The Hermeneutic Trap

     The Hermeneutic project as laid out by all of the authors  for this week suffers from an internal tension. In each case they search for figurations of the “Truth” as it is revealed through scripture. For Dante, Aquinas, Hugh, and Augustine , the answer lies somewhere in the literal, allegorical or grammatic structure of the text. In itself this approach does not create difficulties, however the tension arises  due to the fact that the Truth is already known. The “Word” is waiting in the text. One simply needs to apply the proper lens to find the necessary information. Any inconsistency or worse still contradiction in the text can be resolved by positing a more figurative meaning to that particular problem. To borrow from Monty Python, “Blessed are the cheesemakers. Cheesemakers?  Well he probably means makers of dairy products in general.”
     By corralling the text into a proscribed circle of acceptable meaning this hermeneutic method simply elides the difficulties that make the texts problematic. Augustine, to his credit, does not require a particular reading of a text. On the contrary he freely admits that there are several ways to interpret a signifying relationship, as long as they do not conflict with the doctrine of the faith. Schleiermacher similarly allows for a range of interpretation, but his insistence on avoiding “misunderstanding” contains the built in assumption that there is a limited range of acceptable meanings.
     It is difficult to approach every text with the “truth” neatly in hand. This of course makes this a difficult process to apply generally. I understand that the project as presented to us is meant for the limited scope of sacred text, but even in this case the project lends itself to dogmatic thinking. It would be unlikely that the text could surprise the reader with a “Spiritual truth” that was outside the frame of reference that they brought to the text..