The Text of the Bible and Catholic Biblical Scholarship

1.32 Boole Symposiunt

past inasmuch as it must rejoin a long conversation as Johnson maintairu,

in the present inasmuch as it must live within the liturgical life of the

Church as Kurz reminds us. Catholic biblical scholarship, however, will notfind its identity by retreating behind closed walls.

ConclusionLuke Timotþ Johnson and'Wüliam Kurz have invited us to enter into a

constructive conversation about ihe future of Catholic biblical scholar-

ship. Following their lead, I have tried to do this in a way that takes intoaccount four aspects of the discipline, arguing that it is not a matter ofhistory or theology but both. Nor is it a question of the theology of the

Bible or the theologies in the Bible but both. The Old and the NewTestaments âre not to be read in isolation from each other but together.

It is not a choice between ecclesial or academic exegesis but both. ThisCatholic spirit is found in the great Tfadition we share, a Tradition that

embraces many methods and approaches to Scripture and in whichCatholic exegesis has its home.The future of Catholic biblical scholarship

belongs to those who live in and out of thisTradition, within and for the

sake of the Church. ffi

The Text of the Bible andCatholic Biblical Scholarship

STEpHEN D. RYAN, oPDomínícan House oJ Studies

Washington, DC

LUKE TIUOTHY JOHNSON andWilliam S. Kurz, S;, have writ-ten a timely book, one that delves deeply into the past in order to assess

the current state of Catholic biblical scholarship in the United States.l

Since the book has already been reviewed appreciatively by my colleague

JodyVaccaro Lewis in the pages of this journal, and since its import has

been assessed elsewhere, I will address myself to the "future" featured inthe bookt tide, specifically to the future of the text of the OldTestament.I will seek to relate a rather specific discussion about the form of the textof the O1d Testament to larger questions this discussion raises forecumenism, for the doctrine of biblical inspiration, and for the future of

1 Luke Timothy Johnson and'William S. Kurz, s1, The Future of Catholic Biblìcal

Scholarship: A Constructiue Conuersation (Grand Rapids, MI:'William B. Eerdmans

Publishing Corrrp ary, 2002).

Boole Symposíum 133

catholic biblical scholarship. It is my hope that rhese remarks will addboth an Old Tèstament complemenr to the work ofJohnson and Kurz,both of whom are NewTestament scholars, and a new dimension to thelarger discussion about the future of Catholic biblical scholarship.

The text of Scripture is generally regarded as fixed and stable and weare seldom tempted to add to or subtrect from it. But establishing the textof Scripture has become slightly more complicated in the last fifqi years.For example, when the New Revised StandardVersion was published in1989, one can imagine that relativeþ few readers noticed that the transla-tion of the Old Tesramenr was slightly longer than that found in theRevised StandardVersion of 1952.The reasorl for this change had noth-ing to do with new theories of translation or even with the use of inclu-sive language, but can be traced rather to the momentous textualdiscoveries at the Dead Sea some fifty years ago. In the books of Samuel,for instance, the New Revised Standardversion restored four sentences to1 Samuel 70:27 on the basis of new Hebrew evidence from eumran. Inthe book ofTobit, the New Revised Standardversion chose ro translatethe longer and more original texrual form of the book, again on the basisof evidence from Qumran, adding some seventeen hundred words to theRevised Standardversion translation, which had used the shorter Greektext.And this is only the tip of the iceberg.The quiet and generally unno-ticed revolution in textual studies generated by the Dead Sea Scrolls hasrevealed that for several books of the old Tesramenr the traditionalMasoretic Hebrew text represents only one of several texttral forms thathave a claim to representing the earliest recoverable or "original" form ofthe book.Jeremiah is a case in point. Flere the Greek text, which in severalchapters dift-ers significandy from the Hebrew, arguably represents incertain chapters a different and earlier literary form of the book. Similarexamples could be added.Adrian Schenker has argued recently, for exam-ple, that in large secions of the book of Kings, the Old Greek rext repre-sents an earlier form of the text than that preserved in the Masoretic tex.2This raises several related questions about the goàls oftextual cricicism andhow one determines the textual form to be translated.

