Subject: Re: Eph 5:9

From: Jean VALENTIN <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 97 23:51:57 +0200

>thing but the MSS seems to suggest that neither
Hello Maurice! You just wrote this :

>was particularly used.  Certainly modern-day Christians might refer more
>to the "fruit of the spirit" in various contexts, but that also may be
>because there is more emphasis on the Holy Spirit in the present century.

I understand this point, but in this you might also be conditioned by 
_western_ (and protestant) theological history. If it's true that there's 
a renewal in interest for the Holy Spirit in our century, this 
argumentation is pointless when we consider the eastern churches, of 
which the Greek church is part. All that appears "new" in the west has 
always been "normal" in the East, as monastic communities in the Greek 
church have always been charismatic and prophetic, in an intense way that 
has never been known in the West (remember : the (some very early) texts 
that constitute the Philocalia, or palamism, or closer to us, the 
"starets" movements of the Russian church). For example, the liturgy of 
St John Chrysostom begins with an invocation to the Holy Spirit, 
something quite extraordinary to western christians :

"Heavenly King, Consolator, Spirit of Truth, present everywhere and 
filling everything, treasure of good things and giver of life, come and 
abide in us, and purify us from all uncleanness, and save, o Good One, 
our souls"

This is just to show you that the "emphasis" you discover in the present 
century is just the rediscovery of something that has always existed in 
the East. Remember also that in the eastern tradition, the consecration 
of the body and blood of Christ is thought to take place at the 
"epiclesis" (invocation of the Holy Spirit in the anaphora of the 
liturgy). This is of course just a little contribution and I don't think 
it will revolutionize your approach of this text and its variant :-) , 
but I just mention it for the sake of giving you a little insight as to 
what the thological context of the scribes was. Very different from ours 
indeed.

And, again, as I mentioned that point already, some familiarity with 
liturgy can be interesting for working  in the field of textual 
criticism...

________________________________________________________________
Jean Valentin - 58/7 rue Van Kalck - 1080 Bruxelles - BELGIQUE
________________________________________________________________
email : [email-masked]   ***   netmail : 2:291/780.103
________________________________________________________________
Ce qui est trop simple est faux, ce qui est trop complique est 
inutilisable.
What's too simple is wrong, what's too complicated is unusable.
Wat te eenvoudig is, is verkeerd; wat te ingewikkeld is, is onbruikbaar.
________________________________________________________________

---

From: Maurice Robinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 01:01:42 -0500 (EST)

On Tue, 1 Apr 1997, Jean VALENTIN wrote:

> has never been known in the West 

I did not mean to say that the Eastern Church has not had an emphasis on
the Holy Spirit, and your point is well taken.  The question is whether
the phrase "fruit of the spirit" is one that was _common_ and _familiar_
in that era, or whether it is western Protestantism of the current century
which has popularized the phrase into the "more familiar" concept.

> liturgy can be interesting for working  in the field of textual 

Fully agreed. Now, if someone can find liturgical or other citations of
either "fruit of the spirit" or "fruit of light" in early Orthodox liturgy
or literature, this will be helpful.

_________________________________________________________________________
Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D.           Professor of Greek and New Testament
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary     Wake Forest, North Carolina
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~