A REASSESSMENT OF E.B. PUSEY' S

EARLY CONTRIBUTION TO BIBLICAL SCHOLARSHIP:

AN EXAMINATION OF HIS 'LECTURES ON TYPES AND PROPHECIES

OF THE OLD TESTAMENT' (1836)

By

Kevin John Boddecker

A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Divinity of Trinity College and the Department of Biblical Studies of the Toronto School of Theology in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Theology Awarded by the University of St. Michael's College

Toronto 2010

©Kevin John Boddecker Library and Archives Bibliothèque et 1*1 Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de l'édition

395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada

Your file Votre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-68836-6 Our file Notre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-68836-6

NOTICE: AVIS:

The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant à la Bibliothèque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par télécommunication ou par l'Internet, prêter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des thèses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, à des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non- support microforme, papier, électronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats.

The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriété du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protège cette thèse. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la thèse ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent être imprimés ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation. without the author's permission.

In compliance with the Canadian Conformément à la loi canadienne sur la Privacy Act some supporting forms protection de la vie privée, quelques may have been removed from this formulaires secondaires ont été enlevés de thesis. cette thèse.

While these forms may be included Bien que ces formulaires aient inclus dans in the document page count, their la pagination, il n'y aura aucun contenu removal does not represent any loss manquant. of content from the thesis.

¦?I Canada A REASSESSMENT OF E.B. PUSEY'S EARLY CONTRIBUTION TO BIBLICAL SCHOLARSHIP: AN EXAMINATION OF HIS 'LECTURES ON TYPES AND PROPHECIES OF THE OLD TESTAMENT' (1 836)

By Kevin John Boddecker A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Divinity of Trinity College and the Department of Biblical Studies of the Toronto School of Theology in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Theology Awarded by the University of St. Michael's College

ABSTRACT

This thesis examines the 1836 'Lectures on Types and Prophecies of the Old Testament,' an early, neglected work by Edward Bouverie Pusey (1800-1882), sometime Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University and Canon of Christ Church. This work of Pusey' s is examined to shed light on his early biblical scholarship and in order to reconstruct his understanding of prophecy, biblical inspiration, history and typology. Pusey' s 'Lectures' are examined in relation to his various influences, namely the Church Fathers, nineteenth-century Anglo-Catholic thought and English Romantic poetry. The 'Lectures' are also considered within the history of modern biblical scholarship as an example of post-Enlightenment typological interpretation. Finally, this examination of Pusey' s 'Lectures' fills a gap in his intellectual development and seeks to correct misunderstandings of this important, transitional period in his biography.

ii CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION 1

IL TYPES AND PROPHECIES BEFORE PUSEY: FROM THOMAS AQUINAS TO THOMASSHERLOCK 9

Typology and Allegory in Patristic and Medieval Christianity: Thomas Aquinas 9 The Protestant Reformation and the Insistence on Literal Interpretation: Luther and Calvin 12 Precriticai Biblical Interpretation in Roman Catholicism and Protestantism . . 14 Biblical Interpretation's Political Turn and the Birth of Criticism: Hobbes and Spinoza 15 Meaningful Language and the Problem of Prophecy: Locke, Whiston and Collins 17 Providence, Prophecy, and the Re-Turn towards Typology: Thomas Sherlock 21 Conclusion 23

III. E. B. PUSEY'S THEORY OF TYPES AND PROPHECIES: THE OPENING LECTURE IN "LECTURES ON TYPES AND PROPECHIES OFTHEOLDTESTAMENT" 24

Pusey' s Criticism of the Apologetic Approach to Old Testament Prophecy . . 24 The Theoretical Foundations of Pusey' s Typology 32 The Theological Foundation of Pusey' s Typology 44 Conclusion 50

IV. E. B. PUSEY' S INTERPRETATION OF TYPES AND PROPHECIES:THE SUCCEEDING LECTURES IN "LECTURES ON TYPES AND PROPHECIES OFTHEOLDTESTAMENT" 54

Humanity's Fall and the Protoevangelical Promise 56 Prophecy in the Patriarchal Narratives 70 Types in the Exodus Narratives and the Mosaic Legislation 77 The Typological Interpretation of the Passover 89

V. CONCLUSION 95

BIBLIOGRAPHY 99

Chapter One

Introduction

Edward Bouverie Pusey (1800-1882), the Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford

University and Canon of Christ Church, is a figure in the history of biblical interpretation who has been variously ignored, often misunderstood, and sometimes even maligned by those surveying the intellectual history of nineteenth-century England. Although his abilities as a gifted theologian, churchman, and biblical interpreter were demonstrated throughout his lifetime in his various tracts, essays, commentaries and lectures, and his learning was manifested by his prominence in the English Church of day and his academic appointments, he is now all but forgotten. His life has not be retold since the original publication of the biography written by his disciple, H. P. Liddon, in the decade following Pusey's death and only a few of his works have been republished in the last century.

This ignorance of Pusey in current biblical scholarship most likely results from a contemporary scholarly disapproval of his opposition to the development of biblical criticism in England. As a young scholar studying abroad in Germany, Pusey came into contact for the first time with the burgeoning historical criticism in the lecture of the Göttingen professor J. G. Eichorn which aroused in him a fear of the possible negative impact this sort of rationalism would have if it took root in his native soil:

I can remember the room in Göttingen in which I was sitting when the real condition of religious thought in Germany flashed upon me. 'This will come upon us in England; and how utterly unprepared for it we are!' From that time I determined to devote myself more earnestly to the Old Testament, as the field in which Rationalism seemed to be most successful.1

1 Liddon, H. P. Life ofE. B. Pusey, D.D. Vol I (London: Longmans & Co., 1894), op. cit., 77. 1 This intention to defend the English people against the destructive influence of biblical criticism and rationalism would guide the rest of Pusey's ecclesiastical and academic career, finding its fullest expression in his very erudite and controversial lectures on Daniel the Prophet (1864), which were his response to the publication of the Essays and Reviews (I860).2 In these lectures, against the rising consensus of continental Old Testament scholarship that ascribed parts of the book of Daniel to a pseudonymous Maccabean writer, Pusey argued for the sixth-century dating of the whole book on the basis of an extended argument based on historical and philological evidence. By this, he hoped to strip the Old Testament criticism employed by the authors of the Essays and Reviews of its scientific pretence, exposing it as a system built on unbelief, and to vindicate the prophetic authenticity of the book of Daniel, and perhaps, in so doing, of the Old

Testament as a whole.

However, following Pusey's death, with the appointment of S. R. Driver as the succeeding Regius Professor of Hebrew and the publication of his commentary on Daniel around the turn of the twentieth century, Pusey's position on the book of Daniel became increasingly unpopular and supposedly untenable. Along with this, the next generation saw the ascendancy of historical criticism as the pre-eminent, if not singular, model of biblical interpretation in England, as well as in the United States and continental Europe. The equation of biblical criticism with biblical scholarship resulted in the unwillingness of many scholars to take Pusey seriously as a biblical scholar. Instead, a portrait was produced of the man as one who, while showing promise and potential as a young scholar, was led, for some unknown reason, to abdicate his earlier learning and to trade in his scholarly creativity to become a vanguard of

For the text of the Essays and Reviews along with the history of its publication and the responses it evoked, cf. Victor Shea and William Whitla, ed. Essays and Reviews: The 1860 Text

2 traditional Anglo-Catholicism, thereby proving himself to be little more than a road block in the way of the development of British biblical scholarship in the Victorian era.3

An example of this portrayal of Pusey can be found in John Rogerson's Old Testament Criticism in the Nineteenth Century: England and Germany. While the author claims in his preface that his book is concern with the "reception of biblical criticism among English (some might want to add Anglican) Old Testament experts" and is to be taken for a "history of British Old Testament scholarship in the nineteenth century" he often uses the terms 'scholarship' and

'criticism' interchangeable with regards to the practice of Old Testament interpretation. Further, in his introduction, while discussing the way in which the development of scholarship in any field is directed by the personalities involved, he speculates about the way the history of the development of Old Testament scholarship might have played out had Pusey not been appointed as such a young man to the Regius professorship of Hebrew at Oxford and, therefore, been unable to produce such an influential opposition to historical criticism in England.5 Further, the only work of Pusey' s that receives any attention in the work is his Daniel the Prophet. Now, admittedly, it is not Rogerson's stated intention to consider other methods of biblical interpretation (i.e. theological, patristic, etc), but his equation of biblical criticism with biblical scholarship and his portrayal of Pusey solely as an opponent to historical criticism becomes the foundation of the maligning and ignorance of Pusey's contribution to biblical scholarship, as well as his abilities as a theologian and biblical interpreter. and Its Readings (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 2000). E.g. Matthew, H. C. G. "Edward Bouverie Pusey: From Scholar to Tractarian" Journal ofTheological Studies 1981 XXXII(1):101-124. J. Rogerson, Old Testament Criticism in the Nineteenth Century: England and Germany (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985), ix. 5 Ibid. 3 Since the focus of historians of biblical interpretation has been centred on this one period later in Pusey's life, that of his involvement in the Essays and Reviews controversy, and since he has been too quickly written off on this basis, few have made any effort to press behind the work of the mature Pusey to examine his earlier work as a young biblical scholar. This lamentable fact has led to the perdurance of this unjustified portrayal of Pusey as one whose contribution to the field of biblical scholarship was only negative, i.e. one of opposition to the development of biblical criticism, and not in some way positive, i.e. presenting possible, more desirable alternatives to historical critical methodologies. It would seem that, due to the rise of interest in the theological interpretation of Scripture in recent decades, the time has come for a reassessment of Pusey's own vision of Old Testament interpretation and his place in the history of biblical interpretation.

While many of Pusey's writings, especially his sermons, provide demonstrations of his personal vision of biblical interpretation, an early work of his which most clearly demands attentions in this regard and casts new light on Pusey's early development as a biblical scholar is his unpublished "Lectures on Types and Prophecies of the Old Testament"(1836). Written before the time of his involvement in the various academic, theological and ecclesiastical controversies that marked his life, these lectures are the work of a more optimistic and creative Pusey than one finds in some of his later works or in the caricatures painted by some contemporary scholars. In them, Pusey made a concerted effort to counter what he saw as a contemporary, destructive trend in British Old Testament interpretation which robbed prophecy of its depth and obscured its meaning for the sake of hermeneutical clarity. Rejecting the views of apologists and rationalists alike, Pusey proposed a vision of the Old Testament as a complex text, the meaning of which, by nature of its inspiration, could not be understood simply on a

4 literal level and which was organically united with the New Testament by nature of its being a type participating in its archetype or fulfillment, namely the economy of Christ's incarnation. By giving attention to these earlier, neglected "Lecture on Types and Prophecies", and examining them as an example of Pusey's more positive and creative contribution to biblical interpretation, it is possible to begin to correct the ill-informed perception of Pusey which exists among many contemporary scholars. This attention will lead scholars to see him not only as the opponent of historical criticism, but as the proponent of a theological interpretation which is rooted in a retrieval of patristic typology, the poetic spirit of English Romanticism, and the theological vision of the Oxford Movement.

These "Lectures" were the product of a variety of influences: a knowledge of Semitic languages and the Old Testament which Pusey had gained while in Germany; certain Romantic ideas about the symbolic nature of words and the ability of the human imagination to discern mysteries in the created world and history which he gained from his reading of Byron, Coleridge and Wordsworth; a particular Tractarian sacramental aesthetic and incarnational vision expressed in its early form in John Keble's poetry in his The Christian Year and which Pusey drew out of his personal interactions with the burgeoning Oxford Movement; and from his early impressions of the Church Fathers. For all this, they have remained in relative obscurity among biblical scholars and theologians alike since their delivery in 1836. The few exceptions to this ignorance of the "Lectures" would be the references made to them by Alf Härdelin in his work on The

Tractarian Understanding of the Eucharist, A. M. Allchin's use of them in his essay on "The Theological Vision of the Oxford Movement" which appeared in The Rediscovery ofNewman: An Oxford Symposium, David Jasper's essay on the "Lectures" which appeared in the volume, Pusey Rediscovered, and David Forrester's consideration of the "Lectures" in his revisionist

5 biography, The Young Doctor Pusey: A Study in Development. However, none of these approach the "Lectures" from the vantage point of biblical scholarship, but rather within the larger frameworks of Tractarian sacramentology, ecclesiology, or dogmatic thought, or within a reconstruction of Pusey' s intellectual development. While the probable causes for the general neglect of the "Lectures" are several, there are three that stand out as being of greatest importance. First, the "Lectures" were attended by only a handful of individuals and, after their delivery, were never published. At present, the only existing copy is to be found in the archive at the Pusey House, Oxford. The small, red volume containing the manuscript of the "Lectures" along with the fragments of some other lecture notes of Pusey's was bound by H. P. Liddon, Pusey's disciple and biographer, and were part of his private library before, following his death, they became part of the Pusey House collection. This fact, along with the difficulty of reading Pusey's script, has made the "Lectures" quite inaccessible.

Secondly, Liddon devoted little more than a few lines of commentary on the "Lectures" in his magisterial biography of Pusey and few have been willing to challenge or expand upon Liddon' s portrayal of his teacher's life. This omission, if it was not intentional, was likely due to the Liddon' s disagreement with Pusey on the matter of Old Testament typology/prophecy that led him to brush over the "Lectures" in his biographical presentation. Since Liddon gave little attention to the "Lectures", they have remained unknown to or ignored by many others working on Pusey. As it was the stated task of the two above-mentioned volumes, Pusey Rediscovered and Young Doctor Pusey, to portray and examine certain events in Pusey's life that Liddon failed to properly examine, both drew some attention to the "Lectures".

6 Thirdly, as stated above, there has been a tendency among biblical scholars to focus primarily on and interpret Pusey through lens of his response to the Essayist controversy of the

1860s. Because of the bias that was created by such scholars in their critical appraisal of Pusey, the rest of his work, including the "Lectures", has been completely overlooked by scholars in the field of biblical studies.

This neglect of Pusey's 'Lectures on Types and Prophecies' might be warranted at this time if it could be shown that there was nothing in them of interest to contemporary biblical scholarship, but this is not so. The past few decades have seen a renewed interested in figurai readings of Scripture and the use of typology by biblical scholars of various backgrounds.

Conservative and critical scholars alike, equally dissatisfied with the destructive effects and shallow interpretations produced by their respective methodologies, have begun to look elsewhere for ways to read the Bible theologically again. The growing field of History of

Biblical Interpretation has allowed those trained in one school or another to transcend their own historical and intellectual contexts in order to engage with and learn from the hermeneutical models of ages now past. To all of this is added the impact of the recent publication of various collections and translations of patristic theological works and biblical commentaries. This being the current state of biblical studies, it is possible that Pusey's "Lectures" might offer an example of a coherent theological, sacramental and typological approach to the Old Testament, in particular, and the Christian scripture as a whole. In what follows, an analysis of this series of "Lectures" by E. B. Pusey will be offered.

First, the next chapter will provide a summary overview of the historical development of the rise of modern biblical interpretation, with special focus being given to the break down of typological interpretation, in order to provide a context for Pusey's criticism of his contemporaries approach

7 to the Old Testament and his own proposal for a retrieval of biblical typology. Secondly, in the third chapter an examination of Pusey's criticism of his contemporaries and his own theory of biblical interpretation are analysed, with special attention being given to the philosophical and theological roots of Pusey's typology. In the fourth chapter, examples of Pusey's interpretation of portions of the Pentateuch are examined in order to fill out the picture of his typological interpretation. Finally, the fifth chapter provides a critical appraisal of Pusey's proposal for a renewed biblical typology.

8 Chapter Two

Types and Prophecies before Pusey:

From Thomas Aquinas to Thomas Sherlock

In the opening paragraphs of his "Lectures on Types and Prophecies of the Old

Testament", Pusey laments the disjunction between typology and prophecy that he witnessed among his contemporaries. Biblical interpretation in early nineteenth-century England was marked by hesitance towards, if not rejection of, the typological character of Christian scripture

whose interpretation was deemed tenuous if not completely arbitrary. Further, prophecy shorn of its relationship to a broader figurai schema had been limited to prediction and converted into an

evidence of the Christian religion in the wake of the Deist controversy of the prior century. This development, as Pusey well understood, was the result of centuries of intellectual ferment in

Western biblical interpretation. This chapter will consider the developments that led to the production of the hermeneutical environment in which Pusey lived and prompted his "Lectures". Typology and Allegory in Patristic and Medieval Christianity: Thomas Aquinas

Typology was a normative characteristic of the biblical interpretation employed by the majority of personalities whose works remain from the Patristic era in both East and West. This

1 No singular definition can encompass the concept of "types" nor the phenomenon of "typological interpretation" almost universally present in early Christian biblical interpretation. A tentative definition describes types as "a person, object or event that symbolizes or represents something that is to come at a later date" ("Type, Typology" in A Dictionary ofEarly Christian Beliefs, ed. D. W. Bercot (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1998), 658). Pusey's understanding of types views types as constituted by their partial ontological or metaphysical participation in an archetype and their ability to make the archetype present where it is not manifestly so, rather than as a temporally prior sign pointing towards some future object. Much of the confusion about the nature of typology arises out of contemporary attempts to delineate between allegorical and typological interpretation, seeing the former as based in the interpretation of words or things and the latter as the figurai extension of historical events (cf. G. W. H. Lampe & K. J. Woolcombe, Essays on Typology, Studies in Biblical Theology 32 [London: SCM, 1957]) which 9 trend continued in the West through the medieval period where one finds an elucidation of the four senses of scripture as an expression of the dynamic and multi-valent nature of God's revelatory word, characterised primarily by prophecy. At the height of the Middle Ages, this tradition found its summing up, in the thirteenth century, in the figure and thought of Thomas Aquinas.

For Thomas, the prophet is a figure to whom God has given insight into and knowledge of mysteries that remain veiled and remote from the majority of mankind. The prophet, by a divinely granted light obtains "knowledge of all realities, whether they be human or divine, spiritual or corporeal."3 For this reason, it is not necessary to limit prophetic revelation to future has been shown by others to be a modern construction which only impedes the right understanding and appreciation of early Christian biblical interpretation (cf. Frances Young, "Alexandrine and Antiochene Exegesis," in A History ofBiblical Interpretation, Volume 1 , The Ancient Period, eds, A. J. Hauser & D. F. Watson, [Grand Rapids, Mich.: W. B. Eerdmans, 2003], 334-354). For further studies on the general trends of patristic biblical interpretation see the following: G. Bray, Biblical Interpretation: Past & Present (Downers Grove, 111.: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 77-128; J. Breck, Scripture in Tradition: The Bible and its Interpretation in the Orthodox Church (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2001), 33-66; F. W. Farrar, History ofInterpretation. Bampton Lectures (1885) (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1961), 161-242; C. A. Hall, Reading Scripture with the Church Fathers (Downers Grove, 111.: InterVarsity Press, 1998); A. J. Hauser & D. F. Watson, eds, A History of Biblical Interpretation, Volume 1, The Ancient Period (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W. B. Eerdmans, 2003), 304-408; D. K. McKim, ed, Historical Handbook of Major Biblical Interpreters. (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVaristy Press, 1998), 1-73; H. O. Old, The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Church, Volume 2, The Patristic Age (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W. B. Eerdmans, 1998); M. Simonetti, Biblical Interpretation in the Early Church (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1995); W. Yarchin, History of Biblical Interpretation: A Reader. (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004), 31-92. 2 For further studies on the general trends of medieval biblical interpretation see the following: Henri de Lubac, S.J., Medieval Exegesis, 2 vols. Trans. M. Sebanc & E.M. Macierowski (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2000); H. O. Old, The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Church: Volume 3: The Medieval Church (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W. B. Eerdmans, 1998); Bray, 129-164; Yarchin, 93-108; Farrar, 245-303; McKim, 75- 122. 3 Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiœ, Vol 45, ed. and trans. R. Potter, O.P. (Oxford: Black Friars, 1970), 15. 10 events nor is the prophet's vocation simply one of voicing predictions. Rather, the mind of the prophet is freed of the veils of ignorance and obscurity that cloud post-lapsarian mankind's vision, and the prophet is thereby able to discern the rationality of the creation and its relation to its Creator to the degree that God grants.

Aquinas delineates between the psychological event or subjective experience of the prophetic vision and the proclamation made or action carried out by the prophet in response to such. The former is purely private and has something of an ecstatic character to it, consisting of the drawing near of the mind of the prophet to the mind of God that results in an awareness of those realities normally remote from the rest of mankind. The latter refers to the public and social pronouncement of the received word of God to the community by word or deed. The ecstatic character of the prophetic revelation, coupled with the fallen nature of the prophetic figure and the vocation to express this revelation to a broader community leads to a possible excess of meaning in the revelation over and above the perceptive faculties of the prophet and the apparent intention of his words or deeds:

In prophetic revelation the prophet's mind is moved by the Holy Spirit as a defective instrument by its principal cause. Now the Holy Spirit moves the prophet's mind to perceive or say or accomplish something; and sometimes all three at once, sometimes two only, sometimes one only ... a mind can be moved to utter certain words without understanding what the Holy Spirit means by these words.4 In relation to scriptural interpretation, this superabundance of meaning in the prophetic word serves as the foundation of Aquinas' s understanding of spiritual sense of words over and above the literal dimension of authorial intention. Thomas states that the words of Scripture and the things signified therein by these words can have a multiplicity of senses because the books

4 Ibid., 65. 11 have essentially two authors, one human and one divine.5 The meaning of the words, intended by the human author, makes up the literal meaning of a text, accessible to an interpreter by the

regular means of literary criticism. But, the things referred to by these words, are also significant in and of themselves, and convey a multiplicity of senses which may be described as moral, typological and anagogical. So, since God is also the author of Scripture, it is, at every step, marked by its relation to the fullness of the divine economy, conveying the moral will of the Creator, prefiguring Christ's incarnation, and pointing towards the eschatological manifestation

of the now veiled glory of God. These spiritual senses of Scripture are not disconnected from the literal, for it is only through the medium of the human author's words that a reader has access to

the things signified by them. But neither is the meaning of Scripture limited to that intention of the human author, who has often said more than was meant. This multiplicity of senses is necessary, in the mind of Aquinas, if Scripture is to play any role in the formation of sacra

doctrina which has as its goal a direct knowledge of God and the salvation of man; the mere conveyance of one man's, in this case the prophet or receptive agent of inspiration, knowledge

about God would be insufficient.

