Sanctified Vision: An Introduction to Early Christian Interpretation of the Bible

by John J. O'Keefe

In Sanctified Vision John J. O'Keefe and R. R. Reno explain the structure and logic of the early Church fathers' interpretations of the Bible. These interpretations are considered foundational to the development of Christianity as a religion and offer insight into how the early church fathers thought about Christian doctrine and practice. By analyzing selected portions of patristic exegesis, the authors illustrate specific reading techniques employed by the church fathers to expound the meaning they believed intrinsic to biblical texts. This approach is organized around three basic analytic strategies: literal, typological, and allegorical. The literal strategy is an intensive and broad analysis that identifies particular word associations that intensify scriptural meaning. The typological strategy interprets distinct patterns of events within scripture and applies those patterns to other events in scripture and the history of the church. The allegorical approach to biblical reading, like the topological strategy, seeks patterns in the text, but these patterns are more diverse and represent larger themes or beliefs of the early church. Within this analytic framework, the authors explain the larger structure of patristic exegesis and argue for the importance of this structure in the emergence of Christian orthodoxy.

Genres: Theology, Biblical Studies, History, Religion, Church History, Church

156 pages, Paperback

First published April 1, 2005

Reviews

[Kendall Davis · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a brilliant and amazingly insightful analysis of patristic interpretation of scripture. This is not a survey of patristic approaches to scripture. This is an account of how the fathers as a whole read scripture in contrast to modern readers. The insightful contrast with modern practices is illuminating, convicting, and inspiring. This book will stay with me and continue to give me food for thought for years to come.

[Spencer · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a masterful introduction to the exegesis of the Church Fathers. I very rarely give five stars, but this one did it for me.

In just over one hundred pages, the authors summarize and explain the three major elements of patristic exegesis (literal, typological, and allegorical), using dozens of textual examples of the church fathers, analyzing their principles with excellent precision, meanwhile relating it to the reader with witty examples. They use the Brady Bunch to illustrate typology; the song "American Pie," the novel Animal Farm, and the Chronicles of Narnia to understand the necessity of allegory. I will say again, their treatment of the subject was masterful: vigorous, succinct, readable and witty.

If Patristic exegesis was the way the church read that Bible in Christianity's earliest and most formative years, their lessons pose a significant challenge to modern biblical scholarship. The authors put it this way, "Most biblical scholars are not, in a strict sense, scholars of the Bible. They are experts who specialize in certain books of the Bible or historical periods in which various portions of it was written... The Bible, as such, is not the object of study; contemporary scholars study aspects of the Bible in their historical contexts" (pg. 24). Ouch.

I did my dissertation on typological reading of Scripture, and I would say this is the best book I have come across on the subject. With all the hoopla of "figural interpretation" and "theological exegesis" today, of which I wrote a 300 page dissertation on, very few can actually saw something substantive and relevant for the church today. This book does both.

[Chandler Kelley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent introduction to the methods, purposes, and vision of early biblical interpretation. Highly recommended.

[James · Rating 2 out of 5]

The purpose of this book is supposed to be to show the interpretive method of the church fathers. However, the church fathers are a diverse group and it is impossible to cover their collective interpretive method (assuming there is even a shared one among *all* of them…) in a book of this length. What the book does instead is provide a sampling of the methods employed by a select few of the fathers (e.g. Origen, Augustine, Irenaues). So, if you want a look at an example of methods used by certain church fathers, the book does fine, but that’s not its stated purpose.

[Tyler Turdici · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great work. The chapters on typology and allegory are helpful. The authors do a good job directing the reader to be sympathetic toward the patristics' submission to the "rule of faith" for proper biblical interpretation. We moderns would do well to submit ourselves to that rule as well when we study the word of God.

[Matt Pitts · Rating 5 out of 5]

A brilliant book sympathetic to the hermeneutics of the early church.

