Expert: Christopher Heren - 5/16/2011

Question
QUESTION: Hi, I read somewhere that the origin of both homily and commentary lies in the patristic period. I was hoping you can tell me if:
a) this is true, if so then
b) why did they come into existence during this time and
c) was there no commentaries and homilies before this period, say in the Jewish tradition?

Thank you very much for your time
Jason

ANSWER: Jason,

Commentaries as homilies appear in the Jewish religion in the Synagogue.  When Jesus in Luke 4 reads Isaiah and sits down, with all looking at Him, that was His cue to add his commentary (which He did).  The early church continued this into the Patristic Period, releasing some of the best homilies on Scripture which both point to Christ, godly living, and the secrets of Christianity.  The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Matthew or Romans are good to start with if you are interested in reading any.  You can find them at newadvent.org under "fathers."

Chris

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Thank you very much for the quick response. Just one quick follow-up:
The quote of "the origin of both homily and commentary lies in the patristic period." comes from a book titled "Biblical Exegesis and the Formation of Christian Culture" by Frances M. Young (pg. 4).

Is there any reason why the author would've written this? Is there any particular difference (maybe in form) between commentaries and homilies before the patristic period and after?

Once again thank you very much for your time.
Jason

Answer
Jason,

After perusing the page or two of context, I must admit I think that the only way I can take his comment as correct is if he is referring to specifically Christian biblical interpretation.  Even this though is not fully correct, as the New Testament has no "commentary" but might have homilies.  Also, the New Testament "commentaries" are much more related to imagery borrowed or referenced from the Old Testament, or certain words/phrases (the Holy Spirit "overshadowing" Mary as the Tabernacle in Luke is an example).

She has a degree in theology, but just because people have doctorates in the subject of "theology," that doesn't mean their knowledge of the early church or biblical exegesis is anywhere near comprehensive.  It could be a statement based on a secondary source she was using, but I know the fact is wrong (to the best of MY knowledge).

Hope this helps.

Chris