Only one of the Fathers earned the title of "the exegete," Theodore of Mopsuestia (born about 35o, died 429), the intimate friend and companion, from boyhood, of Chrysostom, to whom in early manhood he owed his conversion. He was the most conspicuous representative of the School of An tioch, which stood for the historical and natural interpretation of Scripture. While he had no knowledge of Hebrew, he had a remarkable in tuition of the historical and grammatical mode of exegesis. He was a strong opponent of the methods of Origen. But he was really a thou sand years in advance of his time. His works were brought under the suspicion of Nestorianism, and were condemned one hundred and twenty-five years after his death.
The allegorical method, against which Theodore had stoutly contended, continued dominant, and was current among the schoolmen. Nicholas De Lyra (born 127o, died 134o), who was a Hebrew scholar, and who had enjoyed the benefit of the studies of the Spanish Jews of the Middle Ages. does indeed "make the first beginnings of a school of natural exegesis . . . by ascertaining the literal meaning." and, through his influence on Luther, paves the way for the following period; but, on the whole, the period from the Apostolic Fathers to the Reformation, in the history of exegesis, might be characterized as that of "the misinterpretation of the Old Testament." 5. Interpretation from the R.eformation to the Eighteenth Century. Two things are characteristic of the period introduced by the Ref ormation in the interpretation of the Old Testa ment ; the freeing of Scripture from the bondage of the Church tradition, and the study of it in the original languages. Both were of the greatest im portance. Until the Reformation, the Bible for the few W 110 used it could mean to the loyal Romanist only what the Church decreed it should mean; hence the motive was wanting to go behind the official text of the Romish Church as found in the Vulgate. This attitude was entirely changed by the Reformation. The Bible became the source of authority; hence the Reformers did not care for the interpretations of the Fathers. Their sole question was what the Scriptures them selves taught. This rendered necessary a careful study of the Bible in the original languages, for which the way had been prepared by Reuchlin's translation of Kimchi's grammar. Hence we may
trace the Bible of Luther and the other reformers back to the studies of Spanish Jews in the Nlid die Ages, under the tuition of the Arabs. Neither Luther (born 1483, died t546) nor Calvin (born 15o9, died 1564) were profound Hebrew scholars, but they marked an infinite advance over the bar ren waste of scholastic exegesis. They mani fested a free attitude in their judgment of the binding authority of certain parts of the Old Tes tament, while yielding loyal and unquestioning obedience to Scripture as a whole. Their position in this respect was in sharp contrast to that of the theologians of the Post-Reformation period, who sought, after the manner of an orthodox Jewish scholar of the second century, to make a hedge about the Scriptures. The effort was made by these theologians to find the same infallibility in the Bible which the Fathers had found in the Church as the custodian of Apostolic tradition. This effort extended to defining the limits of the Scripture to claiming, with reference to the vowel points, that they had been supernaturally com municated ; that the Old Testament was of equal authority with the New ; that the rule of faith was to be found in the clear passages of Scripture, and that the obscure passages were to be interpreted by them. Thus the theologians of the Post-Re formation period brought the Scriptures once more under a yoke of bondage, the rule of faith which was really a barrier to free interpretation. But there were critical tendencies at work, both among Protestants and Catholics. Even Carlstadt (born about 1483, died 1541) had maintained that the Pentateuch could not have been written by Moses, and Luther had asked what difference it would make if he were not the author of it. Yet the main current among Jews, Catholics, and Protestants, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, was to suppress free inquiry about the origin and composition of the Scriptures. But such investigations on the part of individuals could not be kept back.
(1) Spinoza (born 1632, died 1667) may be re garded the father of modern criticism. He was a learned Jew of acute mind who lived in Amster dam, and who was excommunicated by the Jews because of his critical theories. The principles of interpretation enunciated by him are essentially in accord with those held by the modern critical school.