Catholic Bible Student

2008-06-17T09:08:00.003-04:00

Pope Benedict on Exegesis

One thing which I believe is a cause of "concern" — in the positive sense of the word — to all of us, is the fact that future priests and other teachers and preachers of the faith must receive a good theological training; we therefore need good theological faculties, good major seminaries and qualified theology teachers who not only impart knowledge but inculcate in students an intelligent faith so that faith becomes intelligence and intelligence, faith.

In this regard, I have a very specific wish.

Our exegesis has progressed by leaps and bounds. We truly know a great deal about the development of texts, the subdivision of sources, etc., we know what words would have meant at that time.... But we are increasingly seeing that if historical and critical exegesis remains solely historical and critical, it refers the Word to the past, it makes it a Word of those times, a Word which basically says nothing to us at all; and we see that the Word is fragmented, precisely because it is broken up into a multitude of different sources.

With Dei Verbum, the Council told us that the historical-critical method is an essential dimension of exegesis because, since it is a factum historicum, it is part of the nature of faith. We do not merely believe in an idea; Christianity is not a philosophy but an event that God brought about in this world, a story that he pieced together in a real way and forms with us as history.

For this reason, in our reading of the Bible, the serious historical aspect with its requirements must be truly present: we must effectively recognize the event and, precisely in his action, this "making of history" on God's part.

Dei Verbum adds, however, that Scripture, which must consequently be interpreted according to historical methods, should also be read in its unity and must be read within the living community of the Church. These two dimensions are absent in large areas of exegesis.

The oneness of Scripture is not a purely historical and critical factor but indeed in its entirety, also from the historical viewpoint, it is an inner process of the Word which, read and understood in an ever new way in the course of subsequent relectures, continues to develop.

This oneness itself, however, is ultimately a theological fact: these writings form one Scripture which can only be properly understood if they are read in the analogia fidei as a oneness in which there is progress towards Christ, and inversely, in which Christ draws all history to himself; and if, moreover, all this is brought to life in the Church's faith.

In other words, I would very much like to see theologians learn to interpret and love Scripture as the Council desired, in accordance with Dei Verbum: may they experience the inner unity of Scripture — something that today is helped by "canonical exegesis" (still to be found, of course, in its timid first stages) — and then make a spiritual interpretation of it that is not externally edifying but rather an inner immersion in the presence of the Word.

It seems to me a very important task to do something in this regard, to contribute to providing an introduction to living Scripture as an up-to-date Word of God beside, with and in historical-critical exegesis. I do not know how this should be done in practice, but I think that in the academic context and at seminaries, as well as in an introductory course, it will be possible to find capable teachers to ensure that this timely encounter with Scripture in the faith of the Church — an encounter on whose basis proclamation subsequently becomes possible — can take place.

-Pope Benedict XVI, "Audience with the Bishops of Switzerland," 7 November 2006.
Complete text available from EWTN.

2008-06-05T10:46:00.002-04:00

John Paul II on How to do Exegesis

As the Council well reminded us: "In the sacred books the Father who is in heaven comes lovingly to meet his children, and talks with them. And such is the force and power of the word of God that it can serve the Church as her support and vigour, and th children of the Church as strength for their faith, food for the soul, and a pure and lasting source of spiritual life." (Dei Verbum, no. 21)...Without this support [a vigorous spiritual life], exegetical research remains incomplete; it loses sight of its main purpose and is confined to secondary tasks. It can even become a sort of escape. Scientific study of the merely human aspects of the texts can make him forget that the word of God invites each person to come out of himself to live in faith and love....

While engaged in the very work of interpretation, one must remain in the presence of God as much as possible...they will avoid becoming lost in the complexities of abstract scientific research which distances them from the true meaning of the Scriptures. Indeed, this meaning is inseparable from their goal, which is to put believers into a personal relationship with God.

-Pope John Paul II, "Bible Experts Must Be Guided by the Spirit," L'Osservatore Romano (English ed.), 28 April 1993, pp.3-4, quoted in Ralph Martin, The Catholic Church at the End of an Age: What is the Spirit Saying?, (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1994), pp.151-152.

2008-05-20T10:38:00.003-04:00

Amazing Catholic Bible Resource!

Thanks to a commentor on this blog, I found this sweet repository of Catholic resources on the Bible. It is a collection of electronic texts to be used with e-Sword (the best free Bible software in the world). You can find this collection of Catholic Bible resources here. It truly is an amazing amount of material: the old Catholic Encyclopedia, the Vulgate, the Summa, the Early Church Fathers, the Catechism, The Peshitta, the Baltimore Catechism, the New Jerusalem Bible, early liturgical texts, Haydock's Bible, a Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture, a Greek-English interlinear and a Hebrew-English interlinear. The list goes on and on! So go download e-Sword here and then download all these Catholic e-Sword goodies here.

