Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist Released Today!

Today's the day! After five years of research, and many months of waiting, my new book, Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist, was officially released by Doubleday Religion today, February 15th! 

As many of you know, I've been working on two manuscripts alongside one another for the last several years: one a readable and accesible book with Doubleday Religion and another longer academic monograph on Jesus and the Last Supper with Eerdmans. (The latter is still in progress.) These years of research on the eucharistic words and deeds of Jesus have been some of the most exciting of my life; it's tremendously gratifying to finally get to share some of it in print with a wide audience.

Here's a brief description from the Random House website, as well as the table of contents:

About The Book
In recent years, Christians everywhere are rediscovering the Jewish roots of their faith. Every year at Easter time, many believers now celebrate Passover meals (known as Seders) seeking to understand exactly what happened at Jesus’ final Passover, the night before he was crucified.

     Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist shines fresh light on the Last Supper by looking at it through Jewish eyes. Using his in-depth knowledge of the Bible and ancient Judaism, Dr. Brant Pitre answers questions such as: What was the Passover like at the time of Jesus? What were the Jewish hopes for the Messiah? What was Jesus’ purpose in instituting the Eucharist during the feast of Passover? And, most important of all, what did Jesus mean when he said, “This is my body… This is my blood”?

     To answer these questions, Pitre explores ancient Jewish beliefs about the Passover of the Messiah, the miraculous Manna from heaven, and the mysterious Bread of the Presence. As he shows, these three keys—the Passover, the Manna, and the Bread of the Presence—have the power to unlock the original meaning of the Eucharistic words of Jesus. Along the way, Pitre also explains how Jesus united the Last Supper to his death on Good Friday and his Resurrection on Easter Sunday. 
      Inspiring and informative, Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist is a groundbreaking work that is sure to illuminate one of the greatest mysteries of the Christian faith: the mystery of Jesus’ presence in “the breaking of the bread.”

Table of Contents
Foreword by Scott Hahn
Introduction
1. The Mystery of the Last Supper
2. What Were the Jewish People Waiting For?
3. The New Passover
4. The Manna of the Messiah
5. The Bread of the Presence
6. The Fourth Cup and the Death of Jesus
7. The Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith
8. On the Road to Emmaus


Thanks
For a full list of thanks-givings, you can see the acknowledgements section of the book. But I would like a take a moment here to especially thank my good friend Scott Hahn, who graciously agreed to write the Foreword to the book, my editors at Doubleday Religion, especially Gary Jansen and John Burke, for their fantastic hard work in bringing the whole thing to fruition. 
Last, but certainly not least, I want to thank my wife Elizabeth, to whom the book is dedicated, for everything. To top off what is already a great day, the book, which is dedicated to Elizabeth, was (in God's providence) released on her birthday! 
Happy birthday, my love. I hope you like your present.

Jesus, the Divine Law-Giver: Thoughts on the Lectionary for the Sixth Week of Ordinary Time

In the Gospel Reading for today’s Mass (Feb. 13), we continue to read from the Sermon on the Mount (Mat 5:17-37):

Jesus said to his disciples:
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets.
I have come not to abolish but to fulfill....

“You have heard that it was said to your ancestors,
You shall not kill; and whoever kills will be liable to judgment.
But I say to you, whoever is angry with brother will be liable to judgment ....

“You have heard that it was said, You shall not commit adultery.
But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman with lust
has already committed adultery with her in his heart....

It was also said, Whoever divorces his wife must give her a bill of divorce.
But I say to you, whoever divorces his wife - unless the marriage is unlawful -
causes her to commit adultery....

“Again you have heard that it was said to your ancestors,
Do not take a false oath, but make good to the Lord all that you vow.
But I say to you, do not swear at all....

In this Gospel Reading, Jesus “dares” to correct not only the common interpretations of the Law of Moses, but even (in places) the Law of Moses itself!

What is the Pillar and Bullwark of the Truth?

Here’s one of those verses I never saw for thirty years before becoming a Catholic:

1Tim. 3:14   I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these instructions to you so that,  15 if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.

St. Paul here asserts that the Church is “the pillar and bulwark of the truth.” (I accept Bo Reicke’s arguments that the pastoral epistles are genuinely Pauline.)

Can a Calvinist call the Church the “pillar and bulwark of the truth”?  I submit: only with difficulty.  A Calvinist is much more comfortable calling the Scriptures the “pillar and bulwark of the truth.”  But that verse isn’t in the Bible.

What ecclesiology is assumed by the statement “the Church ... [is] the pillar and bulwark of the truth”?

I suggest it entails an ecclesiology in which the Church is a (1) single, (2) visible body.

If the Church wasn’t a single body, it could not serve very well as the “pillar and bulwark” of the truth, because one would not know which of the various churches was teaching the truth.

If the Church wasn’t a visible body, it could not serve very well as the “pillar and bulwark of the truth,” because it could not be identified with certainty, nor could it speak with clarity.  An invisible, voiceless Church cannot be the support and defense of the truth.

Therefore, I submit that St. Paul assumes that Church is a single, visible body.  His ecclesiology is Catholic.

But everyone is free to contradict me.  Share your thoughts in the comments.

The Confession iApp

The priest who is co-leading a pilgrimage to the Holy Land May 9-18 with me, Fr. Dan Scheidt, was part of the team who came up with the first iApp to receive an imprimatur.

Father Dan was the theological consultant for the project, and then got the finished app an imprimatur from Fort Wayne-South Bend's (think "Notre Dame's") Bishop Kevin Rhodes.

Friends from South Bend sent me an announcement a few weeks ago:

The app received an imprimatur from Bishop Kevin C. Rhodes of the Diocese of Fort Wane - South Bend, IN. It is the first known imprimatur to be given for an iPhone/iPad application. The text was developed in collaboration with Rev. Thomas G. Weinandy, OFM, Executive Director of the Secretariat for Doctrine and Pastoral Practices of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, and Rev. Daniel Scheidt, pastor of Queen of Peace Catholic Church in Mishawaka, IN.