The Protestant Reformation and the Insistence on Literal Interpretation: Luther and Calvin

With the Protestant Reformation of the sixteenth century and its employment of grammatical interpretations of Scripture, suspicions were raised about the appropriateness of

allegorical interpretations like those endorsed by Aquinas' s four senses that were deemed questionable because of an apparent arbitrariness.6 John Calvin evinces his distrust of allegory

5 Cf. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiœ, Vol 1, ed. and trans. T. Gilby, O.P. (Oxford: Black Friars, 1964), 37ff. 6 For further studies on the general trends of biblical interpretation in the era of the protestant reformation see the following: H. Bornkamm, Luther and the Old Testament 12 when, in his commentary on Galatians, he accuses "Origen, and many others" of having seized upon Paul's use of the word a????????µe?a, in this passage [Galatians 4.21-26], as an endorsement of their "torturing Scripture, in every possible manner, away from the true [i.e., literal] sense."7 Further, in direct opposition to Aquinas, Calvin caricatures the Catholic position and states his own when he remarks:

Scripture, they say, is fertile, and thus produces a variety of meanings. I acknowledge that Scripture is a most rich and inexhaustible foundation of all wisdom; but I deny that its fertility consists in the various meanings which any man, at his pleasure, may assign. Let us know, then, that the true meaning of Scripture is the natural and obvious meaning.8 Martin Luther, equally wary of the allegorical in biblical interpretation, in commenting on this same passage, states that "allegories do not provide solid proofs in theology; but, like pictures, they adorn and illustrate a subject."9 For Luther, sound interpretation of Scripture and Christian dogma are founded on a literal interpretation of the text. The only place the allegorical can play is the rhetorical one of illumination, functioning like a parable illustrating a truth established on surer grounds.

This being the case, a form of typology continued to be widely accepted as a means of understanding the prophetic relationship between the Old and New Testaments, predominantly in

(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969); Bray, 165-220; Farrar, 307-354; M. H. Franzmann, "Seven Thesis on Reformation Hermeneutics," Concordia Journal 15 (1989), 337-50; W. J. Kooiman, Luther and the Bible (Muhlenberg, PA: Muhlenberg Press, 1961); H. J. Krauss, "Calvin's Exegetical Principles" Interpretation 31, 8-18; McKim, 123-255; H. O. Old, The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Church, Volume 4, The Age of the Reformation (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W. B. Eerdmans, 2002); L. Puckett, John Calvin 's Exegesis ofthe Old Testament (Louisville: Westminster, 1995); T. F. Torrance, The Hermeneutics of John Calvin (Edinburg: Scottish Academic Press, 1988). 7 Cited in William Yarchin, History of Biblical Interpretation: A Reader (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004), 189. 8 Ibid., 190. 9 Martin Luther, Luther 's Works, Volume 26, ed. Jaroslav Pelikan (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1963), 435. 13 a Christo-centric way. Calvin, immediately after his more critical statements concerning allegory, speaks of the way in which Hagar and Sarah can be understood as relating to Israel and the Church by means of a "mystical interpretation" which was "not inconsistent with the true and literal meaning" of the text. By this figurai extension of the plain sense reading of the text, it

becomes apparent that the "principal and most memorable events" of the Old Testament "are so many types to us."10 From this, one can gather that Calvin was not concerned with the exegetical extraction of a singular, propositional meaning intended by an author, but rather with the integrity of the interpreter in relation to the biblical text. For him, the possibility of a figurai reading of Scripture was not at odds with, but was in reality an extension of the literal sense of the text and would grow out of a reading of Scripture that gave close attention to the rules of its

grammar and history. Precriticai Biblical Interpretation in Roman Catholicism and Protestantism Hans Frei characterises Western biblical interpretation in this period before the rise of

biblical criticism by three characteristics which are equally applicable to the majority of Catholic

and Protestant approaches at this time. First, there was a belief that biblical stories, if meant to be read literally, "referred to and described actual historical occurrences" and were not meant to be taken strictly as allegories.11 Secondly, it was believed that such a reading of the various biblical accounts would produce a single sequence of events and one over-arching narrative; typology, as a means of interpretation, was both an expression of this vision of a single story and the mechanism by which seemingly disparate persons and events were bound together in harmony. Finally, it was assumed that the world depicted in the Scriptures was the same as that

10 Cited in Yarchin, 190. 1 x Hans W. Frei, The Eclipse ofBiblical Narrative: A Study in Eighteenth and Nineteenth

14 in which the reader lived and, therefore, interpretation of Scripture was determinative in the construction of one's understanding of extra-biblical experience which was to be brought in line with the Scriptures. With the passing of the Medieval period into the Renaissance, this is the

form which the reading of Scripture took, but in the centuries that followed these three characteristics of pre-critical interpretation served as the loci of the rejection of typology and

much of the rest of pre-critical interpretational approaches. Biblical Interpretation 's Political Turn and the Birth ofCriticism: Hobbes and Spinoza

The dissolution of typology began to manifest itself only a few generations after the reformers. Whilst the Reformers, for doctrinal purposes, had sought to produce a controlled

biblical interpretation that would put in check what they perceived as the arbitrary wanderings of medieval interpretation and the doctrinal accretions which resulted from these, this next stage in the development of interpretation and critical engagement of prophecy in Scripture took a

decided political turn. In the seventeenth century, Thomas Hobbes in England with the publication of his Leviathan (1651) and Baruch Spinoza on the continent with his Tractatus

Theologico-Politicus (1670), an attempt was made to wed a particular biblical hermeneutic with an absolutist view of the state and a liberality of opinion in matters of private religion. In both

Century Hermeneutics (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974), 2-3. See John Milbank. Theology and Social Theory: Beyond Secular Reason, 2d ed (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2006), 18-22. On Hobbes's place in the early history of modern biblical criticism see the following: N. Malcolm, Aspects ofHobbes (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002), 27-52, 383-431; P. Springborg, "Hobbes on Religion" in The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes, ed. T. Sorrell (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 346-80; A.P. Martinich, Hobbes (New York: Routledge, 2005), 176-207; H. G. Reventlow, The Authority of the Bible and the Rise of the Modern World, trans. J. Bowden (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), 194-222; Rogerson, 148-50. On Spinoza's place in the early history of modern biblical criticism see the following: E.Curley, "Notes on a Neglected Masterpiece: Spinoza and the Science of Hermeneutics," in Spinoza: The Enduring Questions, ed. Graeme Hunter (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994), 64-99; Travis L. Frampton, Spinoza and the Rise ofHistorical Criticism of 15 of these men, there was a fear of the tenuous and uncontrollable nature of personal religious conviction and superstition, which were deemed great threats to the civil order of society. Therefore, it was necessary for such to be kept in check by the producing a common ground of access to and conversation about its content and meaning. For Spinoza, in particular, this desire to keep the Bible and its use in check resulted in construction of what might be seen as a nascent scientific criticism of Scripture coupled with a strict sola scripturism. The implementation of such a methodology would free Biblical interpreters and the general population from being "agitated by so many contentions, nor so many hatreds, and they would cease to be excited by such a blind and rash passion for interpreting the sacred writings, and excogitating novelties in religion."13 But Spinoza's method should not be mistaken for a restatement of the Reformation ideal of stripping Scripture of the decadent architecture of dogmatic tradition that had been built up around it in the medieval period; instead, he also insisted on employing philological, historical, and philosophical tools to get behind the form in which the proclamation of the revelation was cast by the prophet or biblical author in an effort to get at the abstract revelation itself.

For Spinoza, the purpose of the Scriptures is to inculcate piety and teach virtue, and the prophet is one who "receives sure knowledge revealed by God" and "interprets the revelations of God to those unable to attain to sure knowledge of matters revealed" but who apprehend "them by simple faith."14 Now, since the message of obedience to God and the practice ofjustice and the Bible (New York: T & T Clark, 2006); Frei, 42-6; R. H. Popkin, "Spinoza and Biblical Scholarship" in The Cambridge Companion to Spinoza, ed. D. Garrett (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 383-407; Yarchin, 195-207. 13 Benedictus de Spinoza, The Chief WorL· ofBenedict de Spinoza, volume 1, trans. R. H. M. Elwes (New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1951), 98. 14Ibid., 13. 16 charity was conveyed by men of certain opinions and to people of certain opinions with the intent of provoking the latter to receive and obey this message, the pure revelation of God has

been clothed in their mutual language and thought. So the historically contingent garb in which revelation has been clothed but has now outgrown, as well as the structure of the allegorical

which has hidden the revelation in its purity, need both to be discarded so that interpreters might not bother themselves with these whilst missing the simpler truths of piety and virtue. Spinoza considered his scientific method of interpretation as a means of freedom "from

theological prejudices" and "the acceptance of human fabrications as divine teachings" and the resultant intolerance of those whose opinions are at variance with one's own, but he did not

realise the semantic shift he brought about in the understanding of prophecy and its interpretation.15 Denuded of anything like Thomas's super-abundance of meaning in the

prophetic word or the Reformers' figurai extension of the literal sense of Scripture, prophecy is flattened and limited to the historically contingent expression of abstract and timeless religious truths. The prophet is not exceptional because of some special degree of knowledge, but because of an imaginative perception of realities not recognised by the general population and a suasive ability to produce in his hearers religious affections and morality.

Meaningful Language and the Problem ofProphecy: Locke, Whiston and Collins In the following century, prophecy, having already been shorn of its typological excess,

became further distorted and limited as it was made to act as an evidence of the veracity of

Christianity, especially in the debates between the orthodox and deists in England. While the methodologies produced by Hobbes, Spinoza, and their contemporaries continued in their use

and development, it was an explicit shift in epistemology laid down by John Locke that formed

17 the primary foundation for the contentions that followed. As displayed in his Essay concerning Human Understanding, Locke understood speech and propositions to be the expression of ideas in the mind of the speaker. The truthfulness of a proposition is determined first by its degree of accuracy in expressing the ideas of the speaker and then on the basis of the idea's ability to reflect the reality conceived. Because of this, a propositional statement can only have one meaning, that intended by the speaker: "Words in their primary or immediate Signification, stand for nothing, but the Ideas in the Mind of him that uses them . . .".17 Now, when this idea about the meaning of propositions was ushered into the consideration of prophecy, it meant that if anyone was to speak meaningfully about a fulfillment of prophecy, they would have to demonstrate that the prophets were in fact predictively describing the events which took place in the life of Christ. So, in this way prophecy was limited to descriptive prediction. The question which concerned the writers in eighteenth-century England was whether it was possible to prove the validity of the application of Old Testament quotations taken by New

Testament writers as prophetic predictions which they claimed were fulfilled in the events of Christ's life and that of the early Church. At issue, "was the correctness or incorrectness of a later interpretation of the words of earlier texts."18 Granting the logical maxim established by John Locke that every propositional statement has one intended meaning granted to it by its

13 Ibid., 99. 16 More in-depth studies of Locke's epistemology and his place in the development of modern theology and biblical criticism can be found in the following works: M. Ayers, Locke, Volume I, Epistemology (London: Routledge, 1991), 60-77; M. Losonsky, "Language, Meaning, and Mind in Locke's Essay" in The Cambridge Companion to Locke's "Essay concerning Human Understanding", ed. L. Newman (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 286- 312; L. Newman, "Locke on Knowledge," ibid., 313-351; Reventlow, 243-285. 17 John Locke, An Essay concerning Human Understanding, ed. P. H. Nidditch (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975), 405. 18 Frei, 41. 18 author, then, since prophecy is set in propositional statements, its interpretation must also abide by this rule. A vindication of an apostolic author's claim that a given prophecy was fulfilled by Christ needed, therefore, to establish that the prophecy was a descriptive prediction which envisaged the event in Christ's life and that the action of Christ coincided with this description. Discrepancies arose, though, when it became apparent that the New Testament application of Old Testament prophecy did not seem to jibe with this literal, descriptive approach or, worse, when an Old Testament prophecy claimed in the New Testament appeared nowhere in the Old. The perception of these difficulties would lead to a heated debate between orthodox and apologetical writers hoping to vindicate Christianity in the face of these challenges and critical deist objectors who attempted to capitalise on this opportunity to derail the authority of Christian claims.

In 1724, in an attempt to address these issues, William Whiston published his An Essay towards restoring the true Text of the Old Testament, and for vindicating the Citations thence made in the New Testament. In his Essay, Whiston argued that the New Testament writers shared the logical assumptions with those of eighteenth-century English thought and had intended their citations of prophecy to be taken as literal, descriptive fulfillments, though these passages appeared no longer to be applicable to the events of Jesus' s life. This disconnect, though, was not the fault of the New Testament writers, but rather the result of a corruption of the text of the Old Testament which had been carried out intentionally by the Jews in the early

Christian era to cast uncertainty over the Christian claims that Jesus was the promised Messiah.

19 A fuller account of Whiston' s work and the controversy that arose in its wake, particularly in response to the work of Anthony Collins is offered in the following works: Frei, 66-85; Reventlow, 362-9; Sir Leslie Stephen, History of English Thought in the Eighteenth Century, Volume I (New York: Harcourt, Bruce & World, 1962), 179-92. 19 In order to correct this, Whiston called for a massive text-critical project whereby he would

restore the supposed true text of the Old Testament which had served as the vorlag of the New Testament writers. Once the text had been restored, the application of those prophecies to Christ would be vindicated and the veracity of Christianity would be apparent to all. Having laid out his hypothesis, Whiston proceeds to carry out the method he proposed in various instances in an

attempt to prove its benefit. While the suspension of logic inherent in such a thesis was apparent to many at this time,

it was Anthony Collins who took the opportunity offered by the tenuous nature of Whiston' s project to inveigh against his argument and, indirectly, the Christian claim to a literal fulfillment

of prophecy in general. In his A Discourse of the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion, Collins argued that the reality of a wide-scale textual corruption at some point in history was ridiculous and, even if it could granted, Whiston' s claim to have a means of repairing

such was equally untenable. With this theory about a textual corruption dismantled, Collins takes it for granted that those prophecies cited by the New Testament "plainly relate, in their obvious and primary sense, to other matters than those which they are produced to prove"20 and, therefore, "it is impossible to account for these citations on any other foundation than on an Allegorical Scheme."21 Such an allegorical or typological approach to Scripture was unacceptable for Collins because it amounted to non-sense because it made words essentially meaningless which can be bent to arbitrarily mean whatever one might like. So, if typology is not permissible and if there is no other way to vindicate the claims to prophetic fulfillment,

Christianity needs to accept the fallacy of its claims and move on.

Anthony Collins. A Discourse of the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion (London, 1724), 48.

20 Providence, Prophecy, and the Re-Turn towards Typology: Thomas Sherlock Collins' s Discourse provoked no shortage of responses, few, if any, who were willing to

defend Whiston's text-critical project, but many apologists who wanted to defend Christianity against Collins' s incredulity and vindicate the fulfillment of prophecy in Christ. Many

challenged the specific claims made by Collins, few were able to challenge the logical paradigm which excluded any understanding of prophecy-fulfillment other than the literal, predictive

description approach. But, while others fought to vindicate individual Old Testament prophecies cited in the New Testament, Thomas Sherlock, in his The Use and Intent of Prophecy in the Several Ages ofthe World, attempted, ultimately in vain, to shift the focus of the debate towards

a vision of a larger, over-arching scheme of providence into which the individuals prophecies were to be fitted and in which they made sense.

Sherlock takes for granted that the language of prophecy is, in many senses, enigmatical in nature, but rejects the assumption shared by many of his contemporaries concerning the

meaningful use and interpretation of language. As he states in commenting on the proto- evangelium:

The language of this prophecy is indeed in part metaphorical, but it is a great mistake to think all metaphors are of uncertain signification: for the design and scope of the speaker, with the circumstances attending, create a fixed and determinate sense. Were it otherwise, there would be no certainty in any language; all languages, the eastern more especially, abounding in metaphors.

21 Ibid., 50. 22 Frei highlights Sherlock's imaginative and creative response to Collins in his Eclipse (pp. 70-5). 23 Thomas Sherlock. The WorL· ofBishop Sherlock. Vol 4 (London: A.J. Valpy, 1830), 54. 21 For this reason, "prophecy was never intended to be a very distinct evidence" but rather was offered in various ages to direct the people who received it towards a yet future redemption.24 The prophecy given to Adam and Eve after their sin was intended to direct their faith towards and curb their despair so that they might look forward in hope; it was not intended to offer a precise description of the means by which this economy of salvation would be ultimately accomplished nor is there reason to believe that their original recipients understood them as such. Further, the prophecies which preceded the event towards which they ultimately pointed, the incarnation, are not as clear as the final manifestation and only receive their clarity retrospectively as parts of the whole providential economy. Finally, it is only as a coherent whole that the prophecies can be understood in relation to and as fulfilled by Christ, each prophecy functioning individually in its own dispensation but ultimately finding its fulfillment in the event of the incarnation.26

Sherlock, then, by way of his providential scheme, was able to stand above the logical assumptions of his time and deal with the enigmatic nature of prophetic language, while also retrieving something of a coherent typology like that seen in the interpretation of the Medievals and Reformers. But, for all this, he was not able to turn the majority away from the paradigm established by Locke and made the grounds of further debate with its employment by Collins.

"We may contemplate all the steps of Providence relating to the salvation and redemption of mankind in the several ages of the world, and by a comparison of all the parts, may discern that Christ was indeed the end of the law, and of all promises made to the fathers . . ." (Ibid., 39). 26 Sherlock states that the argument from prophecy proceeds from the fact "that every prophecy has in a proper sense been completed by the coming of Christ. It is absurd therefore to expect clear and evident conviction from every single prophecy applied to Christ; the evidence must arise from a view and comparison of all together" (33). 22 The rest of the century saw the publication of further apologetic attempts and rebuttals of such,

but no re-establishment of a bond between the prophetic and the typological.

Conclusion

Having surveyed the historical development, as well as the philosophical presuppositions and theological roots, of biblical interpretation leading up to the end of the eighteenth century, it becomes clear that the centuries between Aquinas and Pusey were marked by a diminishing appreciation for and eventual disdain for typological interpretation. This was best exhibited in

the Whiston-Collins debate in which both sides rejected typology as fanciful, though in very different ways. However, in the work of such persons as Thomas Sherlock, the suasive character of biblical typology remained present well into the modern era. It was in a manner very similar

to that found in Sherlock's work that Pusey sought to revive the typological reading of the Old Testament. So, having established, in this chapter, a context in which to understand Pusey' s

concerns, criticisms and contributions in his "Lectures on Types and Prophecies of the Old Testament", the next chapter provides an analysis of Pusey' s theoretical reflections on biblical typology as found in the first part of his "Lectures".

23 Chapter Three

E. B. Pusey's Theory of Types and Prophecies:

The Opening Lecture in "Lectures on Types and Prophecies of the Old Testament"

In the first lecture in his series of "Lectures on Types and Prophecies of the Old

Testament", E. B. Pusey attempted, by means of negative criticism and positive theory, to clear the ground and lay the foundation for a restored typological interpretation. First, Pusey

constructs a genealogy of the breakdown of the interpretation of Old Testament prophecy, a problem which he sees rooted in the effort of eighteenth-century apologists to provide ample and

convincing proof for the validity and singularity of the Christian religion over against the objections of their critical deist opponents. After this, Pusey begins to offer certain correctives in

an attempt to both undermine the assumptions on which this eighteenth-century approach to prophecy was built and provide the theoretical and theological basis on which a renewed approach to types and prophecy could be built. This chapter will consider Pusey's portrayal of the history of interpretation preceding and leading up to his time and then examine his vision of

typology and prophecy before moving on, in the next, to look at his actual interpretation of

certain Old Testament texts.

Pusey 's Criticism ofthe Apologetic Approach to Old Testament Prophecy

"The notion, and use of Prophecy has, in these latter days, been much narrowed and obscured by the apologetic character which our Theology has so largely assumed."1 With these

words E. B. Pusey opened the initial lecture of his series of "Lectures on Types and Prophecies of the Old Testament" and began his criticism of the approach to prophecy prevalent among his

1 E. B. Pusey, "Lectures on Types and Prophecies, 1836, MS, Pusey House Library, Oxford University, 1. The manuscript of Pusey's "Lectures" will hereafter be cited as "MS".

24 theological contemporaries in England. The preceding centuries had witnessed a variety of challenges to the Christian religion which had been raised by skeptics, both in Britain and on the Continent. In order to respond to these challenges a whole genre of literature was developed in which apologetic evidences provided for Christianity were produced. Among the most prominent of such arguments was an attempt to prove Christianity on the basis of evidences drawn from biblical prophecy concerning Christ.