[Luke Stamps · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent introduction to patristic interpretation. O'Keefe and Reno offer a mostly descriptive but largely sympathetic treatment of the Fathers' main interpretative methods: an intensive reading of the text's verbal details, a sensitivity to the typological patterns built into the structure of the economy of salvation, and the more ambitious allegorical readings that sought to decode hidden philosophical/ethical meanings below the surface of the text. I can't go all the way with the authors in their sympathies for patristic exegesis (especially with regard to more allegorical readings that seem to impose Neoplatonic ideas onto the text of Scripture). I also have some quibbles with how they describe the theory of meaning undergirding patristic exegesis (tied to their postliberal tendency to overstate the intrasystematic nature of doctrine). But these issues aside, this book was an insightful account of how the Fathers read all of Scripture in the light of Christ and his gospel. Highly recommended.

[Hunter · Rating 5 out of 5]

As an introduction to Patristic writings, this is an excellent book. The writing is clear, the Structure of the book is sound, and for the most part, the text is not tedious. The authors do an excellent job framing the general thinking and motives of the early-church fathers. Christ for the Fathers was the hinge by which all interpretation must move.

The three methods of interpretation that the authors look at are: the intensive reading, typological interpretation, and allegorical interpretation. For people, who have never read or have briefly read the church fathers, it can be confusing and laborious without the understanding of how they come to their conclusions. This book helps the reader equip themselves so they can approach with some ideas on how the Fathers thought.

The weaknesses of this book are the weaknesses of any introduction. O'Keefe and Reno are broad in their use of examples, pulling from multiple Fathers. The reader is left to suss out weather their framework truly applies across all fathers and when the method begins to shift. Also, there is no discussion of the outside pressures or internal pressures that might have affect the method espoused.

Overall, if you are new to the Early church Fathers or have read them and walked away confused by the way in which they are interpreting the same Bible your reading then this would be an excellent read. It is short and concise and readable and academic. Four things that don't often come together.

[CJ Bowen · Rating 4 out of 5]

"A failed typology is one that needs to be explained, and a typology that becomes so theoretical that it sounds like an explanation is no longer a typology at all but rather what we will call an allegory. The beauty of typology is that it allows us, the reader (or viewer), to enter into the experience of the type directly and without the mediation of extended interpretive explanation." - 72

"The difference [between allegory and typology] lies in the amount of work the reader must put into the interpretation. For a well-functioning typological interpretation, two figures are brought into association, and the interpretation convinces (or not) by virtue of the perceived fit....In contrast, allegory is nearly always a more intentional, explicit, and, for its critics, stained development of association." - 90

"The allegorical interpretation does not refute or deny the literal sense, nor does it attempt subversion; it simply adds more and does so according to the narrative structure." - 103

"Allegorical interpretation offends by what it presumes and not by how it proceeds." - 109

"We tend to think that the Bible is important because of the x that it represents: historical events, ancient religious sensibilities, ideas, doctrines, and so forth....For the fathers, the scriptural text itself is the subject matter of interpretation; it is not the means to that subject matter." - 116

"Reading is difficult because God wants us to suffer the dry deserts of incomprehension as so many days of interpretive fasting." - 139

[Ephrem Upart · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a wonderful read!! As I've been getting into Biblical studies, questions came up about interpretation, especially in regards to patristic authors such as Origen, Augustine, and Irenaeus. "Sanctified Vision: An Introduction to Early Christian Interpretation of the Bible" by John O'Keefe and R.R.Reno provides an excellent overview of the various methods and "senses" different Church Fathers employed in their reading of the Biblical texts. Contrary to the popular narrative, the authors defend the claim that the literal sense was crucial for a healthy understanding of the biblical texts, yet there is always more than meets the eye. Fundamentally, the authors make the case that for the Fathers, "God saturated scripture with a great wealth of truth, and zeal was the right disposition to take as an interpreter." Additionally, "for the fathers Jesus Christ is the logos of the divine economy."
Highly recommend to anyone looking to find more about how the early Church read the Bible, and how the various "spiritual senses" of Scripture are important for our development as Christians and preachers of the Gospel.

[Evan Kostelka · Rating 4 out of 5]

The authors attempt to show how the early church fathers (Iranaeus, Origen, Gregory of Nyssa) read their Bible. Modern Bible scholars focus on certain things which were not as important or even known in the first couple hundred years of Christianity.

The authors go through three main approaches: intensive, typological, and allegorical.

The authors do a great job showing how the church fathers used their Bible to reinforce their points. At times, he refers to them anticipating some of the difficulties to read it literally (talking snakes, sun created after light in Gen, etc) but they don't spend much time on that.