The release of the app follows Pope Benedict's general prayer intention for January 2011: "That young people may learn to use modern means of social communication for their personal growth and to better prepare themselves to serve society."

To see the app, click here.

For an example of the buzz it's creating in the news media, click here.

To go on a pilgrimage with this amazing priest, click here.

UPDATE: The buzz has already reached the Vatican: click here.

UPDATE: Interview with the South Bend creators of the iApp: click here.

In the Beginning, God Created ...

Speaking of translations, the Mass readings for today (Feb 7) began with Genesis 1:1. The version used in mass is an adaptation of the NAB, and reads:

In the beginning, when God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was a formless wasteland ...

Interestingly, "when" is not in the Hebrew. The Hebrew, according to the Masoretic pointing, reads "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." I did a study on this some years ago, and all the ancient translations--the Greek (LXX), the Latin (V), the Syriac (S), etc.--also read "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."

Nonetheless, the NAB's reading--with the slipped-in "when", which makes v. 1 a temporal clause with v. 2, rather than a separate sentence--is the current "fashionable" approach. That's how the NRSV and the New Jewish Publication Society (NJPS) versions also read. What's the agenda here?

It also raises an interesting question. What does it mean to say, "The text means X," when there's no evidence that anyone understood the text to mean "X" prior to, say, your own generation? Second Temple Judaism, the New Testament authors, the Church Fathers, the Medievals, etc. all read "In the beginning God created ..." What does it mean to now say, that's not the "meaning" of the text? Can the "meaning" really be different than what everyone understood the meaning to be? Whatever one's answer, it's an interesting question.

The NAB: Why It's Better to Stay Literal When Possible

Adding on to Michael's comments below on the NAB, I want to point out my personal pet peeve with the translation.

The RSVCE, 2nd ed., provides a fairly literal translation of Psalm 8:4-6:

What is man that you are mindful of him,
and the son of man that you care for him?
Yet you have made him little less than the angels,
and you have crowned him with glory and honor.
You have given him dominion over the works of your hands,
and have put all things under your feet.

The NAB, however, renders v. 4:

What are humans that you are mindful of them,
Mere mortals that you care for them?

Rendering the Hebrew "son of man" as "mere mortals" has multiple difficulties--moving from singular to plural, introducing the concept of "mere," and guessing that the sacred author's intention was to stress the mortality of humanity as the salient issue in his poem.

But most of all, based on Psalm 8:4-6, Daniel 7:13, and other texts, the title "Son of Man" acquired a messianic sense in Second Temple Judaism (i.e. the Judaism of the New Testament). The "Son of Man" in some pseudepigraphal Second Temple documents, like 1 Enoch, is a supernatural savior figure, not a "mere mortal"!

This sheds light on what Jesus meant when he called himself "The Son of Man." He was not claiming to be mortal. He was claiming to be the one who has "dominion over all the works of [God's] hands", and who has "all things under his feet" (see Ephesians 2:22!). That Jesus meant his self-identification as "Son of Man" messianically is clear in his testimony before the Sanhedrin (Matt 26:54).

My point is, the NAB translation obscures the messianic reading of Psalm 8 and removes the verbal connection with Daniel 7 and Jesus' preferred form of self-identification. The intertextual dynamics of Scripture are obfuscated.

Having said that, let me also state that I appreciate the NAB translation of the Gospel of John, which highlights the "I AM" statements of Jesus. On the "I AM's" of John, the shoe is on the other foot: the various forms of the RSV add in too many words in English, obscuring the literal sense of the Greek.

Kingdom of the Poor

In the readings for last week’s Sunday Mass, we saw Jesus as the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy (Isaiah 9) that a divine king, a Son of David, would appear in the north of Israel and give light to the people there.

In the readings for todays’ Mass (4^th Sunday of Ordinary Time), we see Jesus explaining what kind of kingdom he rules: a kingdom of the “poor in Spirit”:

Grace and Merit: St. Bernard of Clairvaux

The quote on grace and merit from a couple of days ago was uttered by ... St. Bernard of Clairvaux, as several people guessed.

I found it striking because, without context, I would have assumed the quote was from Luther, in his younger days.

St. Bernard does not deny that merit has its role. He goes on to say:

It is enough for merit to know that merit is not enough. But as merit must not presume on merit, so lack of merit must bring judgment. Furthermore, chidren re-born in baptism are not without merit, but possess the merits of Christ; but they make themselves unworthy of these if they do not add their own——not because of inability, but because of neglect; this is the danger of maturity. Henceforward, take care that you possess merit; when you possess it, you will know it as a gift. Hope for its fruit, the mercy of God, and you will escape all danger of poverty, ingratitude, and presumption.

This quote and the previous one are from St. Bernard's Sermons 67-68 on the Song of Songs (!), and yes, as some of you surmised, I'm drawing from Ralph Martin's book, The Fulfillment of All Desire, which I highly recommend to everyone, Protestant and Catholic alike.

I think these striking quotes from St. Bernard indicate several things that have been lost to sight by many, including myself at times:

1. The emphasis on the primacy of grace in salvation found in Luther, Calvin, and other early Protestants is a legitimate point, but it is not a "Protestant" point: it is a truth that is at home in the Catholic spiritual and theological tradition. One does not have to break from Rome in order to recognize that salvation is by grace.

2. Properly understood, the Reformation slogan "sola gratia", by grace alone, is also affirmed by the Catholic Church. This is one of the reasons, for example, that some ten years ago or so the Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation was able to issue a joint statement on the doctrine of justification.

