See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/281489982

Eugen J. Pentiuc: The Old Testament in Eastern Orthodox Tradition. New York:
Oxford University Press, 2014; pp. 414.

Article  in  Journal of Religious History · September 2015

DOI: 10.1111/1467-9809.12288

CITATIONS READS

0 1,121

1 author:

Doru Costache
Sydney College of Divinity
75 PUBLICATIONS   74 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Wellbeing View project

Christian Gnosis View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Doru Costache on 25 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 [Journal of Religious History 39:3 (2015) 438-40]
!
EUGEN J. PENTIUC: The Old Testament in Eastern Orthodox Tradition. New York:
Oxford University Press, 2014; pp. 414.
!
Comprehensive studies on how Orthodox Christians engage Scripture are overall
missing from contemporary literature. Granted, for construing themselves as
inheritors of the patristic witnesses of the past, many Orthodox are convinced that
what their own tradition has to say about Scripture has already been said. Similarly,
and related, many non-Orthodox believe that Orthodoxy is always about tradition and
never about Scripture. Thus, whilst currently striving to dispel the rationalist illusion
of a Bible that sits on its own – without the living community that preserves Scripture
and draws on it (137) – non-Orthodox scholars do not bother to explore this “rich and
luxurious, yet scarcely known tradition” (321) which, according to Eugen Pentiuc, has
immensely much to offer in terms of approaching Scripture within the ecclesial
environment.
!
Against this backdrop, the author’s work courageously addresses the matters both
retrospectively, from the viewpoint of the early Christian and Byzantine ways of
reading Scripture, and by considering the complex experience of living Orthodoxy,
which both incorporates and transcends past patterns. The book is “concerned
specifically with Eastern Orthodox ways of reception and interpretation of the Old
Testament,” an undertaking whose “scope and depth” warrants no definitive outcome
and remains open for further discussion (321). Observing the principle that “Scripture
did not arise in a vacuum,” that a series of “hermeneutical assumptions … are
inherently part
!
………439………
!
of the ‘appropriation’ process … [and that] where there is Scripture, there must also
be a community abiding to a set of rules regarding interpretation, if … Scripture is to
be rightly understood and lived” (137), Pentiuc proposes that the Orthodox
engagement with Scripture illustrates this very principle.
!
The first chapters review familiar topics, such as the history of canon formation, text
reception and interpretive authority, to which Pentiuc adds an Orthodox flavour. For
instance, after concerning himself with various supersessionisms in history (21-33,
39-50), he refers to similar views exhibited by certain Orthodox milieus interested in
doing away with the foundational paradox of the Christian Bible, which incorporates
the sacred book of another religion (xiii). Pentiuc categorically dismisses the “noxious
triumphalism” of these milieus, questioning supersessionism from the angle of the
mainstream tradition which has gathered together and maintains the literature of the
two Covenants as one Scripture (50-61). Consequently, he suggests that changes
should be made to the Byzantine hymnographical compositions, still in use, which
contain supersessionist and hateful ideas (40).
!
Another interesting aspect pertains to Pentiuc’s deconstruction of the popular notion
that the Septuagint was from the outset and exclusively the Bible of the Orthodox
Church. He rejects this widespread claim by analysing passages from a plethora of
patristic writers who deplored the shortcomings of the Septuagint, favouring instead
the original Hebrew (82-84, 96-100). On a different yet not unrelated note, Pentiuc
discusses the apparently blurred contours of the Orthodox scriptural canon. As
illustrated by the prescribed readings for various liturgical offices, the Orthodox make
indeed use of more Scriptures than those of the Masoretic shortlist, leaving the
impression of a fluid canon (131-134). Those other Scriptures are the “readable”
writings appended to the Septuagint. Whilst agreeing that the notion of an open-ended
canon is abhorrent to some circles, the author points out two things, namely, that the
Orthodox mindset naturally combines conservatism and flexibility, and that Orthodox
liturgy does not confound the canonical and the “readable” Scriptures, making use of
the latter for formative purposes (134-135).
!
Chapter five offers a very useful overview of the patristic principles of interpretation,
cherished by the Orthodox, such as the cryptic character of the Bible which requires
deciphering through the “senses of Scripture,” the assumption of a “perfectly
harmonious” Bible which derives from the notions of divine inspiration and the
Christ-centred infrastructure of the collection, which in turn demands a
“Christological interpretation” (169-198). That said, Pentiuc’s most important
contributions are located in the last two chapters, the sixth and the seventh, where he
discusses at length two characteristically Orthodox ways of engaging Scripture –
designated as the aural and the visual, which pertain to the liturgical context. The
reader encounters a wealth of information regarding the Orthodox liturgical cycle of
scriptural readings, the spirit of traditional homilies, the hymnographical
interpretation of various passages and their visual illustrations. Relevant case studies
are presented. For instance, for the aural dimension Pentiuc analyses the scriptural
readings for the major feast days of the Lord (236-262) and the Theotokos (227-236),
pointing out the complex connections between pericopes and their hymnographical
context, where the sensitivities and the worldview of God’s people come to the fore
through multilayered connections. In turn, Pentiuc discusses the visual dimension of
Orthodox hermeneutics by emphasising the “fusion of text and image” in the
proclamation of Christian teaching (276, 290-300), a presentation which culminates in
a detailed analysis of several major Old Testament themes and their Orthodox
iconographical renditions (284-320).
!
………440………
!
Pentiuc’s portrait of Orthodoxy is that of a community largely characterised by a
scriptural mentality. In brief, he proposes that Scripture is central to the Orthodox
experience; that Scripture is approached by the Orthodox both strictly (the canon) and
flexibly (the canon’s broader literary context); that Scripture confers to the Church’s
mind consistency, providing it with criteria to assess all intellectual and spiritual
pursuits – as illustrated by the Church’s interpretive engagement with Scripture,
which is discursive, intuitive, informative and formative. The message of this book
 surprises both the Orthodox that superficially believe in a non-scriptural Christian
experience and the non-Orthodox who entertain the equally superficial notion that
Orthodoxy is a non-biblical Church. The excellent work of Pentiuc is a worthwhile
read for the academics interested in traditional hermeneutics and likewise for those
among the faithful interested in reading the Scriptures for spiritual benefit. My modest
appraisal can in no way do justice to the author’s tremendous effort and achievement.
!
DORU COSTACHE
St Andrew’s Greek Orthodox Theological College, Sydney

View publication stats