The Law Is a Shadow

Abstract

The reception of the Mosaic Law was a source of perplexity for ancient Christians. The New Testament cites several of the laws set forth in the Books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy (Mt 5:27, Lk 10:25-27, and 1 Cor 9:9-10). Yet the New Testament also suggests that the Mosaic legislation has been mitigated or abrogated (Acts 10, Rom 7:14, and Heb 10:1). Justin Martyr and Irenaeus of Lyon recount second century debates with Marcionites and Valentinians concerning the status of the Mosaic Law in ancient Christianity. This dissertation analyzes how similar debates played out in third and fourth-century interpretations of Psalm 118, an alphabetical acrostic whose 176 verses praise God’s laws (νόμος), commandments (ἐντολή), ordinances (δικαίωμα), testimonies (μαρτύριον), and judgments (κρίμα). Judith Lieu’s question – “Whose Marcion?” – provides a critical point of departure for this study, which focuses on how patristic authors conceptualized and attacked their own conceptions of “Marcion,” rather than on Marcion as an historical figure. Thus, Origen’s extant fragments from his commentary on Psalm 118, the earliest that survives, should be read within the context of his anti-Marcionite, Caesarean, exegetical homilies on the Books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers. Using hermeneutical methods that systematize his attacks on Marcion, Origen inaugurated the anti- Marcionite tradition of interpretating Psalm 118 by emphasizing the figurative interpretation of the Mosaic Law, God’s role in teaching it, and the possibility of spiritual progress through understanding and acting on it. Origen, drawing on Philo of Alexandria’s figurative interpretations of the Pentateuch, responds to the Marcionite challenge by describing the contemplation of the Mosaic Law as a foundation for Christian ethics. During the fourth century, two western bishops – Hilary of Poitiers and Ambrose of Milan – received and developed Origen’s anti-Marcionite interpretation of Psalm 118. This study argues that both Hilary and Ambrose retain the anti-Marcionite orientation of Origen’s commentary and respond to the emergent threat posed by the Manichaeans, who in turn received and developed the Marcionites’ antinomian challenge. Hilary builds on Origen’s exegesis of Psalm 118 by describing divine law as a remedy for infirmitas. Hilary’s Tractatus on Psalm 118 recapitulates the main themes of Origen’s interpretation while giving greater emphasis to themes of theological anthropology. Rather than contemplation, Hilary calls for “exercise” (μελέτη/exercitiō) in the law as a means of Christian formation. Unlike his predecessors, Ambrose explicitly attacks Marcion in his Expositio on Psalm 118, unveiling the anti-heretical bearings of the tradition inaugurated by Origen. Ambrose comments on Psalm 118 within the liturgical context of offering post-baptismal catechesis to neophytes. Ambrose builds on Origen’s exegesis of Psalm 118 by describing David – the author of the Psalter – as an exemplary exegete of the figurative sense of the Mosaic Law. For the benefit of the neophytes, Ambrose contrasts David’s understanding of the Mosaic Law with the misunderstandings of the Marcionites, Manichaeans, and Jews. This study shows that the anti-Marcionite tradition of commenting on Psalm 118 was ultimately overshadowed in the fifth century and afterwards by Augustine’s anti-Pelagian Enarratio in Psalmum 118. Yet the anti- Marcionite tradition – which teaches Christians to read and profit spiritually from the Mosaic Law – is worthy of recovery.