2008-05-20T09:46:00.002-04:00

New Link: Aleppo Codex

If you want to dig into the oldest and most important manuscripts we have of the biblical text, look no further than the Catholic Bible Student sidebar. I just added a link to a facsimile edition of the Aleppo Codex, one of the most ancient and authoritative Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament. The website has very sleek functionality and high-resolution zoom. Unfortunately, the other most important Hebrew manuscript, the Leningrad Codex, is not available online yet. At least, not in facsimile form. But you can find a link to its text at this amazing website from Tyndale House. They've done a wonderful job pulling together the best Bible resources on the web and are making them freely available. You can find links to the most important manuscripts, papyri and critical editions, tons of English versions, help with original languages. It's a gold mine!

2008-05-16T14:10:00.001-04:00

Pope Paul VI on how to be an exegete

"Your work is not limited...to explaining old texts, reporting facts in a critical way or going back to the early and original form of a text or sacred page. It is the prime duty of the exegete to present to the people of God the message of salvation, to set forth the meaning of the word of God in itself and in relation to men today."

Pope Paul VI, Address to the Pontifical Biblical Commission
March 14, 1974

2008-05-14T13:45:00.002-04:00

"With sin's entry into the world, the gift begins to vanish into corruption. Knowledge ironically produces not further revelation, but hiddenness and isolation (Gen 3:8-9)."

-Telford Work in Living and Active, p. 38.

2008-05-09T09:30:00.003-04:00

Source Criticism

I've been reading a lot of commentaries on the Minor Prophets. Most of them focus rather myopically on source critical questions. While I think source/redaction criticism is generally valid and can be useful in certain situations, its fundamental philosophical basis is flawed. (Source criticism is the process of determining the sources, editions, redactions or layers of a particular biblical book.)

First, source criticism of the Bible, especially the Old Testament, relies entirely upon internal evidence. Now internal evidence is not invalid, it just cannot be substantiated by hard data like manuscripts, archaeology, etc. I suppose some source-criticism bases itself on interpretations of archaeology, but rarely.

Second, what is the purpose of source-criticism? Does it really help you read a book better when you know who the supposed editors were and how they differed from the "original" author? Sometimes it seems comparable to reading the Constitution by trying figure which lines were proposed or rejected by various members of the Constitutional Convention. And while flipping through the early drafts of the Constitution may be interesting from a historical perspective, it doesn't really shed that much light on what the Constitution actually says. Why? Because the Constitution was a compromise document. So the important part is the consensus, the written page, not the intentions, motivations or even the individuals involved.

So when it comes to the Bible and getting the general reader interested in picking up the Good Book, it seems source-criticism really isn't going to give them that much. The general reader needs to pay attention to the "consensus" or the "compromise document." What do I mean by that? The regular reader should not be concerned with the redaction history of Amos or Zechariah, but should focus on what the text says as it stands, what it means in its present context, what God is saying through the Sacred Word. Picking apart the various layers of development has a limited usefulness even for the expert. Because what matters is not the development, but the end-product. Likewise, the end-product of the Constitutional Convention is what matters. It is the law of the land, not the notes and scribbles of Jefferson or Madison or whomever. So with the Bible, the canon is what counts, not the theories and re-workings of the scholarly class.

2008-05-01T12:15:00.002-04:00

A Famous Debate

On January 28, 1948 Bertrand Russell, the famous Welsh logician and Fr. Frederick Copleston, a Jesuit priest-philosopher held a debate on the existence of God on BBC Radio. Apparently, the original debate was widely listened to in England and stirred up a considerable amount of excitement. I took a particular interest in this debate because I have great respect for Fr. Copleston, having read much of his History of Philosophy. I also have much respect for Bertrand Russell's intellect and his important essay, "Why I am not a Christian." Additionally, Ravi Zacharias is fond of quoting this debate because of the dramatic clash of worldviews it put on display long before many other philosophical fissures developed in our general Western society. Even if you don't enjoy the meat of the debate, their accents are really worth hearing!

I put up the audio on Internet Archive myself today:
Audio: Debate on the Existence of God, Bertrand Russell and Fr. Frederick Copleston SJ

You can also get the text of the debate here.

2008-05-01T11:17:00.002-04:00

Zechariah and Evangelization

"Thus says the LORD of hosts: In those days ten men from the nations of every tongue shall take hold of the robe of a Jew, saying, 'Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.'" Zech 8:23 ESV

As I read this passage, I was struck by the image. I mean, can you imagine ten men of the nations clinging to the robe of every Christian saying "Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you"? And yet, this is how evangelization is supposed to work. Our lives should so resemble the life of Christ, be so filled with the Holy Spirit and the existential reality of faith that everyone around us should have same phrase on their lips because they notice that "God is with us." So often, our experience fails to measure up to what Watchman Nee liked to call the Normal Christian Life. But I do think that if we truly walk in the Holy Spirit, in the fullness of the Gospel, our lives will be noticeably different. And the difference won't only be that we don't accept society's hedonistic mores or don't use contraception--the difference will be shown by our comportment, our joy, our hope, our Christ-like-ness. Then people will notice that God is with us and they will ask to "go with us" to his kingdom.

