On Re-Opening the Bible
Stratford Caldecott

 

We are living at a very interesting time for biblical studies. The great achievement of this century by Catholic biblical scholars was undoubtedly to have assimilated the historical-critical method: a method which was originally developed largely by Protestants, but gradually endorsed by the Catholic Church, culminating in one of the key documents of the Second Vatican Council, Dei Verbum. The Jerome Bible Commentary and its successor reflects that achievement. But as Cardinal Ratzinger suggested in his famous 1988 Erasmus Lecture in New York, the assimilation of the historical-critical method was only a beginning. We are now entering a ‘post-critical’ phase, marked by the rediscovery of certain traditions of interpretation (notably spiritual exegesis) that had been obscured by all the excitement over historical-critical method. Among other things, the Cardinal drew attention to the need to become aware of the philosophical presuppositions that lie behind some uses of this method. (Many of the assumptions of Bultmann are simply not compatible with Catholicism.)

We know more than we did - and more than the ancients did - about the formation of the canon of Scripture and about its historical context. That knowledge will remain with us, and will continue to illuminate the work of exegesis. But the limitation of methods which treat Scripture merely as a set of literary texts to be analysed like any other historical document, and which expend all their energy on source criticism, is that they effectively deprive the Word of God of its power. They can undermine the premises of Lectio Divina. The Bible in fact tends to disappear behind a screen of expertise. For how can we tell, without the help of an expert, whether such and such a statement belongs among the most authentic texts, or that the meaning we read into it was intended by its original author? The danger here is of a new kind of Gnosticism that pulls the body of Scripture apart and reserves the art of interpretation to a small circle of initiates.

The popular revival of Lectio Divina since the Second Vatican Council is evidenced by the work of Cardinal Martini of Milan with young people, described by Bishop Brewer in his talk at our recent day conference (see below). Together with the development of new schools of interpretation, including canon criticism, feminist criticism, narrative criticism and liberation theology (most of them sympathetically described in the 1993 document of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church), this revival has helped many in the scholarly community to realize that in the case of Scripture historical conclusions must always be integrated with, or even subordinated to, a method which respects the Word of God as something alive, organic and personal – in fact as sharing with the Church in the nature of a sacrament. The more we outgrow the assumptions of positivism, the more the patristic method of interpretation, which makes much of typology, correspondence and analogy, begins to come back into fashion.

We are told in Dei Verbum to read Holy Scripture ‘in the spirit in which it was written’. It may not have been dictated by the Holy Spirit, as the biblical fundamentalist tends to believe, but we can say with confidence that it has at least been edited by the Spirit, working through the Church in history. Its meaning cannot therefore be limited to the meaning intended by its human authors in their own time and place. Spoken by the Church, the words of Scripture become the Word of God. Before this Word we need to attain the same contemplative openness and state of attention that we would aspire to if we were sitting at the feet of an omniscient teacher (as we in fact are), or gazing at the Blessed Sacrament. This is the Voice that called us into existence, and it is the same Voice that sends us out into the world in the name of love as agents of transformation. And furthermore this principle applies even to the historically most dubious texts.

The control over what meanings may be found within Scripture is properly not the verdict of an expert as to the original intention of the human author, but rather the authority of the Church and of her tradition, which gives us the Bible in the first place. Here is a suggested ‘working hypothesis’ for Catholic (and Orthodox) exegesis. No meaning that actually conflicts with an established principle of the Church’s teaching can be authentic. Nor can any meaning which conflicts with a certainly established fact of history or natural science. But between these limits, a surprisingly wide area is open for creative and at the same time prayerful exegesis. In the application of Scripture to everyday life, and in the interplay of one part of God’s Word with another, the positive content that may be brought out of the text through the medium of prayer is literally inexhaustible. Today our knowledge of history and of literary genres should merely anchor and enrich, but without controlling, our interpretation.

If you wish to read more on this important subject, I would draw your attention firstly to the great four-volume work by Henri de Lubac entitled Medieval Exegesis, which is appearing in English from T&T Clark and Eerdmans. (The second volume will appear shortly, and an introduction by Susan Wood called Spiritual Exegesis is already available from the same publishers.) You might also look at an important regular section in the journal Communio called ‘Spirit and History’. For example, an article by Denis Farkasvalvy in the Fall 1998 issue, entitled ‘A Heritage in Search of Heirs’, opens up this new agenda and many new horizons for Catholic exegetes. Erasmo Leiva-Merikakis, Fire of Mercy, Heart of the Word (Ignatius Press) is a remarkable exercise in the spiritual exegesis of the first part of Matthew’s Gospel, while Wherever He Goes by Marie-Dominique Philippe (available through T&T Clark) opens up the Gospel of John to the most profound meditation - as does Adrienne von Speyr’s four-volume series on John from Ignatius Press. Also highly recommended is Ignace de la Potterie, Mary in the Mystery of the Covenant (Alba House).