In order to achieve their end of using prophecy as an evidence for Christianity, apologists found it necessary to define prophecy in terms of a miraculous prescience, emphasising the fact that precise predictions of unforeseeable events could only be made with divine assistance and that such prophecies proved the divine origin and authority of the religious system in which they were delivered. In order to distinguish between true prophecy and coincidental guess or some sort of unusual foresight, a series of criteria were developed by the apologetical writers, which Pusey lists: "I) the known promulgation of the prophecy prior to the event 2) the literal and prophetic fulfilment of it 3) the remoteness of the event from the human view."2 By applying these criteria to individual prophecies, the apologists sought to demonstrate them as valid predictions, especially those concerning Christ, and, by the same criteria, to disprove any occurrence in the literature of Graeco-Roman antiquity that might challenge the singularity of biblical prophecy. With their case seemingly established, they hoped to persuade others of the validity of the Christian religion. While Pusey commended the apologists' desire to defend the Christian religion against its opponents, he could not condone what he saw as a misconstrual of the nature and use of

Quotations taken from the manuscript will retain Pusey' s spelling and style. 2 Ibid., 3. 25 prophecy for a variety of reasons. First, Pusey feared that, in their effort to demonstrate that the prophets possessed a supernatural foreknowledge, the apologists had come to disregard the subject foretold: "A prediction which related to Pagan Rome or the discovery of America, was, in this point of view, as much a prediction, as one relating to the Redeemer of the world."3 For Pusey, the significance of biblical prophecy lay, not merely in its bare prescience, but rather in the fact of its foretelling the unfolding narrative of events in the divine economy of salvation, ultimately realised in Jesus Christ. Secondly, it was necessary for the apologists to examine individual prophecies separately in order to accurately ascertain their validity by the application of the above-listed criteria. While this atomisation of prophecy was convenient for the defense of Christianity, it would prove detrimental to any theological vision of the symphonic harmony of the divine economy. Prophecies, now portrayed as individual units, could no longer be seen as parts of a coherent whole nor understood within the structure of an overarching system. Thirdly, such an approach led to the neglect of a major class of prophecies, namely typical prophecies. Because of the assumption, inherited from and held in common with the deists, that '"divine prophecy must be delivered with the utmost clearness and perspicuity, and fulfilled with irresistible evidence,'" the apologists were unable to deal with typology because they found it impossible to make such prophecies serve their ends as evidences and so, simply ignored them.4 Pusey could not allow for such negligence since, for reasons which will become clear below, he understood it to be a betrayal of Christianity's apostolic origin and patristic inheritance.

3 Ibid., 1. 4 Ibid., 5. 26 Finally, Pusey refused to see prophecy, which he claimed had been given "to direct and guide faith, not to create it,"5 made to serve an end for which it was never, at least primarily, intended. It is here that he locates the source of his contemporaries' distortion of prophecy: "In the apologetic use, prophecy is addressed to those who believe not ... [in order to] produce belief by the abstract argument that an event, not cognizable by human foresight, could only have been predicted by God, and that consequently the system wherein such predictions were found came from God . . . when this was made the principal mode of setting it forth, it is manifest, that the highest value and purposes must have been overlooked .... For prophecy was thus tied down to those who could least appreciate it and of necessity, superficialized."6 Such a view was abhorrent to Pusey, not only because it represented a misconstrual of the nature and purpose of prophecy, but also because it exhibited an under-appreciation of the epistemological complexities of human conviction. Commenting on the complexity of conviction, Pusey says: "Our conviction also is of a compound character and made up of various emotions: in moral subjects it cannot be merely intellectual: in Divine things, our wonder and absorbing sense of infinity, of purity, or of holiness, infer conviction more directly than reasoning . . ." For this reason, above the rest, Pusey had to reject the entire apologetic as misdirected: that even if a proof of the validity of a given prophecy could be developed, it would still not be able to provoke the conviction proper to religious belief. Conviction, as such, is not the simple sum of logical argumentation or artificial reasoning, but arises within a person, often mysteriously, as the result of impressions made by more natural or organic means: "the chance sight (so to say) of a flower illumined by the sun's

5 Ibid., 4. 6 Ibid.

27 rays or of the starry heavens, 'the moon and the stars which God has ordained', impress the feeling of God upon the soul."8 Having disarmed the apologetic end towards which these prophetic evidences were set, Pusey also called into question the hidden assumptions that under-girded the faulty approach of his predecessors. First, Pusey challenged the contemporary tendency to ignore typology, so prevalent in the New Testament and the interpretations of the Church Fathers, on the basis of its apparent arbitrary character and its being unconvincing to modern readers.9 Regarding this contemporary difficulty in interpreting the New Testament use of types, Pusey can only remark that, "if they [typological interpretations] have lost their form of proof to us, this is precisely a sign that we have lost the key, whereby to unlock their meaning, the faculty to understand them."10 For him, typology was an indispensable component of any Christian reading of the Old

Testament because it was the only means by which the entire Old Testament could be shown to be fulfilled in the economy of Christ's incarnation, which he presumed to be the point of Christ's discussion with the two men on the road to Emmaus. ' ' Further, typology was necessary because

7 Ibid., 6. 8 Ibid. In this discussion, one may find the roots of ideas that would be later spelled out more fully and lucidly by John Keble in his Tract no. 89, "On the Mysticism Attributed to the Early Fathers of the Church." 10 MS, p. 6 11 Luke 24.13ff. In this passage, the resurrected Christ appears to two of his disciples and walks with them on their way to Emmaus, but they do not immediately recognise him. Along the way, he "beginning with Moses and all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself (v. 27). Pusey thought a typological interpretation of the Old Testament was necessary if "all the scriptures" were to speak of Christ, as he said: "For in that be His last teaching to His disciples, after His Resurrection, 'beginning at Moses and all the prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself and again '"these are the words which I spake while I was yet with you that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms concerning Me'" then opened He their understanding that they might understand the Scripture 28 of Christ's own use of it elsewhere in the Gospel accounts, coupled with the employment of types from the Old Testament by the Apostles (e.g., Paul's allegory of Hagar and Sarah in his epistle to the Galatians and the typological interpretation of Jewish ritual in the epistle to the Hebrews). From all this, Pusey concluded that typology was a consistent element of apostolic biblical interpretation and was unable to characterise any system which rejected its use as anything but "at variance with that of the New Testament."

It is here that another point of contention between Pusey and his apologetic predecessors becomes clear. Contrary to the attempts of some in the eighteenth century to consider the predictive validity of individual prophecies in relation to Christ, Pusey possessed a vision of the

Old Testament as a vast system of typological relations that could only be understood as a whole and in its organic connection to the New Testament. In this regard, he stated:

Scripture does not favor our mechanical views of prophecy, as containing so many items, as it were, as these are striking passages, as though prophecies admitted of being counted up, and the evidence of prophecy was to be weighed according to the number and contents and tangibleness of these several predictions. Rather, the whole previous system of the Old Testament, its people, its individual characters, its rites, its sayings, its history, was one vast prophetic system, full of the New Testament.

For this reason, he was able to assert that biblical interpretation should concern itself only with the explicitly predictive prophecies of the Old Testament, nor simply those types pointed out and elucidated by the New Testament authors. Instead, it should, follow the apostolic example and one must suppose that typical prophecies are certainly included, if they were not His chief subject: 1st because one should hardly find direct prophecies concerning Him in all the Prophets: 2. our Lord at other times alleges typical prophecies 3. The Apostles after and close upon this instruction quote such prophecies. So that not only must we look upon the quotations of the Apostles as alleged by men, upon whom the Holy Ghost had been poured, but as bring part of the direct teaching of our Lord" (Ibid., 7). 12 Ibid., 8-9. 13 Ibid., 7-8. This passage, along with other parts of Pusey's criticisms, is very reminiscent of Thomas Sherlock's argument. It is possible that he had read his work, but without

29 seek out further typological relations between the two testaments. The apostles, in identifying certain types did not illustrate the full extent of such interconnections; rather, they sought to reveal the typological nature of the Old Testament and then to direct and guide others in its exploration. Only then will the relationship between the two testaments and the real significance of the Old Covenant be rightly understood. Having established the New Testament's authorisation of typological interpretation,

Pusey moved on to show how it had been in general practice throughout ecclesiastical history. The approach which denied typology was a modern invention lacking any historical precedent, save the "notoriously unsound school of Antioch."14 This lack of antiquity was coupled with, any specific reference to it, it is impossible to prove any direct connection. 14 Ibid., 9. Behind Pusey' s identification of the apparent similarities between the Antiochene and modern methods of biblical interpretation stands evidence of the cross- pollination of ideas between himself and others in the Oxford Movement. John Henry Newman, a few years prior to the delivery of Pusey' s "Lectures," had published a lengthy work on The Arians ofthe Fourth Century whose influence is felt in this section of Pusey's argument. In the appendix to his work, Newman had considered the relationship between the Antiochene approach to Scripture and the rise of the Christological heresy and concluded thus: "The immediate source of that fertility in heresy, which is the unhappy distinction of the Syrian Church, was its celebrated Exegetical School. The history ofthat school summed up in broad characteristic fact, on the one hand that it devoted itself to the literal and critical interpretation of Scripture, and on the other that it gave rise first to the Arian and then to the Nestorian heresy. In all ages of the Church, her teachers have shown a disinclination to confine themselves to the mere literal interpretation of Scripture. Her most subtle and powerful method of proof, whether in ancient or modern times, is the mystical sense, which is so frequently used in doctrinal controversy as on many occasions to supersede any other. In the early centuries we find this method of interpretation to be the very ground for receiving as revealed the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Whether we betake ourselves to the Ante-Nicene writers or to the Nicene, certain texts will meet us, which do not obviously refer to that doctrine, yet are put forward as palmary proofs of it. On the other hand, if evidence be wanted of the connexion of heterodoxy and biblical criticism in that age, it is found in the fact that, not long after their contemporaneous appearance in Syria, they are found combined in the person of Theodore of Heraclea, so called from the place both of his birth and his bishoprick, an able commentator and an active enemy of St. Athanasius, though a Thracian unconnected except by sympathy with the Patriarchate of Antioch. The case had been the same in a still earlier age; - the Jews 30 and perhaps resulted from, a suspicion towards the Church Fathers. The method of biblical interpretation employed by the eighteenth-century apologists was marked by an inability to see beyond the literal meaning of Scripture. The Church Fathers, on the other hand, in continuity with the Apostles, consistently employed allegorical and typological approaches to the Old Testament. This allowed Pusey to voice his suspicion "that theirs [the Church Father's] not ours is the Apostolic mode or at least approaches the nearest to it."15 For Pusey, it was inconceivable that, had the apostolic methods of interpretation been more like those of the modern, they would have so quickly shifted in the direction of the elaborate patristic typology.16

clung to the literal sense of the Old Testament and rejected the Gospel; the Christian Apologists proved its divinity by means of the allegorical. The formal connexion of this mode of interpretation with Christian theology is noticed by Porphyry, who speaks of Origen and others as borrowing it from heathen philosophy, both in explanation of the Old Testament and in defense of their own doctrine. It may almost be laid down as an historical fact that the mystical interpretation and orthodoxy will stand or fall together" (John Henry Cardinal Newman, The Avians of the Fourth Century [London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1901], 405). Pusey picks up on this theme in Newman's larger argument, but he leaves its more direct charge of heresy's implicit presence within the programme of strict, literal interpretation at the level of a sub-text. Instead, he invokes the Patristic typological consensus concerning certain types as a witness against the shared assumptions of his contemporaries and as a testimony to a shared apostolic inheritance along within a fuller deposit of faith. 15 Ibid., 9 16 It is of interest that Pusey did not press on further to illustrate the continuity of the medieval Church with that of the patristic era in regards to the employment of typology and allegory in biblical interpretation. It may be accounted for in different ways. For one, it is not clear whether Pusey would have been familiar, at this time, with the works of the Scholastics, while his employment of the Church Fathers and, later on, important Anglican divines are exhibitive of the theological curriculum of his time. Secondly, most of the Tractarians were apprehensive about calling for a return to Medieval theology and practices, since these were too often associated with the errors they connected with the contemporary Roman Catholic Church. For this reason, with the exception of the more extreme Hurrell Froude, the members of the Oxford Movement were more apt to find connections between the English Church and that of the earlier centuries of Christian history, especially the era of the Ecumenical Councils. Whatever the reason this omission, Pusey' s argument on the basis of antiquity or precedent could only have been strengthened by an appeal to an approach to Scripture like that of Thomas Aquinas. 31 For all these reasons, Pusey could not agree with the apologetic approach to or use of prophecy. In order to correct its faults and keep its further implications in check, he moved on to lay out the theoretical basis upon which a typology akin to that of the New Testament and the Church Fathers might be retrieved.

The Theoretical Foundations ofPusey 's Typology Early on in the 'Lectures,' Pusey derided the apologists for sacrificing the super-

abundance of meaning in prophecy for the sake of clarity and exchanging the rich system of interconnections for a more easily comprehended, though flattened, image of the Old Testament.

For this reason, Pusey sought to restore for others a vision of the inexpressible depths he saw in the world, in human language, and in history. At each point, he actively attempted to overturn

the shallow and limiting world-view of modernity that lay behind the apologetic approach to prophecy. The first correction was a metaphysical one. Moving away from a view of the world as

self-contained, distinct from God and governed in itself by the operation of natural laws, Pusey

pointed towards a renewed realisation of the way in which all things in the world point beyond themselves: "the natural world is an emblem of the spiritual."17 Though he did not employ this term, Pusey was calling for shift towards or return to a participatory metaphysics which he saw as a critical foundation for his system of typology.18 Its restoration was of singular importance, in his mind, if there was to be any hope of reviving typological interpretation, because it shows

17 Ibid., 2. 18 David C. Schindler defines a participatory metaphysics as follows: "To speak of metaphysical participation is to say that one thing has what it is with and indeed after and in pursuit of another: it has its reality, in other words, by virtue of something other than itself (David C. Schindler, "What's the Difference? On the Metaphysics of Participation in a Christian Context," The Saint Anselm Journal 3.1 [Fall 2005], 1) 32 the type-archetype relationship to be a facet of the universe, not just the arbitrary creation of authors and of fantastic interpretation of readers. On the basis of this metaphysical presupposition, Pusey first demonstrated how historical figures could be seen as types of certain archetypal characteristics. "In witnessing any developed character, one cannot but refer him, not simply to the class to which he belongs, but to an ideal which he represents more fully than others, which yet one looks upon as beyond himself. Of this character he is the type, a representation, an embodying of it, yet an imperfect one."19 Negative examples of this sort of representation are found in figures like the Roman emperor Nero and the Byzantine emperor Julian who are types of the persecution of God's people and apostasy respectively. Moreover, positive examples of this characteristic typology can be found in Plato, who embodied contemplation, and Xenophon, practical wisdom. It is only in such personal types that we can comprehend these abstract character ideals, but as they are finite representations, whether of good or evil, we know that they point beyond themselves to something more.

Further, it is not only human persons who serve as types, but also the "other visible creatures" which "present a continual harmony with an order of things, they possess in themselves a relation to things above them."20 Here Pusey invokes Richard Hooker in a move towards a revolutionary retrieval of analogia entis21 contrary to the ontological univocity that had predominated Western theology since the time of John Duns Scotus:22

1VMS, 14. 20 Ibid. ¦y ? David Bentley Hart sees this term as referring to "the tradition of Christian metaphysics that, developing from the time of the New Testament through the patristic and medieval periods, succeeded in uniting a metaphysics of participation to the biblical doctrine of creation, within the framework of trinitarian dogma, and in so doing made it possible for the first 33 For, as Hooker says . . . 'All things being partakers of God' in that 'God hath this influence into the very essence of all things, without which influence of Divinity supporting them, their utter annihilation could not choose but follow, they are his offspring' and as being such, they must (in so far as they have not been married and deformed by sin) bear a certain impress and image of Himself and an analogy or proportion or relation to the other existences derived from God. ... So that all things which God hath made are without respect the offspring of God; (Acts 17.28, 29) they are in Him, as effect in the highest cause, He likewise actually is in them the assistance and influence of His Divinity being their life.

The Scotist notion which subsumed all beings under the genera 'being' placed an irrevocable distinction between all beings, whether finite or infinite, and its development eventually made talk of types, in nature or in biblical interpretation, questionable if not altogether infeasible.

Within Pusey's understanding of analogia entis, however, all things, because of their mutual creation by God and continued ontological subsistence in Him, are related to one another and together, reflect the glory of God, even if in a shattered or besmeared mirror. Further, there exists a similar relationship between the natural works of God and his revealed works, so much so that "his actual works also, in numerous instances, convey the same truth, which He

time in Western thought to contemplate both the utter difference of being from beings and the nature of true transcendence" (David Bentley Hart, The Beauty ofthe Infinite: The Aesthetics of Christian Truth [Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2003], 241). 22 Scotus (1265 or 1266 - 1302) was a Franciscan theologian, trained at Paris in the generation after Aquinas, who taught at Oxford. John Milbank sums up univocal ontology and its connection with Scotus as follows: "Duns Scotus . . . distinguished metaphysics as a philosophical science concerning Being, from theology as a science concerning God. Being, he argued, could be either finite or infinite, and possessed the same simple meaning of existence when applied to either. 'Exists', in the sentence God 'exists', has therefore the same fundamental meaning (at both a logical and a metaphysical level) as in the sentence 'this woman exists'. . . . Scotus wants to find a place, in theology, for an analogical attribution of words like 'good' to God in an eminent sense, but his metaphysics appears to restrict the scope of eminence to a mere greater quantity, or else unknown exercise of quality whose sense and definition is fully understood by us. And just as being or goodness are attributed in the same sense to both infinite and finite, so they are attributed in the same sense to finite genera, species and individuals" (John Milbank, Theology and Social Theory: Beyond Secular Reason [Oxford: Blackwell, 1990], 302-3). 23MS, 14-15. 34 afterwards expressly declares, only man has not of himself wisdom to understand it." Simply resorting to the conclusions of patristic or medieval biblical interpretation would have proved insufficient as a prolegomena to a restored typology; instead, Pusey probed the metaphysical roots of reality, basing himself in the dogma of creation, in order to find the grounds upon which such an interpretation could be founded, while, in the process, undermining the presuppositions of many modern approaches to biblical interpretation. Pusey seeks to vindicate this participatory metaphysics by insisting that it is this characteristic of nature that allows it to arouse such a deep founded interest within the souls of human persons. Beauty, in nature, acts on the human person, not by means of the rational faculties, but impresses itself more immediately on the imaginative faculties of the person. Against the empirical approaches to epistemology that preceded him, Pusey reiterates his earlier contention that conviction arises from a more complex intra-personal psychological or intellectual milieu. Further, against the Lockean attempt to achieve irreducibly simple and singular conceptions of things, Pusey invokes something akin to Aquinas' s understanding of the super-abundance of meaning in temporal things: Instances of this expressiveness of nature in conveying moral and religious truth will have been felt by everyone; and they will have felt also that these religious meanings were not arbitrarily affixed by their own minds, but that they arise out of and existed in the things themselves, and if a different meaning is found in the same objects, this will be, because in fact each thing contains several such relations, or has several such

Ibid., 15. Sadly, Pusey does not continue on here, or at any other point in the "Lectures", to give a more defined account of his understanding of the nature of revelation. It is possible he was still wary of broaching the subject after the furor that followed in the wake of the publication of the two volumes of his An Historical Enquiry into the Probable Causes of the Rationalist Character Lately Predominant in the Theology of Germany nearly a decade before. Negative response to his discussion of models for understanding inspiration in the first volume prompted a restatement in the second volume with which he was still not happy. 35 characters impressed upon it, whereof, according to their peculiar characters or susceptibility, different minds have perceived different sides.25

In order to prove that this identification of the transcendent quality of nature is not an illegitimate, subjective distortion of reality, Pusey makes an appeal to the vision of contemporary poets and their works: A proof that this expressiveness really has a object and is not the work of imagination (other than as imagination is employed in tracing out the natural correspondence of images with their reality, or with each other) is furnished by this, that when religious poets (as Wordsworth or the author of the Christian Year [John Keble]) have traced out such correspondences, the mind instantly recognizes it as true, not as beautiful only, so not belonging to their minds subjectively, but as actually and really existing (objective).26 From this, Pusey demonstrated that types existed objectively in the world and that it was the task of the human imaginative faculty to discover and discern these, not deduce nor fabricate them. So, "Pusey grants imagination," as David Jasper comments, "a capacity for recognition, and not (as some romantics would) a creative power."27

"Ibid., 16. 26IWd., 16-17. "Pusey's 'Lectures on Types and Prophecies of the Old Testament'" in Pusey Rediscovered, ed. Perry Butler (London: SPCK, 1983), 56. While Pusey invokes the Romantics in his argument, he did not simply accept the poetic cosmology of Wordsworth and Coleridge, which, as Jasper rightly points out, he could not accept because of their "tendency to subjectivism" (61). It is therefore necessary to not overstate the continuity between the Romantics and Pusey and to distinguish his work from the rebellion against the flattened cosmology of modernity, but to see it in terms of a patristic ressourcement. While he shared and was indebted to their openness to the perception of the union of truth and beauty and a mira profunditas in the created world, both of which allowed him to break out of the paradigm of his predecessors, he must be seen less as a Wordsworthian who wishes he were "a Pagan suckled in a creed outworn," and more as an Augustinian. St Augustine, in his Confessions (an English translation of which Pusey published only two years after his "Lectures), better describes the cosmology which Pusey assumes throughout his "Lectures": "I replied unto all things which encompass the door of my flesh; 'Ye have told me of my God, that ye are not He; tell me something of Him.' And they cried out with a loud voice, 'He made us.' My questioning on them, was my thoughts on them: and their form of beauty gave the answer" {The Confessions of St. Augustine, trans. E. B. Pusey [London: Watkins, 2006], 230). There is nothing, then, in Pusey's thought of an implicit pantheism; rather, as noted above, his participatory metaphysics is 36 Having established the metaphysical basis for typology, Pusey moves on to consider the second corrective of the apologists, dealing with the problem of multi-valence in language.

