Canonical exegesis

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The canonical exegesis ( canonical biblical exegesis or canonical scriptural interpretation ) is a hermeneutic approach to the Bible , which interprets the individual biblical texts primarily in the context of the entire biblical canon . It is a Christian-theological biblical exegesis , which sees in Jesus Christ the key of the whole Bible and from him regards the Bible canon in its historical-ecclesiastical form as a unity. Accordingly, it is less interested in the genesis of the individual Bible texts and the historical context in which they were written, so it is a synchronous access to the Bible. Canonical exegesis can nevertheless include the results of the diachronic historical-critical biblical exegesis , the actual method of which is not strictly delimited from theological interpretations of the Bible. Through the organic connection between the two exegeses, Pope Benedict XVI. a new direction of interpretation (see " Ratzinger Exegesis "), which can be viewed as a diachronic variant of canonical exegesis.

Representative of canonical exegesis

Canonical exegesis was developed in the USA in the 1980s, where it was decidedly as a counterpoint to the historical-critical method. Two main theologians took part in this, who represent different directions within this biblical approach:

  • Brevard Childs , his direction is called the "canonical approach", she is mainly interested in the canonical final form of the biblical texts.
  • James Sanders , representative of "canonical criticism" ("Canon criticism"), which deals more with the so-called "canonical process".

In the German-speaking world, this exegesis took root a little later, its main representatives are:

features

The fact that the synchronous canonical exegesis reads the Bible texts in their entirety of the one scripture puts all individual texts in a new light, which in turn refines the interpretation of the entire Bible canon. With the more and more recent readings ("relectures") of the Holy Scriptures, this cycle is repeated, thus creating a hermeneutic spiral , which brings about the post-scriptural development .

Canonical exegesis does not ask about the original meaning of the biblical texts, but about their reception (reception) in the religious community (this has a certain connection to the reception aesthetics of literary studies). In this interaction, she analyzes the elements of the canon texts which have a directing effect on the reader in the perception and weighting of the often interlinked and interwoven texts. Accordingly, the unity of the canon does not mean any unification of the Bible, but rather a “canonization” of its polyphony.

The Council document Dei Verbum of the Second Vatican Council (1965) already identified respect for the unity of the whole of Scripture as a basic principle of theological exegesis. The Pontifical Biblical Commission characterizes the canonical approach as follows: “The method seeks to situate every text within God's only plan in order to strive for an actualization of the Holy Scriptures for our time”.

Connection with the historical-critical method

The study The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church (1993) by the Pontifical Biblical Commission of John Paul II , which was created on the initiative and based on the draft of the then Commission President Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, recommended for the first time that synchronous canonical access together with that of a genuine understanding of the Bible are indispensable to apply the described diachronic historical-critical method: "This is not intended to replace the historical-critical method, but to supplement it."

Pope Benedict XVI developed his holistic theological exegesis (" Ratzinger Exegesis ") through the connection of these two biblical interpretations, which have long been considered to be opposites , which is unfolded in his work Jesus von Nazareth (2007–2012) and described above all in the first volume: "» Canonical exegesis "- reading the individual texts of the Bible in their entirety - is an essential dimension of the interpretation that does not contradict the historical-critical method, but continues it organically and allows it to become actual theology."

Ratzinger emphasizes that the connection of the two different hermeneutics is possible because the actual (a priori free) historical-critical method “points out of its own essence beyond itself and has an inner openness to complementary methods”. Although it examines the genesis and the initial meaning of the biblical texts as a human word in its historical context, it does allow the question of the inspiredness as well as the relevance to the present and future of this past human word: "With careful consideration you can probably guess the" added value "that is contained in is in the word, somehow hearing a higher dimension through the human word, so to speak [...] In the past word the question of his today becomes audible ... ”- thus the historical method opens up its own transcendence. Another argument in favor of combining the canonical approach and the historical-critical method is, according to Benedict XVI., That the scientific method, beyond the analysis of the individual books, also perceives the development processes in which these texts approach the one “script”. Modern exegesis in particular makes it clear how the writing of the words handed down in the Bible would have taken place in ever new “relectures”: “The old texts are taken up anew in a new situation, understood anew, read anew. In rereading, reading on, in silent corrections, deepening and expanding, the creation of the word takes place as a process of the word that gradually unfolds its inner potentials, which somehow lay ready like seeds, but only in the challenge of new situations, in new experiences and experiences opens. "

literature

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Ruth Scoralick, see literature
  2. ↑ a b The interpretation of the Bible in the Church , study of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, Libreria Editrice Vaticana , 1993, German translation by Lothar Ruppert and Adrian Schenker