Taking seriously the reality that theological interpretation of Scripture is not a monolithic enterprise but rather a varied discussion, this paper outlines two historical contributions to the theological reading of Scripture in the Victorian Church of England. By examining the way Richard Chenevix Trench and John Keble interpret the parable of the good Samaritan, this essay shows that though both figures interpret Scripture in order to understand what it says about God, they diverge in their approach over questions of providence and ecclesial authority. The paper argues that for Trench, providence expands the scope of Scripture’s meaning but for Keble it leads to specific interpretive outcomes. Essentially, while Trench sees Scripture to be the product of divine providence, Keble sees providence to have shaped the consensus of the early Church.

认真对待圣经的神学解释不是一个单一的事业，而是一个多样化的讨论这一现实，本文概述了英国维多利亚教会对圣经神学阅读的两个历史贡献。通过检查 Richard Chenevix Trench 和 John Keble 解释好撒玛利亚人比喻的方式，这篇文章表明，尽管这两个人物都解释了圣经，以了解它对上帝的看法，但他们在天意和教会权威问题上的态度存在分歧。该论文认为，对于 Trench 而言，天意扩大了圣经含义的范围，但对于 Keble 而言，它会导致特定的解释结果。从本质上讲，虽然特伦奇认为圣经是天意的产物，但凯布尔认为天意塑造了早期教会的共识。