Catholic Bible Student

Feb. 9: Catholic Sisters on Oprah

2010-02-05T13:40:00.003-05:00

I just heard from the Al Kresta show that a few of the Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucharist will be featured on Oprah's national talk show on Tuesday, February 9. This group of sisters has been growing by leaps and bounds since its foundation 13 years ago. Their mother house is in Ann Arbor, MI and they have opened schools in other dioceses. Oprah's crew went to the mother house and did some filming which will be show during the program. Right now, the group includes 98 sisters and at the helm is Mother Assumpta Long, OP. I am sure the conversation will be interesting, so I'd encourage you to tune in.

Chaff and Fire

2010-02-04T18:02:00.004-05:00

I came across a reference to chaff being burning in the Bible in Exodus 15:7 and I thought,
"Hey, why does the Bible always mention chaff and fire at the same time?"

Here are some examples:
...you send out your fury; it consumes them like stubble. (Exo 15:7 ESV)
Therefore, as the tongue of fire devours the stubble... (Isa 5:24 ESV)
You conceive chaff; you give birth to stubble; your breath is a fire that will consume you. (Isa 33:11 ESV)
Behold, they are like stubble; the fire consumes them... (Isa 47:14 ESV)
...like the crackling of a flame of fire devouring the stubble... (Joe 2:5 ESV)
The house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau stubble; they shall burn them and consume them... (Oba 1:18 ESV)
they are consumed like stubble fully dried. (Nah 1:10 ESV)
For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble. (Mal 4:1 ESV)
...but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire (Mat 3:12 ESV)
...but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire." (Luk 3:17 ESV)

Chaff is the leftovers of the wheat stalk when the edible grain has been removed by the process of threshing and winnowing. Chaff is also sometimes called "stubble." In Hebrew, there are actually two words, one for chaff (חשׁשׁ), the little inedible fuzzies at the top of the stalk and one for stubble (קשׁ), the long stick-like part of the stalk. Apparently, it was a normal part of Israelite agriculture to burn the chaff after the winnowing process was complete. And it seems that the burning pile of chaff was a rather impressive show since it impressed itself on the Hebrew imagination so thoroughly as to serve as a good metaphor for God's judgment. I got curious, and of course, looked it up on YouTube. I found a burning field of wheat stubble--slightly different than flaming piles of chaff. Take a look, if you like:

Copyright Showdown in Federal Court

2010-02-01T14:04:00.003-05:00

I've been thinking (as has everyone else) that we need a copyright law reform in the US. Copyright law has not been touched by Congress since 1998 and things have changed a bit since then. Right now, there is a showdown between Google and several publishers over the Google Books service. Friend of the court briefs and such were all due January 28, 2010 and the federal court (Judge Danny Chin in Manhattan) is scheduled to hear arguments on February 18. Google is hoping to settle with the publishers on a class action basis which would allow them to electronically reproduce up to 20% of a book online in Google Books and allow them to post "orphan" books. Orphan books are technically under copyright, but have no copyright owner (since the author is deceased and the publisher has gone out of business). Google is gaga over orphan books because it sees them as tons of free exclusive online content. Reproducing these books online would let them post ads next to them and rake in cash on clicks.

A bunch of people have weighed in on the grandiose case since it affects pretty much everyone who either reads or writes. There is tons to read on the case. Here are the places to look:

A lot of folks are terrified that this big Google settlement will kill creativity by making it unprofitable (this is from the writer side of things). A lot of other people are scared that the settlement will force all electronic content to be constantly "metered" so that every book is "licensed" to you as you pay for it page-by-page. Google is frightened because if they lose, they could be liable for up to $3.6 trillion in copyright infringement! There is a lot at stake in this settlement and I must say that I hope Congress will weigh in at some point soon and do a copyright law overhaul. Don't hold your breath.

The Qeiyafa Ostracon

2010-01-28T16:41:00.002-05:00

You may have come across a newspaper article entitled something like the following:

When Was the Bible Really Written? (Fox News)
Deciphered Etching Sheds New Light on Bible's Origin (Ha'aretz)
Archaeologists Claim Discovery of Oldest Hebrew Writing (AFP)

If you read the articles, you would notice that they all tell a story of an ostracon which somehow indicates that the Bible is super old, way older than most scholars hold. Then you would feel that all these stories came from the same source. And you would be right. It was this press release from Haifa University and Prof. Gershon Galil.