3. Where the Protestant reformers erred was to deny that there is any role of merit in salvation. The problem with denying this is one of biblical interpretation. If one denies that merit plays a role in salvation, what does one do with so many passages of the Gospels like Matt 25:31-46: "Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance ... for I was hungry and you gave me something to eat ..."

As Keith Green, founding father of CCM, so famously pointed out in a song years ago (this really dates me) passages like Matt 25:31-46 do not teach "salvation by faith alone" as that concept is often understood. Our works play a role in our salvation. (Ironically, Keith Green was also militantly anti-Catholic!)

4. How then to reconcile the many passages of the Gospels (as well as the Epistles! James 2:24) that emphasize the role of merit in salvation with the truth of, say, Ephesians 2:8-9? The answer is thoroughly Scriptural and Catholic: our merits, though necessary, are, in an ultimate sense, not our own, but the fruit of God's grace working in us. "For this I labor and struggle, in accord with the exercise of his power working within me." Col 1:29

Recently, someone said to me, "Most Catholics are Pelagian heretics."

It wasn't during one of my conversations with my Protestant friends and relatives.

It was a priest giving a homily at daily mass on campus at Franciscan.

I agree with him, although I would add, "Most Protestants are Pelagian heretics, too." Pelagianism, roughly understood as the idea that we can, more or less, save ourselves by being good, is a danger for all Christians, and even well-formed, theologically educated Christians can fall into subtle forms of self-reliance.

It's good that St. Bernard reminds us: our salvation is the work of God's grace, not the product of our own efforts.

Identify this Quote on Grace and Merit

I came across this striking quote on grace and merit the other day:

There is no way for grace to enter, if merit has taken residence in the soul. A full acknowledgment of grace is a sign of the fullness of grace. Indeed, if the soul possesses anything of its own, to that extent grace must give place to it: whatever you impute to merit you steal from grace. I want nothing to do with the sort of merit which excludes grace.

So, who is the author and what's his theology? Calvin? Luther? Augustine?

Without googling phrases from the quote, does anyone recognize who this famous theologian is?

Feel free to guess in the comments. I'll post the answer in a day or two.

Repent for the Kingdom is at Hand: Comments on the 3d Sunday in Ordinary Time

The Lectionary readings for today’s Mass, the Third Sunday in Ordinary Time, are particularly rich.

We are in Year A of the Lectionary cycle, and thus we follow Matthew’s Gospel through most of the Sundays in Ordinary Time. (Check this great website to help understand the structure of the liturgy.) This year, Easter falls very late, so we have a lengthy period of Ordinary Time before Lent.

Progressing through Matthew, we find ourselves today at the beginning of Jesus’ preaching ministry in Galilee.

The first reading for today’s mass comes from Isaiah 9:

“The Land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali ...

The people who sat in darkness have seen a great light...”

Obviously this reading from Isaiah is paired with today’s Gospel because Matthew quotes some of this passage and sees it’s fulfillment in our Lord’s revelation of himself in the region of Galilee.

Nonetheless, commentators and homilists often miss the relationship between the two passages.

In his own day, Isaiah was preaching to the northern tribes of Israel (Zebulun and Naphtali), whose territory had been decimated by the Assyrians, with large portions of the population deported around 722 BC. The point of Isaiah’s oracle was one of hope: this same portion of ancestral Israel, so devastated and bleak in his own day, would be the first to witness the arrival of the Messianic age. St. Matthew sees the fulfillment of this passage in our Lord’s choice to begin his ministry in these northern territories—a choice that otherwise might seem counter-intuitive, since the region of Galilee was not a particularly historic or significant one in Israel’s sacred history.

The second reading for today’s Mass is 1 Cor 1:10-17, which was not chosen to fit the theme of the Gospel, but rather because we are reading through 1 Corinthians at the beginning of Ordinary Time. (Curiously, Ordinary Time always begins with 1 Corinthians and then breaks off around Week 8. Thus, it takes the full three-year cycle to “read through” the book. See here.) Providentially, however, the reading provides a connection with the theme of the Gospel for today’s Mass. St. Paul says, “Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel ...” And so we are reminded that the preaching ministry of Christ is continued by that of his Apostles, and also their successors, and so on down through history, to our own day. Even for us lay people, who may not preach in the formal sense of those who share in the charisms of Holy Orders, do have a responsiblity to “preach” by our example and also by our explicit testimony (when given the opportunity) that the Kingdom of God is present now, because Jesus Christ has come.

In the Gospel reading, Jesus “began to preach, saying, Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.”

The concept of the “Kingdom of Heaven” needs to be associated with the Davidic Kingship of Jesus so strongly emphasized by Matthew in the opening chapters of his Gospel (1:20; 2:2; 2:5-6), and present also in Isaiah 9. If we were to read on in Isaiah 9, for example, beyond the portion quoted by Matthew in Matt 3: 15-16, we would find Isaiah predicting the coming of a Davidic King (Isa 9:7) who is also somehow divine (Isa 9:6). The Kingdom of Heaven proclaimed by Jesus is also the Kingdom of David, just as Jesus is fully God and fully Man. And so the Kingdom of Heaven has an earthly manifestation that resembles the Davidic Kingdom it “restores and transforms” (credit to Dr. Scott Hahn for this hendiadys). Thus we see Jesus, in the subsequent verses of Matt 3 (vv. 18-22), beginning to choose his royal officers, ultimately twelve of them, just as there were twelve officers over the Kingdom of David during its golden age (see 1 Kings 4:7-19).

The Kingdom of Heaven remains open to us today, now, if we will repent (turn away from our sins) and receive it. Tomorrow is the March for Life in Washington, DC, which provides us a good opportunity for special acts of repentance (fasting, prayer, acts of self-denial) to express contrition for our own sins and for those of our nation (cf. Dan 9:20), especially those against the sanctity of life.

