From October 17-19, 2012, in the framework of an
ERASMUS exchange, Prof. Dr. Karl Olav Sandnes from Norwegian School of Theology
enjoyed the opportunity to visit KU Leuven’s Faculty of Theology and Religious
Studies. At the invitation of Prof. Dr. Reimund Bieringer, he delivered a
three-part lecture entitled “Homer and Christ: The Development of Early
Christian Hermeneutics” which proved to be a tour de force on the
hermeneutical challenges faced by the early Christian Church. The point of
departure was represented by several photos of Papyrus Bouriant and by Raffaella
Cribiore’s assertion according to whom: “Education became a powerful agent for
preserving ‘Greekness’” (Gymnastics of the Mind. Greek Education in Hellenistic
and Roman Egypt, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001, 9). In adding
to these, Prof. Sandnes emphasised the fundamental role played by Homer and his
oeuvre in Greek encyclical studies. Finding herself in the impossibility
to skirt this reality, the early Christian Church was confronted with the issue
of dealing with pagan texts. However, Homer’s place in encyclical studies was
already under criticism since Plato (The Republic, 379 d - 391 c) and
the insufficiency of these studies was contended by people like Seneca (Ep.
88). In this respect, allegory came to be considered as an easy way out of
criticism (cf. e.g., Od. 12, Penelope and the suitors). Similarly, a
distinction began to be operated between propaideia, comprised of the study
of letters and literature, and paideia, consisting in philosophy or
virtue (e.g., Philo of Alexandria, On Mating with the Preliminary Studies).
In this context, the Christian attitude towards Greek paideia varied
from direct opposition to it (e.g., Tatian of Syria, Oratio ad Graecos
1.3; Didascalia Apostolorum 3.3-18), to a middle position of a noxious
but required process (e.g., Tertullian, On Idolatry 10), and to its
understanding as propaideia for faith (e.g., Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis
15.3; Origen, A Letter to Gregory; Basil of Caesarea, Ad
Adolescentes 4.4-5, 4.8-9; Gregory of Nyssa, De Vita Mosis 1.15). A
special case presented by Prof. Sandnes was that of Augustine who reversed the
propaedeutic logic (cf. Augustine, Conf. 1.13.22, 1.15.24) and argued for
the importance of primary studies. Nevertheless, Augustine appeals also to the notion
of usus and seems to plead for a criterion to assess human culture (cf. Doctr.
1.7). At the same time, Augustine’s stance testifies to the fact that the
attitude towards encyclical studies is intrinsically connected with the
discourse on pagan culture.
In Prof. Sandnes’ own words Homer became “a
catchword for the relationship between Christians and pagans.” As the completion
of his lecture was approaching, Prof. Sandnes shared with the audience the observation
that both those who were building a case against Greek paideia and those
who were arguing for a content-based discernment of it invoked Scriptural passages
in their argumentations. While he declared himself in favour of the latter
opinion, Prof. Sandnes stated that he is not entirely convinced by the
arguments put forward for it. Following this line, he voiced a challenging
question: Why is the New Testament so silent about this topic? By way of
conclusion, Prof. Sandnes admitted that he does not possess a final answer to
this question, but that he can offer some considerations. Firstly, he believes
that it took some time for the theological thinking to become mature enough to
address this issue. Secondly, perhaps this hermeneutical issue was not a real
concern in the first century. Thirdly, he mentioned the nature of Paul’s
letters which do not represent faith treatises and refer to local issues. Last
but not least, Prof. Sandnes maintained that one can deduce the notion of usus
from Paul’s correspondence (cf. Gal 3,24; Phil 4,8-9; 2 Cor 10,4-5). According
to him, truth and wisdom might be found outside the Christian community, but
they should be looked at from a critical perspective.
Teodor Brasoveanu