But you would not know that the ostracon in the limelight was discovered in July 2008 at Khibet Qeiyafa, an archaeological dig by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. You would not know that there has been great interest in this ostracon and tons of research and imaging, all chronicled here. You would not know that the original publication of the ostracon was done by Haggai Misgav and followed up by Ada Yardeni. You would not know that the archaeological team that found the ostracon wrote a rather harsh open letter to Prof. Galil.

The Unusual Case of Henry Poels (Post #1)

2010-01-26T11:10:00.005-05:00

In June of 1909, the pope himself dismissed a priest from teaching Scripture at the Catholic University of America. The firing came in the wake of the Modernist crisis, the decision of the Pontifical Biblical Commission (PBC) which upheld Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch (June 27, 1906) the publication of Lamentabili (a. k. a., The Syllabus of Errors, July 3, 1907) and the encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis (Sep 8, 1907).

Henry Poels was a Dutchman and he had been hired by CUA in 1904 to teach Old Testament. At this time, Charles P. Grannan was dean of the School of Theology and Daniel J. O'Connell was the rector of the University. There was some initial confusion over Poels' status in the university. Grannan and the faculty supported him while O'Connell was skeptical of his leanings. It seems that Grannan and O'Connell were often at loggerheads.

Poels was a consultor to the PBC when it issued its decision on Mosaic authorship. The PBC was Leo XIII's brainchild. As an arm of the magisterium, its purpose was to establish official Church positions on biblical topics. It only promulgated a few official decisions in its early history and these have resulted in some controversy, which I have written about here on this blog. The text of the PBC's decision from June 27, 1906 can be found online in English and Latin. It basically rejects the idea that Moses did not write the Pentateuch, accepts the possibility that Moses may have used assistants to write it, grants that he may have used prior sources, and affirms the critical study of textual problems.

Fr. Poels planned to teach a class on "Hebrew Institutions, as seen in Law and History" in the Fall 1906. But after the PBC's decision he thought he could not teach the course in good conscience, so he offered a course on "the Biblical Question" instead (Poels 14-15). Why? Well, he differed from the PBC. Poels states his position thus:

I could not and cannot conscientiously teach that Moses was the actual author of the first five books of the Bible, as we have them to-day. In this view I do not stand alone, for, as a matter of fact, the overwhelming majority of Old Testament scholars--yea, practically all the Old Testament critics, of any name, are agreed on this point (Poels 15).

Poels found himself in an odd situation. Being a man of honor, he could not "follow the policy of other Catholic Professors...who, thinking as I did, continued their professional duties" (Poels 15). He wanted affirmation. If he had let the issue lie, mostly likely nothing would have happened. But he wanted to make sure he was in a good place and so his troubles began.

He visited Rome in the summer of 1907 to find the affirmation he was looking for. He met with Cardinal Satolli and asked if his disposition would be acceptable if he held that "generally speaking, the institutions, mentioned in the Pentateuch, were of Mosaic origin, although the documents in which these institutions are described, and in their present literary form, did not all actually come from the pen of Moses" (Poels 16). Satolli deferred judgment, so Poels met with Pope Pius X himself.

Poels described his situation to the pope. He related that the question of Mosaic authorship has bearing on every dimension of Old Testament study. The pope acknowledged that according to natural law, he must obey his conscience, but according to church law, he must obey the PBC. So the pope suggested Poels teach in another area. His companion and interpreter, Fr. Genocchi suggested that this would be inappropriate since university professors should be specialists in their area. Pius X then directed Poels to follow the advice of Fr. Genocchi and Fr. Janssens. (Janssens was the head of the PBC.)

