Scripture, the Genesis of Doctrine: Doctrine and Scripture in Early Christianity, Vol. 1 by Frances Young. Grand Rapids, MI: W. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2023. Hardback. 308 pp. $40.99
Scripture in Doctrinal Dispute: Doctrine and Scripture in Early Christianity, Vol. 2 by Frances Young. Grand Rapids, MI: W. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2024. Hardback. 384 pp. $49.99
Much of modern theology seems haunted by a sense of disconnect between Scripture and doctrine. Frances Young’s two-volume Doctrine and Scripture in Early Christianity is an ambitious attempt to tackle this problem through a careful study of the history of the “coinherence” of doctrine and Scripture in the early church up to the very brink of the Council of Chalcedon. Young is already well-known for her publications on early Christian exegesis and doctrinal disputes, including Biblical Exegesis and the Formation of Christian Culture and The Making of the Creeds. She has also engaged in constructive retrieval, most prominently in God’s Presence. Young thus approaches this issue as a seasoned scholar who nevertheless exhibits a winsome openness to new insights. In these two volumes, Young provides a compelling and detailed guide to how the early church grounded doctrine in Scripture and, conversely, read Scripture through the lens of doctrine.
The two volumes that comprise Doctrine and Scripture in Early Christianity are written such that one could read either volume individually. However, the two volumes come together to form a single project; to read either volume independently would be to lose sight of the bigger picture that Young gradually paints. Young begins her first volume, Scripture, The Genesis of Doctrine, with a frank acknowledgement of the “gap” (Young’s preferred term) that is often perceived between Scripture and doctrine, driven in part by the reality of conflicting doctrinal interpretations of Scripture. She describes two important modern models of the relationship between Scripture and doctrine: first, the “developmental model” of Newman which describes doctrine as a sort of evolution from Scripture and, second, the Hellenization model of Harnack which sees doctrine as the result of the importation of alien Greek ideas. While Harnack and Newman come to radically different conclusions, both see the relationship between Scripture and doctrine as complex. Young further notes the modern unease with much of patristic exegetical method. We might accept patristic Trinitarian theology, but do we accept their reasons for that theology? Such considerations all suggest a growing gap between Scripture and doctrine in modern theological thought.
Young begins her historical analysis with a reconsideration of the nature of the early Christian church. We moderns tend to think of early Christianity as one religion among many. Yet, as Young convincingly argues, Christianity’s emphasis upon true doctrine and teaching was radically different from the focus on cultic practices and the relative indifference towards right teaching that existed in the pagan religions of that time. Christianity, with its emphasis on truth and ethical practice, more closely resembled a philosophical school. Young emphasizes this insight throughout both volumes, and it is not difficult to see why—if the Christian community should be understood as being a school in some crucial sense, then the right reading of Scripture and promulgation of correct belief are likely to be central and interrelated in the early Christian community.
Young then turns to a central conflict in the second century Christian world: the identity of the Creator of the World and the Father of the New Testament. She observes the existence of different “schools” within a “fractionated” church, highlighting Marcion and Gnosticism as overly literal and symbolic readers, respectively. Justin Martyr and Irenaeus emerge as key respondents to these groups. In response to these pressures, second century theologians, especially Irenaeus, offer the rule of faith as the “hypothesis,” or summing up, of Scripture, with the “three names” (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) serving a central role. Young further argues that the affirmation of an unknowable God and creatio ex nihilo are early manifestations of Christian doctrine that are decidedly non-Greek and arise out of a deep reading of Scripture. In the end, Young affirms that the monarchia of the one Creator God is clarified through a complex process of doctrinal conflict and careful attention to identifying the right hermeneutical key for the whole of Scripture, a process wherein doctrine and Scripture are coinherent.
“Doctrine arises from and provides a framework for the deep reading of Scripture. Scripture and doctrine are thus ‘coinherent.’ Young suggests that ‘discourse’ is a better model for this process than development.”
Young then considers Origen of Alexandria and Cyril of Jerusalem. She describes Origen as a detailed expositor of Scripture who carries forward second-century concerns around God as creator while also “probing” Scripture for answers to new questions. Pedagogy is a central aspect of Origen’s understanding of God and exposition of Scripture. A century later, Cyril of Jerusalem presents creeds as summaries that are to be demonstrated from Scripture even as they offer an interpretive guide. Young suggests that Cyril emphasizes “dogmatic propositions” in his account in a way that is distinct from the more narrative and questioning approach found in Irenaeus and Origen. Nevertheless, after an extensive survey of Cyril’s catechetical Orations (with a brief discussion of Augustine and Pelagius thrown in for good measure), Young concludes that Cyril is still fundamentally in line with the emphases on the one Creator and ruling God of all things found in earlier centuries. She thus concludes “I find myself nearer to Newman and Behr than I might have expected—the basics of Christian doctrine were there in scripture from the beginning” (225).