Christian Motifs in Batman's Mythology

With the latest news out about the up-coming Batman movie making the rounds I thought I'd re-run a piece here I posted shortly after the last Batman film, The Dark Knight, opened. This appeared on another blog I was contributing to at the time the movie was released (that blog is now pretty much defunct). I'd love to get your thoughts on this. . . This is why I am so excited about the next film.

_________________

Unless, you’ve been living in a cave, you know that Batman is back and like never before. The Dark Knight has received critical acclaim and broken just about every record on the books, setting numerous all-time figures:

• Best midnight opening ($18.4 million) (that doesn’t count the 3am and 6am showings which were slotted after all the midnight showings sold out, which also sold out!)
• Best opening day / single day gross ($66.4 million)
• Best opening weekend ($158 million)
• First movie to make $300 million dollars in 10 days
• Best IMAX midnight preview ($640,000)

Fantastic New Commentary on Matthew's Gospel!

With the coming the New Year, a number of blogs gave recommended readings for the upcoming year. I'd like to do the same, and recommend two books to read carefully over the course of the coming year.

1. First, since for those of us following the Catholic lectionary, it is Year A, it's a great opportunity to reread closely and carefully the Gospel of Matthew. Over a hundred years ago, the French author and rationalist Ernest Renan once referred to the Gospel of Matthew as "the most important book ever written."

On a more personal note, Matthew is my favorite Gospel, for a whole host of reasons. For one thing, it is just so Jewish. If you like the exploring the Jewish roots of Christianity, Matthew is definitely the first place to go. Moreover, if happen to be a teacher, then you'll know that Matthew's Gospel is also a remarkably catechetical. I know this from experience, since in the classroom, I constantly fall back on Matthew for addressing major theological, moral, and spiritual issues. 

I also know this from our family dinner times, during which I've been reading the Gospel of Matthew to my family each night after supper--with the requisite Q & A session after the reading is done! This is a great time to teach your kids the Bible, while they're knocking out their last vegetables. You'd be amazed at how children between the ages of 3 and 9 can zoom in on key exegetical questions if you just read to them and ask... 'Any questions?'...

2. Second, I also recommend that in tandem with Matthew's Gospel, you simply must get a copy of Curtis Mitch and Edward Sri's new commentary on The Gospel of Matthew, hot off the presses from the Baker Academic Press Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture. Just before it was published, I wrote the following blurb for the book, and I meant it:

"In this exciting new commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, Curtis Mitch and Edward Sri do an outstanding job of fulfilling the biblical vision of Vatican II. For years I have wished for an up-to-date Catholic commentary on Matthew that would unite history and theology, Scripture and tradition, Old and New Testaments, Jewish roots and Christian faith. Now we have one! This extremely readable commentary should be on the shelf of any priest, deacon, seminarian, or layperson who wants to bring out 'treasures new and old' from the pages of the First Gospel.'

Those are my two cents for New Year's reading recommendations. Read both books together, and I promise you won't be disappointed. 

New Research on Red Sea Crossing

I was on the Drew Mariani Show on Friday afternoon (broadcast in metro Chicago) discussing a new theory about the crossing of the red sea. Carl Drews, a fluid dynamics scientist in Colorado, decided to analyze the biblical account of the parting of the Red Sea (or Sea of Reeds) from a physics perspective as his masters thesis at the University of Colorado at Boulder. Drews argues that an overnight east wind of 63 mph or more would be sufficient to blow back several square miles of water to a depth of six feet. Working with topographical maps, he thinks he has identified a place in the Nile Delta where such a wind would have provided a draw path to the Sinai Peninsula. Click on the title of this post to read more.

Drews' work is intriguing, but I'm not jumping on the bandwagon yet. I don't have the time to analyze all the relevant data, but my gut instinct is that, although Drews is correct about the fluid dynamics, there are probably textual or archeological data that militate against this location as the actual site of the crossing. Feel free to comment if you know something about this topic.

Amazing Priest Signs On for Pilgrimage

Fr. Daniel Scheidt of Queen of Peace Parish in Mishawaka, IN, just signed on as chaplain for my pilgrimage to the Holy Land May 9-18. Those who know him will agree with me that Fr. Dan is one of the finest young priests in the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, the diocese that includes the University of Notre Dame, my (and Brant's) alma mater.

Fr. Dan is a scholar and a polymath who has studied at the John Paul II Institute in Washington, DC, and written on subjects such as diverse as biblical interpretation, sacraments, priesthood, and church architecture. In fact, one of his essays on church architecture is available online. Some of his pastoral work has made national catholic news.

I feel very fortunate to get Fr. Dan on this pilgrimage (probably as good as Jack Swarbrick felt when he got Brian Kelly to come to Notre Dame). The pilgrims are in for a real blessing!

New American Bible Revised Edition to Be Released

Word just out that a Revised Edition of the New American Bible--the official translation used in the Lectionary of the Catholic Church in America--will be released this spring.

I have to confess that I had no idea this was coming our way, and as such have no idea what kind of changes will be introduced. I'm quite frankly not sure what the article refers to when it speaks of "the discovery of new and better manuscripts" as a reason for changes. Maybe I'm missing something, but exactly what new and better manuscripts have been discovered in the last 20 years that would call for a revision of this translation?

Hopefully, whatever changes have been made are for the better, but it seems to me that at least that the quality of the English (as well as fidelity to the original languages), the NAB would need a complete overhaul. I'll be interested to see what the Psalter looks like--anybody who knows the story of those shifting sands and the battle over the inclusive language version of it can't help but be a bit wary. After the Gospels, the Psalter is easily the most important book of the Bible, liturgically speaking; having a good translation would be great. Of course, having a new translation means becoming familiar with yet another version of 150 prayers that are traditionally memorized...