Poels was a bit confused. He felt he ought to teach in another field, but Genocchi and Janssens urged him to hold his post as an Old Testament professor at CUA. Poels accepted their advice, but asked that they would inform the pope. Both Genocchi and Janssens had audiences with the pope and informed him of the advice. Poels was apparently a bit nervous about the whole thing, so he wrote Genocchi whose reply did not satisfy him. Then he wrote Janssens to ask him to confirm that the pope was privy to the advice for Poels to retain his chair. Janssens met with the pope and "talked over your case a long time quite alone with the Pope" (Poels 49). Janssens states that, as long as Poels would show no contempt for the PBC and its decisions, "the Pope permits you to retain your professional chair." Additionally, the pope said "Tell him that I send to him with love my fatherly blessing" (Poels 49). At this point in May of 1908, it seemed the whole question was resolved and Poels could finally sleep well at night.

But as history would have it, confusion ensues, many more characters get involved and the Rev. Dr. Henry Poels would have many more sleepless nights. However, the rest of the story will have to wait for another post.

---------
Sources on Henry Poels:
Ellis, John Tracy. The Life of Cardinal Gibbons. Vol. 2. Milwaukee: Bruce, 1952. pp.171-182.
Fogarty, Gerald P. American Catholic Biblical Scholarship: A History From The Early Republic To Vatican II. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1989. pp. 78-119.
Poels, Henry A. A Vindication of My Honor. Leuven: University Press: Peeters, 1982

Online Chapels

2010-01-14T16:07:00.003-05:00

This has to be the weirdest thing I have seen all week. I came across an institution touting its "online chapel." I thought to myself--what the heck is that?! Isn't a chapel a place to pray and worship. How on earth could such a place exist in the cyberspace environement?

So then, following the path of any avid internet user (and yes, I do mean that with all the negative connotations), I Googled "online chapel." And as could be expected, I found many online chapels. Most of them seem to be only lists of prayers or Bible readings. But rather than advertising their prayer lists as prayer lists, these websites label themselves "online chapels." Some of them have icon pictures and what not. A few are blogs.

So, I must ask, what is a chapel?

A chapel is a building for prayer. The architecture of a chapel is designed (under good circumstances) not only to provide covering but to actually elevate worshippers hearts to God in prayer. It is a place characterized by silence, beauty, stillness and peace. It is a place where the senses can be quieted to listen for the still, small voice of the Holy Spirit.

A chapel is not an LCD screen with prayers listed on it.

Sr. Lucia's Conversation with Albino Luciani (a.k.a. Pope John Paul I)

2009-12-31T14:59:00.002-05:00

I came across something rather interesting in a book about the Fatima apparitions by Cardinal Bertone. In it, Bertone presents the notes of Albino Luciani who met with Sr. Lucia, one of the Fatima visionaries, on July 11, 1997. Of course, Luciani soon became Pope John Paul I. The quote I am extracting from the notes deals with Sr. Lucia's advice to theologians. Here it is:

"We should pray the holy Rosary. Naaman, the great Syrian general, disdained the simple bath in the Jordan suggested to him by Elisha. Some people act like Naaman: 'I am a great theologian, a mature Christian, who breathes the Bible with both lungs and sweats liturgy from every pore--and they tell me to pray the Rosary?' And yet the fifteen mysteries of the Rosary are biblical; the Pater, the Ave Maria, and the Gloria are Bible passages transformed into prayer, and they are good for the soul. Bible study solely for the sake of scholarship could puff up the soul and leave it in a state of sterile aridity. Bible scholars who have lost their faith are hardly are rare breed."

-Luciani Albino, [notes], quoted in Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, The Last Secret of Fatima (New York: Doubleday, 2008) 60.

I suppose we Bible students should take these words to heart. It does seem that many lose zeal for their faith after many years of studying it intensely. I think over-studying the Faith is similar to over-studying music or butterflies or something. One can easily lose the joy of discovery, the sense of wonder when he thinks he knows something.

I am not exactly sure why this happens. I mean, why should studying give way to pride, puffing up and lack of faith? But these symptoms do seem very common. It seems to me that they derive from the basic functions of human pride. After many years of gaining knowledge through study, a person may think that he knows something--that is, that he knows more than others or is less naive than the regular Joe. Then his mind makes this false leap: "If I know about something I must have conquered it in some way." So he forgets the fact that he must pray, do good, give alms, serve the poor and live out the basics of the Christian life. Knowledge thus leads to pride and pride leads to apathy and apathy leads to aridity.