Here, Pusey challenges the assumption of his predecessors that any given propositional statement, be it divinely inspired or not, has only one meaning, that being the intended meaning of the speaker or writer. This shared inheritance from John Locke, he seeks to undermine by

98 demonstrating the depth of language. In much the same way as things in themselves bear a surplus of meaning and are part of a larger system of typical relations, precisely on the basis of this fact, words and language, in that they are the human means of communicating about these things, also possess in themselves an excess of meaning. Whenever a communicative act takes places, then it is possible, if not likely, that the full meaning of one's words will escape the notice of the speaker/writer because there is something of the thing itself that is communicated in the words, not merely the ideas about or conception of that thing local to the mind of the speaker/writer. Pusey finds an example of this quality of language in the speech of children:

The words of a child are constantly typical of the future developed being: they speak greater truth than they themselves (the outward organ of that truth) know: they speak it in reference to some particular occasion but indefinitely, they are aware of something kindred to that whole truth and have some glimmering of it, but it they grasp not. And yet they who hear it, will rightly wonder at it, and they who understand it better than the child itself will yet confess that they could not have uttered it so simply or so forcibly. Its very indefiniteness adds to its reality, comprehensiveness, energy.29

Adults, and thinkers especially, concerned as they are with precision in speech and meaning, are quick to forget the creative potency of language, utilised and lauded by poets, until some ground, not in the divinity of the world, but the createdness of the material which grants it, as finite, the ability to point beyond itself to other finite beings and to the transcendent. 98 See the discussion above, in Chapter Two, about the impact of Locke's approach to language on the biblical interpretation of the eighteenth century (pp. 17-9).

37 reminder of this sort is granted to them. Pusey, like both Wordsworth and Sherlock before him, here summons his contemporaries to a renewed appreciation of the enigmatic character of language, not as a problem to be overcome but a realisation of its actual means of expression. Once one becomes cognisant of this multi-valent quality of language, one can make use of it to convey meanings deeper than those that might be immediately apparent to one looking only to the surface meaning of words. This understanding of language also draws on the concept of the analogia entis detailed above in Pusey' s participatory metaphysical turn: just as created beings are the only media by which we can come to understand - by means of analogy - the transcendent ideals or archetypes, so the deepest realities can only be expressed under the veil and within the parabolic recesses of human speech. The intentional clothing of the deep truths of religion in the cloak of mysterious language is at the same time a means of their communication and a means of their protection where a plainer, more profuse declaration would only have resulted in their defamation.30

zyMS, 14. 30 Here we see another one of the Pusey' s major contributions to the theological fabric of the Oxford Movement, that is an intimation of the concept of doctrinal reserve. Though he does not use the term or explicitly invoke the patristic practice of disciplina arcani, it is hard not to note its presence here, at least in an embryonic form. This idea was later, more fully explicated in Isaac Williams's (who attended Pusey's "Lectures") Tract 80, "On Reserve in Communicating Religious Knowledge." Here he describes the practice as proclaiming, while concealing, religious truth in an effort to make it known to those of a proper disposition to receive it, while preserving it from those who would make ill use of it or would be harmed in some way by its reception. This practice is shown to have developed from Christ's own use of parables and expanded later by the catechetical and mystagogical practice of the early Church. Finally, this leads to a better understanding and vindication of the allegorical approach to Scripture: "It may be observed among the Ancients in their, almost universal, mode of interpreting Scripture, every part of which they consider replete with mysterious knowledge, revealed only to the faithful Christian. And although individuals among them may be wrong in any particular explanation, the general principle of interpretation, so Catholic and Apostolic, it cannot be doubted, is the right one. St. Augustin speaks not only of the Word of God, but of his works also in nature, and of the Heavens themselves, serving for a covering to hide God from us, by this means to lead us 38 Further, such excesses of meaning are, at times, the result of the direct influence of the Spirit of God and, therefore, inform us of the possibility and nature of divine inspiration.31 Here, Pusey cites the example of the high priest Caiaphas's words in John 1 1.50: "It is expedient for us that one should die for the people and that the whole nation perish not." These words, at the level of their literal surface meaning, refer to the execution of Christ in an effort to quell the prospect of a rebellion that might provoke Roman authorities to destroy the Jewish nation. But,

Pusey points out that "we know that the Holy Ghost meant by his words other than he meant himself and that "his words were so ordered that they bear witness to the blessing of the redemption" as these are pointed out by the evangelist himself. But, it is possible that, even "without St. John's authoritative comment, one here or there would have been struck by the strangeness of the word."32

With the retrieval of being and language, Pusey moves on to offer a corrective of secularised visions of history. For some time, leading up to Pusey, history had been portrayed by many as an arena of human action, following a linear, temporal procession in which events took place connected to one another only horizontally by the chain of cause and effect.33 History, in this modern view, was the medieval saeculum shorn of its relationship to a pre-lapsarian era and the awaiting eschaton, the integrity of which was defined in terms of its lack of divine intervention. If the divine were to be present within history, it could only be by means of taking up, temporarily, the garb of the historically contingent in an effort to communicate eternal truth, on to the gradual knowledge of Him" (Isaac Williams, "Tract 80 'On Reserve in Communicating Religious Knowledge'" in Tracts for the Times by the Members ofthe University of Oxford. Vol IV: 1836-37. [London: J. G. & F. Rivington, 1839], 40.) •y ? Here again, Pusey hints at his understanding of revelation/inspiration, but does not explicate it. 32 MS, 20.

39 before departing once more. For this reason, historicality or temporality had become real issues of concern in relation to biblical interpretation.

Against this modern understanding of the secularity of history, Pusey restates the Christian doctrine of providence and makes two bold claims: that "the history of mankind, in general, is typical," and that "sacred history [i.e., the Old Testament] is the key to profane."35 First, Pusey states, in similar fashion to his discussion of analogia entis, that different nations or events in the history of humankind serve as models or warnings of right and wrong, justice and injustice, and the temporal divine judgment of both, thereby revealing the continued agency of

God in the world. Human perception of this reality, though, remains imperfect as no person bears the faculty for complete insight into the providential out-workings of the divine will. But to aid in this understanding, turning to Pusey' s second point, humanity has been given the history of the Old Testament where this agency is made explicit: The veil is there raised which ordinarily covers connection of events with God, their First Cause, and the meanings and significance of the account in themselves, and their relation with each other. The principles of the history of God's Providence, and the harmony of His creation whereby our part corresponds with and represents another, are then developed, so that one may apply them to what would in itself be obscure in profane history.36 By a careful study of the Old Testament and the way in which God is shown there to deal with humanity, one can gain some insight into the reality of such in the broader history of mankind.

There is also a reciprocating element in the study of profane history in that, just as the biblical revelation has taken up the types of nature and language, and some knowledge of these serves as

Milbank, Theology and Social Theory, 9ff. 34 See the above discussion of Spinoza (pp. 1 5-17). 35 MS, 25. 36 Ibid., 25. Again, another point at which the implications for a doctrine of revelation make their presence known, but are not definitively laid out. 40 an aid to understanding the scriptural use of these, so also does a recognition of the symbolic nature of history prepare us for the reception of use of historical types in the scripture.37 All of this is possible because, as Pusey pointed out, "God is not the God of the Jews only, but the God of the Gentiles also," that is all peoples of all times exist only because of the creative will of the one God, are currently subject to the pervading providence of this same God, and stand to face judgment from this one God in the eschaton.38 This re-situation of history within a broader providential framework cast between the creation/fall and the eschaton does more than extend linear temporality indefinitely in two directions. It calls into question the singular significance of simple historical progression, both in and of itself and as it relates to biblical interpretation. The retrieval of a providential scheme adds a new dimension to temporality that is lost in the distorted image of the saeculum as self- contained and self-sufficient: that of the constant in-breaking of eternity into temporality or rather a renewed understanding of time as the image of eternity, the former existing in a dependent relation to former, similar to the way in which created beings are dependent on the creator who is beyond being. This repositioning and re-presentation of temporality liberates it from the limitations of simple historical flux, allow for the possibility of new understandings of

Pusey seems to have in mind something similar to his earlier discussion of particular individuals as types of virtues or vices. How his consideration differs here is that he has spanned this typical quality of the individual out over historical eras or larger entities, such as national bodies. 38 MS, 25. This view of the relationship between time and eternity is expressed by Plato in his Timaeus and by St. Augustine in Confessions Book XI. 41 how historical figures and moments in different eras can be related to and dependent upon one another along lines other than the demonstration of mere causality.40 In the context of this discussion of the nature of history as the arena of the out-working of God's providence, Pusey considered the special nature of the Old Testament's history as compared with general history. This excursus was necessary in order to curb any tendency to elevate the significance of the general history of mankind to such a degree that the importance of the sacred history of the Old Covenant would be marginalised. "The Old Testament, in consequence of the preparatory office assigned to it, had in it a fulness of type, which could not exist elsewhere."41 While all history imaged out the reality of human good and evil, the history of Israel bore the shadow also of Christ, and this because "the whole nation was formed, guided, chastened, preserved, not for themselves only, but with a view to Him, in Whom the promise to

It was Thomas Sherlock who first pointed of the important place of such a providential scheme in a coherent system of typology like that Pusey is proposing as an alternative to the apologetic use of prophecy. As was shown in the previous chapter, it was on such grounds that he thought it possible to speak meaningfully of Christ as the end of the law and the fulfilment of the promises to the patriarchs. He held this for two reasons: first, because it was the sorted history of humanity and specifically the history of Israel which both demanded the Incarnation and laid the historical contingent groundwork for its possibility, but secondly, because Christ was in reality present in and through the various dispensations of the divine economy of salvation as the object of faith towards which the various prophecies and types, each in their respective age, had pointed. In transcending the confines of temporal progression, Christ is able to take part in history without being bound to its rules and, thereby, is able to redeem it, draw it together into one great narrative, and, thereby, grant it its true significance. The importance of such a providential scheme for a functional typology has also been felt more recently by Hans Frei who, in his Eclipse of Biblical Narrative, portrayed such an understanding of providence as the means by which the particular narratives of Scripture could be understood as parts of and fitted into a singular cumulative story spanning from creation/fall, through the history of Israel, to Christ and the Church, then onward to the consummation. This concept of a cumulative story is what grants validity to the practice of figurai reading in his work, which portrays these various parts in relation to the whole, without destroying their individual integrity. (See the chapter "The Eclipse of Providence" in Mike Higton, Christ, Providence and History: Hans W. Frei's Public Theology [New York: Continuum, 2004], 123- 154).

42 Abraham was to be fulfilled." There was something of a preparatio evangelica among all the races of mankind since the fall, for "as many as lost not the trace of their first estate" were "men

[sic] of longing, men of the future, looking forward to the contemplation of the primaeval Gospel, and so many participated, in their own time and according to the dispensation of God, in that hoped-for reality."43 But Israel, in that it was granted the law and prophets, the cultic rites and the institution of monarchy, was granted a special share in participating ahead of time in the reality of Christ and, therefore, imaged Him out more clearly and anticipated him more definitely. So, while the history of humanity proved to be an arena of the general revelation of

God's nature and dealings with mankind, it is only in the history of Israel that the specific revelation of and preparations for the accomplishment of the divine economy in Christ's incarnation were made. In this fact lies its singular significance.

So with these three correctives laid out, it was possible for Pusey to envision an interpretation of Scripture that breaks out of the eighteenth-century impasse, because it has shed the limiting factor of descriptive prediction as the only meaningful means of uniting the two testaments, and moved on to a fuller and more patristic system of figurai relations. The different approaches are set against one another in stark contrast: We are anxious indeed, to trace up fulfillments of prophecy, but in a way wholly distinct; we wish to find predictions clear, apparent and undeniable, which we more sort with the events, and which on the very surface shall indisputably correspond; they had Christ always in their thoughts, and so the law, the prophets and the psalms, shared before of Him, they read and understood of Christ therein, whatever naturally harmonized with His dispensation, whether it would appear itself to a more rigid understanding or not. It is clear that our learning is altogether in a contrary way.44

41 MS, 26. 42 Ibid. 43 Ibid. 44Ibid., 10. 43 So Pusey, having restored to things the mysterious excess of meaning that derives from their essential createdness, was able once again to see the cosmos as a complex system of organic inter-connections, mutually sharing in and reflecting the divine glory and, thereby, pointing beyond themselves. Next, having restored to language its poetic and enigmatic depths, he was able to loose it from the Lockean shackles so that it could serve again as a medium of communicating the ineffable truths of religion. Finally, having freed human history from the

determinism of bare causality and re-situated it between creation and eschaton, he quelled the despair over historicality and restored history as an arena of divine human interaction. Freed from these a priori of modernity, the Scriptures were once more able to convey divine reality through created things, to embody the divine word in human words, and to portray the redemption of human history by its being drawn up into the broader scheme of the temporal outworking of the divine economy. With these in place, Pusey then moved on to consider the theological foundation of his work to restore typology.

The Theological Foundation ofPusey 's Typology

The three above-listed correctives in the areas of metaphysic, language and history were, for Pusey, all united in his more explicitly theological corrective of the apologist and rationalist approaches to prophecy. This found its basis in Christian sacramentology and understandings of the theandric union effected by Christ in his incarnation. The body of Christ - in His person, in

the Church, or in the sacrament - is not just a useful metaphor by which to explain the nature of typology; instead, it is here, in the incarnation, that the many intimations of the participation of

the creation, human speech, and human history in the mystery of the divine economy, that were everywhere felt, are consummated: "the corner-stone and characteristic is 'God manifest in the

44 flesh.'" Therefore, as the singular end or telos of all the many types, the incarnation, the church and the sacrament most clearly signify the reality towards which the others all point - precisely because in them the sign and the thing signified coincide - and therefore serve as an essential starting point for the determination and interpretation of types.

For this reason, any attempt to get beyond or outside of typology is undesirable, for it is the only means of communicating the truth of Christian religion:

Since the [Old Testament] types are intrinsically significant in themselves, even we who have seen and live in the reality, still have need of that type to express the reality. It has been well said that God has appointed, as it were, a sort of sacramental union between the type and the archetype, so that as the type were nothing, except in as far as it represents, and is the medium of conveying the archetype to the mind, so neither can the archetype be conveyed except through the types. Though the consecrated element be not the sacrament, yet neither can the soul of the sacrament be attained without it. God has joined them together, and men may not and cannot put them asunder.46 Pusey is here drawing on the language of Anglican sacramentology, similar to that used in the Articles of Religion. Article XXVIII "Of the Lord's Supper", reads as follows:

The Supper of the Lord ... is as Sacrament of our Redemption by Christ's death . . . the Bread which we break is a partaking of the Body of Christ; and likewise the Cup of Blessing is ? partaking of the Blood of Christ. . . Transubstantiation . . . overthroweth the nature of a Sacrament. . . . The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the Supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner.47

Similar to the insistence that bread and wine have their importance as a sacrament because by their mediation a "partaking" of the body and blood of Christ is possible, so, for Pusey, the type is significant only because of its office of pointing past itself towards the archetype. The conflation of the sacramental elements with the body of Christ or the dissolving of type and archetype is unallowable, as it is comparable to a defiance of Chalcedonian Christology which

Ibid., 23. Ibid., 23. The Book of Common Prayer, The Episcopal Church - USA (New York: Church

45 sees in the person of Christ the union of two natures without confusion. But, equally abhorrent is any attempt to have spiritual reality without its created medium, for though the Body of Christ is

eaten "only after an heavenly and spiritual manner," this takes place precisely and only "in the Supper;" so too it is only by the mediation of the type that the archetype is communicated.

Pusey notes two possible errors which could arise in relation to this claim. On the one hand, the carnal or materialist person sees in the type nothing beyond its outward form.

Overwhelmed by the immanent, such a person is insensitive to the transcendent and either despairs of never seeing beyond the type to its archetype or rests content with this limited vision.

On the other hand, the pseudo-spiritualist or idealist sees no value in the type and is always attempting to strip it away to get at the archetype directly, to know divine or eternal reality in a completely unmediated fashion. Against these errors, Pusey reiterates the necessity of typological mediation:

For whereas the type did not exist for itself, but always being the character of the Archetype impressed upon it, we by separating it therefrom, as they who saw nothing in it beyond its outward form. The pseudo-spiritualist and the carnal man alike see in water, the bread or the wine nothing but the base elements, and thereby each alike deprives himself of the benefits intended for him: the carnal will live on bread alone, the pseudo- spiritualist without it: the carnal mistakes the clouds and darkness for him who is enshrouded within it, the pseudo-spiritualist would behold Him whom 'man cannot see and live', the 'light inapproachable' whom no man hath seen or can see; the carnal neglects the revelation, the pseudo-spiritual will know the unrevealed God.48

The Old Testament, because it is full of types of the reality made manifest in Christ, provides the Church with the necessary grammar and lexicon for communicating this mystery. For this reason, the modern tendency to convert the figurative terminology of the Scriptures and the Christian theological tradition into supposedly clearer terms is abhorrent. It is only through

Publishing Incorporated, 1979), 873. Emphasis added. 48 MS, 23. 46 the mediation of the events in Israel's history, its institutions, rites, and characters, that we can comprehend and communicate the Christian reality:

We have not, it is true, visible propitiatory sacrifice, a visible theocracy, a visible temple; but it is still through the medium of these figures that we understand, (as far as we do understand) the reality: we have no better way of understanding the main truths of the Gospel than through these very figures, 'the sacrifice of Christ,' 'the kingdom of God,' 'the temple of the Holy Ghost;' and he who would lay aside these types and typical language, and understand the mysteries of God without them, will be acting contrary to the teaching of Scripture and so very wrongly and foolishly. Men think that they gain clearness, but they lose in depth; they will employ definite terms, in order to comprehend that which is infinite!49

While those who attempt the translation of figurai language into plainer terms think that in so doing they will convert the type into archetype, they have instead "stripped the type of that whereby it resembled the archetype - that in it which is divine,"50 and, so, in seeking to clarify, it evaporates the meaning of both.

The system of types employed in the Old Testament is not merely an arbitrary means of communicating abstract truths to minds unfitted to other means of discourse (e.g. rationalism), that can be cast aside once those truths have been made known (à la Spinoza). Rather, following the incarnational model again, "the whole system of religion ... is one of God's condescension," that is to say, it was in these particular figures and types that He chose to "come down to us" and make Himself known to us.51 But, more than this, the Old Testament is not only exhibitive of God's condescension, His kenotic self-emptying, but also of His elevation of mankind into union with Himself, to know Him, to partake of Him. The necessary correlative of kenosis is theosis -

God has not only bent down to cloth Himself in the temporal and human, but has raised these up into eternity - and because of this the Old Testament's significance continues after the revelation

49 Ibid., 24. 50 Ibid., 24.

47 of the Gospel, just as Christ continues to bear his human body throughout all eternity. "So should we survey the Old Testament, not as the dead body of our Lord, to be embalmed with honour and laid with the dead, but as a living and true body, which it hath pleased God to take, in order to be acceptable to us, and wherein alone we can see Him."52 With this, that apostolic and patristic use of the Old Testament is vindicated. This raises questions about the integrity of the Old Testament and its function within the former dispensation before Christ's incarnation. To answer this, Pusey first reasserted the preparatory role of the Old Testament, that while it was full of the Gospel, it was only in a partial way, always pointing onward, beyond itself, to a fuller manifestation. "For there is no reason to expect beforehand, that God should in all types draw the veil equally closely, or make it equally transparent . . . not all understood until the appearance of the Archetype illumined their symbolical characters."53 If, though, the types of Old Testament serve those who would seek to communicate the truths revealed in the gospel and if it is this fuller revelation which retrospectively manifests the true content of the types of the former dispensation, to what degree did those living under the Old Covenant understand them? In response to this query, Pusey posed a question to our understanding of understanding and knowledge, drawing on an earlier, patristic approach to epistemology. Modernity had favoured an understanding of knowledge as a conceptual, reflective, and rational pursuit, whereby the intellectual faculties are employed to understand the qualities of a thing and to form an idea of it. But Pusey, in harmony with the

51 Ibid., 23 52 Ibid., 24. 53 Ibid., 29. 48 Church Fathers, makes a distinction between this rational or conceptual knowledge and the more direct form of knowledge that comes from direct experience of or participation in a reality.54 On this basis, Pusey opposed the confidence of modern attempts, by scientific, historical, critical methods, to reconstruct the mind of a person living in ancient Israel and, thereby, to produce a picture of how such a person must have understood or interpreted the different factors of antique history, religion, or prophecy: "the Hebrew must have surveyed his tabernacle service with far other eyes, than those people who now look upon it from a distance: he lived in it; he acted the types, or he was the type."55 While Pusey could encourage a reading of the Old Testament which turns "back the whole light of the Gospel upon the law" and sees it reflecting, in its partial way, that fullness of light, he could not condone the critical approach to the Old

Testament which attempted to "enquire scientifically how much the Jew may have understood" for two reasons.56 First, there is no real control in such an approach because we do not know the full extent to which revelation had impressed upon those who lived under the previous dispensation. How will the critical interpreter know if she has stripped herself of too much or too little of her knowledge? How can he recreate for himself the tangible experience of the ancient Israelite, removing himself from one sitz im leben and placing himself fully in another?