2008-04-19T14:38:00.002-04:00

Pope Day in Washington

Excitement filled the air at Nationals Park on Thursday as 46,000 people turned out to see Pope Benedict XVI celebrate Mass. The cardinals, dozens of bishops, hundreds of priests and VIPs filled the field while the grandstands were packed with exuberant Catholics from all across the United States. The weather was perfectly warm and sunny as Benedict emerged from the tunnel in the Pope-mobile. And as the procession for Mass made its way through the crowd, you could pick out the pontiff by the sun’s glint off his pastoral staff.

Like most of the participants, I woke up at 4:15 in the morning to get on the metro train and get to my seat. But what amazed me the most was not the massive turnout or the swarm of reporters, the music or the decorations—it was the atmosphere of faith that filled the stadium. Though the smell of hot dogs wafted through this homegrown American ballpark, the crowd’s excitement rose to fever pitch not because of a fly ball or stolen base, but because their Holy Father was with them reminding them of what they knew all along, but so often forget, that it is all true: the fact that God exists and sent his Son and that he loves me and you individually. Somehow that reality, that truth came to life for us people in the crowd. For once, we Americans were not reduced to a number to be checked off on a spreadsheet or a company budget. We did not even pay for our tickets. They were a gift.

Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington, DC connected the Pope’s visit to the arrival of the first Catholics in the colonies in 1634. And in his homily, the Pope reminded us that he came at this particular time because it is the 200th anniversary of the creation of the first American dioceses. He told us that the “remarkable growth” of the Church in the United States was but “one chapter in the greater story” of the Church’s growth. Our story is intimately connected with the story of the whole Church and our life with the life of the whole Church. Benedict told us that he has come to America to confirm our faith, to repeat the message that Jesus Christ is Lord, to call us to conversion and to pray for a new outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the American Church.

He repeated over and over that we are called to constant conversion. To take on this task, we are to rediscover Confession, pray ardently and live out the new evangelization. These themes seemed especially appropriate as the Pope lowered his voice to slowly and painfully discuss the clergy sexual abuse scandal. His sincere sadness was deeply moving. Yet he reminded us Americans that we are people of hope. Hope is part of our civic identity and that uniquely American sense of hope parallels the hope we have in Christ. He emphasized that the sacrament of Penance is a key to the renewal of the American Church. The Pope concluded his homily with a few words in Spanish.

In the silence after the homily, a lone female voice could be heard shouting “Viva la Papa!” With this shout, a great wave of cheers and spontaneous shouts followed, many in Spanish. This moment somehow captured the deeply felt love that the gathered congregation had for the Pope. It was like we were children, telling our father how much we loved him. His smiles, waves and expressions gave us the assurance that the love was mutual. After Placido Domingo finished his exquisite rendition of Panis Angelicus, the Pope embraced him. But it was as if he wanted to embrace each of us and we could each visualize ourselves receiving that embrace.
The Mass concluded with fanfare and music, but the real treasure was deep within our hearts. We each had an encounter and would somehow never be the same.

I had the privilege of seeing the Pope later in the day at the Catholic University of America. He spoke to Catholic educators—university presidents and school-district superintendents. He spoke about the contemporary crisis of truth which is rooted in a crisis of faith. He emphasized that a Catholic educational institution ought to be a place thriving with the life of faith. When he spoke of this he raised his voice to say that “faith and reason never contradict.” He warned that without the Church, the individual can become lost as if on an “ideological chess-board” of endless amoral calculations. He exhorted educators to have “intellectual charity” for their students, to hope, to pray and to live the truth. After his speech, the Pope greeted the students gathered on the lawn outside the building to thunderous applause and exuberant cheers. The students even organized themselves to sing “Regina Caeli,” one of Benedict’s purported favorites.