Oddly, this process contradicts the way that knowledge should function. A person with a deeper knowledge of poetry, literature and acting should be able to put on a much more convincing performance of Shakespeare than a hormone-ridden teenager. Yet hormone-ridden teenagers often outperform aged literature professors on stage. A serious student of the Bible (or of theology in general) ought to live a more convinced and convincing spiritual life than a person who has not had the luxury of study.

Bonaventure's Complete Works Online

2009-11-20T17:29:00.004-05:00

You may know from viewing the persons in my blog's sidebar that I am a fan of the Seraphic Doctor, St. Bonaventure. You may not know that his complete works (his opera omnia, if you will) has been scanned by Google and placed online in Google books and on the new Hathi Trust Digital Library where you can download PDF's of the full Quaracchi Latin edition of his works. These books are very expensive and hard to find and it is an absolute joy to me that they are now online and freely available to all. Of course, if you don't read Latin, you'll still have to buy a translation, but perhaps, Google translate will come out with a Latin-English function. :) We can all hope.

Bonaventure published several commentaries on Scripture. Recently, the very diligent friars at St. Bonaventure College in Pennsylvania, have been translating Bonaventure's scripture commentaries and his other works into English. They are up to 14 volumes now!

Ratzinger on Classical Music

2009-11-20T14:24:00.003-05:00

I was amused by Ratzinger's comment on classical music and I thought you would be too:

"Modern so-called 'classical music' has maneuvered itself, with some exceptions, into an elitist ghetto, which only specialists may enter--and even they do so with what may sometimes be mixed feelings."

-Joseph Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2000) 147.

If you have ever sat through an entire performance of Stravinsky's Rite of Spring or a Bartok String Quartet (as I have) or even the ridiculous "composition" 4'33 by John Cage, you know exactly what he's talking about.

Kasemann on the Root Sin

2009-11-11T21:59:00.003-05:00

I came across an interesting thought from Ernst Käsemann in my reading today:

"To undertake to preserve independence over against God is the root sin..."

Ernst Käsemann, "'The Righteousness of God' in Paul" in New Testament Questions of Today (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969) 180.

How true!

Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation on the Bible

2009-10-19T15:32:00.002-04:00

Pope Benedict XVI is expected to turn out a post-syndol apostolic exhortation on the Bible at some point in the next few months. Last time that he had an October Synod (2005), the exhortation came out in February 2007, about a year and half later. The Bible Synod took place last October 5-26, 2008. Cardinal Marc Oullet, archbishop of Quebec, requested that Pope Benedict write an encyclical on the Bible and biblical interpretation at the Synod last fall (see Zenit). While I do not think it likely for the Pope to produce both an apostolic exhortation and an encyclical on the Bible in a relatively short period of time, it is possible. We can expect he will be spending extra effort on the exhortation in order to sum up the synod and clearly re-state the Church's views on the Bible. If Benedict remains with us for several years after the exhortation, it is possible he could produce an encyclical as well. However, I bet he will invest the exhortation, which he is obligated to provide, with a great deal of thought and energy. It should make for good reading. I imagine it will re-affirm what Catholics believe about the Bible and provide a good synthesis of post-Vatican II teaching.

Medieval Theory v. Historical-Critical Method

2009-10-18T15:31:00.002-04:00

Food for thought:
"The medieval theory of levels of meaning in the biblical text, with all its undoubted defects, flourished because it is true, while the modem theory of a single meaning with all its demonstrable virtues, is false. Until the historical-critical method becomes critical of its own theoretical foundations and develops a hermeneutical theory adequate to the nature of the text which it is interpreting it will remain restricted—as it deserves to be—to the guild and the academy, where the question of truth can endlessly be deferred."

-David Steinmetz, "The superiority of pre-critical exegesis," Ex auditu 1 (1985): 82.

A Professor Claims that God Did Not Create

2009-10-12T13:06:00.003-04:00

You may have seen this story swirling through the Bible news internet blogoplex. Ellen van Wolde, a professor at Radbound University in the Netherlands has claimed that the Hebrew word br' in Genesis 1:1 means "separated" not "created" thus making God a divine manipulator of things already existing, not a creator ex nihilo. Well, as you can imagine, there have been many responses.