Secondly, Pusey questions the desirability of such an approach on the basis of its lack of profit:

54 Maximus the Confessor, living in the sixth century, sums up this patristic understanding m Ad Thalassium 60: "The scriptural Word knows of two kinds of knowledge of divine things. On the one hand, there is relative knowledge, rooted only in reason and ideas, and lacking in the kind of experiential perception of what one knows through active engagement .... On the other hand, there is that truly authentic knowledge, gained only by actual experience, apart from reason and ideas, which provides a total perception of the known object through a participation (µ??e???) by grace" {On the Cosmic Mystery ofJesus Christ: Selected Writingsfrom St Maximus the Confessor, trans. P. M. Blowers and R. L. Wilken [Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2003], 126). 55 MS, 29.

49 "It is altogether a superfluous enquiry how much or how little they know: neither if they knew but little do we know less, nor the more if they knew more."57 Christian interpreters of the Old Testament, living in the reality towards which it pointed have the fullness of truth already. So, regardless of whether or not the persons under that former dispensation knew fully the reality towards which the types all around them pointed, the ultimate manifestation of the divine economy remains unaffected.58

Conclusion

With all of this in place, it was possible for Pusey not only to vindicate but to initiate a retrieval of the approach to prophecy and typology which marked the apostolic and patristic

interpretation of the Old Testament. Pusey was cautious, though, in this project, fearing that his contemporaries, even he himself, having been so influenced by contemporary patterns of thought, would find it impossible to regain that vision which was so clear in the patristic era. He

also feared that the employment of too forcible an attempt at restoration would provoke only incredulity. But he did think the first step that he and his contemporaries had to make was to

acknowledge and be skeptical of their own a priori and from there move on towards the goal of a restored typological approach to scripture.5

50 Ibid., 30. 57 Ibid., 31. 58 It is lamentable that Pusey, following these skeptical remarks about historical criticism, did not provide some positive remarks about the nature and function of historical and philological study in the project of Old Testament interpretation. He does make use of these at various points throughout the "Lectures," as well as in his work on the Minor Prophets and Daniel, but nowhere elaborates any theory of their use. This has only fortified the portrayal of Pusey as nothing more than a staunch opponent of criticism. 59 ". . . it may be that all of us are, or have been, too much influenced by the atmosphere, with which we have been surrounded, even to see clearly when the ancient Fathers enjoyed such undisturbed vision. Nor would too hasty a return be safe; and a more constrained adoption of their views, and determination to see with their eyes, would restore no heartful or clear sights, we 50 At the close of his preliminary lecture, Pusey provided an outline of the study he intended to conduct afterwards in which he planned to follow the chronological order of the Old

Testament, working on a selection of prophecies in each period. In each era, he expected to "exhibit the [prophecies] with as full an understanding" as possible, because this alone provided an "approach towards the depths of Holy Scripture."60 His hope was that, in so doing, he would be able to help restore the vision or interpretative faculty that enabled the Apostles and Church Fathers to trace out such connections. The discovery of one type would naturally lead the discovery of others. So, the process of rediscovery was laid out by Pusey as follows: Our wisest course of investigation is to take as our guides such types as are pointed out in the New Testament, to examine their principles and character and criteria, and then compare with them those generally recognized by the Church or read with eyes so opened the Old Testament itself. One type thoroughly developed will throw much light over the whole typical character of the Old Testament.61 The restoration of typology was, for Pusey, imperative, not "for the gratification of one's curiosity, or indulgence in imagination," but rather for the instruction and edification of the Christian faithful. Pusey saw in it a means of checking the rationalism and unbelief he had witnessed during his time abroad in Germany and of preparing Britain for the inevitable arrival of such in her own Church and Academy. He imagined that the first step towards the abrogation of Scriptural authority was the scepticism which progressively denied the reality of types, first, in the patristic approach, then, in that of the apostles and, finally, in Christ's own reading of the Old

Testament. cannot make ourselves see, but we can lay aside our present love of demonstration and our supercilious manner of speaking of the interpretations of the ancients; and taking the authoritative interpretations of our Blessed Lord and His Apostles, not as so many insulated facts, but as keys to the rest of Holy Scripture we may be led to a view perhaps of the whole more consistent with itself, and with His teaching, and so more edifying" (Ibid., 37). 60 Ibid., 35.

51 The mind has in fact entertained and boasts itself in a scheme of which it views the Apostolic mode of interpretation as an exception. This may hold for a while: it gave way in Germany; and then they who conceived that the Apostles could be in error, still inconsistency, but with an instructive resonance, made the like exception for One, and then at last, they surmounted this also, and became consistent by denying all. Through their own precise and clear and accusing habit of mind, entertaining a secret repugnance to the undefined and less exact and more imaginative and mystic character of types, they drew the line to admit as types whatever is declared to be such in the New Testament and whatever the New Testament is silent to leave in abeyance, neither speaking nor thinking it possible one way or the other.62 The inconsistency in the position that allows for types identified by Christ or the Apostles and denies the contemporary identification and interpretation of any types beyond those detailed in the New Testament produced a cognitive dissonance that forced one to either accept the continued use of typological interpretation or reject it all together. For this reason, Pusey saw the restoration of typology as a defense against German rationalism since, in providing a more consistent and convincing approach to the Old Testament, it robbed that other form of interpretation of its attractiveness.

At the end of his first lecture, Pusey offered a charge to those attending his lectures: "Our Lord seems to invite not only to a more faithful obedience to, but to a deeper study of Holy Scripture."63 This student of Scripture should not content herself only with the "obvious historical sense" of Scripture, "which lies upon the surface" but should seek to find "in words and phrases" a sense "deeper than that which is required for the mere context," because the failure to do so would be "blameable and neglecting a treasure which God had deposited in

61 Ibid., 12. 62 Ibid., 11. 63 Ibid., 37. 52 Scripture below the surface." Throughout the lectures that followed, as will be seen below, he attempted to do just that.

64 Ibid.

53 Chapter Four

E. B. Pusey's Interpretation of Types and Prophecies:

The Succeeding Lectures in 'Lectures on Types and Prophecies of the Old Testament'

The previous chapter analysed Pusey's diagnosis of the errors he found among his contemporaries in biblical interpretation, namely their attempts to place controls on the biblical text in order to make it more easily accessible, to regulate its interpretation and bring it into accordance with the philosophical a priori of modernity, the goal of all of this being the production a definite and perfectly suasive apologetic for Christian belief. The previous chapter also examined the grounds upon which Pusey rejected this approach based on his conviction that it was perilously entrenched in the rationalist project. As far as Pusey was concerned, modern biblical interpretation had traded in a biblical text that overflowed with meaning for a text possessed of a singular and controlled meaning that was to be discovered by the application of various historical and philological methodologies. In place of this, Pusey called for a restored appreciation for biblical typology and a hermeneutical ressourcement along the following lines: first, a return to a participatory metaphysics which he thought would allow for the transcendent to be present in the immanent realm of being; second, a renewed appreciation of the enigmatic depths of language's communicative potential; finally, the re-placement of finite history within the context of the overarching divine economy. In so doing, Pusey thought it was possible to prove that each of these arenas - being, language and history - could serve as loci of divine revelation. Further, these three philosophical foundation blocks for a renewed biblical interpretation were joined by

Pusey with his more overtly theological bases for typology, namely his incarnational Christology and sacramentology. With these points established, Pusey considered a retrieval of typology,

54 which removed biblical interpretation from the context of modernity and re-situated it with the apostolic and patristic tradition, not only possible but also necessary.

Keeping with his intention to expose and overturn the tendency of his contemporaries to distill out of the Old Testament numerous, individual prophetic statements Pusey remarked that

"the whole previous system of the Old Testament, its people, its individual characters, its rites, its sayings, its history, was one vast prophetic system, full of the New Testament."1 But, this

"vast prophetic system" did not consist of some massive, indistinguishable bolus of Old Testament miscellany. Instead, it was to be understood as a progressive narrative and unfolding economy running from the promise in Eden to the deluge, the Abrahamic covenant, the Exodus, and onward. Old Testament prophecies were not abstract statements or theories, but were promises made to specific individuals at given times. The Old Testament types in which the programme of redemption was worked out, consisted likewise of specific events in Israel's history and the continual enactment of cultic rites. Through all of these, the fruits of the promise were communicated to and anticipated by the people of that prior dispensation until their ultimate realisation in the person of Christ was made manifest.

In the lectures that followed his first, more theoretical one, Pusey offered a partial illustration of how this progressive revelation took place in the specific instances and how these were all knit together into that one vast system while also demonstrating the hermeneutical potential of his typological interpretation for a fuller understanding of the Old Testament. The succeeding "Lectures" pass progressively through the Pentateuch, moving first through prophecies found in the book of Genesis, following the fall of humanity and expulsion from

1 Ibid., 7-8. This passage, along with other parts of Pusey's criticisms, is very reminiscent of Thomas Sherlock's argument. It is possible that he had read his work, but without

55 paradise as well as throughout the patriarchal narratives. After this, he offered interpretations of the typological nature of selected sacrifices, cultic rites and religious symbols found in both the

narrative and legal sections of the remainder of the Pentateuch. This chapter will examine some specimens of Pusey's biblical interpretation taken from

those remaining lectures. It will focus first on how Pusey deals with the narrative of the fall of humanity and the prophetic word given to the man and the woman immediately after this event which Pusey saw as the typological basis of the entire Old Testament. For Pusey, this prophecy, commonly referred to as the protoevangelium, was to be understood as the source from which all

succeeding prophecy flowed and as providing part of a context in which all other subsequent prophecy was to be understood. After this, it will provide an analysis of how Pusey interpreted the prophecies of the patriarchal history and the types found in the exodus narratives and Mosaic

legislation, demonstrating his attempt to find harmony and progression among the various types of prophecies their respective settings. With all this, it will be seen the embodiment of Pusey's

theory and be better able to gauge the feasibility of his approach to typological interpretation. Humanity 's Fall and the Protoevangelical Promise In his lecture entitled 'Genesis', Pusey moved progressively through the first book of the Pentateuch interpreting the types and prophecies as they appeared, examining each in its

particular context and while also illustrating their relationships to one another. The first narrative he considered was that of the fall of humanity and the promise of deliverance given by

God to the man and the woman in the garden after their sin found in Genesis 3. In the preceding

chapter, following the creation of man, Adam was given a commandment by God allowing him to eat the fruit of any tree in the garden with the exception of that taken from the tree of the

any specific reference to it, it is impossible to prove any direct connection. 56 knowledge of good and evil. Shortly after this, following the event of the man's task of naming the animals, God made woman and presented her to the man as a wife, and the two found themselves living in a state of harmony and naked innocence in the paradisal garden that had been prepared for them. At this point the serpent is introduced. He proceeds to question the woman concerning the divine prohibition with regards to the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The woman (not yet named Eve), deceived by the serpent's subtlety, is convinced that God is withholding deification from the human couple by not allowing them to partake of the fruit of that tree and, desiring it, takes it, eats it, and gives the fruit to her husband who also eats it. At this point, the human couple realises and is ashamed of their nakedness and the Lord God appears to question his creatures, who hide from His presence, about their disobedience. As the man passes the blame onto his wife and she points to the serpent as the source of the transgression, God levels a curse against the serpent which concludes with these words, which make up that prophecy commonly known as the protoevangelium: "I will put enmity between you [the serpent] and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel."2 Following this word of judgment against the serpent and hope for the human couple, God turns first to the woman to inform her of the labour pains she will experience in childbirth and to the man to announce the cursing of the soil and the toil he will endure in bringing forth food until he returns to the dust of the ground from which he was formed. Finally, God kills an animal and clothes the human couple in its skin before expelling them from the garden and barring their entrance to the tree of life.

2 Genesis 3.15. 57 In this first narrative of the events which precipitated the expulsion of humanity from paradise and initiated the entire divine economy of redemption, Pusey saw the foundation of the rest of the Old Testament narrative and, by figurai extension, the event of the incarnation of

Christ and the consummation of His work in the Church. This was possible because this account tells not merely of some isolated episode at the beginning of time nor even the first link in the chain of human history, but instead describes the formative event which would shape the course of things to follow and would establish the relationships between the characters, human, spiritual and divine, which make up the rest of the biblical story. In this regard, the entire divine economy and its narrative account in the form of the Old Testament and Gospel literature, is a spinning out of the event recorded in this narrative and the interrelations of the characters whose actions are herein described. In a certain sense, this narrative provides the archetypes in relation to which all others are types playing out their part: the man and the woman become archetypical of all human action in a world marred by sin and of their response to their Creator; the antagonism and envy of the serpent prefigures the persistent struggle of the fallen and diabolical spiritual forces to ruin the redemptive will of the Creator; finally, the appearance of God in the garden following the fall of mankind into sin becomes typical of His continual appearance as both judge and redeemer of humanity. The typological framework established by the creation and fall narratives is not limited, in Pusey' s mind, to the narrative framework of the Old and New Testament, but is also applicable in a more general sense as it depicts the reality of human existence after the event of the fall. For example, in the progressive temptation of the woman and her consent to the misdeed proposed by the serpent, Pusey, following the apostle James, finds a pattern of all human sinfulness:

58 "St James seems to allude to the course and nature of this first sin when he says 'every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust and enticed: then when lust has conceived, it bringeth forth sin, and sin, when it is finished bringeth forth death' ... in that we have here so plain and expressive a type of all sin, it not only shows more alarmingly the deadly character of that one fundamental sin but leads us to look deeper in the rest of the narrative."3

The significance of this account, then, extends beyond the mere record of the first act of human sinfulness by depicting both the pattern and the root of all succeeding transgressions, the latter being, in fact, no more than the perpetual manifestation or fulfillment of that original trespass. Further, Pusey saw in the man and the woman's attempt to hide from the divine presence the "natural sequel of all sin" which was only further exemplified by the couple's inability to accept responsibility for their actions, a type of all human impenitence. The blame for the misdeed was cast by the man on the woman, by the woman on the serpent, and together they both indirectly accuse their Creator as the source of their fall.4 Against this pattern, Pusey describes the proper response to the divine query which the first couple and others who fell in them fail to make by not confessing their misdeeds: "The right covering is when man confesses himself 'naked' and God covers him."5

In conjunction with the reading of this event as the type of all human sinfulness, Pusey saw the foundation of a complimentary typological strand of the appearance of God at each juncture in human history as both judge and redeemer. In this narrative, God appeared to the couple immediately after the event of their transgression, offering them an opportunity to repent,

3 MS, 43. 4 "First man would hide himself from God among the very trees which God had planted; then in the half-confusion in answer to God's first call, ? feared because I was naked' dissembling the truth; and then when the truth is wrung from him, throwing back the blame upon his Maker 'the woman, whom thou gavest me.' It is the emblem of every unrepented sin. In like way, Eve sinks all her own sin, and places all to the account of Satan's deceit 'The serpent beguiled me' and the just-suppressed ? could not but be beguiled'" (Ibid., 44).

59 but they were unwilling to accept their culpability. For this reason, He pronounced a curse on the serpent, the instrument of their reprobation in order to offer them, indirectly in his defeat, the hope of their eventual redemption. In light of this, His words to the woman and the man, His clothing of them in the skin of an animal and their expulsion from the garden, bear each in themselves a mixture ofjudgment and hope for restoration. First, in the prophecy God makes to the serpent, He places a curse upon him, stating that he will be forced to go about on his belly eating dust and proclaiming a perpetual enmity between himself and the woman and their respective offspring. The end of the conflict would come when the seed of the woman would crush the serpent's head as he struck his heel. This promise, generally referred to as the protoevangelium or first pronouncement of the Gospel, has traditionally interpreted the 'seed of the woman' as a reference to Christ, who would come to defeat the devil, the seed of the serpent, and sin in the economy of his incarnation.6 For Pusey, this promise was a perfect example of a prophecy whose meaning extended beyond the singular, literal content of its original expression and context. The protoevangelium, being the first pronouncement of the divine economy, was not only the first link in a chain of prophecies pointing towards the working out and fulfillment of salvation, but was in fact the whole story of redemption in précis, and therefore the foundation of all subsequent prophecy. In this regard, Pusey remarked: This first promise then contained in its compass the whole Gospel; the whole history of Redemption is involved in it; it reaches from the gates of Paradise within which it was uttered, to the final consummation of all things at the coming of our Lord, when death and hell shall be cast into the lake of fire: all other subsequent more definite prophecies are but a supplementary of it, filling out the one of the other part of its outline; and so far from pressing on, as some interpreters are wont to do, to the later prophecies, as being

5 Ibid., 49. 6 E.g. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 5.21.1. 60 clearer and more definite and so having more employment for the understanding, we ought to dwell on this, as containing the title-deeds of the whole human race to our closed Paradise, our pledge of success in our conflicts, our assurance that the bite-in-the-heel, to us, as to the Captain of our Salvation is but the condition of the crushing of the armies of the Evil one under our feet. The prophecy is the deeper because, like its Giver, uncircumscribed undefined.7

So, while this promise, on the surface, speaks only of a perduring animosity between mankind and serpentine creatures, with an ambiguous outcome, for Pusey, it was impossible to stop there. Instead, he thought one could read from it the entire divine economy which would eventually culminate in the incarnation, death and resurrection of Christ which would be the event of the final crushing of the serpent's head. But, even by Pusey' s own admission, the elucidation and total perception of the exact details ofthat economy's out-working could only be seen and understood in it fully from a retrospective vantage point.

While retrospection is necessary for a full cognitive reflection on the meaning of the strife between the seed of the woman and the serpent and its conclusion, it is not necessary, therefore, to conclude, with modern interpreters, that such an interpretation is, in fact, a distortion of the original meaning of the statement. Pusey saw in the approach of modernity not so much a distortion of the passage's interpretation as a delimitation of the super-abundance of meaning that exists in such prophecies: "The prophecy in its fulfillment, is a remarkable

7 MS, 45-6. 8 An example of this is found in Samuel Rolles Driver's remark: "The passage has been known as the Protoevangelium; and no doubt it is that: but we must not read into the words more than they contain. No victory of the woman's seed is promised, but only a perpetual antagonism, in which each side using the weapons which it is natural to it to employ, will seek to obtain mastery of the other" (The Book of Genesis [London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1911], 48). Also, later, Gerhard von Rad provides another example: "The exegesis of the early church which found a messianic prophecy here, a reference to a final victory of the woman's seed (Protoevangelium), does not agree with the sense of the passage . . ." (Genesis: A Commentary. Revised edition [Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1972], 93). Against such limitations, Pusey cites certain examples of Rabbinic exegesis to show that the Messianic interpretation of these passages was

61 instance, [of] how much and how varied meaning is comprised in God's word, and how manifold its fulfillment. Each interpretation has its place; only men err, when they mistake the lowest for the highest."9 The antagonism between humanity and the serpent is part of the meaning but, Pusey claims, even the first couple must have seen more in the divine word than this, even if they were not able to understand the exact details or full implications of the prophecy against the serpent they overheard. They could not have been satisfied with the bare surface meaning of this message, and so we cannot "suppose that they to whom it was given, did not examine and press its meaning the more because it was their all."10 Pusey also claims that it must further be granted that Adam understood more from God's word than modern interpretation tends to allow "for he heard the living words of God and saw the presence of God and God's countenance turned toward him, and [he] weighed not the words critically, but heard them with the quickened ear of one whose life they were."11 So here, one finds an example of the difference between cognitive and experiential knowledge, the latter derived from participation in a mystery which may not be fully comprehended but which is known fully by the one taking part in it.12

This prophecy of the serpent's cursing and final defeat beneath the feet of the "seed of the woman" was offered as a word of hope and relief to the couple who saw in the serpent, and whatever spiritual evil might lie behind it, the source of their deception and transgression. The comfort came as they realised that the debasement and destruction of the cause of their reprobation would mean, indirectly, their restoration. So, while the conquest of the serpent was to be brought about through the agency of the singular "seed of the woman", retrospectively seen well-established before the advent of Christian Old Testament exegesis. 9 MS, 45. 10 Ibid., 46. 11 Ibid., 48.

62 to be a reference to Christ, this victory was achieved not only in Him but also in the whole human race who conquers Satan in and through Him. Pusey made a claim for this interpretation on the grounds of his Christology and ecclesiology, backed it by arguments on linguistic grounds and evidence of similar apostolic interpretation:

Then, as to the question, whether the seed of the woman 'contain the whole human race, or the one who was eminently so, as being the 'seed of the woman' only, it might be safely answered, both: for both are fulfilled, and both are in fact one: since we triumph in and through Christ, and He in us, His members. And He has deigned to consider His victory over death and hell not complete, until what He had done for us, be also perfected in us, His Church: so each victory over Satan in any of God's faithful servants before the Redeemer's coming, was a petty type ofthat great conquest, - and an earnest also of the fulfillment of His promise that His disciples should tread on serpents and on all the power of the Enemy, that God should bruise Satan under our feet shortly. Only from these words it will appear that they are mainly fulfilled in Christ, Who is the centre, in Him wholly, in us partially; in Him principally, in us, whether before or after, secondarily and derivatively. And in this special and primary fulfillment, it is remarkable how words which in the more general fulfilment have a more general meaning, have a closer and more specific meaning. The 'seed of the woman' in that more general sense, is more in general, born 'by the woman' (I Cor 11.12) in the more specific, our Lord, Who was 'born of a woman' (Gal. 4.4) exclusively, through the operation of the Holy Ghost. Again, although ?37 admits of being regarded as a collection, yet the latter part of the prophecy corresponds more clearly with an individual.