The Pope’s day in Washington was a wonderful experience of faith, a celebration of Christ our Hope. His encouraging and well-meditated words will serve as food for thought for the American Church in the days and weeks to come. His witness encourages us to become more fully the “leaven of evangelical hope” and to bring the Good News to all the ends of America. ■

2008-04-16T11:51:00.005-04:00

Freedom, Responsibility and the Pope

This morning, the pope gave a great address at the White House. His comments on the moral responsibility underlying American freedom and democracy struck me. He is perhaps the only person who could masterfully quote John Paul II and George Washington in the same breath. Here's the excerpt:

Freedom is not only a gift, but also a summons to personal responsibility. Americans know this from experience — almost every town in this country has its monuments honouring those who sacrificed their lives in defence of freedom, both at home and abroad. The preservation of freedom calls for the cultivation of virtue, self-discipline, sacrifice for the common good and a sense of responsibility towards the less fortunate. It also demands the courage to engage in civic life and to bring one's deepest beliefs and values to reasoned public debate. In a word, freedom is ever new. It is a challenge held out to each generation, and it must constantly be won over for the cause of good. Few have understood this as clearly as the late Pope John Paul II. In reflecting on the spiritual victory of freedom over totalitarianism in his native Poland and in eastern Europe, he reminded us that history shows, time and again, that "in a world without truth, freedom loses its foundation," and a democracy without values can lose its very soul. Those prophetic words in some sense echo the conviction of President Washington, expressed in his Farewell Address, that religion and morality represent "indispensable supports" of political prosperity.

The full text of the Pope's speech is here at the Globe and Mail and will be here at the Vatican.

And kudos to President Bush for quoting the Pope's pre-papacy line about the "dictatorship of relativism." (from this homily) Bush said, "In a world where some no longer believe that we can distinguish between simple right and wrong, we need your message to reject this dictatorship of relativism and embrace a culture of justice and truth." (full text here)

The George Washington quote comes from this line in his farewell address: "Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports." (full text here)

The John Paul II quote comes from Centessimus Annus sec. 46. "But freedom attains its full development only by accepting the truth. In a world without truth, freedom loses its foundation and man is exposed to the violence of passion and to manipulation, both open and hidden. "

2008-04-15T11:01:00.002-04:00

Has anything really changed?

Global Climate Change is the new Apocalypse.
Health is the new salvation.
Doctors are the new healers.
Government is the new Savior.
News is the new Gospel.
Abortion is the new sacrament.
Professors are the new theologians.
Teachers are the new priests.
Activists are the new evangelists.
Chemical imbalances are the new demons.
Psychologists are the new exorcists.

All this progress is not really new at all, is it?

2008-04-10T10:17:00.002-04:00

Dei Verbum, the Minor Prophets and a Catholic Textbook: A Case Study

The Vatican II document on Scripture, Dei Verbum, has some very specific language about how to read the Bible. The document states, "Since Holy Scripture must be read and interpreted in the sacred spirit in which it was written, no less serious attention must be given to the content and unity of the whole of Scripture if the meaning of the sacred texts is to be correctly worked out." (sec. 21) Also it states, "the books of the Old Testament with all their parts, caught up into the proclamation of the Gospel, acquire and show forth their full meaning in the New Testament and in turn shed light on it and explain it." (sec. 16, footnotes removed)

So, as Catholics, we are supposed to read the Old Testament in light of the New and the New Testament in light of the Old. They go hand-in-hand. We are supposed to pay attention to the "content and unity of the whole of Scripture." So let's put these ideas to the test in a miniature case study:

1. The New Testament says, "No prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit." (2 Peter 2:20-21 ESV)

2. A common Catholic textbook on the Old Testament commenting on Haggai says, "Haggai's enthusiastic nationalism and hope for independence led him to extol Zerubbabel as the person God would use to bring blessing to the land." (Boadt, Lawrence. Reading the Old Testament. New York: Paulist Press, 1984. p. 439)

The textbook's explanation of Haggai certainly sounds as if the author believes that Haggai's prophecy about Zerubbabel was produced by Haggai's will because of his nationalism and hope for political independence and not by the Holy Spirit. The oracle is a result of Haggai's personal thoughts, struggles, weaknesses and dreams. That is, it was produced by "the will of man." But this understanding is directly in opposition to the understanding laid out in 2 Peter 2:20-21. There, the author emphasizes thoroughly that the prophecies of Scripture are not the product of human thinking or striving, but of the Holy Spirit's leading and inspiration.

It seems it would be quite difficult to reconcile 2 Peter 2:20-21 and the statement of the textbook. Oh wait, Dei Verbum just makes the problem worse. It says we are supposed to read Scripture as a unity, Old and New Testaments together interpreting one another. Here, 2 Peter is telling us how to read the prophets. So, if we accept Dei Verbum, then we should follow 2 Peter's guidance.

The point is simple, the prophets spoke "under the influence of God"(2 Pet 2:21 NAB). They did not make up their prophecies because of their pet political issues or their psychological problems. God spoke through them. And to read the Bible in a Catholic way, we must accept this simple teaching of the Bible and the Church.

(Photo: Siena, Cathedral of S. Maria, west facade, head of prophet Haggai: ca. 1280-1300 from mtholyoke.edu)

2008-04-08T14:20:00.003-04:00

St. Ambrose on Prayer

"Frequent prayer tends to strengthen our wills, so that we become more amenable to God's purposes though practice, just as we may become less amenable through indifference."