The original article in Trouw (in Dutch)
A report from the UK Telegraph

Responses from:
God Didn't Say That
Ancient Hebrew Poetry (examines the Hebrew)
Chris Heard
Clayboy
Alternate Readings (examines the LXX evidence)
Claude Mariottini

This debate is is important because of the central idea of creatio ex nihilo in Catholic thought. The Catholic Catechism addresses the doctrine of creation in CCC282-301, especially 296-298. The Catechism cites Lateran Council IV which states that the Trinity is "the one principle of the universe, the creator of all things, visible and invisible, spiritual and corporeal, who by this almighty power from the beginning of time made at once out of nothing both orders of creatures, the spiritual and the corporeal, that is, the angelic and the earthly, and then the human creature, who as it were shares in both orders, being composed of spirit and body" (Neuner-Dupuis 19; DS 800; emphasis mine).

However, I don't think very many people will take Prof. Wolde's theory very seriously.

Introduction to Text Criticism Online Book

2009-10-10T16:22:00.002-04:00

I just found a great resource for anyone who wants a brief introduction to text criticism of the Bible. Apparently, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts by Sir Frederic Kenyon used to be a common textbook for textual criticism. I found it to be a very helpful summary of the important points. It can help you make sense of the text-critical apparatus in the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament or Rahlfs' Septuagint, even the Hebrew Bible--but the book was published in 1939, seven years before the discovery of the caves at Qumran. Hence the reason it is no longer a standard.

Kenyon's book has been superceded by a few other books: Bruce Metzger's Textual Commentary on the New Testament (2005) and his Text of the New Testament (co-authored with Bart Ehrman, 2005), Kurt and Barbara Aland's Text of the New Testament (1995)and Emmanuel Tov's Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible (2001).

Conflating Realities with "-ologies"

2009-10-05T22:58:00.002-04:00

So often, too often, scholars are seduced by the similarity between the studied and the student, the researched and the researcher that they make the unforgivable mistake of combining, conflating and confusing the reality of the thing studied with the discipline that studies it. Thus, certain problems between people become "sociological" rather than "societal" or people engage in building "high ethnological walls" rather than high "ethnic" walls.

This phenomenon is an abuse of language. So next time you encounter conflicting neighborhoods or some addiction that afflicts human society, refer to the "social" or "societal" problem you are observing. In this manner, you will be engaging in an act of "sociological" study. Likewise, if you see someone building high walls between ethnic groups, remember that they are "ethnic" walls and that you have just made an "ethnological" observation.

All you Greek scholars out there (and anyone who has ever taken a biology class) know that the "-ology" at the end of a word comes from the Greek word logos, "word, knowledge." So "biology" is "the study of bios" or "the study of life."

Christian Instant Messaging

2009-08-12T18:22:00.002-04:00

Well, I've been using various instant messaging programs for a few years, but I just realized something I never thought of: We have no Christian instant messaging greetings. At least, there are no standard, traditional ones that go back a long ways because well, instant messaging has only been out there for very short time.

Perhaps however, a few traditional Christian greetings can be modified for the IM world. I mean, we like to say things like "God bless you!" or "Godspeed!" (archaic, I know) or even "He is risen!" In writing letters and now emails, Christians often use a complimentary close like "Yours in Christ," or even "Faithfully Yours."

But how are you supposed to convey God's blessing to a fellow Christian through instant messaging of all things? Perhaps there is a way. If you figure it out, let me know.

I suppose we could borrow from speech and letter writing, but it seems a little odd to end an IM session with "Faithfully Yours."

Tabitha (Acts 9:36, 40) - Aramaic in NT Post #3

2009-08-12T12:01:00.004-04:00

Tabitha (Acts 9:36, 40) is a person who shows up a couple times in Acts.