Finally, in this prophecy, Pusey understood the final redemption of humanity to be ironically consonant with the serpent's claim that the man and the woman would become divine as a result of eating the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil: "Satan's lie was again turned into God's truth; and what man would have obtained by disobedience to God and obedience to

Satan, was gained in one man's obedience to God and conquest of Satan, that man should be as God, being made partaker of the Son of God."14 Pusey finds here not only a promise of the restoration of humanity's pre-fallen state, that of being made in the image of God, but the hope

See the discussion of this element in Pusey's theory above in Chapter Three (p. 48ff). 13 MS, 45. 14 Ibid., 50 63 for a further elevation of created divine likeness or deification. This takes place as a result of the incarnation of Christ which took "the manhood into God, whereby man so awfully became higher than the angels . . ."15 So again, the typological extension of these words is made possible by their pointing to Christ in whom the entire economy of salvation is worked out and from whom all those who partake of its riches receive their hope for restoration and deification. After the prophecy directed against the serpent, the woman is told that, hereafter, she will be subjected to a painful experience in labour. Initially, this seems to be simply a form of punishment for her illicit action, but when it is considered along with the prophesied struggle between her seed and that of the serpent, a different image emerges. The woman's child- birthing, painful as it would now be, was the means by which the hoped-for deliverer would come to undo the effects of the serpent's subtle deception and was transformed into her personal agency in the divine economy: "The suffering was to be undergone before the deliverance was accomplished . . ."16 Pusey finds confirmation of this interpretation in the expression of hope inherent to Adam's naming his wife Eve, the mother of all living,17 and in Eve's exclamation

15 Ibid. Here again, Pusey displays his affinity with patristic interpretations of these passages in relation to the Incarnation. St Athanasius's dictum resonates well here: "God became man, so that man might become God" (De Incarnatione Verbi Dei 54.3) Also, Origen's understanding of the distinction between the image and the likeness, the former being something inherent in the human person from creation onward, while the latter was a capacity to be realised in the event of deification, made possible through the incarnation and actualised by the submission of the human will to God (De Principiis 3.6.1). 16MS, 52. 17 "And so we see the meaning of Adam's answer, which stands in such strange contrast with the last words 'so he called his wife mn "life" because she was the mother of all living (G?- 31?)' How? Not by bringing death to the world, was she become 'life'; but because 'her seed' was the giver of life, was she as it were, full of life. It may be that Adam understood not the full meaning of his own words, but they are not less a prophecy, and as such recorded although it may well be, that he understood more and of God's words also, than we deem; for he heard the living words of God and saw the presence of God and God's countenance turned toward him, and weighed not the words critically, but heard them with the quickened ear of one whose life 64 after the birth of her first son, Cain, "I have gotten a man with the help of the Lord."18 Both of these acts seem to imply that the first couple understood the prophecy against the serpent to be a promise that one among their offspring would be that one whose heel would crush the serpent's head. But, while the naming of Cain expressed Eve's hope, it belied her misplaced confidence in a hasty restoration that would soon be put in check. As Pusey commented, with the murder of

Abel by his brother, "Cain was shown to belong to the 'seed of the serpent', and the expectation of the fulfillment of their hope was projected forward, only retrospectively to be realised in the incarnation of Christ.19

Next, the man was subjected to toilsome labour in order to bring forth food from a stubborn and cursed ground until he himself would be returned to the dust of the earth from which he had originally been taken and formed. This word of God, like that given to the woman, was not without hope. As the man was first formed from dust, it was necessary that he be broken down once more into the malleable stuff of his original formation so God could re-create him from that clay once more. What Pusey is hinting at here is the possibility of reading in this narrative a cryptic hope for resurrection beneath the veil of these words: "Adam knew that although taken from the dust, he yet had the breath of God in his nostrils, that he was not mere dust that his proper self was not dust, that he had become a living soul, . . . that he was formed in the image and likeness of God."20 Hearkening to the words of St. Paul in his Epistle to the

they were" (Ibid., 48). 18 "We need not and ought not to speculate what or how much Eve may have understood by her own words ... at all events, the words, as the Holy Spirit caused them to be pronounced do contain the truth, however mistaken Eve's application may have been; they are a prophetic hint as they stand" (Ibid., 51-2). 19Ibid., 51. 20 Ibid., 48. 65 Corinthians (15.42-50), Pusey interprets the return of humankind to the dust as necessary to its restoration:

Man's body must return to its earth, and be dissolved, in order to be restored to a glorious body; it must be sown in corruption to be raised in incorruption, sown in dishonour to be raised in glory, sown in weakness to be raised in power, sown a natural (??????? an animal) body, to be raised a spiritual (p?e?µat????) body, one like that Spirit, which God breathed into his nostrils and pronounced him god. Following the words of judgment and hope to the man and woman, God offers them clothes made from the skin of a slain animal to cover their nakedness, in place of the leaves which they had bound together to hide their shame from one another and from their Creator. Pusey sees in this divine act a sign of hope that humanity might able to stand in the presence of God without shame and behold His countenance once more. What is more, he saw in this "the foundation of all sacrifice" saying:

Yet he was covered, through death; and so while the sentence of death was removed from him alike in the curse of the serpent and his own sentence, it was through another's death (though but an animal's) that his outward shame was covered; and so the more thought he felt for this emblem of God's mercy and the more (as he must) he felt it to be an emblem only, the more must he have been led to think of the bruised-heel of his woman's seed, and to see that the real inner shame was to be removed not only by vicarious suffering but by death.22

This event directed the first couple's eyes, and those of all subsequent readers, to understand that the conquest of the seed over the serpent, would not consist merely of suffering - the "striking of the heel" - but that in order to "crush his head" and to free the rest of humanity from the curse of death, He must be given up to a vicarious death. It was in imitation of this act of God's clothing the first couple with the skin of an animal which he had killed that Abel offered his sacrifice from his flock. The entire sacrificial system of the Mosaic legislation found

21 Ibid., 50. 22 Ibid., 48. 66 its source in this event. Further, according to Pusey, all religious systems are faint echoes of this mystery: "Sacrifice through the world is but the indistinct and often confused echo of this revealing out of God, and so had a root in the human breast, deeper than they who use it were conscious of."23

Finally, the expulsion of the first couple from paradise was also in accord with the redemptive will of God and not merely an act of punishment. Humanity, having fallen from its state of blessed harmony with the creation and Creator and having forfeited its original innocence found itself in a state of misery. This experience would only be perpetuated if they were permitted to remain in paradise or allowed to eat the fruit of the tree of life. In order to protect the first couple from becoming immortal in their unhappy state, God expelled them from the garden and barred the way to the tree: "the tree of life to him who had tasted the tree of knowledge of good and evil would have been a curse."24 Further, without the union with God which had become impossible after the entrance of sin and death, the garden would no longer be, in and of itself, a place of blessedness. Expulsion into the exterior world and the slow progress towards death were the only means of restoration:

It was then in mercy also that God closed the earthly Paradise against him (for not the place but the union of God and His presence made it Paradise) lest as by the consequence of his first sin, he should by further willfulness take of the tree of life and so exclude himself from the only way of complete, yea and more than complete, restoration - suffering and return to dust.25 For Pusey, then, each of these statements made by God are not to be read, as many modern interpreters are wont to do, as a series of etiologies concerning the origin of the antagonism between mankind and serpents, humanity's struggle with evil, the strife between the

23 Ibid., 49. 24 Ibid., 50

67 sexes, the pain of childbirth, the toilsome existence of mankind and the death and decomposition of human persons but as declarations of the means by which humanity's redemption would be fulfilled and the way in which each person could work out their own salvation.26 So, the first couple's pain, toil and death, being signs of the judgment placed upon their sin, when accepted were turned in the end into the means of their redemption: The disease was to be cured: the woman's usurped dominion ('because thou hast obeyed the voice of thy wife') by subjection and suffering: man's passions by continued toil; and the return to the ground comes only a mediation, for which (it has been truly said) Adam in the tenth century of his life, and seeing the multiplied usury of his own sin, may often have longed. The applicability of these means to restoration extended beyond the first couple as the generations passed by and the realisation of the hope which lay in the prophecy was pressed further into the future, waiting for the one who was the anti-type of the serpent's pride, Eve's usurpation and Adam's passion to come and bear the true "seed of the woman": The suffering was to be undergone before the deliverance was accomplished: the wound in the heel felt for many generations, before the serpents head was broken: the promise was to be accomplished not in the boastful ? have gotten a man' but in that meek handmaid of the Lord, the highly favored in a low estate who accompanied her humble amazement 'How shall these things be?' with believing acquiescence 'be it unto me according to thy word' the true contrast to the words of the serpent 'Hath God indeed said?' and whose 'spirit magnified the Lord'. . . 28

¿i Ibid., 51 26 An example of such an interpretation is found in Gerhard von Rad' s commentary on Genesis: "These penalties are all to be understood aetiologically; in them the narrator gives a reason for disturbing enigmas and necessities, he answers elementary questions about life" (Genesis, 92). 27 MS, 48. Pusey seems, in part, to be echoing the words of St Paul: "Woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty" (I Timothy 2.15). 28 Ibid., 53-4. This theme of the typological contrast between Eve and Mary, drawing on St Paul's Adam/Christ typology in Romans 5, was a predominant theme in patristic biblical interpretation, first evidenced in the writings of St Justin Martyr (Cf. Dialogue with Trypho, C) and more fully elaborated by St Irenaeus of Lyons (Cf. Against Heresies, Book III, chapter XXII.4). Lacking any citation, it is impossible to know whether Pusey is drawing directly off 68 So, in these passages, Pusey thought that an interpreter, free from the constraints of modernity's a priori, could confidently see that "the whole history [was] indeed prophetic" and "contained in its compass the whole Gospel," not merely some mythical or etiological account concerning the primeval origins of certain enigmatic realities in the human experience or a simple historical account about the facts of mankind's fall into sin.29 For Pusey, these passages were manifestly concerned with the entire divine economy, worked out and recorded in the pages of the Old Testament, culminating in the Incarnation of Christ. At each point, human persons continued in their sinful inheritance while reaching out in hope for the restoration offered by the God who constantly condescended as judge and redeemer until, in the Incarnation, He found the perfect human response to the redemptive will of God in the Virgin Mary. Through her, He entered the world, taking humanity upon and into Himself, freeing the human race from its shame, bringing about their restoration of its original created innocence, and raising it still further into a state of glorification and deification. In the fullness of this first prophetic promise, the protoevangelium, "containing the germ of all" subsequent prophecy, even if awaiting a future perspective to shine full light on its depths, the mystery of Christ was present to the first couple and they shared in the reality and fruits of His incarnation ahead of time, just as, in the Church, those generations after Christ partake also of His life by being incorporated into his body. It was out of this one prophecy that all others found throughout the Old Testament issued forth, any such instance in patristic interpretation, echoing something an interpretation that had remained present in Anglican tradition or simply recognising a similar analogical connection. This focus on the humble response of the Virgin as representative of the necessary response of the creature to God in the event of redemption chastens Pusey' s otherwise pessimistic perspective on fallen man and his overstated doctrine of original sin. 29 MS, 46, 45. 30 Ibid., 42. 69 including those supposedly clearer, more distinct prophecies which Pusey's apologetic predecessors had latched onto. Finally, Pusey's approach to these narratives, while dependent on typological extensions of the literal sense, is not merely the arbitrary product of an unchecked

piety, but lives, moves and has its being within the traditional framework of the Christian theology he had inherited within his Anglican formation, especially resting on the doctrines of

Christ's incarnation and the Church.

Prophecy in the Patriarchal Narratives

The calling of Abraham is not simply the next step in the temporal outworking of the Old Covenant, but a watershed moment in that history. With the calling of Abraham, the realisation

of the protoevangelical hopes begins to take form as, in the person of the elected patriarch, the people in whom the working out of the divine economy are set apart and their historical existence is initiated. The call of Abraham and the promises made to him are recorded in

Genesis 12.1-3: "Now the Lord had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will show thee. And I will make of thee a

great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing. And I

will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of

the earth be blessed." Pusey breaks this divine word into three parts: first, the call of Abraham out of Mesopotamia to Palestine; next, the promise that his descendants would become a great

nation and the blessings they will receive; and, finally, the promise of universal blessings for all human families received in or from the person of Abraham.

Abraham, at the time of his calling, was chosen from an idolatrous people to be the father

of the one chosen people, Israel, of the one, creator God who had made the promises to Adam. From the time of Adam, humanity had multiplied on the face of the earth before being almost

70 completely eradicated in the event of the deluge. In the person of Noah, a new beginning was granted to humanity, but with the sin of his son Ham, the human race was divided into three branches, the blessed race of Shem, the children of Japheth who would be blessed in and through the former, and the cursed descendants of Ham. Abraham was called from among the descendants of Shem, but not, as Pusey notes, "out of a pure line of Shem, (wherein, as in Melchisedek, the worship of the true God 'the Maker of Heaven and Earth' was yet preserved) butofanidolator."31

The conditions, or rather the unconditionality, of his calling were necessary as a means of dispelling any misunderstanding of Abraham's election and the formation of Israel as a restriction placed on the universal scope of the of the original expression of the divine redemptive will. In this context, and elsewhere, Pusey insisted, against his opponents, that individual prophecies must not be isolated from their respective places within the larger prophetic context of the divine economy; instead they should be understood in relation to one another, each issuing out of the primeval promise of the protoevangelium and rushing forward towards their fulfillment in Christ: "Neither again are we to take these prophecies insulated, but as connected with the original promise and all the expectations founded therein, of One great deliverer . . ."32 In this instance, then, Pusey claims that while "the line of immediate prophecy as that of the Messiah was greatly narrowed, yet prophecy itself retained its universal character." So, in Abraham's election, as an idolater, to obedience towards and the worship of the one God, Pusey sees a type of the future election of the Gentiles and their being grafted into

31 Ibid., 62. 32 Ibid., 66 33 Ibid., 63. 71 the covenental blessings and the eschatalogical restoration of Israel after their rejection for their sin:

In the calling of one educated probably in idolatry, as the forefather of the chosen people, God shewed that He chose not men for their own previous righteousness, but out of His own free mercy, and exhibited, as it were, a type of His future calling of the Gentiles, as perhaps also of his bringing in of the Jews again in that he was chosen from a father of the race of Shem.34

Abraham was chosen to be the historical father of the people among whose descendants would be found that "seed of the woman" who would crush the serpent's head, but the spoils of this victory would, reflexively, be showered upon all the children of Adam, not only the temporal lineage of the children of Abraham. The second and third divisions of the prophecy further elucidate this mystery, showing the blessing and promise to Abraham to be a prophecy with both temporal and spiritual aspects. The division of this prophetic promise to Abraham into two parts sets it apart from and shows it to be more than a simple restatement of the protoevangelium. So, Pusey states: "The two divisions of the prophecy appear to be recognized in the New Testament, i.e., St Paul seems to refer to two prophecies, or two parts of the prophecy, rather than to two fulfillments of the same prophecy . . ." The first portion of the prophecy refers to the historical lineage of the Jewish people, the seed, and the second to that spiritual community who come from all the nations which are blessed in him. The initial promise to Adam and Eve was principally universal in nature, while this one breaks down into its temporal and spiritual aspects. But this distinction cannot be carried too far since the seed of Abraham ultimately refers to Christ and all those who

Ibid., 62. Ibid., 66 72 are in Christ receive His blessings as the 'seed', just as all humanity, in Christ, takes part in the promised trampling down of the serpent.

So the two parts of the prophecy are as follows: on the one hand, this prophecy granted a geographical region to the historical lineage of Abraham and promises their blessings as a growing nation, but on the other hand, it speaks of how all the families of the world would be blessed in or through Abraham. Here, it is seen that the temporal reality and blessings of Israel's historical existence were promised to the patriarch, but these are neither to be conflated with nor seen simply as metaphors of the coming spiritual blessings of humanity in the ultimate realisation or fulfillment of the promise. Rather, the historical progression of Israel's existence recorded in the Old Testament narrative was to blossom forth into the spiritual reality and, as in it something of the final reality was always present, it became a type of its fulfillment in Christ and in His Church:

Temporal and spiritual prophecy were still kept distinct, now as yet was the one made prominently the emblem of the other. From the connection and analogy, indeed, of the several portions in the Divine dispensations (wherein one becomes the image of another) curses then blessings, which seem to be temporal, are in their fullest intent spiritual. Even the words ? make of thee a great nation' ? will bless thee and make thy name great;' 'tell the stars . . . ' are fulfilled in the Christian Church, all whose faithful members have been the children of faithful Abraham." This is because the temporal are raised up to the spiritual, not the spiritual veiled under the temporal. These remarks correct two common errors in the understanding or rejection of the typological interpretation of Old Testament narratives. First, there are those who discredit such interpretations for supposedly turning the history of the Old Testament into a complex system of arbitrary symbols pointing to a spiritual reality beyond themselves and having no real meaning in themselves. Second, another line of thought, rejecting the figurai extension of historical events,

Ibid., 63. Emphasis added. 73 sees no more connection between the Old and New Testaments than that of normal, historical progress and the line of development of religious ideas, national identity, and other factors which produced the milieu which could produce a person like Jesus of Nazareth and a following of disciples like His which would eventually develop into the Christian sect. Pusey considered neither of these approaches as acceptable, because he saw the history of Israel as being drawn up into the larger narrative of God's redemption, which neither negated its own historical particularity by conflating it with metaphor nor allowed it to stand on its own as a simple, immanent chain of events. Instead, Israel's narrative was to be understood as a temporal progression situated in the eternal divine economy.

This understanding grants a degree of integrity to the entire history of the Old Testament, though always as a preparatory dispensation for the incarnation, since Christ is the anchor of all history between creation and eschaton. This does not trivialise Israel's historical reality, but defines its significance in relation to Christ. By way of analogy, it is only because of its relationship to Christ that the Church plays any important role in the working out of the divine economy:

Herein is a difference between the Jewish and Christian Church in this respect, that the Jewish Church only outwardly figured the promised seed, the Son of God, and was the outward channel of its fulfillment of the prophecy, in that of it, according to the flesh, Christ came; the Christian Church, as being the mystical body of Christ, and mystically united to Him, is, though a channel; yet the spiritual channel ofthese blessings from Him, who is Head over all the Church, God blessed forever.37

This principle can be applied to the interpretation of the rest of the Old Testament, understanding the specific instances and persons in the history and the narrative as a whole as flowing out of the original promise to the first couple and towards their consummation in the person of Christ and

Ibid., 69. 74 His body the Church, communicating in that particular historical moment and to those particular persons the hope of the former and some participation in the reality of the latter.38 Pusey's attempt to describe the nature of such an experience of and participation in the promise and mystery of the redemptive economy may be found in his excursive discussion of the Akedah:

Even, however, that more hidden sort of prophecy, which is enacted in types, yielded a portion of its instruction to those times also, although part was reserved to be brought into its full light by its fulfillment. Yet even for those times, one must not think that the mysteries, which were not perceived, were on that account uninstructive; it is not in proportion to the clearness of one perception, that mysteries have their force: how little do we know of the mystery of our own sonship to God, yet it is as we put ourselves forth beyond what we know and endeavour by faith to substantiate what is unseen, and to realize our in part unknown and unbounded privilege, that its immensity begins to discover itself and to impress us. Not its clearness and distinctness, but its greatness, constitute its majesty and impressiveness, . . . not the things, which we know clearly, but the things which we know unclearly, are our highest birth-right for to say this is only to say that we see here 'thro' a glass darkly' only the outskirts of God's glory and of his favour towards us and that it is the very fullness of the light of His countenance, and that His countenance turned to us, which is now hid behind the cloud, and of which only a ray, as it were, breaks through. I mean not by this, that they are separate truths, but rather that it is the highest portion of each truth, which lies concealed from us; nor again, that we ought to fix our minds exclusively upon those veiled parts; but only this, that as we acquiesce not, or ought to rest in, those parts of the divine Economy of which we can form to ourselves clear conceptions, as e.g. we should not limit our thought of the mystery our sonship to God, to His Fatherly Goodness and reconciled love to us, but follow out those other hints which have been traced out for us, of an actual, not a mere relative or figurative sonship, an actual factitious inherent Sonship, as being actual not figurative of His blessed Son, by means of His actual life imparted to us, whereby and wherein we live - so also with regard to faithful Abraham. Our Lord himself tells us that our father Abraham rejoiced to see His day and saw it and was glad, and it becomes as not to limit this liveliness of faith and joy, by what we should abstractedly imagine a person might see, or what we, abstracting ourselves as much as we can from the event should ourselves see.39

So, the primary knowledge of the mysteries and promises in the prophetic system of Old

Testament typology which those living under that dispensation possessed was one of direct

38 Pusey, however, does not offer a fuller illustration of what such an interpretation would look like as he did not carry out his programme of interpretation past the Pentateuch to the historical books.

75 experience and participation. That part of the mystery which was visible to or perceived by them piqued their curiosity to raise their eyes higher to understand that which remained veiled. It was necessary for the light of fulfillment to shine on the shadowy figures before secondary reflection could permit the perceptive and rational faculties to understand the connection of these types to their archetype, but this does not mean that before their consummation those who partook of their reality remained in complete ignorance. The temporal progression and limiting focus of the prophetic development is traced by

Pusey as the promise is restated by God to Isaac and then by Isaac to Jacob. At this point, the blessing is further focused on the tribe of Judah, specifically in the Jacob's blessing of his sons: Judah, your brothers shall praise you; your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies; your father's sons shall bow down before you. Judah is a lion's cub; from the prey, my son, you have gone up. He stooped down; he crouched as a lion and as a lioness; who dares rouse him? The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until tribute comes to him; and to him shall be the obedience of the peoples.40

Here, Judah's line is singled out as that from which the promised delivering 'seed' would come. This promise, like that given to Abraham, was "two-fold, 1) to the Jews themselves, that one tribe should not lose its domain or independent existence, until the Messiah should come; [ 2)] the other that the Gentiles should come in."41 So, again, like the relationship between the Abrahamic promise and the protoevangelium, this prophetic promise further elucidates the actual means of the working out the divine economy by limiting the focus of the historical lineage through which the 'seed' would appear, while still leaving wide open the scope of the redemption to be effected by the promise's fulfillment.