The first volume ends with an engagement with Augustine’s Christian Doctrine. Young comes to the tentative conclusion that both Newman and Harnack’s accounts assume an “evolutionary” intellectual framework, a framework which she attempts to unsettle. Instead, drawing upon both postmodern thought and Augustine, she observes “profound continuities” tied to the fact that “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” (245). Doctrine arises from and provides a framework for the deep reading of Scripture. Scripture and doctrine are thus “coinherent.” Young suggests that “discourse” is a better model for this process than development. Development is acknowledged but understood as “the outcome of an implicit search for the truth, indeed for identity, through argument and by the exegesis of texts received as authoritative Scripture” (246).
The second volume, Scripture in Doctrinal Dispute, opens with the Arian controversy. Young carefully traces the approaches to Scripture utilized by the defenders of Nicaea, giving pride of place to Athanasius and substantial attention to the Cappadocians, Ephrem, and Pseudo-Marcarius. Young observes that Athanasius offers a catena of Scriptural evidence for the Son’s eternality and divinity while evincing common strategies for addressing problematic texts, with the most important being a form of partitive exegesis that assigns nondivine descriptions to the incarnation. As in the second century, the three names of God play an important role. Young observes similar patterns in Athanasius’ successors, highlighting their consistent emphasis on interrelationship between the economy of divine action and the doctrine of the Trinity; both develop together out of deep reflection upon the God of the Scriptures. There is a further relationship between the doctrine of the Trinity and the transformational interpretation of Scripture: “the doctrinal articulation of an apparently paradoxical Triune concept of God…becomes a heuristic tool for prizing out of scripture truths hidden in symbols, ‘types,’ and images that fire ethical and devotional concerns” (108). Young thus observes that Scripture, doctrine, and spiritual transformation are tightly bound together.
“Young suggests that Chrysostom tends to ‘probe’ the Scriptures, digging into the narrative and pedagogical significance of Jesus’ actions. Cyril, by contrast, engages in less investigation and more argument for doctrinal propositions.”
The next two chapters survey the Christological controversies that led to Chalcedon. In chapter four, Young surveys the exegesis of Hebrews and John by leading teachers from Alexandria and Antioch, focusing on John of Chrysostom and Cyril of Alexandria. Young suggests that Chrysostom tends to “probe” the Scriptures, digging into the narrative and pedagogical significance of Jesus’ actions. Cyril, by contrast, engages in less investigation and more argument for doctrinal propositions. Nevertheless, Young sees many commonalities and argues that both share an interest in spiritual formation and right doctrine. In Chapter Five, Young examines the scriptural exegesis at play in the Nestorian controversy. Young moves back and forth between Nestorius and Cyril’s arguments, describing Cyril as “kenotic” in his approach while noting Nestorius’ zeal to safeguard the full divinity of the Logos. Philippians 2 is crucial to Cyril’s Christology with kenosis serving as a crucial hermeneutical key. Young further suggests that emphases on divergent (though both ultimately necessary) aspects of salvation played a key role in the controversy. For Young, Nestorius and the Antiochenes emphasized the necessity of humanity paying for its sin whereas the Alexandrians emphasized divine action to rescue and restore humanity. Young concludes the chapter by comparing Cyril’s On the Unity of Christ with Theodoret’s Eranistes, two works produced after the Formulary of Reunion. In On the Unity of Christ, Cyril attends carefully to the rich, incomprehensible depth of Scriptural teaching, yet Young suggests that there are still Antiochene insights into Scripture, particularly the redemptive significance of the humanity of Christ, that Cyril fails to fully grasp. Theodoret evinces a similarly deep engagement with Scripture that stresses the recapitulatory work of a Christ that must be fully human. Yet, Theodoret fails to fully understand Cyril’s overarching narrative of the Word made flesh. While Young does not explore Chalcedon in any detail, she suggests that the exegetical arguments described above are indeed central to the disputes that necessitated the council. Scripture grounded and shaped doctrine in the midst of the misunderstandings and real disagreements that characterized the fifth century Christological controversies.