In Greek: ταβιθα
In Aramaic: טְבִיתָא

I'm borrowing the Aramaic transcription from Thayer's Lexicon. He gets it from Kautzsch's Aramaic grammar. It is a female given name seemingly related to the Aramaic word for good (tab). So it means "good, precious, worth" or something like that. Here a couple dictionary entries on it: DJPA and Jastrow p. 515b. (It is not related to the word "talitha" discussed below.) It seems similar to the names Tobias and Tobit which are related to the same root word in Hebrew and Aramaic.

However, Acts 9:36 indicates that name "translated, means Dorcas." Well, maybe this is helpful for Greek speakers, but us English-speaking folk need a little more help. So, if you happen to look up Dorcas (Δορκας) in a Greek dictionary, it means "antelope, gazelle." So, what the heck? Is Tabitha really related to tab or not? It seems not.

The real root of Tabitha in Aramaic is the word for gazelle, טבי (tby). The "-tha" ending just feminizes the masculine word. Here's Jastrow's entry:
http://www.catholicbiblestudent.com/uploaded_images/tby-726702.JPG

So, Tabitha means gazelle. I suppose that that is a complimentary female name. Now, there is one other point of interest here. In Acts 9:40, Tabitha has died and Peter goes in to the body, pronounces the words "Tabitha, arise" and she is raised from the dead. Of course, this looks a lot like the phrase Jesus used "Talitha, qum" or "Talitha, arise." Very interesting that these two resurrection stories have such similar words. Also, it seems that the minor variant "tabitha" in Mark 5:41 probably originated from confusion with Acts 9:40. But it seems that this is merely a coincidence. "Little girl" and "gazelle" mean very different things even though they are only one letter different.

Talitha cum! (Mark 5:41) (Aramaic in NTPost #2)

2009-08-07T11:21:00.005-04:00

This is my favorite use of Aramaic in the New Testament.

Overview of this series
Many scholars conjecture Aramaic underpinnings to much of the Greek in the New Testament. They will cite "Semitic influence," "semiticisms," or "Aramaisms." The point is that a lot of the writers of the NT were GSL people (Greek as a second language). Some people used to think that parts of the NT were originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic (especially the Gospel of Matthew), but very few people hold that anymore. Most folks think that the NT was written by Aramaic speakers who were bilingual in Greek. Although some deny knowledge of Aramaic or Hebrew to certain NT authors.

What I want to do in these posts is highlight something more specific: the use of transliterated Aramaic in the NT. "What weird idea!" you might say. But these curious words are often misunderstood or simply not understood since they are rarely translated into English, they are simply transliterated (i.e. the sounds are reproduced by English letters) from Greek because they were transliterated into Greek from Aramaic. Now, this gets a little complicated because the Greek does not necessarily show all the features of the Aramaic. I mean, Aramaic is written right to left with no vowels and such. Greek attempts to reproduce the sound of the Aramaic, but isn't always faithful or consistent.

Side note: one of the ways we know how ancient Hebrew and Aramaic were pronounced is through the use of transliteration in the Greek NT, but more importantly, the ancient Septuagint translation of the Bible. Most transliterated words are names since they are notoriously hard to translate.

Talitha cum! (Mark 5:41)
In Aramaic: טַלִיתָא קום
Transliterated into Greek: ταλιθα κουμ

Now, the first word we can find in the Jastrow Aramaic Dictionary:

If you notice, the vowel pointing I used is a little different than Jastrow's because I'm working back from the Greek transliteration, but no matters, it's the same word. So the word basically means "young girl" or something like that. There's a very similar word for boy (taley).

Now qum is a very common word which means "to stand, arise." But here's the fascinating part. In Aramaic, qum is used as a second masculine singular imperative, which would make perfect sense here IF the dead person were a boy. The feminine version would be קומי qumi! So a couple questions arise, so to speak: 1.) Is the Greek faithful to the Aramaic? 2.) Are there textual variants? 3.) Is the dead person actually male?

In reverse order:
3.) We know from the previous verses, esp. v.35, that it was a daughter who had died, not a son. She is usually referred to as "child" (paidion in Greek) which is a neuter word. But, we know it's a daughter, so the dead person is female, not male.
2.) There are textual variants! Now, don't get too excited. Sinaiticus, Vaticanus are on the side of the text qum. But Alexandrinus, Koridethianus and a few others have qumi (well, it's actually in "κουμι" in Greek transliteration). I guess the New Testament text committee decided on qum because of B and א. There's a few other witnesses that have ταβιθα instead. But these are very rare.
1.) Ah! And lastly, it appears that no, the Greek doesn't quite capture the Aramaic. The variants are probably corrections rather than representing an earlier text. It also seems that most of the early copyists did not know Aramaic, so they wouldn't be tempted to correct it.

