Brown, 'Bede: On the Tabernacle', Bryn Mawr Classical Review 9502
URL = http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/stacks/serials/bmcr/bmcr-9502-brown-bede.html

@@@@95.2.14, Holder trans., Bede:  On the Tabernacle

Arthur G. Holder, Bede: On the Tabernacle. Translated Texts for Historians,
vol. 18. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1994; distributed in the
U.S. by University of Pennsylvania Press. $17.95. ISBN 0-85323-378-0
        Reviewed by George Hardin Brown -- Stanford University
        brown@leland.stanford.edu
        
        Holder, a professor in the Church Divinity School of the Pacific
(part of the Graduate Theological Union), has specialized on Bede's De
Tabernaculo. After publishing five solid articles related to Bede's
commentary on that subject, he has now produced an excellent translation
of it. The thirteen-page introduction to the work provides a succinct,
informative account of Bede's exegesis, his audience and purpose in
writing, the content, composition, and sources of the De Tabernaculo, its
textual history and editions. Holder then gives a clear, accurate
translation of the often technical text, to which he adds critical and
explanatory footnotes, many of which are not in the Latin edition from
which he is working, that of Dom David Hurst in the Corpus Christianorum
Series Latina, vol. 119A, 1-139. Holder concludes with a bibliography and
indices of biblical and patristic sources

        My remarks here are, in medieval terms, a gloss on Holder's
gloss-translation on Bede's commentary-gloss on Exodus, chapters 24-30. A
careful reading of Bede's commentary reveals much about the tradition of
biblical symbolism in the early Middle Ages, the polytypic mode of
interpretation, and Bede's mindset. In a pastoral homiletic exegesis he
unfolds from different hermeneutic points the symbolic meanings for the
contemporary Christian contained in the text about God's ordering his
people to construct a tent-dwelling for him in their midst. 

        Bede is known to most as the author of The Ecclesiastical History
of the English People, the brilliant work of history produced in 731 which
earned him the title, "the father of English history." However, as Holder
points out in his introduction (p. xiii), Bede thought of himself
primarily as an exegete and gave his biblical commentaries pride of place
in his bibliography, at the end of the Historia Ecclesiastica. Authors can
be wrong in their estimation of the relative merits of their own works,
but that wasn't Bede's case. Far into the Middle Ages, his biblical
commentaries were esteemed, copied and circulated, in company with the
writings of Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, and Gregory. From the ninth
century Bede was considered one the Fathers of the Church and has the
title, Doctor Ecclesiae. 

        A few of Bede's other exegetical works have been translated. His
Commentary on the Seven Catholic Epistles (another patristic first by
Bede) was translated by David Hurst for Cistercian Studies 82 (Kalamazoo,
1985).  Lawrence T. Martin translated Bede's Commentary on the Acts of the
Apostles , CS 117 (1989); this is a good translation but Martin
regrettably did not include Bede's important Retractatio as he originally
intended. Martin and Hurst teamed up to translate Bede's Homilies on the
Gospels, in two volumes, CS 110 (1991). We are fortunate to have those
translations, but Holder has done a noteworthy service to early medieval
and particularly Bedan scholarship by tackling a commentary that is more
challenging, more symbolic, more extensive, and more indicative of the
alterity of medieval culture than those other Bedan works. I think Martin
underestimates the contemporary reader's abilities and willignness to
explore when he states "Bede's Commentary on Acts especially recommends
itself to the modern reader also because it is somewhat more accessible
than his later commentaries, which are generally extremely allegorical,
perhaps beyond the bounds of the taste of many today" (On Acts, p. xviii).
For those of us who delight in the mentality of the age, the commentary On
the Tabernacle is more interesting, fascinating, and beautiful than even
the impotant Commentary on Acts.. It reveals the eighth century scholar at
the apex of his powers, sensitive, reasonable, learned, architectonic, and
judicious, deeply imbued with and better versed in the Scriptures and in
the hermeneutics of Scriptural commentary, both literal and symbolic, than
many exegetes then and now. 