Jy Ibid., 70-1. 40 Genesis 49.8-10. 41 Ibid., 76. 76 Pusey, dependent on patristic interpretation and defining the conditions of this prophecy's fulfillment in Christ, attempted to account for the absence of any reference to this promise in the

New Testament:

Their authority naturally circumscribed, yet in a degree remaining; and this is probably the reason why this prophecy is nowhere cited in the New Testament; inasmuch as though in fact fulfilled, its fulfillment was not yet evident, for the sceptre as not yet quite gone; whereas after the destruction of Jerusalem, we do find it cited in the first instance by Justin Martyr.42 It would not have been possible for the apostolic authors of the New Testament to use this prophecy as evidence of Christ's fulfillment of the Old Testament since the events that would

confirm its fulfillment had not yet taken place or had not become clear. Therefore, it was left for the writers of the early patristic period to make this connection in continuity with and as an extension of the spirit of apostolic interpretation.

Types in the Exodus Narratives and the Mosaic Legislation With the passing of Israel's patriarchal ancestors, Pusey noted a distinctive shift in the

mode of revelation that is seen throughout the rest of the Old Testament. Whereas God had spoken directly to the first couple after their sin, had called Abraham when he was living in

Mesopotamia and declared the promises concerning his progeny, had echoed these promises to Isaac and had appeared to Jacob on a few occasions, with the figures of Moses and Aaron, there

was instituted an economy of prophecy and cult in which God spoke through the mediation of prophetic figures and enigmatically communicated through the types of the religious symbols

and sacrifices. Pusey accounted for this transition by stating that with the growth of the children of Israel from a small, patriarchal clan to the larger embryonic nation there was a complimentary

diminution of faith: "From the great and full-grown faith of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, we pass

77 to the childish faithlessness and waywardness of their descendants, like children, turned aside by every difficulty, living in the present, and caring but about the present."43 As the people's disposition had changed from one characterised by hope and anticipation to one marked by a limited scope of vision and contentment with the near at hand, so the means by which God sought to communicate the comfort and hope of the redemptive promises was by necessity changed to accommodate those who "believed no further than they saw; so, though the promises were not withdrawn from such as would meditate thereon, the rest were trained principally by what they saw, acted and felt."44

At this point, Pusey considers how Israel might be understood as a type of the fulfillment of the redemptive economy of God: Israel then was in a three-fold manner typical: first, in its institutions, wherein it was to live, until by constantly living in them, it imbibed their spirit an so became susceptible for the teaching which unfolded their meaning; secondly, in God's general guidance; thirdly, in their own particular character and conduct, as a people guided by God.45 First, the religious institutions which were established under the Mosaic law, including the cultic centre (tabernacle and temple), purification codes, sacrificial rites and festal celebrations were all meant to convey different aspects of the divine economy's fulfillment which would be drawn together and summed up in the person of Christ. Each of them, in and of themselves, only offered a glimpse of part of the picture, providing a present, though partial, comfort to those partaking of them while always pointing beyond themselves toward their archetype in whom the whole panoply of images was to be brought together. These types, Pusey claimed, were intentionally infused with imperfection in their institution so that, while granting some

Ibid., 83. Ibid., 86

78 participation in the mystery of redemption, they would not cause those who lived in them to stop short of seeking out and attaining the fullness of the truth conveyed in them: "As God held forth types of deliverer, and yet allowed something of imperfection to be mingled in them, lest they should be mistaken for the reality; and in portraying the mode of the deliverance the sacrifice was made purposely incomplete, lest they should be mistaken for the substance."46 This does not mean that the types were in themselves either deceptive or defective - they did convey real knowledge, offering at points elucidations and refinements of former revelation - but ultimately, they were meant as technologies of desire, producing a proper appetitive quality in their participants that would provoke and rightly direct their anticipation towards the fulfillment of the primaeval and patriarchal promises. So, Pusey could say the following about the sacrificial system: Since sacrifice was the very centre of the ritual the thoughtful among them [the Israelites] obviously constrained to connected their ritual with their future hopes, and to search and see what or what manner of things these rites might mean. And the longing, which this would produce, is just the frame of mind, to which God discloses further truth, if not in distinct outlines, yet at least so that they should understand and feel its general spirit and character.47

In this regard, the error of Pusey' s contemporaries who disregarded typological prophecy because of its lack of clarity is shown to be a confusion of the purpose of Old Testament prophecy. Modern interpretation assumes that a prophecy is only meaningful if it conveys logically clear statements describing future events; anything other than this is, supposedly, meaningless because it is not possible to place its content under any normative, hermeneutical controls which leave it open to any arbitrary interpretation. Pusey, countering this dichotomy,

45 Ibid. 46 Ibid., 91-2.

79 showed that it was possible that prophecy was directed to a different human mental faculty than the rational mind, namely the soul, upon which it makes an impression stronger than that which comes from logical conviction and produces in a person a proper desire for the fulfillment of its promise and directs the person towards the event or person in which or whom this fulfillment would take place.48 The individual types under the Mosaic economy could not have been understood at all by those living under the old covenant unless they were seen to be rooted in and growing out of the primaeval promise of the delivering 'seed of the woman'. For this reason, the degree to which these types were understood, whether they appeared opaque barriers around or transparent lenses bringing into focus the mysteries beyond them, would depend on the individual disposition of any given Israelite which would have been formed both by the individual's ability to view the rituals in relation to the prior promises and the degree to which their anticipative desire had been clarified by participation in the cultic institutions. So, as was shown above, Pusey found the attempt of modern biblical interpretation to reconstruct the scope of understanding open to Israel of the symbolic system in which the lived and the prophecies given them ultimately tenuous if not completely misdirected:

In considering the prophetic character of the ritual of the Old Testament it were a perplexing and restless task to endeavour to ascertain how much Israel himself understood thereof; perplexing because the degree in which he understood it, must have varied endlessly, according to the different degrees of spirituality in different times and individuals, ... It has now been in great measure been opened to us by God in the New Testament, and it is for us to read. To go back and imagine what was open under the Old Testament is like half closing the open page; whereby we might readily not only close it more than it was closed to them, but risk closing it altogether to ourselves. And this the

See the above discussion of Pusey's understanding of the nature of human conviction in Chapter Three (27ff). 80 more, since people in investigating the teaching of the ritual, have so often regarded it as an insulated system.49

The ritual types, like the parables of Christ, were intentionally cast in an enigmatic form to provoke exploration into deeper truths by those who would seek the fullness of their meaning, while appearing to those without such a resolve to be of no greater significance than their outward form conveyed. These types were partial manifestations in (Israel's) history of the eternal reality which was to be realised in the event of Christ's life, only seen in its fullness retrospectively in the light of that ultimate fulfillment. Pusey saw them not as an admixture of truth and fiction, but as lower degrees of truth in a broader spectrum, as instances of participation in a fuller and yet unrevealed mystery, which he compared to the present degree of understanding which Christians have of the heavenly realities of which the Church and its sacramental life are types. In this regard, he states: That more hidden sort of prophecy, which is enacted in types, yielded a portion of its instruction to those times also, although part was reserved to be brought into its full light by its fulfillment. Yet even for those times, one must not think that the mysteries, which were not perceived, were on that account uninstructive; it is not in proportion to the clearness of one's perception, that mysteries have their force: how little do we know of the mystery of our own sonship to God, yet it is as we put ourselves forth beyond what we know and endeavour by faith to substantiate what is unseen, and to realize our in part and unknown privilege, that its immensity begins to discover itself and to impress us. Not its clearness and distinctness, but its greatness, constitute its majesty and impressiveness, ... ; not the things which we know clearly, but the things which we know unclearly, are our highest birth-right for to say this is only to say that we see here 'through a glass darkly' only the outskirts of God's glory and of His favour towards us and that it is the very fullness of the light of His countenance, and that His countenance turned to us, which is now hid behind the cloud, and of which only a ray, as it were, breaks through.50

Ibid., 70. See the above discussion of Pusey thoughts on this mater in Chapter Three (48ff). 50 Ibid., 70. 81 So, while the several elements of the fulfillment of prophecy were manifested in the various types and prophecies (e.g. vicarious sacrifice in the slaying of the animal to clothe the first couple or the intimation of resurrection in the Akedah) and were cognizable to persons living under the former dispensation, what remained hidden from them ultimately was the nature of the combination of these various elements in the event of their fulfillment. But, with all the components of redemption symbolised in these rituals and with a proper desire for and anticipation of their fulfillment, an Israelite would have attained to that degree of understanding which the types were meant to convey, even in the absence of anything like a complete literal, predictive description. Beyond the symbolic nature of Israel's religious institutions, the temporal flow of events in their very history was also typical, though at times their true significance was not immediately apparent. For example, the Exodus was not simply the inauguration of Israel's national identity but the paradigm and archetype of all of God's future acts of deliverance. For this reason, Judah's return from Babylonian exile was cast in terms of the earlier deliverance, showing forth the continuity of God's redemptive will for His people and the correspondence and harmony that existed between God's various acts on behalf of His people.51 This inward meaning of the Exodus remained hidden until the periods of the late Israelite and Judean monarchies and the

Babylonian exile when its significance was propounded by the prophetic figures who appeared at that time, especially in Judah: Most of the typical providences of God, would be for the time concealed as to their inward meaning, until the time of their [Israel's] second captivity and the second deliverance of the people of God, when the prophets began to point out the relation of that former deliverance to that which was now approaching, describing this new mercy in

51 Ibid., 86. 82 terms borrowed from the former, and at the same time directed their minds to one which was yet beyond. This interpretation of the Exodus exemplifies Pusey's earlier remarks about the typological potential of history once its scope has been extended beyond the immanent chain of cause and effect and re-situated in the larger economic framework between creation and eschaton.53 An event, like the Exodus, so important in the mind of the ancient Israelites, does not bear its significance in and of itself, but only because of its place in the broader divine economy. To look at it on its own, isolated from the broader divine economy, is to limit the scope of its meaning and to rendered it meaningless beyond the limited place it had for the historical members of a particular and insignificant Near Eastern civilisation.

This does not necessarily make of Israel's history nothing more than a cryptic symbol representing only some yet future event without any significance in and of itself. The dispensation of the old covenant, though preparatory of the economy of Christ's incarnation and the fulfillment of the promises in the Church, was in itself also a manifestation, though partial and transitory, ofthat ultimate reality and its character partook to some degree of the fruits of the promise and were in part a fulfillment of the prophecies. So, of Israel, Pusey said: They are told not only that they are a holy people, a peculiar people (Deuteronomy 7.6, 14.2) but a kingdom of priests (Exodus 19.6). They also were in their measure made kings and priests and so the priesthood did not represent the priesthood of Christ only, (which was represented chiefly by the high priest) not the priestly character and sanctity of all Christians on the other hand, but they saw herein, as in its perfection, the holiness of their own character, as the people of God.

See the above discussion of Pusey's attempt to re-situate history in the larger framework of the divine economy in Chapter Three (39ff). 54MS, 93. 83 Thus, Israel's historical existence is not trivialised by a typological interpretation of the same, but is shown to have a degree of integrity in and of itself, even though it is ultimately significant only as a preparation for and because of its participation in the Christian reality.

To illustrate these principles, we will now consider some examples of Pusey's interpretation of several symbolic institutions in Israel's history and cult. First, in his lecture entitled "The Law," Pusey offered an examination of the brazen serpent which, as recorded in the narrative ofNumbers (chapter 21), was cast by Moses as a means of healing those stricken by the fiery serpents sent as a punishment of the people wandering in the wilderness between Egypt and the promised land. This serpent was characterised by Pusey as a "temporary symbol, which was evidently of a character to be immediately understood and which being connected with former teaching, may give us a hint to look upon the rest of the law, not as insulated, but as carrying God's former revelations and to interpreted by them."55 The fact that God punished His people with the serpent's bite and then commanded that a bronze serpent should be cast as the means of their healing, far from being arbitrary, was to be understood in the context of the former promises to the first couple regarding the crushing of the serpent. Since the serpent had become the instrument of humanity's reprobation, it became also a symbol of evil and transgression. Therefore, "it seems that God employed this moment of earnest repentance and confessions of sins ('we have sinned for we have spoken against the Lord and against Moses) to impart to them a lasting instruction how sin might be pardoned and the source of sin destroyed."56 In this symbol, an image of the serpent, the author of sin, was formed, nailed to a pole and raised up so that those who might look upon it as the destruction of their enemy might

Ibid., 87. Ibid., 88. 84 have the sting of its bite healed. This symbol, then, had both immediate and concealed levels of meaning: Immediately, however, while it relieved their present sufferings, it exhibited the destruction and powerlessness of him, through whom (as they from tradition knew) all the evils, which they felt, as well as that greatest evil, sin, whose consequences, at least, they now felt repentantly, had been brought into the world. The whole Church of God were now, from all quarters, looking at a triumph over Satan, in the image which he had chosen, nailed to the cross, the standard of the sanctuary and made an open show and all who looked in faith to this destruction of the source of their woes were made whole.57

Just as this symbol could not be understood as an isolated type, detached from the earlier parts of the biblical narrative, it is clear from Pusey's interpretation that it is can only be fully understood retrospectively in light of the New Testament. In and of itself, it only showed forth the defeat of the author of sin, not the precise means by which this would be accomplished: "The brazen serpent declared indeed only part of the Mystery of Redemption; it showed the author of sin, and sin with him overcome and nailed to the cross, and by a mediator and that all who in faith gazed thereon lived; it would not show that that mediator was to nail it to His own cross

..." It was necessary, Pusey said, that the conquest of death be here exhibited separate from vicarious sacrifice, so that it could be understood purely, before it would be seen united with the other aspects of redemption in the person of Christ. Pusey's reading back into the Old Testament narrative is heavily dependent on the dialogue between Christ and Nicodemus recorded in the Gospel of John (3.1-21) where he speaks of the lifting up and glorification of the Son of Man

Ibid., 88. Pusey's interpretation is here dependent on his assumption that the exodus generation would have already had something like our present narrative account of the fall in the beginning of Genesis in their tradition. It is not clear how current critical assumptions about the traditional and literary history behind the text of Genesis would affect his approach. One regrettable fact about Pusey's "Lectures" is their unqualified, fideistic rejection of biblical criticism and his unwillingness to consider how the advances in scholarship achieved early on by the use of historical and philological critical methodologies might be utilised in conjunction with his revived typological interpretation.

85 invoking the analogy of the brazen serpent. Also, he cites St Paul's comment in his Second Epistle to the Corinthians (5.21): "For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." After this, Pusey considered the typological nature of sacrifice, especially the annual Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16.1-34), first reasserting that it is only properly understood in the context of the whole Israelite cult, in relation to the former revelation and as a shadow of the future reality: The different parts of the ritual - the tabernacle, sacrifices, priesthood, festivals - are so intimately connected together that any division of it into holy places, persons, things, times must of necessity be more or less arbitrary. The priesthood can only be understood in connection with its offices of sacrifice, and the meaning of sacrifice is most fully seen in the rite of the great day of atonement.59 This event, the Day of Atonement, was of great importance because it was offered as a great, singular sacrifice each year, thereby drawing the entire system of sacrifices together into an annual focal point. The varied sacrifices offered throughout the year, be they thank-offerings, cereal-offerings, wave-offerings, etc, found their significance ultimately in this annual sacrifice offered for the remission of sins and so showed that the many sacrifices were to be summed up and fulfilled in the one. But even this great Day of Atonement, like all parts of the cultic institution, revealed its own "imperfection . . . [which] was set forth in the very fact of its annual repetition: it was perfect as a figure, imperfect as a reality: and shown to be imperfect lest the shadow should be mistaken for the salvation and so the image become an idol, by having His honors, Whom it represented."60 This was necessary since these institutions under the law, as Pusey understood them, were never meant to be the final revelation or means of redemption, but

Ibid., 89. Ibid., 94 Ibid., 99 86 always were to be felt as penultimate pointers towards the ultimate reality of which they made their agents partakers. So, the Day of Atonement focused the attention of the Israelites on the singular, annual sacrifice that would never fulfill their hope and therefore pointed beyond itself to the singular, eternal sacrifice in which all the types would be united and the prophetic promises would be ultimately fulfilled. In his discussion of the Day of Atonement, Pusey also examined the practice of laying the guilt of the peoples' sin on the scapegoat's head before driving it into the wilderness. About the strangeness of this practice, Pusey said: "The escape of the one goat, which was an atonement for sin, was something so peculiar in the Hebrew ritual that it must needs turned men's minds to consider its mystery."61 Here again, Pusey claims that the enigmatic visage of the types was not to be seen as a defect in them, but understood instead as the source of their ability to provoke intrigue which would lead their participants to further investigate the depths of meaning in the respective symbols. Without such, one might have rested content with the more manifest, outward meaning of these types and never pressed on to understand them fully or to see in them pointers towards some future fulfillment. Further, in the context of his discussion about the sacrificial rites and the Day of

Atonement, Pusey addresses the accusation of the inherent arbitrariness of typological interpretation made by some of his contemporaries. His opponents claimed that the mere fact that those who utilised typology or allegorical interpretational approaches were prone to find multiple layers of meaning or several referents in a given Old Testament type or passage was evidence of a lack of hermeneutical control and, therefore, invalidated the authenticity of a such an approach to these narratives. Pusey, on the other hand, saw in this variety of interpretational

87 layers, not evidence of arbitrariness, but proof of the super-abundance of meaning in the various Old Testament narratives, legal codes and religious institutions, and claims that each interpretation is proper in its own place:

We may derive a caution, in interpreting the types of the Old Testament, viz. that the same subject may have several relations, . . . and therefore the one by no means excludes another. What then is so frequently alleged is proof of the arbitrariness of types, and makes so many shrink from seeking out their meaning at all, viz. that different interpretations read their meaning so differently, may and does in part, arise only in the very manifoldness ofthat meaning.62 As was discussed above in the previous chapter words and things bear within themselves enigmatic depths and are capable of communicating eternal realities.63 Therefore, any attempt to place undue constraints on the metaphysical or linguistic extension of things or words produces, in effect, a distortion of their essential reality, limits their potential for communication and denies our capacity for insight into their depths and fullness of meaning. This was an important precaution, in Pusey's mind, not just when considering the interpretation of the Old Testament, but also with regards to a proper understanding of the Christian reality found in the Church and its sacraments wherein the eternal mystery is still mediated by means of types and symbols: The knowledge of these types is obviously of importance to the Christian for the understanding of the Gospel now that it is given, as to its practical apprehension beforehand, since it is in its language that much of the mysteries of the Gospel are still shadowed out to us: we [the Church] know definitely to what the languages applies which they [Israel] did not; but what is passive [sic] figured in that language, precisely we know not; we are still in the land of shadows.64

So, the use of typological interpretation of the Old Testament is vindicated as soon as we realise that typology has not been done away with, even in the Christian dispensation. It is still

61 Ibid., 97. 62 Ibid., 93 See above the discussion of Pusey's understanding of the multi-valent and enigmatic character of language in Chapter Three (36ff).

88 necessary as a medium of communicating the reality manifested in Christ - the fullness of light has shown forth in his person, but its still necessary for those in the Church to have their eyes adjusted to its manifold brightness until we should look fully on the face of glory in the new

heavens and new earth.

The Typological Interpretation ofthe Passover

Finally, at the end of his series of "Lectures on Types and Prophecies of the Old Testament", Pusey considered the Jewish feast of Passover and its typological implications. This feast, instituted in Exodus (chapter 12), was a compliment to the annual Day of Atonement,

filling out the typological manifestation of the fullness of the mystery of the economy of redemption:

The great day of atonement exhibited sin as remitted by the vicarious death and contained the profession that that death was merited by those whose sins were so remitted: the Passover pictured the imparting of life, or condition of similar vicarious suffering: which death fell upon those whose life was not thus preserved. It fills up this and is filled up the teaching of the 'yearly expiation'; the one represented and was attended with humiliation, the other joy; the one the expiation of sin, the other the setting-free of the sinner: the one was Good Friday, the Passover was the Easter day of the Jewish Church; at least in the imperfect degree in which it had either.65

Here again, Pusey showed that it is only by the combination of the several Old Testament types

that a full picture of the prophecy's fulfillment would begin to emerge. No single type, on its own, could sufficiently bear in itself the fullness of the whole mystery. Alone, the sacrifices

only communicated the hope for the removal of the guilt of sin and the ability of vicarious suffering to effect this remission; by itself, Passover recalled the joy of redemption in the event

of the Exodus; each part of the cultic institution only showed forth a part of the whole mystery,

MS, 94. Ibid., 102. 89 but retrospectively, in the event of their fulfillment, their complementarity and inter-relatedness was made manifest.

