Tuesday, November 19, 2013

"The Gift of the Word" by Fr. Richard J. Clifford

The November 11th edition of America magazine included an article written by New American Bible Revised Edition translator and Biblical scholar Richard J. Clifford.  It takes a look at the areas of growth and places of challenge in Scriptural literacy for Catholic since the Second Vatican Council and the document Dei Verbum.  The article is entitled The Gift of the Word and here are a few notable excerpts:

"Dei Verbum” sees itself in continuity with two earlier councils that dealt with the Bible: Trent (1545-63) and the First Vatican Council (1869-70), and like them devotes considerable space to the broad context of the Bible—God’s initiative in relating to humanity. God’s desire for a personal relationship with human beings on earth accounts for the self-revelation of God recorded in the Bible. That self-revelation invites a human response (“the obedience of faith”) and results in the formation of an elect people bound to God and to each other. 

Trent also dealt with translations of the Bible, for the age of printing had dawned, flooding Europe with translations. Trent forbade only anonymous translations, passing over in silence other translations, including Protestant ones. It declared the Latin Vulgate “authentic,” a declaration that was later widely misunderstood as making the Vulgate the official version of the Bible for the Catholic Church. As Pope Pius XII’s encyclical “Divino Afflante Spiritu” (1943) taught, and John W. O’Malley, S.J., explains in more detail in Trent, the word authentic at the Council of Trent meant only that among the welter of Bible translations of that era, the Vulgate was a reliable text for preaching and teaching, to be revered because of its long usage in the Latin church. The council fathers were well aware of the errors that had accrued to the Vulgate over the centuries, and decreed that the Vulgate not be printed again until it was thoroughly corrected. Like Trent, “Dei Verbum” acknowledges the venerable nature of the Vulgate, but reaffirms the teaching of “Divino Afflante Spiritu,” which urged biblical scholars to use the original Hebrew and Greek texts for translations. In recent years, there have been attempts to impose the Vulgate as a standard for translation, but such attempts run counter to the directives of “Dei Verbum.”

“Dei Verbum” encouraged Bible reading among Catholics and has been a major factor in unseating the neo-scholastic theology that dominated Catholic and even Protestant thought up to the mid-20th century. But if we look at the final practical chapter of “Dei Verbum,” which enthusiastically encourages Bible reading among all Catholics, we are reminded all too clearly of the task that lies ahead.  First, it challenges Catholics to read the Bible regularly and hear it attentively when proclaimed in the liturgy. .......An unsettling reminder of how important Bible reading is to the flourishing of the Catholic Church comes from the Pew Research Religious Landscape Survey of 2008, which points out the Catholic Church in recent years has lost a third of its membership. Half of those leaving the Catholic Church have become unaffiliated, and half have joined Protestant churches. Of the half that joined Protestant churches, the most cited reason (71 percent) for leaving the Catholic Church was their “spiritual needs were not being met,” in particular their need for meaningful worship and nourishing Bible reading........To be fair, today there are excellent Catholic Bible resources like the Little Rock Scripture Study, the Paulist Bible Study Program, the Collegeville Bible Commentary Series, Now You Know Media, Bible-oriented homily services and the lectures and digital resources of many Catholic colleges and universities. And there are good study Bibles, including The Catholic Study Bible (Oxford University Press). There were harldly any resources like these before Vatican II. The problem, therefore, may not be a lack of resources, but a lack of resolve, planning and imagination.

A second challenge of “Dei Verbum” is to develop a theology that allows the Old Testament greater importance in the Bible. 

A third challenge to the constitution’s exhortation that all Catholics read the Bible in the context of the church comes from fundamentalism......Many Catholics, apparently unaware of anti-Catholic fundamentalist writing, regard fundamentalist approaches to the Bible as the only correct and traditional way of reading the Bible. How can we persuade such Catholics to adopt the truly traditional and correct way of “Dei Verbum”? Some do’s: read the Bible yourself and be willing to say simply what you have found nourishing in the Bible; witness rather than argue. Encourage your pastor to preach on the Bible and your fellow parishioners to engage in Bible study. Some don’ts: don’t argue with fundamentalists or use ridicule, but take fundamentalism seriously. It is an important part of American culture.

Your thoughts?

6 comments:

Theophrastus said...