        However, as Holder notes, "Little or nothing of [Bede's] exegesis
could be called speculative or constructive theology" (p. xiv).  He was
not an Origen or Athanasius, not a precursor of the Scholastics. He was a
religious man deeply concerned about the conversion and instruction of his
fellow Englishmen. (That's really what the Historia Ecclesiastica is about
too) On the Tabernacle is pastoral, asking "What does this ancient text of
the Old Testament mean for me and my salvation? It is not by accident that
he cites and incorporates in this commentary so much of Gregory the
Great's instruction in pastoral theology, the Cura Pastoralis. 

        Martin, in his introduction to the Homilies (I.xxii), claims that
in the homilies Bede "does not use the fathers primarily as authorities to
strengthen his own position in matters of interpretation, which is
characteristic of his use of patristic sources in his commentaries.
Instead, ... Bede often draws on the fathers for motifs to enrich and
ornament his own words, quite freely adapting his predecessors' work to
suit his own homiletic themes and purposes." I would contend that Bede's
mature commentaries, such as On the Tabernacle, belie that distinction,
for in them Bede is also both homiletic and creative. 

        As Bede was dying, he was translating into Old English the gospel
of John, which has in its Prologue the great declaration of the
Incarnation, "Et verbum caro factum est et habitavit in nobis." Bede,
whose Greek was quite good by the end of his life, presumably knew that
"et habitavit in nobis" represented a weak translation of the Greek
"SskAnvsen Sn <m n," "pitched his tent among us." This is of course a
Johannine typological reference to Yahweh's presence in the Tent, the tent
of meeting, the tabernacle. Bede recognized the tent as emblematic of
God's presence in the midst of his chosen people, as the Eucharist is the
Lord's presence in the midst of the Christian (monastic) community. (Bede
frequently stresses the Eucharist in his writings, especially as Viaticum,
manna, in the peregrination to heaven.)

        About the time he was at work on the Historia Ecclesiastica, Bede
created this extensive commentary on Exodus 24-30.  In it, he exploits the
symbolism of each part of the tabernacle and its accouterments (as he says
he will do in the Introduction to Book One, p. 1). The wonder is that Bede
would be the first of the Fathers, late in patristic time as he is, to
mine systematically and resolutely the historical and symbolic valences of
the tabernacle for the Christian reader (p. xv). 

        The subject is not an easy one, both because of its archeological
antiquity but also because even at the literal level the biblical text is
so problematic. The parts and pieces of the tabernacle are described in
detail (some of them apparently retrospective from the Temple sanctuary),
but the way it fits together is not described. It's a bit like having a
do-it-yourself kit with all the parts listed but no directions about how
to put it together. Modern biblical scholars are still puzzling over
whether the slats were fitted next to one another or overlapping clapboard
style (see R. E. Friedman's article on Tabernacle in the Anchor Bible
Dictionary, 6.292-300). At each stage, before probing the symbolic senses
suggested, Bede tries to make sense of the description. He studies the
verses, reads Josephus and Jerome, then gives what he thinks is a likely
depiction of the object. At one point, 26.12-13 (p. 60), Bede suggests a
practical experiment to ascertain the shape and dimensions of the
tabernacle by tracing the ground plan with a piece of string. Since modern
biblical scholars have been struggling with the question of the shape and
dimensions of the Tabernacle for over a century, small wonder he says,
'Here's a try, but if someone can do better, I'd appreciate it' (p. 62:
His actual words in Holder's translation are, "In so far as we have been
able to understand them, we have taken care briefly to explain these
things concerning this most difficult subject, but we are ready to learn
more accurate information about these matters if anyone wishes to instruct
us"). 

