Frances M. Young. Scripture, The Genesis of Doctrine: Doctrine and Scripture in Early Christianity , vol. 1; Frances M. Young. Scripture in Doctrinal Dispute: Doctrine and Scripture in Early Christianity , vol. 2

As a doctoral student, my entryway into patristic exegesis and reading practices was greatly facilitated by Frances Young’s Biblical Exegesis and the Formation of Christian Culture (Baker, 2002). I have repeatedly returned to this book and recommended it to others as an eye-opening account of how to make sense of Scripture in the early church. So, it was with a good deal of excitement that I read Young’s two-volume account of the relationship between doctrine and Scripture in the early church. And these volumes do not disappoint. The argument is fairly simple and straightforward even if the geographical and chronological terrain is complex and unwieldy. The research question that drives Young’s project is this: How did appeals to Scripture relate to and produce doctrine? Her argument in volume 1 is that “doctrine was generated by the need to make sense of scripture” (p. 13). Volume 2 extends the thesis by showing how the reading of Scripture led to the articulation of the doctrines of the Trinity and the two natures of Christ.Readers who are familiar with Young’s work will recognize many of her previous research at work in her account of the relationship between Scripture and doctrine. For example, she argues that Christianity functions more like a philosophical school in its emphasis on truth, teaching, and its interpretation of sacred texts. While the school members were surprisingly diverse (in terms of ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic identities), early Christianity was similar to other schools in their emphasis on teachers who argued for and sought to embody a particular way of life. Young canvasses the second century to demonstrate this point by examining the scriptural exegesis of Marcion, Valentinus, and Justin. Justin’s interpretation of Christian doctrine through using the rule of faith as a hermeneutical key is performed, and can only be performed Young argues, through exegetical engagement with the biblical text.One of the repeated arguments throughout is the interrelationship between right doctrine for the right reading of Scripture, and the necessity of the right reading of Scripture for the articulation of the right articulation of doctrine. So, Origen combats Marcion and Valentinus’s reading of Scripture by claiming they have failed to understand the true doctrine of God, namely, that there is one Creator God who created all things except evil. Young notes that it was Origen’s foundational “commitment to the apostolic tradition, rather than any particular hermeneutical method, that enabled Origen to distinguish the right meaning and truth in scripture. . . . Only right doctrine could make sense of scripture” (p. 139).A lengthy chapter that can stand alone in its encapsulation of Young’s argument is “Creeds” (ch. 6, vol. 1). Here Young examines a variety of early creeds and confessions, shows their interconnections with one another as they are revised to address new questions, and demonstrates how the key doctrines are articulated through careful appeal to Scripture. Again, the argument is straightforward: There is a coinherence between creed and Scripture. In the words of Young: “Whether in creedal form or looser summaries like the rule of faith, doctrine provide the key to correct scriptural interpretation. Yet that doctrine was itself distilled from scripture in a process of making sense of it, turning its narratives and prophecy, psalms and wisdom into propositions that articulated the truth revealed” (p. 225). Young concludes the first volume with a summary of the argument highlighting how Scripture generated doctrine and noting the remarkably continuities between early Christian exegetes in their understanding of the relationship between Scripture and core doctrines associated with creation, fall, redemption, and the last things. As Young notes: “Dogmas were never discrete, never piecemeal, because it was the way they fit together into a coherent conception of the overarching biblical narrative that constantly shaped their formulation” (p. 245).Volume 2 is divided into two parts. The first part examines the relationship between Scripture and the articulation and defense of the doctrine of God, particularly the Trinity. Young argues that there was widespread agreement that good interpretation of Scripture required understanding God’s oikonomia. She also examines what some have referred to as prosopological exegesis, showing how a variety of biblical texts were invoked as witnessing to a conversation or relationship between more than one divine person (e.g., Prov 8:22–31; Pss 2:7; 45:6–7; 110:1; Isa 45:1; 61:1; Acts 2:36; Phil 2:9). The second part examines the two natures of Christ. This section is remarkably rich as she discusses Athanasius’s partitive exegesis, John Chrysostom on Hebrews, Cyril of Alexandria’s Commentary on John, and the dispute between Cyril of Alexandria and Nestorius.Young’s argument presents a decisive blow to prevalent views that orthodox Christian doctrine arose from nonbiblical factors. She presents her thesis as an alternative to Harnack’s Hellenization thesis whereby Christian doctrine is largely an accommodation to Greek philosophy, but her argument is also an alternative to the view that the powerful simply imposed their doctrine through political power. I have noted already the simplicity of the argument, neatly encapsulated in the title of the first volume, but readers of these two volumes will also receive a master-class introduction to the reading practices of a plethora of early Christian figures. While it is a cliché to say so, I hope readers trust me that these volumes will be worth returning to for decades to come.