While I am generally favorably disposed to Fr. Clifford's view, I think that his case is overstated. For example, Fr. Clifford claims,

An unsettling reminder of how important Bible reading is to the flourishing of the Catholic Church comes from the Pew Research Religious Landscape Survey of 2008, which points out the Catholic Church in recent years has lost a third of its membership. Half of those leaving the Catholic Church have become unaffiliated, and half have joined Protestant churches. Of the half that joined Protestant churches, the most cited reason (71 percent) for leaving the Catholic Church was their “spiritual needs were not being met,” in particular their need for meaningful worship and nourishing Bible reading

Several points to note here. First, I do not understand why Fr. Clifford used the 2008 Pew survey rather than the 2011 Pew survey which showed substantially fewer Catholics leaving the faith for this reason. Further, an examination of the survey questions does not reveal how Fr. Clifford reached the conclusion that the figures he does cite indicate that "spiritual needs [...] not being met" = a lack of "nourishing Bible reading." It seems to me that unmet "spiritual needs" could refer to a broad range of reasons (for example, Fr. Clifford does not here consider the possibility that the shortage of Catholic priests might lead some to feel that "spiritual needs" were being unmet.)

Fr. Clifford says that the Oxford Catholic Study Bible as a "good study Bible[]" although he fails to note that he was a major contributor (authoring 56 pages of commentary) to that volume.

This blog has extensively compared various Catholic study Bibles with various non-denominational, Protestant, Jewish, and Orthodox study Bibles, and has suggested that Catholic study Bibles have sometimes fallen short in presentation and marketing. As an example, I am unaware that Oxford has fixed the major shortcomings previously noted in the Oxford NABRE Catholic Study Bible. The Oxford CSB OT commentary, including the portion authored by Fr. Clifford, does not match the revised NABRE text.

Finally a general remark about Fr. Clifford's tone: it seems to me that his remarks are sometimes rather more political than pedagogical.

Timothy said...

Theophrastus,

I think you make a legitimate point regarding Clifford's assessment of available Catholic study Bibles and tools. There is no real comparison still between Catholic and Protestant bibles study materials that are of a more popular yet catechetical in nature. And the majority of the time there are various issues with the quality and content of the material. How often do we have debates on the NAB that never really concerns the translation itself, but the study notes.

I also detect, perhaps slightly, an implied diss on the Biblical work done by people like Scott Hahn and the like. I wouldn't be surprised if he would consider tools like the Ignatius Catholic Study Bible as being close to Catholic Fundamentalist.

So it seems, then, we may have two schools of Catholic biblical thought. One side may be represented by those associated with the NABRE, the Catholic Study Bible, and Little Rock, with the other represented by Ignatius Press, Franciscan University, and the Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture.

rolf said...

I think that is the beauty of the Catholic Church, the diversity in biblical thought. I learn from both points of view!

Anonymous said...

Discussion with the fundamentalist is very difficoult according to different exegesis.

Fundamentalist normally takes out the specific bible verse without the context to support his theology. And standalone verse can be very sharp and informative.

Normal catholic layman without deep knowledge of the passage is lost and cannot argue.

I know it very well from my own experience.

The old catholic practice proclaiming no need for catholic layman to read the Bible and sufficiency of the mass reading is, I don't apologise for this word, crime.

Direct impact of this practice is loosing the believers to fundamentalists preachers.

As such I bless you for your blog, it is really God's work.

Roman

Biblical Catholic said...

No, the old Catholic belief that not everyone needs to read the scriptures for themselves is 100% correct, and the existence of fundamentalism proves that everyone reading for the scriptures for themselves tends to create more harm than good.

Javier said...

"The common practice today is to measure the Bible against the so-called modern worldview, whose fundamental dogma is that God cannot act in history -that everything to do with God is to be relegated to the domain of subjectivity.
And so the Bible no longer speaks of God, the living God; no, now we alone speak and decide what God can do and what we will and should do. And the Antichrist, with an air of scholarly excellence, tells us that any exegesis that reads the Bible from the perspective of faith in the living God, in order to listen to what God has to say, is fundamentalism; he wants to convince us that only his kind of exegesis, the supposedly purely scientific kind, in which God says nothing and has nothing to say, is able to keep abreast of the times."
"Jesus of Nazareth. From the Baptism in the Jordan to the Transfiguration", Pope Benedict XVI. Dobleday. 2007. Pages 35-36.