Anyway, here's the story as reported at the USCCB website:

WASHINGTON (January 6, 2011)—The New American Bible, revised edition (NABRE), the first major update to the New American Bible (NAB) translation in 20 years, has been approved for publication. Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, then president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), signed the canonical rescript approving publication on September 30, 2010. The NABRE will be available in a variety of print, audio and electronic formats on March 9, Ash Wednesday.

The new translation takes into account advances in linguistics of the biblical languages, as well as changes in vocabulary and the cultural background of English, in order to ensure a more accurate translation. This issue is addressed in the apostolic exhortation of Pope Benedict XVI, Verbum Domini, in which the pope says, “The inculturation of God’s word is an integral part of the Church’s mission in the world, and a decisive moment in this process is the diffusion of the Bible through the precious work of translation into different languages.

The new translation also takes into account the discovery of new and better ancient manuscripts so that the best possible textual tradition is followed. The NABRE includes the first revised translation of the Old Testament since 1970 and a complete revision of the Psalter. It retains the 1986 edition of the New Testament. Work on most books of the Old Testament began in 1994 and was completed in 2001. The 1991 revision of the Psalter was further revised between 2009 and 2010.

The revision aimed at making use of the best manuscript traditions available, translating as accurately as possible, and rendering the result in good contemporary English. In many ways it is a more literal translation than the original New American Bible and has attempted to be more consistent in rendering Hebrew (or Greek) words and idioms, especially in technical contexts, such as regulations for sacrifices. In translating the Psalter special effort was made to provide a smooth, rhythmic translation for easy singing or recitation and to retain the concrete imagery of the Hebrew.

The NABRE is approved for private use and study. It will not be used for the Mass, which uses an earlier, modified version of the NAB translation.

Mary, Mother of God, a Common Protestant/Catholic Confession

As our Catholic readers know, this is the Solemnity (Holy Day) of Mary, Mother of God, one of the more significant liturgical celebrations in the Catholic calendar

The confession of Mary as “Mother of God” presents a stumbling block for some non-Catholic Christians, but curiously it never did for me.

I think it was back in the Fall of 1992 when I was sitting in a course in Ancient Church History at one of the best Calvinist seminaries in America. Our professor, a devout Dutch Calvinist (like most of us students), was lecturing on the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus AD 431, the council that recognized Mary as “Theotokos,” “Mother of God” (or more literally, “Bearer of God”). He began to address the question, Can Calvinists confess Mary as “Mother of God”? He answered in the affirmative, granted that one understood this not as a claim for Mary’s motherhood of divinity itself, but in the sense that Mary was mother of Jesus, who is truly God. And that, of course, is precisely how the Catholic Church understands the term.

So far from being a cause of division, the common confession of Mary as “Mother of God” should unite all Christians, and distinguish Christian orthodoxy from various confusions of it, such as Arianism (the denial that Jesus was God) or Nestorianism (in which Mary mothers only the human nature of Jesus but not his whole person).

Happy feast day to all!

On a side note, I’ll be gone starting Monday on a retreat and won’t be blogging again until January 10 at the earliest.

Notre Dame beat Miami in the Sun Bowl yesterday, no doubt aided by the fact that there was snow in El Paso overnight and the temperature at kick-off was 37 degrees Fahrenheit. That’s balmy for South Bend but not for South Florida. Despite my conviction that college sports is overhyped and frequently a disordered waste of time, my alma mater’s win made me happy. Go Irish!

What is Realism? Ben XVI's Perspective

What is realism? Some would say it was an artistic movement of the nineteenth century, a good example of which is the painting at right.

For others, "realism" is almost synonymous with "pessimism" or "cynicism." So a realist is the person who says the glass is half empty.

One of my favorite lines from the Pope's Apostolic Exhortation Verbum Domini is the following:

"The Word of God makes us change our concept of realism: the realist is the one who recognizes in the Word of God the foundation of all things" (§10).

As we continue to celebrate the Octave of Christmas, reflecting on the Word made Flesh, may we all become Realists!

Thank You, Lord, for a Bishop Like This

Check out this video of Bishop Olmstead, responding to criticism for declaring officially what everyone had known for some time: the local Catholic hospital was not really Catholic:

Good Advice on Surviving Christmas

Florine Church shares a link to a good article on surviving the rigors of Christmas. Check it out and enjoy!

Catholic Saint on the Importance of Scripture

The Pope's recent apostolic exhortation, Verbum Domini, (through which I am reading, albeit slowly), reminds me of how frequently the popes, the fathers, the doctors, and the saints have urged us Catholics to read and reflect on Scripture--and how sluggish our response has been!

I know the stereotype is that Catholics aren't interested in Scripture. In many places and at many times the stereotype holds true. I would add that many Protestants are also not interested in Scripture, but the point at present is not to argue apologetics. My point at present is that, if Catholics are not interested in Scripture, it is not from a lack of exhortation from the most authoritative representatives of the faith.

St. Josemaria Escriva, a recently canonized saint, is a good example of the reverence for Scripture that lies at the heart of the faith:

“When you open the Holy Gospel," St. Josemaria wrote, “think that what is written there—the words and deeds of Christ—is something that you should not only know, but live. Everything, every point that is told there, has been gathered, detail-by-detail, for you to make it come alive in the individual circumstances of your life.

“God has called us Catholics to follow him closely. In that holy Writing you will find the Life of Jesus, but you should also find your own life there.

“You too, like the Apostle, will learn to ask, full of love, ‘Lord, what would you have me do?’ And in your soul you will hear the conclusive answer, ‘The Will of God!’

“Take up the Gospel every day, then, and read it and live it as a definite rule. This is what the saints have done” (The Forge, §754).

Ruth and Advent

The Book of Ruth is rarely mentioned during Advent, but it makes for good Advent meditation.

