Mark (Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture) [Hardcover]

Thomas C. Oden (Editor)

Book Description

Series: Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture | Publication Date: October 1, 1998

The Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture is a unique twenty-eight-volume series encompassing all of Scripture and offering contemporary readers the opportunity to study for themselves the key writings of the early church fathers. Arranged by the books of the Bible, each portion of commentary allows the living voices of the church in its formative centuries to speak as they engage the sacred page of Scripture, rendered throughout the series in English in the ecumenically accepted Revised Standard Version of the Bible. The Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture does what very few of today's students of the Bible could do for themselves. With the aid of computer technology, the vast array of writings from the church fathers - including much that is available only in the ancient languages - have been combed for their comment on Scripture. From these results, scholars with a deep knowledge of the fathers and a heart for the church have hand-selected material for each volume, shaping, annotating and introducing it to today's readers. Each portion of commentary has been chosen for its salient insight, its rhetorical power and its faithful representation of the consensual exegesis of the early church. The Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture is an ecumenical project, promoting a vital link of communication between today's varied Christian traditions and their common ancient ancestors in the faith. On this shared ground we listen as leading pastoral theologians of the church's first several centuries gather around the text of Scripture and offer their best theological, spiritual and pastoral insights. Today the historical-critical method of interpretation has nearly exhausted its claim on the biblical text and on the church. In its wake there is a wide-spread yearning among Christian individuals and communities for the wholesome, the deep and the enduring. The Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture seeks not to replace those excellent commentaries that have been produced in the twentieth century. It supplements them, framing them with interpretive voices that have long sustained the church and only recently have fallen silent. It invites us to listen with appreciative ears and sympathetic minds as our ancient ancestors in the faith describe and interpret the scriptural vistas as they see them. The Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture is a postcritical revival of the early commentary tradition known as the glossa ordinaria, a text artfully elaborated with ancient and authoritative reflections and insights. An uncommon companion for theological interpretation, spiritual reading, and wholesome teaching and preaching.

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal

These are the first two volumes published in the "Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture" series intended for educated laity and the clergy, which aims to introduce the reader to the church fathers and their exegesis of the Bible. The scope of Mark is impressive and the format generally easy to use. It presents the gospel in its entirety in the Revised Standard Version, with each passage followed by an overview of selected comments from the church fathers of the first seven centuries and then by the full comments themselves. To find these comments, the editors ran computerized searches of the whole body of patristic literature in Greek, Latin, Syriac, and Coptic; comments are limited to the church fathers, including nothing from the Arians or Gnostics, for example. Individual passages are fully referenced for easy location in the original, but while there is a list of writers at the end, there is no list of their works. From the appendix, it appears that far more passages were omitted than included, and a list of omitted passages would have been useful. Hall (biblical and theological studies, Eastern Coll.) has written a useful introduction to the series. He discusses the methods used by the church fathers in their exegesis of scripture, concentrating on Athanasius, Gregory of Nazianzus, Basil the Great, and John Chrysostom in the East and Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, and Gregory the Great in the West, then moving back in time to their predecessors. Again, no references are made to those outside mainstream Christianity. Little is said about rabbinic or philosophical influences on the church fathers' methods, and one might wish that the influence of the New Testament, and its use of the Old, had been more fully explored. Nevertheless, this book is thorough and informative on the methods and controversies of the church fathers. For public, academic, and church libraries.?Michael S. Borries, CUNY
Copyright 1998 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an alternate Hardcover edition.

Review

'A valuable resource ... will open up a body of Christian literature to readers who might not otherwise have encountered it.' Reference Reviews 'The publishers and editors must be congratulated not just for restoring lost commentaries but for making it so easy for us to benefit from them.' Contemporary Review

Product Details

• Hardcover: 400 pages
• Publisher: Routledge (October 1, 1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 157958036X
• ISBN-13: 978-1579580360
• Product Dimensions: 10 x 7.1 x 1.2 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.8 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.9 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (7 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #4,467,631 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Thomas C. Oden (Ph.D., Yale University) recently retired as Henry Anson Buttz Professor of Theology at The Theological School of Drew University in Madison, New Jersey. He is general editor of the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture and author of numerous theological works, including a three-volume systematic theology.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

11 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A place to start, not to end, October 23, 2003

By A Customer

This review is from: Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, New Testament II: Mark (Vol 2) (Hardcover)

This volume (and I wager the rest of the series) is useful if one approaches it with the right perspective. Certainly, this book is not (and could never be) a substitute for reading and examining the Church Fathers and their considerations on Scripture. However, if one uses this work more for quick reference and leads, it can be most helpful. After all, the sheer volume of the Fathers' works prevents even the most learned patristics scholar from remembering who commented on what verse. As an example, I have used this volume to quickly find some comments on the verse regarding rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's - seeing some of the comments listed, I then went to the source and read the Fathers' comments in context. This volume, then, is a tool (perhaps a shortcut) to find certain texts that may be of use.

Is this volume comprehensive? No. But, even in its current state, it is over 200 pages (when the Gospel of Mark, in the New American version, is about 35 pages) - trying to collect all the commentary by the Fathers would extend the length much more. As such, it is a starting point, useful for quick reference. It should not be held to a higher standard than that.