Johnson and Kurz discuss the question of the textual form of the Bibreonly in passing.Johnson notes that authors likeJames, paul, and Luke.,read

2 A. Schenker, op, AlrcsteTëxtgeuhichte der Könígsbücher, Die hebräísche vorlage derursprünglichen septuaginta als iilteste TÞxtforn der Königsbücher (Fribourg: AcademicPress,2004); see also the theoretical discussion in Schenker's earlier arricle,"'wasüberseøen wir? Fragen zur Textbasis, die sich aus der Textkritik ergeben,,' in DíeUbersetzung der Bíbeî-Aufgabe derTheologie, eds.J. Gnilka and H. p. Rüger (Biele-feld: Luther-Verlag, 1985), 65-80.

734 Book Symposíurt

and interpreted the Greek translation of Torah called the Septuagint(LXX)" (47),and goes on to observe that some HellenisticJews regarded

the Greek text to be divineþ inspired (48). Later, having observed that

Kurz signals the importance of the Septuagint as the intertext for NewTestament authors (767-69, 21,5-16), Johnson writes,

The richness of this exposition presses the issue of the status of theSeptuagint for Catholic biblical interpretation. Everyone acknowledges

that the NewTestament itself is unintelligible without reference to theSeptuagint. But this recognition has no effect on anything else.

Catholics who do not have Greek have no sense of these interconnec-tions. But even when they are pointed out by scholars, ordinaryCatholics cannot find them in their Bibles, or hear them in the liturgy,for all modern translations are from the Hebrew (256).

Without doing so explicitly,Johnson seems to argue in favor of facilitat-ing wider popular access to the form of the OldTestament used by many

of the writers of the NewTestament, nâmely the Septuagint.'While this

is in itself a laudable goal, recent developments in the field of O1d Testa-

ment textual criticism raise even broader issues about the earþ biblicalversions and their status. Below I will briefly raise four questions dealing

with the text of the Bible that I should like to propose for the futureagenda of Catholic biblical scholarship.

1. Multiple literary editions. Eugene Ulrich has written recently about

the phenomenon of multiple literary editions of some books of the

OldTestament.3 The discoveries at the Dead Sea have helped schol-

ars like lllrich to recognìze more clearly that several books of the

Old Testament circulated in more than one literary form. Examples

of this phenomenon are found in certain chapters of the books ofExodus, 1-2 Samuel, 1-2 Kings,Jeremiah, and Daniel. In some cases

two Flebrew forms are preserved, while in other cases one form is

preserved in Greek and another in HebrewTextual criticism itself is

not always equipped to determine which of these forms was earlier.

In the beginning, it seems, there was multiplicity.And this multiplic-ity seems to have continued long past what scholars used to refer to

3 E. tIlrich, "Double Literary Editions of Biblical Narratives and Reflections onDetermining the Form to be Translatedl' ir The Dead Sea Søolk and the Origins

oJ the Bible, ed. E. tllrich (Grand Rapids, Ml:'William Bl Eerdmans PublishingCompany; Leiden: Brill, 1999) ,34-50 . Angela Kim Harkins explores some of the

theological implications of textual pluriformity in a forthcoming article citled,"Theological Attitudes towards the Scriptural Text: Lessons from the Syriac

Exegetical Tiadition and Qumran."

Boole Symltosíum 135

as the period of the stabilization of the biblical text.4The editors ofa ner / critical edition of the Hebrew Bible known as rhe OxfordHebrew Bible have correctþ decided in such cases to print twoHebrew texts in parallel synoptic columns.S It will not be longbefore popular translations follow suit, printing translations of bothHebrew texts side by side.

In addition to the quesrions such plurality might elicit from layreaders, Catholic biblical scholars will no doubt be forced ro considermore closeþ the editorial decisions underþing popular diplomaticeditions of the Masoretic text such as the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgarten-sia.This editio mínor,which prinrs one of the best complete Masoreticmanuscripts and adds a modern, critical apparetus, is often cited as ifit represented "the Bible" in some pristine and normative form.'Whilethe Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, its text and critical apparetus, repre-sented the best standards of scholarship of its day and continues roprovide convenient access to one early form of the Masoretic text, themanner in which the texts have been chosen, edited, and presented,and the readings proposed in the critical appararus, give evidence ofunarticulated historical and theological presuppositions. The result isthat editions such as the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, though usefuI,can hardly be assumed ro give us the definitive text of the OldTesta-ment. The Oxford Hebrew Bible critical edition will undoubtedlylikewise contain very provisional and personal scholarly interpreta-tions. In effect it will approximate an original that should have beenbut never was. But the simple fact that this edition will make occa-sional use of synoptic parallel columns will help to awaken greâterawareness of the limitations of textual criticism and of the difficultiesin the seemingly simple task of establishing the text of the Bible.6