The translation usually given "Little girl, arise!" is quite good. The Greek inserts "I say to you" just to clarify that it is an imperative.

Well, now you know more than you ever could have wanted about this passage. Now you can impress your friends with your Aramaic knowledge!

Aramaic in the New Testament (Post #1)

2009-07-22T19:43:00.004-04:00

Anathema (1 Cor 16:22)
Bethesda (John 5:2)
Eloi, eloi, lema sabachthani! (Matt 27:46; Mark 15:34)
Gabbatha (John 19:15)
Golgotha (John 19:17)
Kephas or Cephas (John 1:42, et al.)
Maranatha! (1 Cor 16:22)
Rabboni (John 20:16)
Raqa (Matt 5:22)
Siloam (Luke 13:4; John 9:7, 9:11)
sign on the cross (John 19:20)
Tabitha (Acts 9:36, 40)
Talitha cum! (Mark 5:41)

Scripture and Christology

2009-03-02T12:09:00.002-05:00

I found a hard-to-find document from the Pontifical Biblical Commission today and I thought I'd share it with you. It's called Scripture and Christology and was published in 1985 in Latin and French. Fr. Joseph Fitzmyer, S.J. did an English translation which has been reproduced online. So here it is: the English translation of the "Instruction on Scripture and Christology.

At the Synod: Tension Between Biblical Scholaship and the Catholic Faith

2008-10-17T15:30:00.003-04:00

I found this report from CNS to be illustrative of the conversations going on at the synod:

During the first 10 days of the Oct. 5-26 synod on the Bible, a recurring theme in the synod hall was the tension several bishops see between some schools of biblical scholarship and the traditional faith of the church.

The day after Cardinal Marc Ouellet of Quebec presented his summary of the synod's initial discussions Oct. 15, several synod members met with reporters to discuss points the cardinal raised.

U.S. Cardinal William J. Levada, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said the tension between some schools of interpretation, or exegesis, and the traditional theology and teaching of the church was "not just one of the key -- but I would say one of the most delicate -- questions" for the synod.

He said, "We might look at the tension this way: When you look at the Scriptures, oftentimes you are told, 'Read the Scripture to look just at what this passage says to you or says in itself.'

"That is a very important step," he said, "but when you think of the way in which the church for 2,000 years has been reading and reflecting on the Scripture, the next question seems natural and necessary, and that is, 'How is this passage of Scripture related to all of the Bible and how is it related to the faith of the church?'"

I'm glad that the bishops are working through some of the most difficult and admittedly delicate questions about the Bible and the Catholic faith. It will be very interesting to see what they come up with. The "tension" between biblical scholarship and the Catholic faith is clear: when scholarship definitely proves something that contradicts the way that Catholics have always thought about something...well, what do you do? John Paul II made clear that the Church is committed both to faith and to reason as ways of discovering truth. But what happens when they seem to conflict?

There are a couple basic approaches to resolving the conflict. 1.) You can reject the traditionally held view as erroneous. 2.) You can gloss over the contradiction and ignore it.

But of course, both of these approaches are problematic. The first one is a problem because people have the tendency to throw out the baby with the bath water and reject more than was proved wrong. Or people assume that because one traditionally-held view was proved wrong that all traditional views should be questioned or overthrown. The second approach is a problem because it does not give due credit to reason--a legitimate and binding way of coming to know the truth.

I grant there are other (and more complex) ways of explaining the problem, but I just wanted to break it down for you.

There are a few attempts out there trying to solve this problem, but it just hasn't been done on a wide scale. I'm hoping that the bishops will work through the difficulty and delicacy of the whole thing, but we'll have to wait and see.

