Commentary on the Gospel of John: Works of St. Bonaventure, Volume XI
Robert Karris has rendered an invaluable service to scholars, students, and pastors interested in Bonaventure, the history of interpretation, and the Gospel of John. His eminently readable translation is accompanied by insightful and learned footnotes. To read Bonaventure's discussion of John is to learn from an exegete who pays close attention to the text, while simultaneously being exposed to the rich theological and interpretative tradition, especially of Augustine and Chrysostom, Bonaventure himself inherited. --Prof. Marianne Meye Thompson, Fuller Theological SeminaryRobert Karris offers an excellent, extensive translation/interpretation of Bonaventure s Commentary on the Gospel of John. Not only does he proÂ­ vide incisive footnotes for his process but he also gives readers an appropriate and fulsome introduction. Here Karris gives readers essential keys of medieval interpretation. First, Karris highlights the fundamental importance of context. In addition to a literal interpretation of a text, Bonaventure offers twenty-six non-literal interpretations as well as providing 414 questions (quaestiones) to offer more detailed interpretation. Second, Karris notes that contemporary commentaries on the Gospel of John do not mention his contribution to scholarly work. Third, Karris compares Bonaventure with contemporary commentators whereas Bonaventure does not discuss the historical Jesus, a contemporary perspective. However, Bonaventure anticipates the themes of witness, representative figures and women that contemporary scholars discuss. Fourth, Bonaventure divides the text of the Fourth Gospel as a method of interpretation. Unlike the consensus with contemporary scholars, Bonaventure makes two divisions: 1) The Word (in se): John 1:1-5 and 2) The Word united to the flesh: John 1:6- 21:25 with additional divisions.Fifth, there are two important sections of the Introduction that offer integral perspectives of this profound medieval commentator. In the "Questions" section, Karris outlines the medieval commentator's interests including comparisons with the synoptic gospels, moral and theological observations, and difficulties in the text. In the "non -literal translations" Karris offers preachers assistance, especially for the narrative sections of the gospel. How can readers assess the value of this Commentary? One way is to compare and contrast it to another medieval commentary. Thomas Aquinas (1225-74), a contemporary of Bonaventure (1221-74), was also a university professor and author. Also, Aquinas commentary does not appear in contemporaries bibliographies either. Aquinas like Bonaventure interpreted scripture for its literal as well as multiple spiritual senses. That both theologians had similar and different perspectives is evident in their Commentaries.Finally, this commentary would have a valuable place in a library where students have access to the history of interpretation. Stretching minds and hearts to take on another worldview in interpretation of the Gospel of John is part of the interpretive process that frees the text and its commentaries from a particular time to present time and possibility.MARY MARGARET PAZDAN, OP, Aquinas Institute of Theology --Horizons - Journal of College TheologyRobert Karris offers an excellent, extensive translation/interpretation of Bonaventure s Commentary on the Gospel of John. Not only does he pro­ vide incisive footnotes for his process but he also gives readers an appropriate and fulsome introduction. Here Karris gives readers essential keys of medieval interpretation. First, Karris highlights the fundamental importance of context. In addition to a literal interpretation of a text, Bonaventure offers twenty-six non-literal interpretations as well as providing 414 questions (quaestiones) to offer more detailed interpretation. Second, Karris notes that contemporary commentaries on the Gospel of John do not mention his contribution to scholarly work. Third, Karris compares Bonaventure with contemporary commentators whereas Bonaventure does not discuss the historical Jesus, a contemporary perspective. However, Bonaventure anticipates the themes of witness, representative figures and women that contemporary scholars discuss. Fourth, Bonaventure divides the text of the Fourth Gospel as a method of interpretation. Unlike the consensus with contemporary scholars, Bonaventure makes two divisions: 1) The Word (in se): John 1:1-5 and 2) The Word united to the flesh: John 1:6- 21:25 with additional divisions.Fifth, there are two important sections of the Introduction that offer integral perspectives of this profound medieval commentator. In the "Questions" section, Karris outlines the medieval commentator's interests including comparisons with the synoptic gospels, moral and theological observations, and difficulties in the text. In the "non -literal translations" Karris offers preachers assistance, especially for the narrative sections of the gospel. How can readers assess the value of this Commentary? One way is to compare and contrast it to another medieval commentary. Thomas Aquinas (1225-74), a contemporary of Bonaventure (1221-74), was also a university professor and author. Also, Aquinas commentary does not appear in contemporaries bibliographies either. Aquinas like Bonaventure interpreted scripture for its literal as well as multiple spiritual senses. That both theologians had similar and different perspectives is evident in their Commentaries.Finally, this commentary would have a valuable place in a library where students have access to the history of interpretation. Stretching minds and hearts to take on another worldview in interpretation of the Gospel of John is part of the interpretive process that frees the text and its commentaries from a particular time to present time and possibility.MARY MARGARET PAZDAN, OP, Aquinas Institute of Theology --Horizons - Journal of College Theology