4 For a different view, one that would see textual uniformiry associated with theJerusalem temple alongside of textual pluriformity elsewhere, see A. S. va¡r der'lvoude, "Pluriformity and uniformiry Reflections on the Transmission of theText of the Old Testament l' in Sacreil History and Saaed Tëxts in Earþ Judaßm, ed.J. N. Bremmer and F, García Martinez (Kampen: pharos, 1992),75149.

s SimilarþT NicHas and c.'lvagner ("Thesen zurTþxrlichenvielfalt imTobitbuch,"Journalfor the Study ofJudaísm 34 [2003]:141-59), who have argued that it is impos-sible to reconstruct an urtext of the book ofrobit and call for a synoptic presen-tation of the extant rexts, suggesting thar only such plurality can do justice to the

. "riches ofthe reception and interpreation history ofthe book ofTobit,'(159).6 see the importânt reflections on the task and limits of textual criticism in James

A. Sanders, "Stabiliry and Fluidity in Text and Canon," in Tradition of the Tëxt,studíes ofered to Dominique BarthéIemy in celebratíon of hß z\th Birthday, eds. G.Norton, oP, and S. Pisano, s¡ (Freiburg: (Jniversirätsverlag, 1991),203-17; and

t36 Book Syrrytosíum

The ancient versions. One of the major trends in Old Testament

studies in the past twenty years has been a growth of interest in and

appreciation of the major biblicel versions (LXX, Peshitta,Vulgate).

While the versions have traditionally been used by text critics as

resources for reconstructing the original Hebrew text, increasingly

they are studied and appreciated as precious literary and theological

texts in their own right. The Spanish textual critic N. Fernândez

Marcos, demonstrating a CathOlic preference for the "both/and," has

observed: "The procedure adopted by the Polyglot Bibles has some-

thing to teach us today: to edit the different ancient texts that circu-lated among the distinct communities and which constiúfie sensu

pleno the Books, ta biblial'7The Septuagint in particular has been increasingly recognized to

have played an instrumental role in the formation of Christianculture. The late Dominique Barthélemy, oP, who devoted most ofhis scholarly life to the establishment of the critical Hebrew text ofthe OldTestarnent, called repeatedly for the recognition of a Christ-ian OldTestament in fivo columns: one containing the Septuagint ofthe first centuries of our era, the second the Hebrew text canonized

by the scribes of Israel.s A preliminary step in this direction has been

taken already in the case of the translation of the book of Esther. A1969 agreement between the United Bible Societies and theVatican

Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity allows for this book to be

translated twice, based on both the Hebrew (in the Hebrew canon

idem,"TheTäsk ofText Criticism," in Problems ín BiblicalTheology, Essays in Honor

of RoIJ Knierim, eds. H. T. Sun and K. L. Eades (Grand Rapids, Ml:.William B.

Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1997),315-27; for a popular discussion of the

differing approaches to textual critcism underþing forthcoming editions oftheHebrew Bible, see James A. Sanders, "Keep Each Tiadition Separate," Bible Reuiew

16 (2000):40-49, s8.7 Fernândez Marcos, "The IJse of the Septuagint in the Criticism of the Hebrew

Biblel' SeJ 47 (1987): 591 2.s Dominique Barthélemy, oP,"La place de Ia Septante dans t'Église," reprinted in

D. Barthélemy. Etudes d'histoire du texte de I'AncienTëstament (Fribourg: Editions(Jniversitaires, 1978), 126; see also Adrian Schenker, oP, "IjEcriture Sainte

subsiste en plusieurs formes canoniques simultanées," in Ilinterpretazione della

Bíbbia nella Chiesa, Atti del Simposio promosso dalla Congregazione per la Dottrina

della Fede (Città delVaticano: Libraria EditriceVaticana,200l),178-86; and the

expanded German version of Schenker's article, "Die Heilige Schrift subsistiert

gleichzeitig in mehreren kanonischen Formen," in Studien zu Propheten und Relí-

gionsgeschichte, ed. A. Schenker, oP (Stuttgert: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk,2003),1.92100.

2.

