Article Sidebar
Published:
May 15, 2023Keywords:
Article Details
The author(s) retain copyright on work published by AOSIS unless specified otherwise.
Licensing and publishing rights
Author(s) of work published by AOSIS are required to grant AOSIS the unlimited rights to publish the definitive work in any format, language and medium, for any lawful purpose. AOSIS requires journal authors to publish their work in open access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence.
Read more here: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
The authors retain the non-exclusive right to do anything they wish with the published article(s), provided attribution is given to the applicable journal with details of the original publication, as set out in the official citation of the article published in the journal. The retained right specifically includes the right to post the article on the authors’ or their institution’s websites or in institutional repositories.
Previously published work may have been published under a different licence. We advise the community that if they would like to reuse the work to consult the applicable licence at article level.
Main Article Content
Ethiopian exegetical traditions and exegetical imagination viewed in the context of Byzantine Orthodoxy
Václav Ježek
Abstract
The following article analysed the originality and creativity of Ethiopian Orthodox exegesis in a broader context of Byzantine and post-Byzantine Orthodox traditions. The originality of Ethiopian exegesis lies in its relative freedom from the conservative and traditionalist development of exegesis in other Eastern Orthodox contexts marked by the Graeco-Roman philosophical milieu. The Ethiopian exegetical tradition, being linked with traditional schooling, has managed to maintain a highly contextual and lively relationship with the community, with contemporary problems and issues and with other traditions, while maintaining a relationship with its own historical background. Analysing the Ethiopian traditions in comparativist contexts is important, but some important questions need to be further asked as to ‘how’ and ‘why’ is an interpretation being produced, what is its exegetical premise and how exegetical imagination functions.
Contribution: The article‘s input and contribution is manifold. As we have seen, a greater emphasis on the role and potential of the Ethiopian traditional ecclesial schools would facilitate their future preservation and function in a rapidly changing world with differing but often linear and exclusive developments in education. Furthermore, as discussed and demonstrated in the article, Ethiopian theological exegesis has a unique potential to contribute especially to contemporary Orthodox theology, which often struggles to maintain a balance between tradition and contextual or contemporary theology. The article further showed in this context that analysing exegetical traditions must also move beyond mere comparativist analysis and must include a broader study of the indeterminate or ‘mystical’ nature of interpretation which is intimately linked with the unpredictable or indeterminate dynamics of the world around us. Or in other words, how the exegete understands his or her freedom in interpretation.
