Cassian's hermeneutic: Part 2

We left off yesterday with the realization Cassian's hermeneutic is not one of a particular methodology but of a way of living/embodying the scripture...connecting interpretation with sanctification. To link the two implies something simple about scripture: it is intended for spiritual formation. This is not to say that methodology has no place in the hermeneutical task, only that is not the controlling mechanism. Knowing Cassian’s classical education, it is surely the case that he employed the tools he had developed in his training though certainly chastened in humility. It appears that the metaphor of ‘plundering the Egyptians’ may be applicable for understanding methodology’s place in Cassian’s hermeneutic. That is to say, employing the research tools available to us from science (literary and cultural analysis) and historical examination are useful and important, especially in identifying what interpretations should be discarded and/or considered possible or plausible, but these methods are truly helpful insofar as they guide the Christian community in appropriate embodiment of the scriptures.

Before moving to the contemplative aspect of Cassian's hermeneutic, it would be serve us well to realize the inter-relatedness of the practical and the contemplative. Unfortunately, it can be easy to dichotomize them as mutually exclusive, but central to Cassian’s treatment of them is the realization that this hermeneutical process is cyclical. There is significant theoretical language in the practical aspect. Similarly, there is pragmatic language in the contemplative. And just as the practical (entire preparation and engagement of self with text) prepares the way for the contemplative to be drawn out, so also the contemplative (in discerning the virtues exhorted in the text) must be pragmatically appropriated in the life of the interpreter or interpreting community by humility and obedience. Weaver makes a convincing case for understanding experience as the connecting link pragmatism and contemplation in hermeneutics. Put differently, experience is how Cassian and his fellow monks engaged not only scripture, but also tradition, by inhabiting the stories of their predecessors in the desert (i.e., Antony, Macarius, etc.) as well as those whom they emulate in scripture (i.e., Elijah, Abraham, etc.). Furthermore, by immersing oneself in the stories of not only the biblical characters, but also its authors, allows the interpreters to actively engage scripture so that the text becomes so embedded in their thoughts and lives that its words become their own.[1] Read any of John Wesley's sermons and you'll get an idea of what I'm talking about here. All aspects of the relationship between the practical and the contemplative show its integrated approach to interpreting scripture and fit well within the gradual process in growing to ‘purity of heart.’

Reference:
[1] Cassian, Conferences, 14.9. Cf. 10.11.