St. Jerome´s Commentary on Ecclesiastes

The planned research project would like to scholarly analyse the Jerome`s Ecclesiastes commentary in a comprehensive manner. More specifically, the research project pursues three main goals: 1. Analysis and Interpretation of the commentary The commentary shall be interpreted in its entirety. Consideration will be given above all to two aspects: (1) Firstly, the hermeneutic and methodological preconditions that underpin the com-mentary have to be manifested and traced closely. (2) Secondly, a comparison with selected positions of contemporary exegesis of the Book of Ecclesiastes shall be undertaken. The comparison is in need of a reflected intercultural hermeneutics. 2. Biblical hermeneutic reflections In recent years, a process of critical hermeneutic and methodological reflection emerged in Bible studies, which can basically be described as a widening of the classical historico-critical paradigm. The applicant has been part of the discussion and was among its initiators (cf. bibliography). The project would like to contribute to the aforementioned discussion with a case study based on the sources to further advance this still open discussion. The working hypothesis for the project is that the newer developments within Biblical studies show surprising affinities to patristic exegesis. In particular, this includes the rediscovery of the biblical canon as the normative context of interpretation within the scope of canonical exegesis, the polysemy of biblical texts and the "Sinnoffenheit" that goes along with it, the relevance of intertextuality and the role of the community receiving the text (Rezeptionsgemeinschaft) for the disclosure and the delimitation of the meaning of Biblical texts. 3. Translation of the commentary As part of the research project the Ecclesiastes commentary will first of all translated into German, relying on the critical edition of Marcus Adriaen in: CCSL LXXII. At present there is no German translation of the commentary. There is a more recent French translation by Gérard Fry in the series: "Les Pères dans la foi" (Migne, Paris 2001). As a Latinist, Fry`s work, however, did not address the specific questions of exegesis and biblical hermeneutics, which will form the main focus of the planned project.

The project investigates Jeromes Commentary on Ecclesiastes (388/389 a. Chr.) from an exegetical point of view. It provides a critical evaluation of Jeromes often depreciated exegesis. The interpretation of early Christian literature is usually seen as belonging to the disciplines of patristics and church history, and its translation to the discipline of Philology. Our project demonstrates that biblical commentaries should constitute an exception to this categorisation. Their interpretation is also the task of biblical scholarship. The reasons are as follows: 1. The interpretation and evaluation of biblical commentaries requires a profound knowledge of Scripture itself, as well as of its past and present exegesis. Furthermore, specialist knowledge of exegetical methods and hermeneutical approaches is also indispensable. It is only with such expertise that the issue of the extent to which patristic exegesis possesses or lacks a systematic approach can be decided, or, as the project shows, variations (in approach/method) are a consequence of the socio-cultural circumstances and ideological preconceptions of particular writers. 2. Modern biblical scholarship is characterised by the lively discussion of methodical issues. The twentieth century was a time of emancipation from established paradigms that dismissed ancient ways of interpretation. Now, however, an increasing number of exegetes are attempting a reappraisal and possible re-integration of the approaches and insights of patristic exegesis into its modern practice. It is therefore crucial that contemporary biblical scholars offer an unbiased picture of the exegetical endeavours of their predecessors. The project undertook this task and was able to correct the partly distorted image of Jerome as an exegete that has commonly been accepted. Several past (scholarly) assessments have turned out to be inappropriate: for example, that Jerome misreads the text; the Jerome only copies Origen; that Jerome withdraws into a spiritual interpretation; and that Jeromes exegetical practice is arbitrary. Instead it became apparent that (a) Jerome used his sources critically and selectively (for differentiated), and that (b) his interpretations are in no way remote from modern ones, and should by no means be denigrated as misreadings. Other objections, such as accusations that Jerome was anti-Judaist and misogynist, turned out to be justified; nevertheless, even in these matters, careful distinctions proved to be necessary, so that generalisations might be avoided. It is thus true that Jeromes polemic against contemporary Jews who did not believe in Christ is inappropriate and savage. However, alongside this goes Jeromes high appraisal of the Old Testament, his cultivation of the Hebrew language, and his emphasis on the election of Israel in the days (or aeon or in the time) before Christ. His devaluation of women as the fallible sex was common in his age, even though he highlighted it with the aggressive style of his rhetoric. He did esteem, nevertheless, women who lived a life of asceticism. Jerome deserves renewed consideration from biblical scholars. He reminds them that they should evaluate their heritage in a critical and professional way.