There are obvious connections between Ruth and the Christmas story. Both Bo'az and Ruth are mentioned in Jesus' genealogy in Matthew 1. Outside of Matthew and Luke, only in Ruth do we have a story about a pious young Jewish couple having their firstborn son in Bethlehem.

When we read Ruth in light of all the Scriptures, we see in Bo’az a clear type, or image, of Jesus Christ. Jesus is truly our “Bo’az,” which means in Hebrew “in him is strength.” Jesus is our go’el, our Redeemer, which is what Ruth calls Bo’az in 3:9 (blandly rendered “next of kin” in the RSV). Jesus is the one who feeds us with bread and wine until we are satisfied (as Bo’az does for Ruth in 2:14) and even have an abundance to share with others (again see Ruth 2:14, and compare The Feeding of the 5000, John 6:11-13, 35). Jesus is the one who espouses himself to us (John 3:29; Eph 5:25-32), though we are poor and hungry (Matt 5:3,6), and not even of the race of Israel (Eph 2:11-13, 19-22). In Ruth 2:12, Bo’az invokes the LORD to bless Ruth since she has come under the LORD’s “wings” (Heb kanaphim); in Ruth 3:9, Ruth literally says to Bo’az, “Spread the wing (kanaph) of your garment over me.” The LORD’s “wing” becomes Bo’az’s “wing.” Bo’az becomes to Ruth the concrete manifestation of the LORD’s mercy, strength, protection, and love. This is also what Jesus is to us, the Church, in the New Covenant.

Marriage is not a human invention and cannot be redefined by human beings. Marriage is an natural icon designed by God to represent his covenant with his people. For that reason, marriage is a prominent theme throughout the Bible and salvation history, from the first marriage of Adam and Eve (Gen 2:21-24) to the Wedding of the Lamb (Rev 21-22). Pope Benedict XVI remarks, “Biblical revelation, in fact, is above all the expression of a story of love, the story of the covenant of God with man; therefore the story of the love and union between a man and a woman in the covenant of marriage was able to be assumed by God as a symbol of the history of salvation” (Address, 6 June 2005). Ruth is one of the best examples in Scripture in which a story of courtship and marriage typifies God’s plan of salvation.

The Messianic reading of the book of Ruth is not uniquely Christian. In conversations with Brant last night, he pointed out that the rabbinic tradition was strongly given to a Messianic interpretation of Ruth. In particular, Ruth 2:14, which has such Eucharistic overtones for Christian ears, was understood by the rabbis as a reference to the Messianic banquet!

I hope to teach on Ruth and on the birth of Jesus at Bethlehem in about five months! I’m helping lead a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. Everyone is invited! Here’s the specifics if you want to come: http://www.holytravels.org/journeys.html . You'll have to scroll down a little to find my pilgrimage.

The Sacred Page Makes A Different Top Blogger List

Yes, thanks to Jeremy Thompson, every month the list of the top fifty biblioblogs comes out and, invariably, TheSacredPage.com makes the cut.

Now we're being mentioned on another list: the top 50 blogs written by professors of Theology, Biblical studies and other related fields, i.e., Religious Studies. The list has been compiled by Rachel Stevenson over at Master of Theology, a site intended to help people learn about grad programs. Check it out.

Sola Scriptura: Is it taught in Scripture?

It's an interesting question to ask whether the Reformation principle of Sola Scriptura is actually taught in Scripture.

When I have posed this question to people, the verse that is most frequently cited is 2 Timothy 3:16:

2Tim. 3:16 All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

However, if one examines the verse carefully, it falls short of saying that Scripture is the only source for the content of the faith, etc. The best defense is probably to take the the Greek word for "profitable" (ophelimos) as "sufficient," reading the verse this way: "All scripture is ... sufficient for teaching, etc." However, that is a bit of a linguistic stretch.

So what do you think? What is the best Scriptural proof of Sola Scriptura?

P.S. Michael, how did the Leviticus talks go?

Life on the Rock Interview

Here's the Life on the Rock episode. I don't come on until about 8 minutes into the show:

Keeping Your Finger on the Pulse of Biblical Scholarship (without spending money!)

Not everyone has institutional funds to cover expenses for conferences like the Society of Biblical Literature. If you are in that situation (e.g. a poor grad student or independent scholar), a great way to keep current on developments in biblical studies is simply to read the abstracts of the papers given every year at the SBL. If you find a paper that really intrigues you, search down the email of the scholar who presented it, and ask them for an electronic copy. Often they are willing to provide one. It’s easy to be intimidated by well-known scholars, especially during one’s student years, but most Bible scholars lead rather modest lives and feel flattered if anyone expresses interest in their work. In any event, if you click on the title of this post, it will take you to the site from which you may view this year’s abstracts. It's useful to "select all" and copy the page into a Word doc. Since it’s electronic format, it’s searchable! That's a big improvement over the print editions which used to be distributed on site.

What is Modernism?

Some may have seen this classic sequence before, but as long as we're in a jovial mood on the blog, I thought I'd post it. Although it's done by and for Anglicans, Catholics and other sorts of Protestants will recognize the Modernist approach to religion satirized here:

SBL Paper on Deuteronomy and Hittite Literature

Just adding on to what Michael said below, I thought the SBL was great. Hanging with Michael in Atlanta's cheapest hotel was awesome. I never knew he talked in his sleep. I learned a lot of really interesting stuff!

One of my favorite papers from the SBL was Joshua Bermann's comparison of Deut 13 with passages from Late Bronze Age (c. 14th-13th century BC) Hittite literature. (Click on the title of the post to see the full text.) I didn't know what to expect heading into the session, but Bermann made a really convincing case that Deuteronomy shared strong parallels with these ancient texts. Unfortunately, I'm afraid most scholars of biblical law are not going to know what to do with his data, because the view that Deuteronomy is a seventh-century BC text influenced by Assyrian literature is firmly entrenched in scholarship (and that's an understatement).