-St. Ambrose Cain and Abel II, 22, FC 42:423

2008-04-05T14:55:00.002-04:00

Knowledge

Fr. Francis Martin points out in a homily how our world's contemporary view of knowledge sees knowledge as "access to power": building bridges, making money, having influence in the company, etc. But he says, "that's the lowest form of knowledge. Knowledge is contact with the truth and rejoicing in the truth! But we can only do that by the mercy of God."

Amen. It is good to remember that knowledge is not for the amassing of power or the oppression of others--though it is often used that way. Knowledge is for access to God, admiring the beauty and wonder of the truth. Rejoice with the truth!

And check out Fr. Francis Martin's website here.

2008-03-27T12:57:00.002-04:00

A Musing on Historical-Criticism of the Bible

One of the great problems with the historical-critical method when it comes to the Bible, is that it denies supernatural reality and revelation de facto. It messes up the whole history of Israel in the Old Testament because it begins from a vantage point which denies the possibility of divine revelation, so it seeks alternative explanations as to the origin of Israel's religion. Rather than Hebrew religion being a divine gift to Abraham and Moses and their followers, historical-criticism reduces it to a slowly evolving and developing religion that began as a mixture of various beliefs and practices adopted from other nations and cultures. Why? Because historical-criticism cannot believe in revealed religion. It is not within its purview.

That is exactly where the historical-critical method loses its explanatory power. The fact is that Israel's religion was revealed by God. It did not evolve out of Canaanite religious practices or beliefs of random Ancient Near Eastern peoples. God actually revealed himself to his people and gave them a way to seek him. Since the historical-critical method cannot admit this, being beyond the bounds of secular science, it fails to explain the importance of the Bible. It is brilliant at dissecting the parts and pieces of the Bible--explaining words and archeology and geography. But it cannot tell you why to read the Bible, how it will change your life or why the Bible makes a difference in the real world.

But the Bible will change your life, not because it is an interesting ancient book, but because it is the word of God to man. It is God's instructions to you about life, death and meaning. Pick it up and read it, not for a perusal of Ancient Near Eastern religious practices, but for spiritual life from the God who loves you.

2008-03-20T15:04:00.005-04:00

The Early Responsa of the Pontifical Biblical Commission

I have recently become very interested in a twisted problem that has polarized debate among Catholic exegetes for the past 100 years. It is the question of the authority or non-authority of the early responsa of the Pontifical Biblical Commission.

The PBC was established by Pope Leo XIII in the document Vigilantiae studiique to undertake "the challenge of explaining and safeguarding" the Scriptures (sec. 3). It was made an official arm of the Magisterium with this statement, "Its work will have the happy result of providing the Apostolic See with the opportunity to declare what ought to be inviolably maintained by Catholics, what ought to be reserved for further research, and what ought to be left for the judgment of each individual." (sec. 9)

Later, when the PBC's authority was questioned, Pius X gave a formal pronouncement saying that "Wherefore we find it necessary to declare and to expressly prescribe, and by this our act we do declare and decree that all are bound in conscience to submit to the decisions of the Biblical Commission relating to doctrine, which have been given in the past and which shall be given in the future, in the same way as to the decrees of the Roman congregations approved by the Pontiff; nor can all those escape the note of disobedience or temerity, and consequently of grave sin, who in speech or writing contradict such decisions, and this besides the scandal they give and the other reasons for which they may be responsible before God for other temerities and errors which generally go with such contradictions."(Praestantia Sacrae Scripturae 18 November 1907 text here)

The PBC convened and proceeded to answer specific questions addressed to it. Some of the answers it gave directly contradicted the "scholarly consensus" of its day and ours. Here is a simplified summary of their decisions:
13 February 1905 - Implied quotations of non-scriptural sources in Scripture have the same authority unless the sacred writer does not approve them or make them his own.
23 June 1905 - The Biblical narrative is historically accurate.
27 June 1906 - Moses is the author of the Pentateuch.
29 May 1907 - The Apostle John wrote the Gospel of John.
30 June 1909 - First three chapters of Genesis are historical, not mythical narratives.
1 May 1910 - The authorship of the Psalms
19 June 1911 - Matthew's Gospel came first and was written in Aramaic.
26 June 1912 - The authorship of Mark and Luke
26 June 1912 - The Two-Source Hypothesis is wrong
12 June 1913 - Luke wrote Acts
12 June 1913 - Paul wrote 1 Tim, 2 Tim and Titus
24 June 1914 - The book of Hebrews
18 June 1918 - The Second Coming
17 November 1921 - Textual variants not in the Clementine edition of the Vulgate are acceptable for publication.
1 July 1933 - Ps. 15 and Matt. 16:26
(Full text of the PBC decisions here.)

