6579 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Open theology
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1515/opth-2020-0175 |