This collection of seven studies of various nineteenth-century writers from the Church of England (including one, Richard Chenevix Trench, who became archbishop of Dublin during the disestablishment of the Church of Ireland from the United Church of England and Ireland in 1870) discusses different approaches to the interpretation of the Bible. The authors are selected as representatives of different strands of Anglican thinking, from the Evangelicalism of Charles Simeon to the Tractarianism of John Keble and the Broad Church thinking of Benjamin Jowett. In addition, Hartin has chosen Christina Rossetti to represent a more literary, figurative (and lay) approach. Unsurprisingly, perhaps, given the nature of the nineteenth-century Church of England, she is the only woman included. Alongside these representative theological positions, there are also studies of figures who are more difficult to pigeonhole, including F. D. Maurice, J. B. Lightfoot and B. F. Westcott (successive bishops of Durham) and Trench (who, rather unexpectedly, often becomes a dialogue partner with the other authors). Hartin’s approach is to introduce the figures briefly in context before giving lengthy expositions of representative texts. What holds the book together is that all the writers were interested in the Bible, some as academics, some as preachers and some as both, but there is little by way of an overarching thesis or argument beyond that of filling a gap in current scholarship, which, along with general antiquarian interest, is sufficient to merit publication.
The chapters proceed roughly chronologically, beginning with Charles Simeon. From an exposition of his massive Horae homileticae, what emerges is a writer who is keen to restrict the meaning of biblical texts to the intentions of their authors, while at the same time ensuring there is always a moral lesson to be learned. Later Evangelicals, especially J. C. Ryle, are also discussed as examples of Simeon’s subsequent influence on the movement. What is clear is that, despite their differences, they felt there was a ‘plain sense’ to be had: figurative interpretations were distractions from the true meaning of Scripture. Chapter ii explores Lightfoot and Westcott, both of whom were principally interested in the text of Scripture rather than an ‘ontology’ (by which is meant a deeper meaning) that lay behind the text. Expositions of Lightfoot’s work include his commentary on Galatians as well as various sermons. Westcott is understood more as a historian through his work on the Gospels (especially that of St John): ‘Not only does language matter when looking at Scripture’s form, but history matters’ (p. 55). Hartin concludes by suggesting that the bishops read Scripture much like Simeon, by focusing on the plain meaning of the text, but differed in emphasising the history of the text itself.
Chapter iii discusses the great classical scholar Benjamin Jowett, who was also a contributor to the notorious Essays and reviews of 1860, which provoked a vigorous reaction from some churchmen who considered themselves more orthodox. For Jowett, to read the Bible ‘like any other book’ was to discern its divinity by unearthing its singular and original meaning in terms of authorial intent and its effect on the original audience. Another ‘Broad Churchman’, F. W. Farrar is introduced as a dialogue partner, who was also keenly interested in the history of interpretation, but had a higher sense of the guiding hand of providence in Scripture. Most importantly, Jowett and Farrar regarded their own interpretations in the light of modern scholarship as surpassing those of earlier interpreters. Again – and perhaps unexpectedly – Jowett is seen as being close to Evangelical ‘plain sense’ methods of interpretation, even if he does leave more room for ‘slightly more expansive readings of the space between what the human authors actually convey in contrast with their intentions to describe the divine’ (p. 94).
The opposite pole of interpretation is represented in chapter iv by John Keble and his fellow Tractarians, who sought very different methods for understanding Scripture. Various sermons are discussed to show the importance of a figurative and moral interpretation that drew on older, especially patristic, traditions. Similarly, Pusey’s typological understanding of the Old Testament is seen as introducing a quite distinct mode of reading Scripture from that of many of his contemporaries. Trench is again introduced as an ‘orthodox’ dialogue partner, even though he was not a direct participant in Tractarian controversies. Where they differ is in their approach to the Fathers, whom the Tractarians regarded (like many of their High Church predecessors) as ‘lesser lights’ in conveying divine revelation to the present day. Christina Rossetti, discussed in chapter v, is contrasted as a Tractarian lay scholar who, while lacking facility in biblical languages, nevertheless approached Scripture in terms of a passion and love for Christ without academic pretension but with a deep knowledge of the content of the canon. Her importance rests in pointing to the multi-layered dimension of Scripture that means its resources are inexhaustible rather than to be constrained in a univocal reading.
Chapter vi discusses F. D. Maurice, who is regarded as an orthodox figure who sought breadth in reading Scripture in the light of tradition, deliberately avoiding the notion of the patristic consensus maintained by the Tractarians. The Bible became a text through which Christians were able to encounter God and to find comfort, which meant that its interpretation varied according to the location of the interpreter. It pointed beyond itself towards the living reality of God, which meant that, for Christians, there was always a Christological focus. The final chapter returns in more detail to Trench, the least well known of the authors discussed, who is regarded as an ‘orthodox’ churchman for whom the text itself carries a multitude of meanings beyond its simple letters. What is crucial is the theological significance behind any historical narrative. Hartin has an obvious sympathy with Trench, seeing his approach as having ‘the most breadth in the movement from restricted, straightened readings to more open-ended, figural readings’ (p. 194).
In a brief summary and even briefer conclusion, Hartin seeks to draw out some implications for the present day, where, again defending Trench, he stresses the need not to approach the tradition too uncritically in ways that might close down further study. In addition – and here he is following Maurice – it is always important to read the text as a means through which God communicates: ‘God is in the text as well as behind it’ (p. 199). Overall, despite its somewhat fluid structure, the book shows Anglican biblical interpretation in the nineteenth century to have been diverse, contested and a deeply serious business. Since history of interpretation has become an increasingly important aspect of modern biblical scholarship, there are many important leads for future study which might be connected to the longer trajectory of Anglican biblical interpretation. The study of the Bible remains highly contested for contemporary Anglicans, not least in such thorny areas as human sexuality.