After the publication of the Encyclical of Pope Pius XII, Divino afflante Spiritu, the curia set out to publish the Enchiridion Biblicum, which was a 1954 handbook of official Church statements on the Bible. But at the time of its publication Catholic scholars were feeling constrained by the PBC's early 20th century pronouncements. Two members of the PBC, the secretary Athanasius Miller, OSB and subsecretary Arduin Kleinhans, OFM published nearly identical articles in two different journals clarifying that the PBC's statements were not binding on Catholic exegetes. Miller's article was published in German and Kleinhans' was in Latin. The citations for the articles are below. (I got much of this info from Bechard, Dean P. The Scripture Documents: An Anthology of Official Catholic Teachings. Collegeville, MN: Litugical Press, 2002, pp.318-329.) The clarification article was also published in the American journal, Catholic Biblical Quarterly.

So the question is whether the semi-official clarification published in these journals truly repealed the statement of Pius X on Nov 18, 1907 which made the PBC decisions binding. Unfortunately this question has not been completely resolved. Catholic Bible scholars, effectively, do their work as if the responsa of the PBC are not longer binding on the faithful. But as is pointed out by Sean Kopcynski, the responsa have never been officially repealed or eliminated by an official statement or clarification. In the meantime, the PBC has lost its status as an official organ of the Magisterium and is now merely a consulting body (See Paul VI, Sedula cura, 27 June 1971).

Interestingly, the reality of the present-day irrelevance of the responsa is confirmed by some very important figures including Cardinal Ratzinger--now Pope Benedict XVI. Quoted Bechard's book (p.328, footnote 38), Ratzinger regards some warnings of the Magisterium as statements which "their core remains valid, but the individual details influenced by the circumstances at the time may need further rectification" including "the statements of the Popes during the last century on religious freedom as well as the decisions of the Biblical Commission of that time." Ratzinger made these comments in L'Osservatore Romano 2 July 1990. Update 3/27/08: I got the text of Ratzinger's comments from L'Osservatore Romano 2 July 1990, p.5. Here's a fuller quotation from his explanation on The Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, "The text also offers different forms of binding which arise from different levels of magisterial teaching. It states--perhaps for the first time with such clarity--that there are magisterial decisions intended to be the last word on the matter as such, but are a substantial anchorage in the problem and are first and foremost an expression of pastoral prudence, a sort of provisional disposition. Their core remains valid, but the individual details influenced by the circumstances at the time may need further rectification. In this regard one can refer to the statements of the Popes during the last century on religious freedom as well as the anti-modernistic decisions at the beginning of this century, especially the decisions of the Biblical Commission of that time. As a warning cry against hasty and superficial adaptations they remain fully justified; a person of the stature of Johann Baptist Metz has said, for example, that the antimodernist decisions of the Church rendered a great service in keeping her from sinking into the liberal-bourgeois world. But the details of the determinations of their contents were later superceded once they had carried out their pastoral duty at a particular moment."

There is at least one Catholic biblical scholar who did not accept the majority view about the clarification. That was J.E. Steinmueller in The Sword of the Spirit (Waco, TX: Stella Maris, 1977). Update 3/24/08: Here's a quote from Steinmueller from 1941 showing his position before the semi-official clarification, "On October 30, 1902, Pope Leo XIII instituted the Pontifical Biblical Commission to promote and direct biblical studies, and on November 18, 1907, Pope Pius X in his Motu Proprio determined the authority of its decisions. From these it follows: (1) that the Decrees are neither infallible nor irreformable; (2) that they are of the same authority as the other Sacred Congregations; (3) that external as well as internal consent is required; (4) that this assent need not be absolute and irreformable; (5) that the formal object of these Decrees is either security or non-security of any doctrine." (Steinmueller, J.E., A Companion to Scripture Studies [New York: Joseph F. Wagner, 1941] p. 245) There is a lot of technical language in Steinmueller's summary, but I think it's clear enough. (end update) Update 4/14/08: I finally got my hands on Steinmueller's comments about the semi-official clarification of 1955. I quote two sentences and their footnote in full from his book Sword of the Spirit, p.7. First the sentences, "The Church has made no definite and dogmatic pronouncements as the the authorship of any book of the Bible. The decrees of the first Biblical Commission, however, should be regarded as directive norms, and it would be temerarious to disregard them, even though research may be carried further." Now the footnote:

