Book Review: Theological Hermeneutics

Alexander Jensen, Theological Hermeneutics (London: SCM, 2007), 237 pages, ISBN 9780334029014.

Alexander Jensen's Theological Hermeneutics is a historical introduction to theological hermeneutics, which Jensen defines as the way in which the problem of understanding has been addressed (2). The book surveys key theological hermeneuts and movements from antiquity, to the watershed that was the Enlightenment, up to the present postmodern context. Jensen argues that theological hermeneutics must be critical (214).

Beginning with his discussion on "Hermeneutics in Antiquity," Jensen convincingly argues that criticism has always been present throughout the history of hermeneutics. Indeed, he shows that despite the popular impression of pre-moderns as not being critical interpreters, there have always been critical interpretations from antiquity until the Enlightenment. For example, because a literal interpretation of the text was not always amenable to interpreters, the criticism of allegorical interpretation dominated antiquity. And critical methods were developed to criticize allegorical interpretation.

Perhaps the most pivotal insight into hermeneutical thinking and criticism, however, came about as a result of Augustine's recognition that language is imperfect and the spoken word does not perfectly convey one's thought. In other words, the listener or reader will never arrive at the speaker's or author's thought, but can only approximate it (47). Jensen appropriately emphasizes that this understanding has guided hermeneutical thinking to the present, that is, except for a notable exception during the Enlightenment era.

Before discussing this exception, however, Jensen's survey highlights the fact that the discovery of errors in authoritative texts led Medieval and Reformation interpreters back to the sources (ad fontes). So the Bible and the Patristic tradition were used to critique texts. Therefore, Reformation hermeneutics, commonly considered to be based on sola scriptura also had its critical element of the "purified" tradition.

But a notable exception to the need for critical hermeneutics occurred during the Enlightenment. To be sure, the Enlightenment did usher in the Modern era of explicit historical criticism attributable to the development of Baconian scientific method, and Cartesian rationalism that suggested human reason is the ultimate authority. However, the realism of the Scottish Enlightenment and Thomas Reid's "common sense" philosophy, again, contrary to the prevailing Augustinian understanding of the hermeneutical process, considered the spoken word to be representative of one's thought. So, critical reflection was not needed for understanding. But, agreeing with the Augustinian tradition, and in light of his thesis, Jensen considers this common sense to be naive and a denial of one's presuppositions and prejudices in interpretation (85).

Despite Reid's "common sense," the post-Enlightenment era, consistent with Augustinian thought, also evidences the continuous presence of critical hermeneutics. For, Friedrich Schleiermacher advocates both a grammatical and psychological critique of texts. William Dilthey's historicism critiques texts in their historical contexts. The so-called (by Paul Ricoeur) "masters of suspicion," Karl Marx, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Sigmund Freud, prescribes hermeneutical criticism because ideology, the will to power, and the author's unconscious, respectively, may be the driving force behind texts.

Moreover, postmodern interpretations like post-structuralism and deconstruction demand critical hermeneutics because a work may have multiple texts and readings respectively. Even in a closed-sign system like literary or narrative criticism there is still the need to interpret critically because of differences in the linguistic system. Finally, post-colonial readings are a critique against colonial assumptions which tend to distort discourse with the view that Western culture is superior.

Having surveyed Jensen's argument for a critical hermeneutic, one major critique of Theological Hermeneutics is that a Pentecostal or charismatic hermeneutic was not included in the survey. Jensen only mentioned that "Pentecostal and charismatic traditions are different in that they allow for an element of immediate ecstatic experience" (213). This assessment is obviously true, but it does not justify the exclusion of Pentecostal and charismatic traditions in such a historic survey. Even though Pentecostal and charismatic interpretations are relatively new, so are the postmodern understandings which Jensen elaborates. And even though the output of Pentecostal and charismatic texts may be relatively smaller than postmodern texts, there have been enough articles written in regards to Pentecostal hermeneutics to justify its inclusion in his survey.¹

This exclusion of Pentecostal and charismatic interpretations could be because of the same impression of pre-modern hermeneutic as not being critical (61). But Pentecostal and charismatic interpretations are also critical in that they present a balanced hermeneutic that is sensitive to the continuing inspiration/illumination of texts and readers by the Holy Spirit. Pentecostal and charismatic interpretations also employ critical methodologies like narrative and textual criticism, along with criticism from the community of interpreters. Thus, Jensen is right that Hermeneutical theology must be a critical theology due to the multiplicity of understandings that can be obtained from texts. Such critical theology, however, should not be exclusive of the Spirit, especially if epistemology, hermeneutics, interpretation, and method are characterized by a pneumatological logic.²

In spite of Jensen's exclusion of Pentecostal and charismatic hermeneutics, it is conclusive that Theological Hermeneutics is an excellent survey of theological and hermeneutical thought from antiquity to the present postmodern context. I highly recommend this book to all theology students.

Reviewed by Fitzroy Willis

Notes

¹ Cf., for example, McLean, Mark. "Toward a Pentecostal Hermeneutic." Pneuma 6 (1984): 35-56. Moore, Rickie. "Canon and Charisma in the Book of Deuteronomy." Journal of Pentecostal Theology 1 (1992): 75-92. Thomas, John Christopher. "Women, Pentecostals and the Bible: An Experiment in Pentecostal Hermeneutics." Journal of Pentecostal Theology 5 (1994): 41-56.

² Amos Yong, Spirit-Word-Community: Theological Hermeneutics in Trinitarian Perspective (Burlington: Ashgate, 2002), 108.

Fitzroy Willis is currently a Ph.D. student in Renewal Biblical Studies at Regent University where he also earned an M.A. in Biblical Studies. Additionally, he has earned a M.S. and B.S. in Bio-chemistry from SUNY Health Science Center at Brooklyn and SUNY Stony Brook respectively.