A Third Site about the Synod

2008-10-15T08:00:00.000-04:00

As I keep discovering more sites about the Scripture Synod, I keep giving you the links. Today, I came across the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops site about the synod. As for news, it seems to rely on the same sources as the other two sites: basically reporting from Catholic News Service. BUT the site has the added bonus of blogging by none other than Bishop Gerald Kicanas. I think it's pretty unusual to have a bishop blogging during a synod--it may be a first. Nonetheless, I hope you enjoy it. You can even get an RSS feed of the blog.

My Introductions to the Bible

2008-10-13T17:54:00.002-04:00

One thing I've been working on over the past two years is writing introductions to every book of the Bible for eCatholicHub.net. After lots of sweat, reading, note-taking, writing, editing and after ecclesiastical approval: here they are. Read them, let me know what you think. My hope is that these introductions will help people get quickly into reading the Bible with a basic understanding. They are purposefully short. I attempt to give the reader a handhold for basic points in every book, so that reading the Bible is not a (primarily) confusing experience. I wrote the introductions from a Catholic perspective mainly for other Catholics. But I think lots of different kinds of people will find them useful. So take a look my introductions to every book of the Bible. Oh yeah, that includes the deutero-canonical books.

US Delegates at the Synod

2008-10-11T19:53:00.003-04:00

In a previous post, I didn't explain the synod structure quite right. So, there are 32 members appointed by the pope (all bishops) which are part of a total 253 voting members of the synod. The other members are members of the curia, heads of religious orders and bishops voted for by their respective bishops conferences. In addition there are the experts and observers.

So, the voting members from the US are:
1. Francis Cardinal George
2. Daniel Cardinal DiNardo
3. Archbishop Donald Wuerl
4. Bishops Gerald Kicanas
5. Archbishop Basil Schott, OFM

The experts from the US are:
1. Sr. Sara Butler
2. Fr. Damian Akpunonu
3. Msgr. Timothy Verdon

The observers from the are:
1. Carl Anderson, Supreme Knight
2. Ricardo Grzona
3. Sister M. Clare Millea, A.S.C.J., Superior General, Apostles of the Sacred Heart of Jesus

I hope that clears up any confusion about the synod's structure and US representation there.

Synod Struggles Over Inerrancy

2008-10-11T18:00:00.006-04:00

Hmmm...synods, I imagine, are generally rather boring. A bunch of bishops and theological experts sit around having abstruse discussions about Church life and theology. But whoa, you touch the Bible and whether it's true--or at least, in what sense it is true--and zing! you've got a controversy. Thus is the case with the current Scripture Synod.

(For the record, CNS has reporter Cindy Wooton on the ground and National Catholic Reporter has John Allen Jr.)

Catholic Bible Student Notes on the Synod:
1. There's been discussion about the correct Catholic understanding of the inerrancy of Scripture. Check out this article from NCP. Looks like theres been talk concerning the debate between "restricted inerrancy" and "unrestricted inerrancy," a hot debate at Vatican II.

2. John Allen's interview with Cardinal Pell. The Cardinal says: "I would say the synod is going along very sedately and securely. I’d say there’s less division in this synod than in any synod I’ve been to." He also mentions the possibility of setting up an international Institute of Biblical Translation. He says that Cardinal George recommended that the CDF issue a statement on biblical inerrancy (in Cardinal Pell's words) "to make clear that saying the Bible is ‘inspired’ is not necessarily the same thing as claiming that it’s universally inerrant, in every way." The interview is long but makes for interesting reading.

3. Rabbi Shear-Yashuv Cohen addressed the synod on Monday. I'm looking for video of the address if anyone finds it, please post the URL in the comments. From what I've heard it was a moving speech. Unfortunately, he made some negative comments about Pope Pius XII--there's been talk of beatifying this pope and some Jews have been upset by his supposed inaction during World War II. Other Jews like Rabbi David Dalin have defended his actions.

4. If you want to read what's actually going on at the synod without any media filter. Check out the daily bulletins released by the Vatican which include the Holy Father's homilies to the synod, short speeches by voting bishops and an outline of every day's activity.
October 3 another
October 4
October 5 (opening day of synod)
October 6 another
October 7 another
October 8
October 9 another and another
October 10 another
October 11

Ok, these are my notes so far.