"I was consultor of the first Pontifical Biblical Commission from 1947 (after the publication of Divino afflante Spiritu) to 1971; and I never heard any intimation that any decrees of the Commission were ever revoked. At most they were clarified (cf. Letter to Cardinal Suhard of Paris, 1948). Recently some Catholic scholars have asserted that the decrees were implicitly revoked by Divino afflante Spiritu (1943) and that this is confirmed by two articles written in 1955 by A. Miller and A. Kleinhans, who seem to restrict the scope of the decrees to matters of faith and morals (cf. Jerome Biblical Commentary, Vol. II, p. 629). The articles referred to were unauthorized and were condemned by the voting Cardinal members of the Commission. A. Miller and A. Kleinhans were to be brought before the Holy Office because of the articles, but were saved from this ordeal through the personal intervention of Cardinal Tisserant before the Holy Father. It was my friend, Father Miller, O.S.B., who told me the whole story before his return to Germany.
"Decisions of this Pontifical Biblical Commission were sent to the Holy Father, who ratified them or sent them back for further consideration. The official decisions were published only at his command.
"This first Pontifical Biblical Commission as an independent commission came to an end by the apostolic letter issued 'Motu Proprio' by Pope Paul VI, June 27, 1971. As a new body the Biblical Commission was to be a dependent subcommission under the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith presided over by its Cardinal Prefect. Its members are appointed by the Supreme Pontiff, on the proposal of the Cardinal president after consultation with the episcopal conferences."

Phew! Ok, so that was a really long quote, but I think it's good to get this stuff out there. The only question I still have about Steinmueller's story is who "Father Miller, OSB" actually is. I suppose it could be the same as Athanasius Miller, OSB but I'm not sure. I also wonder if Miller, Kleinhans or even Tisserant have published memoirs or recollections about this event. It would be very interesting to find more in writing about this. It is also fascinating that Steinmueller recounts the cardinals on the PBC voting to condemn the articles which were ostensibly semi-official PBC documents. True, Steinmueller does not actually say the articles were condemned by a vote, but that they were "condemned by the voting cardinal members of the commission." This whole story keeps getting more convoluted! (end update)

So it seems to me that while the issue has never been officially resolved, the reponsa have been effectively sidelined as no longer binding. It seems unfortunate to me that the situation has never been officially clarified and Pius X's warnings of grave sin on the part of those who disagree with the PBC's statements is still out there. But I suppose that the issue may be resolved at some point, but maybe not.

Resources:
Text of Pontifical Biblical Commission Responsa from Catholic Apologetics International (unofficial translation)
Leo XIII. Vigilantiae studiique. 30 October 1902.
Pius X. Lamentabili Sane. 3 July 1907.
Pius X. Pascendi dominici gregis. 8 September 1907.
Pius X. Praestantia Sacrae Scripturae. 18 November 1907.
Pius XII. Divino afflante Spiritu. 30 September 1943.
Paul VI, Sedula cura, 27 June 1971.

Bechard, Dean P. The Scripture Documents. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2002.
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian. 24 May 1990.
Kleinhans, Arduin. "De nova Enchiridii Biblici editione." Antonianem 30 (1955): 63-65.
Kopczynski, Sean. "Rediscovering the Decrees of the Pontifical Biblical Commission." Living Tradition 94(2001).
Miller, Athanasius. "Das neue biblische Handbuch." Benediktinische Monatschrift 31 (1955): 49-50.
Miller, Athanasius. Catholic Biblical Quarterly 18 (1956): 24-25.
Pontifical Biblical Commission Documents List from Vatican site.
Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal. "Relationship Between Magisterium and Exegetes." An address to the PBC. 10 May 2003.
Steinmueller, J.E. The Sword of the Spirit. Waco, TX: Stella Maris, 1977.

2008-02-28T14:47:00.003-05:00

Church Fathers Links

Here are the best online editions of the writings Church Fathers that I can find and that are free. Note especially the Patrologia Latina and the Patrologia Graecae, the most complete original language editions of the Church Fathers. Unfortunately the Corpus Christianorum is not yet available online.

CCEL (English)
Fathers of the Church Series (English)
Patrologia Graecae - Version 1 (Greek)
Patrologia Graecae Version 2 (Greek)
Patrologia Latina (Latin)

2008-02-26T16:05:00.003-05:00

Dumbed-Down Christianity?

I was reading a bit of Ravi Zacharias this morning and came across this observation:

"Sometime in the 1980's, Christians in the West began to label evangelistic techniques and reconfigure church services to reduce the message to the lowest level of cognition in the audience. As nobly intentioned as that was, the end result was th lowest level of writing and gospel preaching one could imagine. Mass media was brought to aid this purpose, and before long evangelicals were seen to be masters in entertainment and minimalists in thought. As this was happening, the intellectual arenas were being plundered and young minds gradually driven away from their "faith" in the gospel message. Christians are paying our dues today and likely will pay for an entire generation." (from the Introduction to Beyond Opinion)

While I don't think that Zacharias' observation applies equally to Catholics as to evangelicals, I do think that it is incisive. I see a deep alienation between the community of faith and the scholarly community on issues of theology, Bible and practice in both Protestant and Catholic groups. It seems that this has been brought about by certain anti-intellectual tendencies in the community of faith and by results-oriented evangelism that counts quantity but not quality--not to mention the sweeping problems in the scholarly community! There is a proliferation of Catholic and Christian TV shows, websites, radio stations, etc. But there are fewer and fewer people to watch them, donate to them or listen to them.