An interesting interpretation discussed in the book is how some church fathers read the story of the Israelites journey as being the same growth in every Christian (leaving Egypt, crossing the Sea, entering promised land).

Although the argument is made the early church father's interpretations were not made to prove their doctrines there are examples where it seems that is exactly what they did such as the Athanasius debate.

[Tim S · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book provides strong insight into the church fathers' perspectives and understanding of Scripture and Christ. There is much that modern believers can learn and should learn from the church fathers, especially regarding biblical interpretation. The church fathers believed that 'Christ is the end of the Law and Prophets' more directly, transparently and fully than the majority of believers today, which was shown with such confidence of Christ and His work that is foundational to their interpretive work. Learning from the church fathers would correct and guide the modern, particularly western church in many ways that are desperately needed, such as an accountable community that higher church structure has significantly more than low-church structures.

[Ted Morgan · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this many years ago in 2005. The book explains various modes of interpretation of biblical and other texts. It demonstrates or indicates how mode of interpretation influenced the emergence of Patristic Christianity. For a speciality topic, this work is clear and accessible.

Especially interesting is how many early interpreters disregarded historical contexts of texts. The interplay of typological and analogical interpretations and emerging orthodoxy involved seeking patterns. Even a lay reader like me benefits from this study.

[Matt Crawford · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sanctified vision is a narrow view in the interpretation of the early church fathers. The book has a narrow scope though. It concentrates on only a few issues. The one that stands out the most is the idea of typology versus allegory. Their scope of source material is narrow as well. Naturally Augustine is a well to be drawn from. Gregory, Cyril and Athanasius are used. Origen is drawn on the most. It is almost as if they did not want to expose the reader to new less popular fathers. It is good that the subtitle say introduction because this is a very brief survey, and that it does well.

[Timothy Decker · Rating 5 out of 5]

The rationale behind the patristic exegesis is helpfully explained in this book. In fact, the ascetic aspect of their lifestyle is finally and splendidly unpacked at the last half of the final chapter the gives way to the title of the book. So very helpful!

[Daniel Pandolph · Rating 5 out of 5]

Book was short but tricky. Initial few chapters felt…meh?

But the chapter on allegorical use was profoundly helpful and the last chapter on the Rule of Faith has some brilliant, jaw-dropping, world-changing analysis (at least for me).

Definitely a book that challenged me on several levels.

[Georgiana · Rating 5 out of 5]

I struggled mightily with this for quite a while, but then something clicked, and I suddenly began to appreciate just how incredibly different and yet ingenious the Church Fathers' approach to Scripture really was. I'm sure I will be coming back to this.

[Tyler Holley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great entry gate for the exegetical practices of the early church. The chapter on Typology was worth the book.

[Travis Johnston · Rating 4 out of 5]

Helpful intro to the hermeneutical principles of the early church fathers.

[Rex · Rating 4 out of 5]

A clarifying study on the principles of Patristic exegesis.

[Andrew Kneeland · Rating 4 out of 5]

Necessary primer to any serious patristic study.

[Ted · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very helpful book - it clearly shows how our assumptions about how the bible is to be read and interpreted shape what we think the bible says. The Patristic Fathers had different assumptions and so found other messages in the Scriptures. The authors do an excellent job of showing us some of our assumptions (they are assumptions about how to read, what we mean be truth, etc) and why we read the text the way we do and sometimes feel uncomfortable with the Patristic reading of the text. Our assumptions are no more or less valid than theirs - we therefore need to read their commentaries with eyes, minds and hearts open or we will miss some of the depth of the riches of God's Word.

[Caleb · Rating 4 out of 5]

In their 2005 collaborative effort, Sanctified Vision, John O’Keefe and R.R. Reno describe with depth and clarity the exegetical principles of reading the Bible which guided the church fathers. This is most welcome considering other works that relate the historical or social influences on patristic interpretation, but ignore or do not understand how the church fathers went about exegesis or understood the Bible as meaningful. Sanctified Vision addresses how the fathers actually read the text.