The importance of the Passover laid in the fact that it pointed to the significance of a singular historical event, namely the first Passover which made possible Israel's deliverance from Egypt. The various sacrifices, including the Day of Atonement, were not bound to any one historical event, but the Passover was a celebration which was understood to be a commemoration of or a festal participation in that first Passover: Herein was again exhibited the unity of that great sacrifice for sins, that the passover was in that proper vicarious sense, not repeated. Then, also, it was within that there is one sacrifice which giveth life, and this stood at the very commencement of the Jewish dispensation as the Christian redemption of the Christian [dispensation]. The other passovers were also sacrifices but rather sacrifices commemorative of a vicarious sacrifice ... the main office was to keep in mind that first sacrifice.66

The annual celebration of the Passover, unlike the Day of Atonement, called its participants to look back to and live out of that first Passover, pointing out the singular and life-giving significance of this one event.

In this way, the Passover pointed backwards to its original institution while directing the attention of the Israelites to the singular historical event in which each element of their cult found its ultimate significance rooted, the event in which the primeval promise would be finally fulfilled, namely the death of the paschal lamb, Christ, and His resurrection. Regarding the dual significance of this feast, Pusey remarked: The Passover then partakes of a double character, as we regard it in its original celebration, or in its subsequent character and in each it is prophetic. It was a vicarious sacrifice giving life; subsequently it was a sacrifice, commemorative and representative only of a vicarious sacrifice yet although no longer vicarious propitiating as was all sacrifice and all shedding of blood appointed by God. On both occasions alike the sacrifice was given back wholly to man, as his food and nourishment; was to be without

Ibid. 90 blemish; not the priests only, but the whole of Israel, family by family, were to partake of it, and they were to receive it entire . . .67

At each point here, Pusey found types of the Christian Eucharist and Christ's death and resurrection which the sacrament represents. As the celebrations of the Passover were dependent

on and represented that original event while looking forward to its fulfillment, so also the

Christian Eucharist is an oblation commemorative of the vicarious sacrifice of Christ which

points towards His second coming: "There was but one full, perfect and sufficient sacrifice,

oblation and satisfaction made for the sins of the whole world: the death of our Lord Jesus Christ

on the cross; this sacrifice was represented by the Jewish sacrifices before our Lord's coming, and is by the Eucharist now; . . ."68 This interpretation of the Passover shows again the sacramental and incarnational basis of

Pusey' s typology. The incarnation and sacraments do not just offer viable analogies by which the system of types maybe understood; they are, instead, part and parcel of the same reality. In turn, the mystery of redemption fulfilled in Christ's incarnation is communicated to the Church through the sacraments in a manner similar to the way in which it was participated in by Israel through their sacrificial system and annual feasts. This sacramental reality, again, was not conveyed by means of rational communication but by experiential participation and a union which is effected between the individual person and the larger divine reality. Herein lies the difference between the Jewish feasts and the Christian sacraments, the former merely anticipated the fulfillment of hope in Christ, while the latter are a participation in that fulfillment:

As in the Passover, so in the Eucharist, first is that whereof the sacrifice consists in the Passover, the lamb, in the Eucharist, the bread and wine, both alike symbolic of the Body and Blood of Christ are first offered to God; in the language of the liturgy of [John

67IWd., 103. 68Ibid., 106 91 Chrysostom], 'we offer to Thee of Thine own' . . . Then God gives them back in nourishment to His people, only to the Jews in type, to the Christian in reality, to the Jews to the nourishment of the body, to Christians, to the strengthening and refreshing of the soul also through the Body and Blood of Christ.69 So, here again, Pusey demonstrated what he saw as another aspect of the misguided approach of his opponents which deemed an Old Testament type meaningless if it did not immediately convey a logically precise prediction, showing that they were meant to offer sustenance, not just ideas. In the Old Testament types and prophecies, there is not so much a communication of ideas about the divine economy as instances of partial participation in the fullness of that economy. For this reason, Pusey says that what distinguishes modern, critical biblical interpretation from the typological approach of the church fathers was their conviction that every element of the Old Testament religious institution and every event in Israel's history bore within itself hidden depths of significance and manifold meaning: "In part also, their thorough connection of the divinity of every least jot and tittle, every fringe and bell in the veil embroidery of God's word that everything in the whole economy had its designs and meanings - enabled them to use proofs which would be closed to moderns." So, what is needed to restore a typological approach is not an extended argument about how various allegorical interpretations might cohere with critically reconstructed portraits of the original intentions of an ancient author's meaning, but a retrieval of the sacramental vision that sees mysterious depths in all things and the anticipatory desire to finds such connections between the Old Covenant and the New and understands the Old Testament as the expression of those persons who lived under that former dispensation of their awareness or perception of the divine economy in which they participated.

69 Ibid., 104.

92 With these examples of a typological interpretation of the Pentateuch laid out, Pusey finally offered a tentative definition of typology and considered the nature of the relationship between the Old and New Testaments, as the following lengthy quote demonstrates: This metaphor might perhaps express the truth as nearly as it admits of being expressed; the types before our Lord's coming, like the moon in night season, show more conspicuously, yet the reflection of our meridian Sun, although less, when compared to that Sun, is still more overpowering. The Old Testament had the office of conveying information as to that which was not yet, as well as of impressing it upon the mind; our images have only the office of impressing it, but impress it more deeply. Theirs had an office which ours has not; ours fulfills the office, which they have in common more gloriously. Thus the sacrifice of the Jews contains a longing expectation which for us, through the mercy of God has been abundantly satisfied: but ours have in them a fullness of glory and of awe, which theirs could not have, since they know but darkly what was intended by them. And our' s have their longing expectation too only, until they be fulfilled, ie., filled up completely by the presence of Him whom they foreshadow; for ours also fills up a period of looking-onward, until a greater glory be revealed: they are so many images of our absent Lord, and shew forth His death until He come'; and then shall our images be swept away, when sight succeeds to the reflection of the unseen as were there shadowed by the first coming of Him, the Substance. Neither their shadows nor our images are of course any thing in themselves; but what they are and were, they both derived from the Substance, whence they are expressed. But in that ours have the greater fullness, in consequence of our Lord's having actually come, theirs may be in a degree, said to be types of our' s inasmuch as the 'type' is that, which contains the substance less fully, than that of which it is the 'type' and although there can be only one Archetype, that namely, wherein the whole substance dwells, these may be many degrees of types, whereof the one approaches to the Archetype nearer that the others.71 The Old Testament can be understood typologically in relation to Christ because it contains something of and offered a means of participating in the reality of Christ before the event of His incarnation. It did not posses the fullness of Christ which was not possible until He had come to fulfill the prophetic hopes of Israel, of which the Church partakes in the wake of His death and resurrection. The various parts of the Old Testament are more or less typical of Christ the more or less clearly they represent or approach closer to the archetype they showed forth before its

/u Ibid., 118. 71 Ibid., 123. 93 (His) manifestation. All of this was meant to convey information about and to produce a longing expectation for that which was still future.

94 Chapter Five

Conclusion

Having surveyed Pusey's "Lectures on Types and Prophecies of the Old Testament" in their entirety, it is clear that the predominant portrait of Pusey that exists at present in contemporary discussions of the history of biblical interpretation is in need of revision. The Pusey one finds in these "Lectures" does not fit easily into the mold of a staunch traditionalist bereft of any scholarly acumen, but stands as a figure who is not only critical of some prevailing trends in the theology and biblical interpretation of his contemporaries but also offers a creative alternative by his attempt to revive typological biblical interpretation as well as the philosophical and theological framework which upholds it. Throughout the "Lectures" certain prevailing themes in Pusey's interpretive practice come to the surface which, while not only calling for a revision of assumptions about Pusey may also serve as guideposts for contemporary attempts to retrieve a typological or figurai interpretation of Scripture in the modern world. First, Pusey here fleshes out his insistence that specific prophecies not be interpreted as individual instances of prediction in isolation from one another, but rather in such a way that each prophecy is seen as part of an integral and connected system interwoven throughout the entire fabric of the Old Testament. In this understanding, the whole proclamation of prophecy was wrapped up in that first protoevangelical promise and word of hope given to the first couple in the wake of their original transgression concerning the 'seed of the woman' who would crush the serpent's head and undo the effects of their Fall. From this one prophecy, as from a source, the entire Old Testament flowed forth and each subsequent prophecy was offered either to elucidation some portion of this redemptive economy or in order to delimit the historical lineage and persons through whom its temporal fulfillment would be effected, while never limiting the

95 scope of its promise. The particularity of the prophetic fulfillment was continually narrowed throughout the dispensation of the Old Covenant until it focused solely on the humble and obedient Virgin who would bring forth the conquering 'seed', Christ, through whom the universal hope of redemption would be accomplished. So, as Pusey said, that first prophecy "contained in its compass the whole Gospel"1 and as all other prophecies were a spelling out of that first and found their ultimate fulfillment in Christ, they were all bound together into one great overarching system and could only be understood properly when both their historical particularity and their place in the broader context were considered.

Secondly, prophecies and types did not offer, primarily, statements of ideas about God nor literal, predictive descriptions of future events within the redemptive economy. Instead, they were meant to produce a proper appetitive desire in their participants and offered sustenance until their fulfillment and reality was made manifest. Pusey here returns to the epistemological claims he made in his initial lecture concerning the nature of human conviction and the difference between experiential/participatory forms of knowledge and cognitive/rational understanding. While the former sort of understanding was shown to be prior to the latter in Pusey' s consideration of various Old Testament characters, this is not meant to imply that he thought either that persons under the former dispensation failed or were unable to reflect on the meaning of the prophecies they received or the types in which they lived. Instead, it safeguards the reality of their knowledge of the divine economy against modern epistemological presuppositions which omit these deeper forms of knowledge. Types and prophecies, then, were never intended to offer a clear portrait or account of the one to come, but rather to produce a

1 MS, 45. 96 proper taste and desire for the One in whom they would be realised so that, by these faculties, He might be recognised and embraced. Thirdly, Pusey acknowledged the fact that the individual types and prophecies did not possess in themselves each the full reality in which they participated and towards which they pointed. Instead, they were each like the different colours of a spectrum, which, when refracted by a prism, can be examined each singly, but can only be properly seen as an aspect of a singular ray of light. So, the different prophecies to the first couple, the patriarchs, and Israel, as well as the various elements which made up their cultic and legal system each present some one piece of the larger picture which was to be fulfilled in Christ and in the Church. All the pieces could be found and understood in the Old Testament, but the exact nature of their eventual combination in the event of their consummation could only be understood. The different sides of their fulfillment were found in each, but the nature of their combination could only be perceived retrospectively in light of their consummation. Only from the ecclesiastical vantage point, on this side of the incarnation, ministry, death and resurrection of Christ can the typical nature of the Old Testament be properly gauged and its sense interpreted.

Fourthly, such types are not hermeneutical aberrations or the arbitrary inventions of wreckless interpretators. Instead, they are realities instituted by God within the divine economy as instances of participation in the full reality of redemption which were partially discerned by the authors of the Old Testament and further manifested by and elucidated by the apostles and patristic writers in light of their consummation in the event of the incarnation, ministry, death and resurrection of Christ. They are instances of a broader framework, based in the reality of the incarnation, the Church and its sacraments which demonstrates the potential for an eschatalogical union between the transcendant and immanent. Their credibility and the viability of a restoration

97 typological interpretation hangs upon the retrieval of a theological and sacramental vision which has the capacity to discern these realities in the broader world, outside the biblical canon, and can come to terms with the possibility of mathesis, or the participation of the finite in the eternal, in the realms of being, language and history. As was shown above, without such a vision, typological interpretation will continue to appear arbitrary or at best a literary game which plays with the flexibility of the narrative or rhetorical matrix of the Old Testament, bending it to conform with the shape of the New whenever possible. Finally, the restoration of a typological interpretation is desirable for a variety of reasons.

First, only it, if Pusey is correct, can make proper sense of the prophecies and types of the Old Testament, granting them their individual integrity while including them in the broader typological framework of the divine economy. Secondly, only it, by establishing the participation of the Old Testament as a type in the reality of Christ, can properly establish a coherent and organic unity between the Old and New Testaments, in opposition to the overly disjunctive nature of other formulas such as prophecy (read: prediction)/fulfillment models or the various historical critical models which are concerned only with the development demonstrated in the immanent realm of history. Finally, it is only through the refraction of the reality of Christ throughout the typological fabric of the Old Testament that the Church has any grammar to interpret, understand and communicate the mystery of its own faith which is still a type of a yet future heavenly reality. So, while the dispensation of the Old Testament has passed on into that of the New, the significance of its types remains.

98 Bibliography Allchin, A. M. Participation in God: A Forgotten Strand in Anglican Tradition. London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1988.

______. "Theological Vision of the Oxford Movement," in The Rediscovery ofNewman: An Oxford Symposium. Edited by John Coulson & A.M. Allchin. London: SPCK, 1967: 50- 75.

Athanasius, Saint. De Incarnatione Verbi Dei in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Volume 4, Athanasius: Select Works and Letters. Edited by P. Schaff & H. Wace. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004: 36-67.

Augustine, Saint. The Confessions. Translated by E. B. Pusey. London: Watkins, 2006. Ayers, Michael. Locke, Volume I, Epistemology. London: Routledge, 1991.

Blowers, Paul M. The Bible in Greek Christian Antiquity. Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1997.

Book of Common Prayer, The. The Episcopal Church - USA. New York: Church Publishing Incorporated, 1979.

Bornkamm, Heinrich. Luther and the Old Testament. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969.

Bray, Gerald. Biblical Interpretation: Past & Present. Downers Grove, 111.: InterVarsity Press, 1996.

Breck, John. Scripture in Tradition: The Bible and its Interpretation in the Orthodox Church. Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2001.

Butler, Perry, ed. Pusey Rediscovered. London: SPCK, 1983. Chadwick, Owen. The Spirit of the Oxford Movement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

Charity, A.C. Events and Their Afterlife: The Dialectics of Christian Typology in the Bible. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1966.

Coleridge, Samuel Taylor. Aids to Reflection. Ed. H. N. Coleridge. 1840; Port Washington, N.Y.: Kennikat, 1971.

______. The Collected Works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge. 13 vols. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969-1984.

99 Collins, Anthony. A Discourse of the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion. London, 1724.

Daniélou, Jean. From Shadows to Reality: Studies in the Biblical Typology of the Fathers. Translated by Wulstan Hibberd. London: Burns and Oates, 1960.

Dictionary ofEarly Christian Beliefs, ed. D. W. Bercot. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1998. Driver, Samuel Rolles. The Book ofGenesis. London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1911.

Faber, Geoffrey. Oxford Apostles: A Character Study of the Oxford Movement. London: Faber andFaber, 1974. Farrar, Frederic W. History ofInterpretation. Bampton Lectures (1885). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1 96 1 .

Forrester, David. Young Doctor Pusey: A Study in Development. London: Mowbray, 1989.

Frampton, Travis L. Spinoza and the Rise ofHistorical Criticism ofthe Bible. New York: T & T Clark, 2006.

Franzmann, Martin H. "Seven Thesis on Reformation Hermeneutics." Concordia Journal 15 (1989): 337-50 Frei, Hans W. The Eclipse ofBiblical Narrative: A Study in Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Hermeneutics. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1974. Garrett, Don, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Spinoza. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Grant, R. M. A Short History of the Interpretation of the Bible. 2nd ed. Revised and Enlarged. London: SCM, 1984.

Hall, Christopher A. Reading Scripture with the Church Fathers. Downers Grove, 111.: InterVarsity Press, 1998. Hanson, R.P.C. Allegory and Event: A Study of the Sources and Significance of Origen 's Interpretation ofScripture. London: SCM, 1959. Härdelin, Alf. The Tractarian Understanding of the Eucharist. Uppsala: Almquist & Wiksells, 1965.

Hart, David Bentley. The Beauty ofthe Infinite: The Aesthetics ofChristian Truth. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2003.

100 Hauser, A. J. & D. F. Watson, eds. A History ofBiblical Interpretation, Volume 1, The Ancient Period. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W. B. Eerdmans, 2003. Higton, Mike. Christ, Providence and History: Hans W. Frei 's Public Theology. New York: Continuum, 2004.

Hunter, Graeme, ed. Spinoza: The Enduring Questions. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994.

Irenaeus, Saint. Against Heresies in Ante-Nicene Father, Volume 1, The Apostolic Fathers, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004: 315-567.

Justin Martyr, Saint. Dialogue with Trypho in Ante-Nicene Father, Volume 1, The Apostolic Fathers, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004: 194-270. Keble, John. The Christian Year. New York: E.P. Dutton and Co., 1872.

______. Keble's Lectures on Poetry 1832-1841. 2 vols. Trans. E.K. Francis. Oxford: Clarendon, 1912.

Kooiman, W. J. Luther and the Bible. Muhlenberg, PA: Muhlenberg Press, 1961. Krauss, Hans-Joachim. "Calvin's Exegetical Principles." Interpretation 31,8-18 Lampe, G. W. H. & K. J. Woolcombe. Essays on Typology. Studies in Biblical Theology, 32. London: SCM, 1957.

Liddon, Henry Parry. Life ofEdward Bouverie Pusey. 4 vols. Edited J.O. Johnston and Robert J. Wilson. London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1894.

Locke, John. An Essay concerning Human Understanding. Edited P. H. Nidditch. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975.

Louth, Andrew. Discerning the Mystery: An Essay on the Nature of Theology. Oxford: Clarendon, 1983.

Lubac, S.J., Henri de. Medieval Exegesis, 2 vols. Translated by M. Sebanc & E. M. Macierowski. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2000.

Luther, Martin. Luther's WorL·, Volume 26. Edited by Jaroslav Pelikan. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1963. Malcolm, Norman. Aspects ofHobbes. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002.

101 Martinich, A.P. Hobbes. New York: Routledge, 2005. Matthew, H. C. G. "Edward Bouverie Pusey: From Scholar to Tractarian." Journal of Theological Studies 1981 XXXII(1):101-124. Maximus the Confessor, Saint. On the Cosmic Mystery ofJesus Christ: Selected Writingsfrom St Maximus the Confessor. Translated by P. M. Blowers and R. L. Wilken. Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2003. McKim, Donald K., ed. Historical Handbook of Major Biblical Interpreters. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVaristy Press, 1998. Milbank, John. Theology and Social Theory: Beyond Secular Reason. Second edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2006. Newman, John Henry Cardinal. The Arians of the Fourth Century. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1901. Newman, Lex. The Cambridge Companion to Locke's "Essay concerning Human Understanding. " Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Nockles, Peter B. The Oxford Movement in Context: Anglican High Churchmanship, 1760-1857. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Old, Hughes Oliphant. The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Church, Volume 2, The Patristic Age. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W. B. Eerdmans, 1998. ______. The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Church, Volume 3, The Medieval Church. Grand Rapids, Mich.: W. B. Eerdmans, 1998. Origen. De Principiis in Ante-Nicene Father, Volume 4, Tertullian, Part Fourth; Minucius Felix; Commodian; Origen, Parts First and Second. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004: 239-382. Prickett, Stephen. Romanticism and Religion: The Tradition ofColeridge and Wordsworth in the Victorian Church. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976. ______. Words and 'The Word': Language, Poetics and Biblical Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Puckett, David. John Calvin 's Exegesis ofthe Old Testament (Louisville: Westminster, 1995); Pusey, Edward Bouverie. "Lectures on Types and Prophecies, 1836." MS. Pusey House Library, Oxford University, Oxford.

102 ______. An Historical Enquiry into the Causes of the Rationalist Character lately predominant in the Theology of Germany. London: C & J Rivington: Pt. 1, 1828. Pt. 2, 1830. von Rad, Gerhard. Genesis: A Commentary. Revised edition. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1972

Reventlow, Henning Graf. The Authority of the Bible and the Rise of the Modern World. Translated by J. Bowden. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985.

Rogerson, John. Old Testament Criticism in the Nineteenth Century: England and Germany. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985. Schindler, David C. "What's the Difference? On the Metaphysics of Participation in a Christian Context." The Saint Anselm Journal 3.1 (Fall 2005): 1-27.

Shea, Victor and William Whitla, ed. Essays and Reviews: The 1860 Text and Its Readings. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 2000.

Sherlock, Thomas. The Works ofBishop Sherlock, Volume 4. London: A.J. Valpy, 1830. Simonetti, Manlio. Biblical Interpretation in the Early Church (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1995

Skarsaune, Oskar. The Prooffrom Prophecy: A Study ofJustin Martyr's Proof-Text Tradition: Text-Type, Provenance, Theological Profile. Leiden: Brill, 1987.

Sorrell, Tom. The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. de Spinoza, Benedictus. The Chief Works ofBenedict de Spinoza, Volume 1 . Translated by R. H. M. Elwes. New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1951.

Stephen, Sir Leslie. History ofEnglish Thought in the Eighteenth Century, Volume 1 . New York: Harcourt, Bruce & World, 1962.

Thomas Aquinas, Saint. Summa Theologiœ, Vol 1. Edited and translated by T. Gilby, O.P. Oxford: Black Friars, 1964.

______.Summa Theologiœ, Vol 45. Edited and translated R. Potter, O.P. Oxford: Black Friars, 1970.

Torrance, Thomas F. The Hermeneutics of John Calvin. Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press, 1988.

103 Tracts for the Times. By Members of the University of Oxford. 7 vols. London: J.G.F. and J. Rivington and J.H. Parker, 1840.

Trigg, Joseph W. Origen: The Bible and Philosophy in the Third Century. London: SCM, 1985. Wordsworth, William. Poetry and Prose. Edited by W.M. Merchant. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1970.

______. The Prose Works of William Wordsworth. 3 vols. Edited by W. J. B. Owen & J.W. Smyser. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1974. Yarchin, William. History of Biblical Interpretation: A Reader. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004.

Young, Frances M. Biblical Exegesis and the Formation of Christian Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

104