The conclusion of the second volume returns to Augustine, paying particular attention to On the Trinity. Perhaps the most striking element of this section is Young’s brief reconsideration of Proverbs 8, where she suggests that Augustine’s comments help us to see that the passage fits within the flow of the Scriptural narrative to point forward to the incarnation. She draws her argument to a close with a striking and creative move—comparing Augustine’s distinction between knowledge and wisdom to Ian McGilchrist’s work on left/right brain distinctions. In short, Young suggests that there must be a coming together of left-brained, temporal, rational analysis and right-brained, eternal, and holistic apprehension: “one could say that what the right brain encounters through the narratives, teaching, and poetry of scripture, the left brain clarifies through propositional doctrine, which not only constrains but enables the shaping of the Christian imagination when it is taken up into the perspective of eternal wisdom…Doctrine and Scripture are surely meant to be coinherent and together to break open our generally narrow conceptions of what might constitute rationality so as to appreciate the ‘intellectual cognizance of eternal things’ in a way that might indeed enable us to find wisdom, to close that perceived gap…” (304). Young suggests that the gap between Scripture and doctrine is fully closed in the finding of wisdom in the act of worship and fittingly concludes with three Trinitarian “meditations.”
In Doctrine and Scripture in Early Christianity, Young has provided a rich feast for anyone interested in the relationship between doctrine and Scripture. Young’s work is certainly a history of the Early Church, yet many of her insights have great relevance for contemporary conversations, a point Young herself explicitly makes. The book is enhanced by the personal character of the writing; Doctrine and Scripture in Early Christianity, despite its staid title, is not a dry, impersonal book. Rather, in these volumes, Young invites us along on a journey of discovery. Young highlights things that surprised her. As her argument unfolds, the reader increasingly gets the sense not of being led along a predefined route, but of experiencing a shared intellectual journey. The conclusion of the second volume, which in its body is not as personal as the first, cements this impression by including a brief account of Young’s intellectual journey over the course of her career.
“Young suggests that there are still Antiochene insights into Scripture, particularly the redemptive significance of the humanity of Christ, that Cyril fails to fully grasp.”
While the book is personal, it is also a masterful work of scholarship. Young’s interactions with her sources are careful and informed by a wealth of knowledge, as she easily and clearly contextualizes and teases out the nuances of the texts that she examines. Young also shows a solid command of the history of scholarship on the figures and movements in question. She is generous in her appreciation for the scholarship of others and confident in the application of her own judgment. While there are minor points of interpretation that I might quibble over (as is inevitable in a project of this scale), Young’s arguments always bear the marks of careful and thoughtful reading rather than flippant and hasty overgeneralizations. Young is capable of that rare skill in a scholar—stepping out of the way of her sources in order to facilitate an encounter between her reader and the figures she presents. It is perhaps worth noting at this juncture that this work does assume a certain level of familiarity with some of the figures and controversies assayed; this would be a difficult text for someone with little background in the Early Church.
My final comment is perhaps the strongest reason for giving attention to this work. In addition to the plethora of valuable individual readings offered within this text, Young, in my judgment, offers a fresh viewpoint from which to consider the historical relationship between Scripture and doctrine. Much of modern scholarship has been caught between considering doctrine as either devolution or development (as Young herself outlines at the beginning of the project). Young’s model of discourse and coinherence can, in my judgement, help us capture the intricacies of the relationship between doctrine and Scripture better than either of these models. Young captures the early church’s sense that they are simply continuing to expound what Scripture itself teaches. For Young, the core claims of Christian doctrine arise from Scripture and simultaneously allow for a clearer perception of Scripture’s central narrative and thus fund deeper readings of Scripture. At the end of the second volume, an additional insight, hinted at throughout the work, is made explicit: doctrine and Scripture both orient to, support, and are clarified by the church’s worship of God. While this is not yet a full prolegomena in a systematic theological sense, Young offers a compelling read of the historical evidence that cries out for theological application. Furthermore, I think that Young’s understanding of the relationship between Scripture and doctrine is very close to a magisterial Protestant understanding. Doctrine is the perception of the mind of Scripture. The Protestant affirmation (expressed memorably in Westminster) that Scripture interprets Scripture and that we accept the “good and necessary consequences of Scripture” seems to me to be in line with some of Young’s insights, though Youngs’ concern with narrative and imaginative aspects could enrich such an account. The idea of good and necessary consequence and Scripture interpreting Scripture has, in my view, interesting resonances with Young’s account of coinherence, and is closer to it than either Newman or (certainly!) Harnack. Certainly Young’s denial of a “gap” between doctrine and Scripture is a welcome assertion to Protestant ears! For those Protestants wrestling with the relationship between Scripture and doctrine, Young provides a fresh assessment of the early church that demands careful attention.
J. Caleb Little received his PhD from Baylor University in 2024, where he studied the use of images of sickness and healing for sin and salvation in Gregory of Nazianzus and John Calvin. He continues to explore the early church and his own Reformed tradition, with a specific interest in soteriology, theology proper, and Scriptural interpretation. He is currently an upper school teacher at Bloomfield Christian School in Michigan, where he teaches Greek, theology, and humanities.