        Bede assists us in perusing the rich array of symbolic
interpretation by guiding us through the chapters with structural division
(e.g., pp. 45-46, the threefold meaning of the two sancutaries) and
summaries (e.g., pp. 50, the four characteristics of the elect summarized
in the four colors of the curtains). Most medieval commentaries proceed by
a verse by verse explanation or gloss on the text; when the biblical book
or chapter comes to an end, the commentary does too, just as modern
commentaries, such as the Interpreter's Bible, do. Bede proceeds this way
in his early commentaries, such as those on the Apocalypse and on the
Seven Catholic Epistles. But in the commentaries of his maturity he
applies his creative talents as a teacher, historian, writer of narrative
prose and poetry; and he skillfully organizes the narrative so that it not
only comments verse by verse but also forms a satisfying, unified whole. 

        In this commentary on the Tabernacle, Bede begins Book I with a
paragraph introduction, explaining that first he is going to describe the
elements, topography, and circumstances and then speak about the figure,
the symbolic meaning of the tabernacle, vessels, and utensils. After
giving the historical background and significance of Moses' contact with
God on the mount and God's command for the Israelites to make the
sanctuary for his dwelling with them, Bede describes the ark and its parts
(in nine chapters). In the longer Book II (thirteen chapters), he follows
the chapters of Exodus about the construction of the tabernacle and its
appurtenances. In book III, after a chapter on the oil for the lamp, which
we might think ought to be placed more logically at then end of the
preceding book, Bede takes up the vestments of the priesthood, the altar
of incense, and the purificatory basin. In the captivating discussion of
the meaning of the golden plate ("lamminam") engraved with the words "holy
to the Lord, " which was affixed to the highpriest's turban, Bede compares
the priest's apotropaic plate to the protective emblem of the cross on the
Christian's forehead.  Here is one of the places that Holder could have
been more helpful in the notes, by at least adding to the liturgical note
(note 4, p. 130) some reference to the vast patristic topos of the
protective sign of the cross on the forehead and breast (e.g., in the
writings of Tertullian, Cyril of Jerusalem, John Chrysostom, and the
Western Fathers). 

        In the latter part of Book III, by noting the verses Bede omits
from his commentary, we can see something of Bede's editorial method at
work. He leaves out large parts of Exodus 29 and 30, such as the offering
of cattle and the besprinkling and marking of the priests with blood.
Then, in the last chapter, 14, on the bronze basin, instead of just
treating it verse by verse and coming to an end, Bede interweaves a
synthesis and summary of the whole commentary. In a lovely reprise he
talks not only of the Christian significance of the tabernacle but also
the altar of holocaust (signifying "the extinction of carnal desires" p.
159), the altar of incense (representing the purity of the holy), the
priesthood "of all the faithful" (p. 161, in which Bede shows he is not
narrowly clerical), the high priesthood of Aaron, who prefigures Christ,
and finally, all of us, because "in all humility we too belong among those
descendants of whom it was said that 'it shall be an everlasting
law...throughout their generations.'"

        Most modern biblical readers are partial to some symbolic reading
of the text and adverse to others. Thus, to accept the golden crown as
symbolic of regal glory presents no problem. We're not bothered when Bede
compares the Tabernacle to transient life in this world inhabited by God's
presence, and the Temple to the perduring life with God in eternity; and
most would also accept Bede's explanation that the Tabernacle can signify
God's presence among the Israelites, and the Temple can signify God's
presence in the Christian Church. But there comes a point when the modern
mind may even balk, either at the ambiguity or polysemous quality of the
symbol or at the symbolic mode for specific details, such as for posts,
skins, pots, tongs, forks. This is where the allegorical mode challenges
our understanding. As Holder remarks in an article on "Allegory and
History in Bede's Interpretation of Sacred Architecture," ABR 40:2 [1989],
115: "Every part of the structure (whether tabernacle of temple), every
detail of ornament, every number, measurement, or point of the compass
described in the biblical accounts, presented Bede with the mystery of the
Church. Nor was his interest limited to the buildings themselves. The
names and races of those who built each edifice, like the vestments of the
priests who ministered in them, contained hidden meanings yielding much in
the way of doctrinal instruction, moral exhortation, and good example for
the pastors and teachers who now stand as pillars in the spiritual house
of God, which is the Church." Some major meanings are drawn from minor
objects; for example, he suggests that the snuffers (Ex. 25.38) represent
the snuffing of the wicks of the Old Testament prescriptions, so that they
can be repaired as lamps of the gospel to give the better light of the
Holy Spirit (p. 40, bottom).  Frequently, to the modern mind's
consternation, Bede furnishes two or more explanations for an object ("It
can mean this, or, if we like, this or this"). For Bede and his readers,
this was not a problem but a bonus. 