37 of 51 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars ACCS=Ancient Chrsitianity Clearly Simplified, March 15, 1999

By A Customer

This review is from: Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, New Testament II: Mark (Vol 2) (Hardcover)

The ACCS is a unique achievement in the world of biblical scholarship. In an age in which legitimate scholarly commentaries seem to be limited to the "current" and "relevant," the ACCS reaches back to the roots of not just biblical scholarship, but biblical piety, and it is there where it makes its mark. With the ACCS, we read of the role of scripture in the lives of faith of great men such as Augustine and Chrysostom, and we thus come to realize that any "scholarship" done on the bible in their day was done out of faith. Anyone current in modern biblical scholarship can see how this is a far cry from the detached scholarship coming out of so many seminaries and graduate schools today. As a catechetical tool for parish religious education programs, the ACCS comes highly recommended as a means by which the believer can come into contact with the Christian past. However, the merits of the ACCS stop here, in the face of more than a few criticisms and obstacles which it ignores.

First of all, the commentary on Mark, and I might suspect the whole series, over-simplifies the Christianity which it seeks to present, giving the impression that the "Patristic period" was a time of consensual thinking void of serious conflict. Often, certain passages of Mark will be commented upon by church fathers who did not even consider each other as "orthodox" (a loaded term in need of qualifying), or who were only considered by many to be orthodox in their own time, or only years after their deaths.

The less critical reader may come away with the idea that patristic theology was a school of thought not unlike reformed or existential theology, which we know is not the case. By offering examples from third century fathers like Origen (deemed a heretic after his death and hardly an example of "consensual thinking"), fifth century fathers like Augustine, and eighth century fathers like John of Damascus, there is a tendency toward anachronism in the ACCS, which can only paint an artificial picture of ancient Christianity, a picture which seeks to ignore (and I would wonder why) the diversity and conflict so common in the church during late antiquity. Also, given the method by which certain texts of the fathers were chosen (and not chosen) for the ACCS, I would wonder at the criteria: do we only hear from the texts of the fathers which agree with the agenda of the editors, or do we really get a full picture of the ancient church?

Second, I would question the editors' choice of sources, of examples which are supposed to serve as representative of patristic thought. Many of the sources cited were not even biblical commentaries, and thus any examples of what a church father said about a biblical passage runs the risk of being taken out of context in the ACCS. More often, the writings which the ACCS editors present as a father's comments on a biblical passage were from mere letters, or treatises on topics other than the particular biblical passage at hand. Usually, when a father did quote scripture in such non-biblically focused works (such as catechetical lectures, apologetics, etc.), his goal was to proof-text from scripture in order to make a point, his goal was certainly not scripture commentary. However, in presenting such passages out of context as if they were solely commentaries on scripture, the ACCS again paints an artificial picture of ancient Christianity. You would think that the doctoral students who worked on this project with Professor Oden would know better.

Finally, I would question which biblical manuscripts the fathers were commenting upon when they wrote the works which serve as the sources for the ACCS. As Professor Oden should know, there was no single Greek (or Latin, or Syriac, etc.) manuscript of the New Testament in the age of the fathers which could have served as the only basis for commenting upon scripture (consider here the codex vaticanus, sinaiticus, etc.). However, in presenting all the varied comments by the fathers on these passages of Mark, giving only the English RSV as a referent, the reader again gets the false impression of a mushy "consensuality" among those who only later came to be called fathers of the church, a "consensuality" which is supposed to span centuries as well as cultural/linguistic/geographic boundaries.

The questions the ACCS does not answer are how we are to reconcile the disparity among the manuscripts of the NT used by the fathers, and the basis upon which can we use a ready-made English translation whose underlying Greek text was quite unlike that used by the men whose comments are employed in the ACCS. These ultimately come down to a question of method. These questions are not answered because (conveniently perhaps?) they are not addressed, but shouldn't they be, in the spirit of scholarly inquiry? It is this lack of variant readings and clear articulation of method which, I feel, calls the "scholarly" legitimacy of this work into question.

In conclusion, I would have to add that it is the perspective of the reader which will determine the usefulness of the ACCS. If one's goal is merely to refer to what some of the fathers said about a passages of scripture, in order to find a link between the church's past and present, then the ACCS is a fine reference. However, if one's goal is to probe the methodology and presuppositions behind what has come to be known as patristic exegesis, the ACCS can only serve as a convenient starting point for one unfamiliar with other sources on the subject. Even in that case, the usefulness of the ACCS cannot be expected to last long for those with the deeper questions.

5 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars The first published volume. . ., March 12, 2004

By 

David Zampino "21st Century Hobbit" (Delavan, Wisconsin) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, New Testament II: Mark (Vol 2) (Hardcover)

. . .of an amazing series of commentaries.

This commentary on Mark's Gospel, from the perspective of the Fathers of the Church is a long-awaited and much needed reference for Christians eager to explore the Scriptures as they were seen by those who used them in the earliest days of the Christian faith. If the rest of the series lives up to the standard of "Mark", we have a lot to look forward to.

Only in the "Computer Age" could such a project be feasibly undertaken. Kudos to Oden and company for their effort.

Highly Recommended.