The book is basically divided into the different methods the fathers used to read (entire chapters devoted to intensive reading, typological reading, and allegorical reading) while also underlining some of the basic assumptions that guided their interpretation. For instance, they suggest, “Unlike most modern intellectuals, the church fathers recognized that good interpretation is most likely to flow from a good person. Patristic exegesis was, finally, a religious exercise. Right reading was a fruit of righteousness.” (23)

Another important assumption guiding the fathers, one which O’Keefe and Reno underline, is the presence of a divine economy (in the classical sense of ‘arrangement’) within the biblical text. That is to say, they assume that everything in the text is there for a reason and that the parts are arranged in a meaningful way, all of which point ultimately to Christ. To assume a divine economy is to assume that God delivers his people by a pattern, and that this pattern is repeated throughout the Bible (OT and NT) and even in the church’s historical present.

While describing some of these patristic assumptions, O’Keefe and Reno also point out some of our modern assumptions in reading the bible, assumptions which the church fathers would not have deemed most important. For us enlightened moderns, meaning is referential. That is to say, we grasp the meaning in the biblical text when we understand what it is that the biblical text refers to. This could be a doctrine, or a historical event. In either case, the text is referential, and the x it refers to is what makes it meaningful, whether this is the doctrine of sovereignty or the flight from Pharaoh.

Far from denying the truth that the Bible actually refers to various doctrines and historical events, the fathers would stress that this is not the most important thing as far as meaning is concerned. As modern people, this is hard to get our minds around, but simply, the meaning of the Bible is found in the text itself and not in what the text may refer to. For the fathers, one grasps the meaning of the biblical text when one’s mind is subjected to the words, images, and networking patterns that the bible manifests to the patient, reading saint in pursuit of holiness. What is meaningful, first and foremost, is the formation of the soul which takes place when the mind is made subject to the text and all that the text entails. This requires training and discipline, but in such a way one can find meaning by reading the Bible as a spiritually formative exercise. This is not to deny the exodus, for instance, as an objective historical event, but it is to suggest that the objective historical event is not the only important thing.

[Bernard · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting look at the way in which the Fathers of the Church read the Bible which is, alas, crippled to a certain extent by the narrowness of the theological environment in which the authors seem to work.
Drawing on the philosophy of language and hermineutical theory, the authors provide a decent explaination of how the early readers of scripture engaged with the text, and reflect on the significance of their approach for theology today. However, it lacks the theological sensitivity and appreciation that de Lubac, for example, displayed in his writings on patristic and medieval exegesis. Astonishingly, de Lubac isn't even cited in the bibliography of this book - an extraordinary and inexcusible omission.
However, their approach does supplement what de Lubac has to say, and their different perspective does add something. One suspects, however, that Reno and O'Keefe focused too much on some texts of Origen in their analysis of the approach of the Fathers to the historical content of scripture.

[Tyler Cohen · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a wonderful book on the exegesis of the church fathers and touches on the doctrine of scripture in light of their exegesis. I think the authors are a bit too conservative in their approach at times. It is although an exploratory or inductive approach. Also, their concept of the matrix of understanding seems rather vague. It seems to parallel closely the concept of worldview or Charles Taylor's social imaginary. I wish they had just come right out and described what is going on with the matrix of belief and thought concerning the nature of scripture as viewed by the Patristics. Overall, a good introduction to Patristic exegesis.

[Sarah · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reno and O'Keefe explain how early Christian interpretation was motivated differently and used different tools than modern biblical interpretation. They also show that criticism of Early Church interpretations is often misplaced. We moderns really have issues with the Early Church's vision of scripture as a unified whole since modern scholarship doesn't share that vision. The authors wrap up by showing that the Early Church Fathers believed a disciplined life and "sanctified vision" were necessary to understand God's witness in his word.

[Joel Zartman · Rating 5 out of 5]

A better appreciation of Early Christian interpretation than any other I've encountered. Makes sense of why Irenaeus, Origen and Gregory of Nyssa interpreted as they did. Very thorough explanations. I'm astonished that four centuries were treated similarly, but I think it works because the idea is to explain a premodern way of dealing with Scripture.

[Sarah · Rating 3 out of 5]

I think this would be a good book for someone who is unfamiliar with patristic/pre-critical biblical exegesis and is skeptical that it has much to offer.

[Tyson Guthrie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Readable and engaging. The best introduction to patristic exegesis.

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good introduction to patristic exegesis. Particularly concerned with typology and allegory.