Forty Gospel Homilies (review)Kenneth B. Steinhauser

Journal of Early Christian Studies, Volume 1, Number 1, Spring 1993,pp. 102-103 (Article)

Published by The Johns Hopkins University PressDOI: 10.1353/earl.0.0122

For additional information about this article

Access Provided by Oxford University Library Services at 11/27/12 9:43AM GMT

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/earl/summary/v001/1.1.steinhauser.html

102 JOURNAL OF EARLY CHRISTIAN STUDIES

that the doctrine of the Trinity must be abandoned by Christians if it cannotprovide the intellectual, ethical and sociopolitical model to guide complex andpluralistic cosmopolitan life.

Faith to Creed closes with a summary statement that reviews the consultation'sfindings and suggests issues and questions for further reflection and discussion. Itprovides a helpful conclusion to a book that is both informative and stimulating.

Kelly McCarthy Spoerl, St. Anselm College, Manchester, New Hampshire

Gregory the GreatForty Gospel HomiliesTranslated by David HurstCistercian Studies Series 123Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1990. Pp. 389.

The translator has proceeded in a rather unorthodox fashion which necessitatessome explanation. Since there is no modern critical edition of Gregory's FortyGosepl Homilies, David Hurst has created an "interim critical edition" (p. 3). Fiveitems form the basis of the "interim critical edition": (1) the Maurist text reprintedin Migne's Patrolog-a Latina 76, which the translator has judged insufficient, (2)Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 69, (3) Barcelona, Archivo Capitular de laCatedral 120, (4) Paris, Bibliothque Nationale, lat. 12254, (5) quotations fromGregory's homilies found in the commentaries of Bede the Venerable. In otherwords, Hurst has translated the text of PL 76, supplemented and corrected in lightof the three manuscripts and the subsequent quotations in Bede. In his very briefintroduction of four pages he has offered no criteria for his selection of manuscripts.Since the "interim critical edition" exists nowhere but in the mind of the translator,the original text cannot be consulted. The normal method of procedure is rathersimple, plain, and straightforward. First, one established the text. Second, onetranslates the established text. The present translation attempts both at the sametime. Of course, in defense of Hurst one may legitimately assert that we now havethe translation of a work that was previously unavailable to the English-speakingpublic.

Scholars generally agree that the gospel homilies were preached during the litur-gical year 590-591 and published in the following year. Gregory dictated the firsttwenty homilies which were read to the congregation by some official. Since thecongregation was less inclined to listen to a bureaucrat, Gregory delivered thesecond twenty homilies personally, as he himself discloses in Homily 21: "Hence Iwant to depart from my usual custom and carry out myself this explanation of thelessons of the holy Gospel during the sacred solemnity of the mass, not dictating butaddressing you in person" (p. 157). The homilies appear to have been circulatedoriginally in two codices with each containing twenty homilies. The two volumeswere later combined into one during the ninth century by scribes of the Carolingianperiod. Since PL 76 presents the homilies out of their original order, Hurst usedseveral medieval Gospel Books to reconstruct the original sequence according tothe then current Roman liturgical calendar: British Museum, Cotton. Nero D. IV

BOOK REVIEWS 103

(The Lindisfarne Gospels), British Museum, Regius I. B. VII., and Wrzburg, Mp.th. The process was also facilitated by Gregory's occasional reference to a saint or afeast day. Hurst's reconstruction appears to have been as successful as possiblegiven the data available.

Gregory's exegetical method is rigorous and usually consistent. He stands in theAugustinian tradition which allows the allegorical interpretation of a passage aslong as the literal sense is not violated. In Homily 13, which deals with the miracleof the blind man being restored to sight, Gregory explains his approach: "We mustunderstand the miracles of our Lord and Saviour, dearly beloved, so as to believethat they have been truly done, and that their meaning still signifies something tous. His works show one thing by their power, and speak to us another by theirmystery" (p. 95). Gregory, while insisting on the existence of a historical blind man,interprets the figure allegorically to represent the human race, which lost its sightthrough the fall of the first parents and received it again through the redeemer, JesusChrist. Gregory also permits himself to be subjected to the discipline of the text. Hedoes not conveniently manipulate the gospels. For example, when Luke 13:613combines the parable of the fig tree and the miracle of the infirm woman, Gregoryfeels himself obligated to combine the two in his Homily 31, which explains thepericope. Both the tree and the woman are symbolic of human nature. The tree maybe made to bear fruit through fertilization while the woman is bent over and cannotlook upwards. Repentance allows the Christian to bear the fruit of good workswhile contemplation allows one to look upward toward heaven.

Concrete examples, which occasionally give insight into the historical contextand social fabric of Gregory's community, abound in the homilies: "The day beforeyesterday, my friends, you heard that an old orchard was uprooted by a suddenhurricane, that homes were destroyed and churches knocked from their founda-tions. How many persons who were safe and unharmed in the evening, thinking ofwhat they would do the next day, suddenly died that night, caught in a trap ofdestruction?" (p. 19). Gregory frequently uses intriguing stories about individualsin the monastic or broader community sometimes anonymously and sometimesidentifying them by name. Usually the story tells of some miraculous revelation ordivine intervention, which should serve as a lesson to his audience.

Although the translator's method of establishing the text may be questioned, thetranslation is certainly adequate and readable. References to the Bible appear at thebottom of each page while explanatory notes and references to patristic worksappear at the end of each homily. There are no indices. An occasional typographicalerror mars the text. On p. 211, n. 2, for "Bede" read "Gregory."

Kenneth B. Steinhauser, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri