These two modes of interpretation, the allegorico-typ- ical and tlio cdler/orico-mystical, are found in the Chris- tian writers as early as the first and second centuries ; the latter as yvwau:, the former as a demonstration that all and evcrj-thing, both what had happened and what would come to pass, was somehow contained in the sa- cred Scriptures (see Justin Jlartyr, Apol. i, p. 52, 61, and Terttdlian, Adversus Jfareionem, iv, 2, "The preaching of tlie disciples might appear to be questionable, if it was not supported by other authority").
To these allegorical modes of interpretation was added a third moilc. which necessarily sprung up after the rise of the CaUii.licd-npdstoliial Church, namelv, the doqnuit- ical or th,,./,,,/;,;,-, rr/,,-<;„s/ind. Tlic followers of the Catliolici.-ai)(istoHcal Church agreed that all apostles and all apostolical writings had an equal authoritv, be- cause they were all under an equal guidance of the' Holy (ihost. Hence it followed that they could not set forth cither contradictory or different doctrines. A twofold expedient was adopted in order to effect harmony of in- terpretation. The one was of the apparent and relative kind, because it referred to subjects which ai)pear in- comprehensible only to the continoil human understand- ing, but which arc in jierlect harmony in the divine thoughts. Justin (Diidor/iix mm Tri/p/ione, c. 65) says: " Being quite certain that no Scripture contradicts the other, I will rather confess that I do not understand what is said therein." St.Chr^'sostom restricted this as follows (llomil. iii, c. 4, in Ep. 2 ud Thessalonicenses) :
"In the divine writings everything is intelligible and plain, whatever is necessary is open" (compare Homil. iii, De Lazaro, and Athanasii Oratio contra gentes, in Opera, i, 12).
The second expedient adopted by the Church was to consider certain articles of faith to be leading doctrines, and to regulate and define accordingly the sense of the Bible wherever it appeared doubtful alid uncertain. This led to the theologico-ecclesiastical or dogmatical mode of interpretation, which, when the Christians were divided into several sects, proved to be indispensable to the Church, but which adopted various forms in the va- rious sects by which it was employed. Not only the heretics of ancient times, but also the followers of the Roman Catholic, the Greek Catholic, the Syrian, tlie Anglican, the Protestant Church, etc., have endeavored to interpret the Bible in harmony with their dogmas.
Besides the three modes of interpretation which have been nieiiti(jned almve, theological writers have spoken of typiriiL ji/-i'j //I ticid. I iiijj/i(itieaL plnlosopihicul, tradi- tional, iiiiinil. in- jiniciirii/ interpretation. But all these are only one-sided developments of some single feature contained in the above three, arbitrarily chosen ; and, therefore, they cannot be considered to be separate modes, but are only modifications of one or other of those three. The interpretation in which all these modes are brought into harmony has lately been called the panharmonical, which word is not very happily chosen (F. H. Germar, Die Panharmonische Interpreta- tion der Heiligen SchriJ}, Lpz. 1821 ; and by the same author, Beilrag zur Allgemeinen Hermeneutilc, Altona, 1828).
The interpretation which, in spite of aU ecclesiastical opposition, ought to be adopted as being the only true one, strictly adheres to the demands of general hernieneutics, to which it adds those particular hermeneutical rules which meet the requisites of particular cases. This has, in modern times, been styled the historico-gram- matical mode of interpretation. This appellation has been chosen because the epithet grammatical seems to be too naiTow and too much restricted to the mere ver- bal sense. It might be more correct to style it simply the historical interpretation, since the word "historical" comprehends everything that is requisite to be known about the language, the turn of mind, the individuality, etc., of an author in order to rightly understand his book. This method, the origin of which has been traced to Semler (^Varbei-eitung z. d. theol. Hermeneut. 1762), is liable, however, to degenerate into Rationalism (Farrar, History of Free Thought, p. 22), unless guarded by the spirit of evangelical piety.
The.different modes of interpreting the Bible which have generally obtained are, according to what we have stated, essentially the following three : the gkajuiati- CAL, the ALLEGORICAL, the DOGJiATicAL. The gram- matical mode of interpretation simply investigates the sense contained in the words of the Bible. The alle- gorical, according to Quintilian's sentence, "Aliud ver- bis, aliud sensu ostendo," maintains that the words of the Bible have, besides their simple sense, another which is concealed as behind a picture, and endeavors to find out this supposed figurative sense, which, it is said, was not intended by the authors (see Olshausen, Kin Woi-t iiber tieferen Schriftsinn, Konigsberg, 1824). The dogmatical mode of interpretation endeavors to ex- plain the Bible in harmony with the dogmas of the Church, following the principle of analogia fdei. Com- pare Concilii Tridentini, Session iv, dccret. ii : " Let no one venture to interpret the holy Scriptures in a sense contrary to that which the holy mother Church has held, and does hold, and which has the power of decid- ing what is the true sense and the right interpretation of the holy Scriptures." So also Rambach. Institntiones Hcrmenenticm Sacrm (Jena, 1723) : " The authority which this analogj^ of faith exercises upon inteqireta- tion consists in this, that it is the foundation and gen- eral principle according to the rule of which all scrip-