 |
 |
Christopher Crockett wrote: > My apologies for breathing into a dying string (I've been computerless > for the week and can't help myself), but the subject seems important enough > and I've been interested in it--for several reasons--for donkies' years. > > My understanding (easily wrong, as usual) is that > three-fold/four-fold/*-fold ways of looking at scripture (and, by extension, > everything else) were not just *a* way of approaching things, but *the* way, > universally accepted and permeating all aspects of the medieval "mindset" > (sorry). > > Including, for example, literature (cf. the discussion in Robertson's _Preface > to Chaucer_, based [?] on Augustine's _On Christian Doctrine_, which slipped > by Otfried [!???]). > > Although the _Glossa Ordinaria_ (partly the life's work of Abelard's smokey > nemesis, Anselm of Laon and available in two vols. of the PL), and St. Thomas' > _Caetana Aurea_ (based on the _G.O._) provide an exhaustive view of the whole > Bible seen through the lens of this this way of "looking", it is the > wonderfully subtle liturgical sermons of Guerric of Igny (Latin/French ed. in > _Sources Chretiennes_; English trans. in the Cistercian Fathers series) which > are my personal favorite "practical" application of this "method" of exegesis. > > Perhaps enough mistakes for a single post. > > I've not kept up on the literature and the memory fades, but, as I say, > an important topic which might be of more interest to others. > > Someone please correct me before I faut again. > > Best to all from here, > > Christopher The person with the best perspective I have ever seen on the senses of scripture is Karlfried Froehlich of Princeton. I've heard him talk about this a couple times at Kalamazoo, and he mentions it briefly it his Biblical Interpretation in the Early Church. Simply put, he sees the senses as a kind of "school exercise" that interpreters had to learn before going on to an even deeper level. That's why medieval exegetes so seldom refer to the four senses--they've gone beyond it. So, they were only "the way" in a limited sense. Steve Cartwright Western Michigan University