International Trade in the Days of Solomon?

At the Society of Biblical Literature annual convention, I like to hang out at the archeology sessions. One of the more interesting presentations this year was from an archeologist working in the land of Israel, who, among other things, had uncovered some tenth-century BC religious vessels. The vessels had incense residue in them, and upon testing, the incense had components in it native to Sri Lanka (apparently). That's quite an import in the tenth century BC. Further testing needs to be done to confirm this. *IF* confirmed, it's quite a discovery. Israel Finkelstein, for example, has been claiming that the report of the Queen of Sheba (southern Arabia) visiting Solomon is fictitious, because trade routes weren't that extensive in the time of David/Solomon.

Bob Cargill's SBL Paper

Bob Cargill has posted the text of his excellent SBL paper, "Instruction, Research and the Future of Online Educational Technologies." He does an excellent job explaining the way the world is going online, pointing out that the academy is being left behind. Here are a few excerpts:

"I’ll point you to this statistic: this year marked the first year that Amazon.com sold more e-books than it did printed books. If this stat is shocking to you, you probably work for a university. The world has transitioned to e-books, online journals, and handheld devices.

This leaves the academy, which is only now beginning to seriously ask the question: “what’s happening?”

. . .

"Pope Approves Condoms": Yeah, right...

So I'm coming back from the Atlanta SBL conference (Society of Biblical Literature) and I'm sitting in the airport, and I buy a (grossly overpriced) wireless internet pass so I can check my email (well, actually, so I could watch highlights of the ND-Army game, but I don't want to admit that). And as I am dutifully answering my urgent messages (i.e. watch Tommy Rees throw touchdown passes), I notice an new email pop up from a conservative news site with the headline "Pope Says Condoms OK in Some Cases." Normally I would have ignored a news article like that, but the source (Newsmax) is not a tabloid and is generally sympathetic to Catholicism. Reading the article, I found out that "the Pope says condoms are OK in some cases, like for male prostitutes...." My reaction was, "I'm just sure. Like the Pope is really going to reverse Catholic moral teaching so that male prostitution is OK as long as you use a condom."

I followed links to the actual document, and found out that what the Pope really said was that condoms were not an answer to the spread of AIDS, and that the only real answer was to rehumanize sexuality. The point of confusion arose over a further comment, in which he indicated that sometimes the use of a condom might be a step in the right direction morally: in other words, at least you care enough about the person you are having relations with, that you make *some* effort to avoid communicating to them a serious disease.

That's it. He did not say condom use was moral, or that relations outside of marriage were moral, but only that in some instances the use of a condom might indicate that a person has a modicum of concern for the one with whom they are sleeping, which is better than having no such concern.

Of course, explaining what the Pope really said doesn't make for a good headline, and doesn't get people to buy newspapers or click on links.

The way papal statements get mangled in the media make it very difficult for the Pope to say anything careful, precise, or nuanced in public. When he tries, people get it wrong and spread confusion. It's hard to lead the largest human organization in the world when you're working under such a limitation.

Election of Dolan Bodes Well

The U.S. Bishops broke from precedent by not electing the sitting Vice President of the USCCB as President. Instead, they elected Timothy Dolan, Archbishop of New York, as President. The Archbishop of New York is, practically speaking, the primate of the U.S., though the U.S. has no formal primate. Lately, the USCCB has been much more pro-active than ever before about life and moral issues, both in the Church and in politics. The election of Dolan is another sign that the American bishops are increasingly not willing to do "business as usual," but are seeking to make the USCCB an effective organization in promoting the Church's teaching. Dolan has a great deal of charisma, is camera-friendly, and speaks the Church's teachings clearly.

CRC and RCC Getting Closer: Common Baptism

It seems that the major Reformed or Calvinist denominations in America are ready to sign a document recognizing Baptism with the Catholic Church. (Click on the title of this blogpost to go to the full article.) My own denomination was the Christian Reformed Church (CRC). I've often found it a little amusing that I went from CRC to RCC (Roman Catholic Church). The two will be a little closer if this document is signed. (The distinctive CRC cross-and-triangle logo is at right.)

Pope Benedict XVI's New Apostolic Exhortation on the Bible (Nov 11)

Great News!

According to Zenit News Service, Pope Benedict XVI's long-anticipated Apostolic Exhortation on the Bible, Verbum Domini will be released next week, November 11!

For details, go to: http://www.zenit.org/article-30868?l=english

For those of us in Catholic biblical studies circles, this document's advent is something akin to the coming of the Son of Man. It has long been known that the document would appear--the Synod on the Word of God took place in Fall 2008!--but no one seemed to know either the 'day or the hour'.

Now we know: Nov 11. It's not clear from the article whether the English translation will be available next week. Let's hope so, or some of the cognitive dissonance associated with eschatological delay may well set in for those of us who have been "keeping watch" for what is sure to be an important document on the Bible.

This is curious, since post-synodal apostolic exhortations (think here of Sacrament of Charity) usually take six months or so to be published; this one has taken well over two years! Let's hope that the delay of the parousia in this case is an indicator that it was well worth the wait. It's Benedict, after all, so I suspect it will be. Some have speculated that the delay is tied to the debate over inerrancy and interpretation that took place during the synod; I have no way of verifying or falsifying that, but it will be interesting to see whether the exhortation addresses it, since Proposition 12 from the bishops requested clarification on "the inspiration and truth" of Scripture. Will Benedict give it in this exhortation? We'll find out.

In any case, as far as I know, there hasn't been a full-length papal document focused solely on Scripture since the publication of Pius XII's Encylcical Letter, Divino Afflante Spiritu, which was published in 1943. That's quite some time ago! Not a little exegetical water has passed under the bridge since the Second World War. (To be sure, there have been several lengthy PBC documents, but these are not properly magisterial, as Ratzinger himself points out in the intro. to the 1993 Interpretation of the Bible in the Church.)