The evangelization of our generation must be a deeply personal activity involving friendship, grassroots community, deep conversations and lovingly shared home-cooked meals. Our generation is not starving for more Christian media or more entertaining worship services, but we are starving for love, friendship, deep connection with others--for a life that is personally meaningful because it is full of persons with whom we can love and share and draw near to God. But this deeply meaningful type of evangelization can only be carried out on the most solid of intellectual foundations, a sincere and honest approach to the Bible, a reflective and fully obedient attitude to the Magisterium, and a full embrace of the Faith with all of its complexities, controversies and paradoxes.

2008-02-02T17:23:00.000-05:00

An Aramaic Verse in Jeremiah?

Weird. There's one, lonely, Aramaic verse in Jeremiah. It's Jer 10:11, "Thus shall you say to them: 'The gods who did not make the heavens and the earth shall perish from the earth and from the heavens.'"

Carey Moore in his book Esther, Daniel and Jeremiah contends that this verse is the basis for the Letter of Jeremiah, which mocks idol worship (Bar 6). It repeats the fact that idols are not gods over and over. But, how weird is that there is just one, only one, Aramaic verse in the whole Hebrew book of Jeremiah!

2008-01-31T20:57:00.000-05:00

Praise in Captivity

I wrote a paper about a year ago called "Fire, Prison and Praise: How Worship Unlocks the Lord's Deliverance." I focused on the three young men in the fiery furnace and on Paul and Silas in prison in the book of Acts. But I found another passage which heartily endorses the principle that worshiping God when in captivity is a good thing to do to unlock his deliverance. Take a look at Baruch 3:7 (Baruch's just after Jeremiah.): "For this, you put into our hearts the fear of you: that we may call upon your name, and praise you in our captivity, when we have removed from our hearts all the wickedness of our fathers who sinned against you."

Isn't that great? When we experience bondage to sin or captivity to depression or imprisonment to addiction, we can turn to God and worship. And worship "unlocks" his deliverance. It's not that God was refusing to deliver us, but that our heart needed to undergo a conversion of sorts. We've got to worship when we get into trouble and the Lord's deliverance will come. It's biblical. Now, how's that for Catholic Bible Student action?

2008-01-29T13:45:00.000-05:00

John Henry Cardinal Newman, "An Essay on the Inspiration of Scripture"

I came across this essay which was quite influential in the time it was written. I've been thinking a lot about the Catholic doctrine of inspiration and this is part of my inquiry. Let me know what you think. Oh yeah, and before I forget here's the link. The guy in the picture is John Henry Cardinal Newman and if anyone can figure out why his left index finger is tucked behind his ear in this picture, you'll win my accolades.

2008-01-24T18:09:00.002-05:00

Modernism
I found this great cartoon on Wikipedia's entry for Modernism (Roman Catholicism). I'm reading a great book on the subject by Marvin O'Connell called Critics on Trial: An Introduction to the Catholic Modernist Crisis. I'm only a few pages in, but I'll already recommend to you. Maybe I'll tell you more about it once I'm done.

2008-01-24T11:08:00.001-05:00

Biblical Times, Children and Abortion

A thought by Fr. George Montague, S.M.:

The pagan world of Biblical times showed little concern for mercy. Two groups especially suffered--slaves and children. Slaves were considered tools, and masters had the right to kill them as they wished. Unwanted infants were left to die of exposure, particularly girls. And, as happens even today in some countries, unwanted children could be picked up for the "slave trade" or deliberately maimed and used by racketeers to beg. The modern world flinches at such accounts, then abets them by legalized abortion. Our mercy, like that of our pagan forebears, is selective.

(from Montague, George T. Companion God: A Cross-Cultural Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1989. p. 60.)

2008-01-21T21:13:00.000-05:00

How to Memorize

I struggled with memorizing vocab words when I first started learning Greek. My friend introduced me to the Leitner Cardfile System, invented by psychologist Sebastian Leitner. I have used it for vocab memorization and found that it helped me. I just use index cards with the foreign word on the front and its English equivalent on the back. There are a few vocab memorizing programs that use the same method: flashcardexchange.com and Memory Lifter.

There are other programs out there for memorizing Greek and Hebrew Bible vocabulary. I have used Flash Works and QuickMem Greek and would recommend both.

I also just found this great site which rates memorization programs.