{"title":"为永恒而食尼萨的格列高里对《日用饮食请愿书》的社会维度解读","authors":"Thomas Breedlove, Alex Fogleman","doi":"10.5325/jtheointe.18.1.0061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Gregory of Nyssa’s interpretation of the Lord’s Prayer’s request for daily bread is difficult to place in the history of the petition’s exegesis. Early interpreters—among them Tertullian, Cyprian, Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Ambrose, Augustine, and Peter Chrysologus—stressed what is often called, in Henri de Lubac’s phrase, a “spiritual interpretation” of the bread as knowledge, the Eucharist, or Christian doctrine. The majority of modern commentators, in contrast, understand the petition to ask for material food. Gregory, however, troubles simple contrasts between ancient and modern and spiritual and material interpretation. In his fourth homily on the dominical prayer, he draws upon Origen’s exegesis, interpretating the bread within a metaphysical framework distinguishing between the perceptible and intelligible, but Gregory understands the bread to be material bread and the necessity of eating to be central to the human creature’s imitation of the impassible and immaterial God. Even more unique than this departure from the spiritual interpretation of the bread is Gregory’s argument that luxury and excess—eating more than the minimum required by the body—are practices not only bad for the soul but harmful and unjust to one’s neighbors. This article takes both these dynamics in turn: first, putting Gregory’s interpretation in relief by comparing it not only to the spiritual interpretation of bread by Origen but also the materialist interpretations offered by Chrysostom and Theodore; and second, bringing to light Gregory’s remarkable deployment of a perceptible/intelligible ontology to argue for the purpose of material sustenance and its importance for a just society.","PeriodicalId":53190,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Theological Interpretation","volume":"54 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Eating for Eternity: The Social Dimensions of Gregory of Nyssa’s Interpretation of the Petition for Daily Bread\",\"authors\":\"Thomas Breedlove, Alex Fogleman\",\"doi\":\"10.5325/jtheointe.18.1.0061\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Gregory of Nyssa’s interpretation of the Lord’s Prayer’s request for daily bread is difficult to place in the history of the petition’s exegesis. Early interpreters—among them Tertullian, Cyprian, Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Ambrose, Augustine, and Peter Chrysologus—stressed what is often called, in Henri de Lubac’s phrase, a “spiritual interpretation” of the bread as knowledge, the Eucharist, or Christian doctrine. The majority of modern commentators, in contrast, understand the petition to ask for material food. Gregory, however, troubles simple contrasts between ancient and modern and spiritual and material interpretation. In his fourth homily on the dominical prayer, he draws upon Origen’s exegesis, interpretating the bread within a metaphysical framework distinguishing between the perceptible and intelligible, but Gregory understands the bread to be material bread and the necessity of eating to be central to the human creature’s imitation of the impassible and immaterial God. Even more unique than this departure from the spiritual interpretation of the bread is Gregory’s argument that luxury and excess—eating more than the minimum required by the body—are practices not only bad for the soul but harmful and unjust to one’s neighbors. This article takes both these dynamics in turn: first, putting Gregory’s interpretation in relief by comparing it not only to the spiritual interpretation of bread by Origen but also the materialist interpretations offered by Chrysostom and Theodore; and second, bringing to light Gregory’s remarkable deployment of a perceptible/intelligible ontology to argue for the purpose of material sustenance and its importance for a just society.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53190,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Theological Interpretation\",\"volume\":\"54 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Theological Interpretation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5325/jtheointe.18.1.0061\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Theological Interpretation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/jtheointe.18.1.0061","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
尼萨的格列高里对《主祷文》中 "日用饮食 "请求的解释很难被归入该祷文的注释史中。早期的解释者--其中包括良(Tertullian)、塞浦路斯人(Cyprian)、奥利(Origen)、耶路撒冷的西里尔(Cyril of Jerusalem)、安布罗斯(Ambrose)、奥古斯丁(Augustine)和彼得-克利索洛格斯(Peter Chrysologus)--强调的通常是亨利-德-卢巴克(Henri de Lubac)所说的 "精神解释",即面包是知识、圣餐或基督教教义。与此相反,大多数现代注释家都将这一请求理解为对物质食物的请求。然而,格里高利对古代与现代、精神与物质解释之间的简单对比提出了质疑。在关于主祷文的第四篇讲道中,他借鉴了奥利的注释,在区分可感知和可理解的形而上学框架内解释了面包,但格里高利将面包理解为物质面包,将进食的必要性理解为人类受造物模仿不可感知和非物质上帝的核心。与面包的灵性诠释相比,格里高利更独特的论点是,奢侈和过量--吃得超过身体所需的最低限度--不仅对灵魂有害,而且对邻居也是有害和不公正的。本文依次论述了这两种动态:首先,将格里高利的解释与奥利对面包的灵性解释以及金口和西奥多的唯物主义解释进行比较,从而将其置于轻松的氛围中;其次,揭示格里高利对可感知/可理解本体论的出色运用,以论证物质养料的目的及其对公正社会的重要性。
Eating for Eternity: The Social Dimensions of Gregory of Nyssa’s Interpretation of the Petition for Daily Bread
Gregory of Nyssa’s interpretation of the Lord’s Prayer’s request for daily bread is difficult to place in the history of the petition’s exegesis. Early interpreters—among them Tertullian, Cyprian, Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Ambrose, Augustine, and Peter Chrysologus—stressed what is often called, in Henri de Lubac’s phrase, a “spiritual interpretation” of the bread as knowledge, the Eucharist, or Christian doctrine. The majority of modern commentators, in contrast, understand the petition to ask for material food. Gregory, however, troubles simple contrasts between ancient and modern and spiritual and material interpretation. In his fourth homily on the dominical prayer, he draws upon Origen’s exegesis, interpretating the bread within a metaphysical framework distinguishing between the perceptible and intelligible, but Gregory understands the bread to be material bread and the necessity of eating to be central to the human creature’s imitation of the impassible and immaterial God. Even more unique than this departure from the spiritual interpretation of the bread is Gregory’s argument that luxury and excess—eating more than the minimum required by the body—are practices not only bad for the soul but harmful and unjust to one’s neighbors. This article takes both these dynamics in turn: first, putting Gregory’s interpretation in relief by comparing it not only to the spiritual interpretation of bread by Origen but also the materialist interpretations offered by Chrysostom and Theodore; and second, bringing to light Gregory’s remarkable deployment of a perceptible/intelligible ontology to argue for the purpose of material sustenance and its importance for a just society.