So spread the word! And if you happen to be one of my students or friends, don't email me or call me next Thursday. I'll be busy reading...

Bob Dylan, John Paul II, and Ecclesiastes

We're studying Ecclesiastes in our undergraduate Wisdom and Psalms course right now, and I am fascinated by the similarity of many of the "Preacher's" (aka Qoheleth's) assertions to those found in popular culture.

Cultural icon Bob Dylan wrote a famous song, "Blowin' in the Wind":

"How many roads must a man walk down, before they call him a man,
How many seas must a white dove sail, before she sleeps in the sand,
How many times must the cannonballs fly, before they are forever banned?

The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind,
The answer is blowing in the wind."

And so it goes. I don't remember Bob Dylan personally, but the song is played on radio, it's been transmuted to various Muzak versions, and has appeared frequently in movies, e.g in a pivotal scene in "Forrest Gump."

Dylan's poem/song is really a cry about the injustice of the world, especially the injustice of death:

"How many deaths will it take till he knows, that too many people have died?"

This is likewise the issue that occupies the Preacher of Ecclesiastes. People say that it is the “vanity” or “meaninglessness” of life that bothers the preacher, but if you study the book carefully, it turns out that it’s really Death that is the “kicker,” the central issue that makes life so “vain”:

“8:1 Everything before [mankind] is vanity, since one fate comes to all, to the righteous and the wicked, to the good and the evil, to the clean and the unclean, to him who sacrifices and him who does not sacrifice. ... 3 This is an evil in all that is done under the sun, that one fate comes to all...”

The word for “vanity” in Hebrew is “hebel,” which can also mean “breath, vapor, breeze.”

So the Preacher of Ecclesiastes and Bob Dylan have a very similar outlook on life. “Breath of Breath, all is Breath” and “The answer is blowing in the wind” mean just about the same thing.

Now I want to relate one of the most iconic events in the papacy of the late John Paul the Great.

Back in 1997, the Pope went to speak to a youth rally in Bologna, and some creative liturgist had the idea to invite Bob Dylan to “open” for him.

(Yes, that’s just what the Catholic youth of Italy need: aging American hippies to catechize them. Whatever.)

Be that as it may, Bob Dylan was invited and came out to sing, and of course, what is he going to sing except his signature song: Blowin’ in the Wind.

The Pope, unnoticed by everyone else, was backstage and listening intently to what Dylan was singing. When he finally came out to speak to the youth, he took advantage of the situation:

"A representative of yours has just said on your behalf that the answer to the questions of your life "is blowing in the wind". It is true! But not in the wind which blows everything away in empty whirls, but the wind which is the breath and voice of the Spirit, a voice that calls and says: "come!" (cf. Jn 3:8; Rv 22:17).

You asked me: How many roads must a man walk down before you call him a man? I answer you: one! There is only one road for man and it is Christ, who said: "I am the way" (Jn 14:6). He is the road of truth, the way of life."

The Preacher and Bob Dylan are both representatives of the contemplative thinker who cannot make sense of the world by reason alone. All turns out to be wind. But the Pope echoes the answer of the New Testament to the cry of thinkers ancient and modern: there is a Wind, and there is a Way, that really are an answer!

(Click on the title of this post for a longer article about the Pope and Dylan at the Bologna 1997 event.)

More on the Literary Nature of Judges

Continuing on Michael's observation on the literary structure of Judges, there are other literary techniques involved in the book as well. For example, as others have noted, the choice of judges is almost continually ironic. With few exceptions, those who rise to judgeship are unusual, or display eccentricities that normally would not characterize those in leadership in the ancient Near East:

Ehud: Left-handed
Shamgar: Fights with an ox goad!
Deborah and Jael: Female
Gideon: timid youngest son of small clan
Jephthah: son of a harlot
Samson: a Nazirite, a womanizer, and none too bright.

This can hardly be an accident; sacred author seems to delight in telling us about the unusual judges. It seems to reflect the author's view that this was a chaotic period in Israel's history in which down was up and up was down. Whenever I read it, I think of 1 Corinthians 1:26-31.

"The Sexual Person" and Why I Became a Catholic

A couple days ago I blogged about a book purportedly about Catholic moral theology called “The Sexual Person” by two professors associated with Creighton University, and the US Bishops clear rebuke of the arguments presented therein.

Basically the authors deconstruct all Scriptural and magisterial sources of authority for moral reasoning by applying a radical historicism. In other words, “The biblical authors, the church fathers, and the popes just reflected the cultural norms of their day, plus they aren’t as smart as we are now, so we can disregard their views about sexuality.”

For me, reading the arguments from “The Sexual Person” were a blast from the past.

While I was in high school, and an ardent Dutch Calvinist, a report was made to my denomination’s synod from one of our sister denominations, concerning their committee on sexual morality. After years of study, this Calvinist denomination’s committee was unable to affirm almost any of traditional Christian moral teaching. The only principle remaining to guide one to moral sexual relations was “justice love.” Wherever “justice love” was present, sex was moral. They recommend that our denomination accept the same “principles” of “morality”—ones essential re-articulated now in “The Sexual Person.”

Looking over the reasoning our sister denomination was using, I realized their “hermeneutic” could be used to defeat any Scriptural teaching.

That was the beginning of a gradual dawning on me—which would eventually lead to Rome—of the realization that Scripture alone was not sufficient to conserve the deposit of the faith, because various hermeneutics could make Scripture say almost anything one wished.

One needs to be guided by tradition, but even tradition is not enough—there also has to be a living voice of the salvific community.

“When Scripture is disjoined from the living voice of the Church, it fall prey to the disputes of experts,” Benedict XVI says.

The living voice just spoke through the mouths of the US Bishops. I am thankful for them.