Exploring the Literary Contexts of Patristic Biblical Exegesis consists of 14 essays that examine a wide range of genres in which ancient (and one medieval) Christian authors interpreted Scripture. Many essays consider biblical interpretation in genres such as visionary texts, poetic retellings of Scripture, and theological polemics. Other essays provide a novel analysis of more conventional exegetical genres – namely, commentaries and exegetical homilies. There are essays devoted to the usual suspects: three each on Augustine and Origen (if one includes Paul-Huber Poirier’s essay on a fragment attributed to Origen in a catena). But the book also contains treatments of other authors, such as Jacob of Serugh, Gregory Nazianzus, and John Cassian. Exploring does two things extremely well: First, the collection showcases the sheer variety of genres in which biblical interpretation took place, from the visions of Hildegard to the metrical sermons of Syriac Christian poets. Second, several essays illustrate how early Christian authors adapted and transformed the existing intellectual culture. Some essays, however, while offering rich descriptions of patristic exegesis and its contexts, are less rigorous in their analysis of how the interpretation of specific texts is being transformed.

The volume opens and closes with essays that analyze how two women interpreted the Bible through their visions. The first essay, by Elizabeth Klein, examines how visions one and four of the Passion of Perpetua and Felicity incorporate imagery from Revelation in such a systematic fashion that it must be deemed interpretation, not mere allusion. Klein argues, “Perpetua, in her actual martyrdom and the accounts of her visions, interprets Revelation as teaching that martyrdom is a kind of public liturgical act, which like other liturgical acts, makes present a cosmic reality, and which is the prelude to the true liturgy of heaven” (p. 14). Karl Shuve wrote the final essay, “Visionary Exegesis: Interpreting Scripture in Hildegard of Bingen’s Scivias.” In the time of Hildegard, biblical commentaries were the provenance of men. She nonetheless found a creative way to offer comment through the interpretation of her own visions in her Scivias. Shuve discusses several biblical texts Hildegard incorporates into this commentary and insists that Hildegard is not merely offering glosses but is engaged in a creative, even daring, “visionary exegesis” that draws on a rich theological tradition but is also productive of new meaning (see esp. 259). The most striking example is Hildegard’s “re-writing of 1 Cor 11:9” (p. 262), for Hildegard insists that Paul is saying, “Woman was created for man’s sake, and man was made for woman’s sake” (p. 261, emphasis mine). The second essay, by Bronwen Neil, also tackles biblical interpretation in visions, focusing on Mandate 11 of the Shepherd of Hermas. This essay, however, fails to make a compelling case that Hermas contains much biblical interpretation, and unlike Shuve’s “visionary exegesis,” Neil’s category of “congregational exegesis” applies to the communal evaluation of extra-biblical revelations but fails to offer a heuristic window into how biblical texts are interpreted in Hermas.

Robert Kitchen’s “Teaching Lions to Fast: Jacob of Serugh on Daniel 6” introduces readers to the retelling of biblical texts in the form of metrical sermons written in Syriac. The essay offers a rich discussion of the backgrounds of this Syriac tradition and Jacob in particular. Kitchen emphasizes the parallels Jacob draws between Christ and Daniel in the story of the lions’ den, such as the striking parallel Jacob creates between Daniel’s being thrown into the pit and Christ’s descent into Sheol. Daniel’s rescue is also likened to the resurrection. While an informative read, the essay is more descriptive than analytical. Similarly, in “Late Antique Poet as Scriptural Interpreter: The Case of the Metaphrasis Psalmorum,” Andrew Faulkner examines the paraphrasing of Scripture in a poetic genre reminiscent of the epics of Virgil and Homer. The essay exemplifies yet another theme of the volume, what Faulkner describes as “the repurposing of classical learning to express Christian truth” (p. 123). Similarly, essays by Brian Daley and Robin Darling Young provide examples of how exegetical culture(s) amalgamated Scripture and Greco-Roman culture, especially philosophical traditions.

Indeed, Young’s essay, “Exegetical Biography: Gregory of Nazianzus’ Oration on His Sister, Gorgonia” can serve as a representative example of the collection’s strengths and limitations. The essay offers a rich account of the broader social contexts in which exegesis can occur. Young notes that Gregory “was the first Christian to deliver a public discourse in memory of a woman” (p. 133). Gorgonia was a wife and mother but also an ascetic who eventually, with her husband’s consent, renounced intercourse in her marriage and served the poor from her home. Young discusses Gorgonia’s lifestyle in the context of the diverse forms of asceticism and religious participation pursued by Christian women in Cappadocia. Gregory’s oration contains many elements that serve to present Gorgonia as an ideal “ascetic philosopher” (p. 130). Young also demonstrates that “Gregory of Nazianzus used the classical form of the epitaphios logos now infused with biblical interpretation, to present his sister as an exegete and holy woman” (p. 131). This biblical interpretation includes Gregory’s efforts to present Gorgonia as the fulfillment of biblical types, such as Job and the ideal wife of Proverbs. Thus, we have another account of how early Christian writers transformed classical models. And yet, on p. 148, Young offers a lengthy quotation in which Gregory quotes Heb 12:23 and alludes to Gal 4:25 (and likely to Heb 11:13–16, possibly Phil 3:20). Young, however, notes the Platonic allusions without analysis of how the specific biblical passages are being interpreted and/or transformed, other than rightly observing that Gregory “makes Christian community equivalent to a society of philosophers” (see also p. 141).

Miriam De Cock’s essay, “Origen’s Exegetical Treatment of Romans 8:15: Spiritual Adoption by the Father, in the Son, and through the Holy Spirit” stands out for its analysis of how Origen interprets a specific passage in two genres. De Cock compares Origen’s interpretation of Romans 8:15 in his commentaries and homilies, to determine whether, in this case, genre makes a difference. Unlike other patristic exegetes, who detected a reference to heretics in the phrase “the spirit of slavery,” Origen interprets the phrase as a reference to those at a low level of spiritual progress. De Cock concludes that Origen is consistent across genres. In contrast to contemporary academic exegesis, both systematic commentary and homilies serve for Origen the same pastoral goal of guiding souls to Christian maturity and intimacy with God.

In sum, De Cock and Klein have produced a fine volume. Though essays have different strengths and weaknesses, every single essay is worth reading. The essays showcase the variety of genres in which interpreters were generating creative applications – or flat-out reworkings – of Scripture, to suit their social and intellectual contexts, and thus challenge us to think more broadly about what constitutes “exegesis.”