        Such an understanding of symbol derives from the late antique and
medieval mindset that sees the world and the objects of this world as
signs, semeia, pointing to transcendental reality (Cf. Augustine's
semiology in the De Doctrina Christiana). Moreover, such a reading of
reality is typical of the patristic and monastic praxis of ruminatio, the
reflection on an object and regurgitation of a text to provide various
"true takes" on reality. It is such a reflective, multi-faceted,
polyvalent, and seemingly forced effort that creates the alterity, the
difference, between our understanding of symbol and Bede's. Where I find
my medieval sympathies tried the most is in the sections where Bede plays
the Augustinian numbers game, as, for instance, in his interpretation of
the fifty cubits in Exodus 27.12-13, and of the fifteen cubits in Exodus
14-15 (p. 100): "Surely it is well known that fifteen, which is the sum of
seven plus eight, rightly designates the joys of eternal life...." Others,
with more Pythagorean instincts, may find the extended numerology
delightful, but all of us can at least wonder at the intricate ingenuity
of the process. 

        Nonetheless, Holder contends that despite some forced meanings
Bede's exegesis still provides a valid, efficacious, pastoral
understanding of Scripture for the modern Christian. I concur, but Bede's
exegesis also teaches our modern mind something about the elastic
potential and interpretative inexhaustibility of the biblical text, its
cumulative hermeneutics, and its invitation to understand the text in a
new old way. 

        The reviewer's task includes calling attention to faults and
corrigenda. Here my task is not onerous. I have compared the translation
with the Latin throughout, and can attest that Holder has fashioned a very
good translation indeed; its elegant clarity must have cost him many
hours' labor. It was carefully vetted by the late Margaret Gibson. Only
very rarely, such as on the bottom of page 79 and top of page 80, is the
translation confused or confusing. The only problem with the text layout
is that throughout most of Book II for some strange reason the marginal
reference numbers to the CCSL are off by six to twelve lines, so that, for
instance, [65] on p. 72 belongs eight lines lower, and [82] on p. 91
should be ten lines further, on p. 92. The notes are spare but helpful. I
would like to have seen a few more explanations for words that are
confusing in translation, such as "sacrament" for Bede's "sacramentum."
There are very few typos; in this remarkably clean text the only ones
worth mentioning are in the note to the frontispiece, where the folio
numbers in Codex Amiatinus shoud be IIv-IIIr, not IIr-IIIr (not the
author's mistake), and the intrusive "n" in the spelling of the name
Conchini for Cochini on p. 140, note 1 (but spelled correctly in the well
selected bibliography). 

        Finally, a word of praise should be voiced for the editors and
presses of the series in which this translation appears.  The nineteen
titles so far translated are important ones for students of the late
antique and early medieval periods; with ever fewer scholars capable of
reading Latin easily, translations such as these make available major
texts that would remain inaccessible without them. The translations in
this low-priced series are generally of high quality, but Holder's
translation Bede's On the Tabernacle establishes a highwater mark. 

George Hardin Brown
Department of English, Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-2087
office: 415 723-3014  fax: 415 725-0755  home: 415 852-1231