Boole Symposiurn ß7

section) and the Greek (in the deuterocanonical section).9This prec_tice has been adopted by the NEB, R_EB, New Revised StandardVersion, GN, and the FrenchTOB translarions. It is to be hoped thatin the future consideration will be given to printing both versionssynoptically in parallel columns.

Several major international projects are nov¡ underway toprovide not only translations but also commentaries on the Septu_agint and the syriac Peshitta.lO This is a welcome development andone that will make the rich heritage of the Eastern churches acces-sible to'Western audiences. As Brian Daley, SJ, has recently noted,"christian exegesis must not only become more theorogical butmore theologically ecumenical, if it is to nourish the Church."11Theinter-faith (christian-Jewish) and ecumenical gains involved withthe use of a critical Hebrew text based on the work of the Masoreteshave been significant, especially with regard to the increasing conver-gence of lectionary practice in NorthÂmerica. one might anticipatesimilar ecumenical gains to be had with a grearer accessibiliry of theGreek and Syriac Bibles in English translation, though the wide_spread use of these versions in the western liturgies is not likely.12The catholic church, with its supra-narional organizational srruc-ture, long history of utilizing non-Hebrew versions of the oldTesta-ment, and its theoretically multi-cultural and multi-lingual nature, isthe church best equipped to foster the use of the versiàns alongsideof critical and scholarþ editions based on the earliest recoverabletexts. As the pioneering catholic biblical schorar Richard Simon

9 united Bible Societies Executive comrnittee and the vatican Secretariat forPromoting chrisrian uniry "Guiding principres for Inrerconfessional coopera-

_ ^ tion in Translating the Biblel' The Bíble Tianslator 19 (1965): I03.

10 The three septuagint projects are known as the New Englishrianslarion of theseptuagint; La Bibte d'Alexandrie, and Septuaginta Deutich. The New EngrishAnnotated Translation of the Syriac Bible is sponsored by the peshitta Institutein Leiden.

11 Brian E. Daley, s¡,"Is Patristic Exegesis Still usable?: Reflecdons on Early chris-_ ^

rian Interpretarion of the psalms,', Communio 29 (2002): 2I3.72 At a conference on the interpretarion of the Biùle heid in Romania in 199g,

orthodox and -w'estern

scholars identified the questions of the satus of theSeptuagint and of christological reading of the old rèsrament as related ques-tions and as open issues remaining to be resolved; see the editor,s commerits in"Konvergenzen und offene Fragen," in Ausregung der Bibel ín orthoiloxer und øest-licher Percpektiue, Akten des west-östlíchen Neutestamentler/ínnen-symposislns uorlNeamt vom 4.-11. September 1998, eds. J. D. G. Dunn, H. Klein, lJ.-L,¿2, andy.Mihoc (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000),21.9.

l

t,

l:

&

138 Boole Symposíum

noted long ago, "UÉglise Romaine reçoit toutes ces nations âvec

leurs Bib1es."13 The preservation of an ecclesial role for the Septu-agint, Vulgate, and Peshitta, and perhaps for other important earlytranslations as well, would manifest in a clear way that the Bible ofthe whole Church, East and'W'est, has been inspired by the HolySpirit in radically rich and diverse ways. Though the CatholicChurch clearþ calls for modern biblical translations to be based onthe original scriptural lang¡rages, there is a growing body of ofi[icialteaching on the role the biblical versions are to play alongside theoriginal Aramaic, Greek, and Hebrew texts. Del Verbum, number 22,

for example, refers to the honor with which the Church holds these

versions, even while going on in the next sentence to call for trans-lations to be based on the original texts:"For this reason the Church,from the very beginning, made her own the ancient translation of theOld Testament called the Septuagint; she honors also the other East-

ern translations, and the Latin translations, especially that which is

called the Vulgate."14 The recent instruction Liturgiam authenticarn

suggests a similar concern for preserving the riches of the biblicalversions when preparing liturgical translations:

fO]ther ancient versions of the Sacred Scriptures should also beconsulted, such as the Greek version of the Old Testamentcommonly known âs the'Septuagint,'which has been used by theChristian faithful from the earliest days of the Church. . . . Finally,translators are strongly encouraged to pay close attention to thehistory of interpretation that may be drawn from citations ofbibli-cal texts in the writings of the Fathers of the Church.ls

This ofiìcial ecclesial sanction for the use of the versions may beunderstood as another expression of a Catholic predilection for"both/and" inclusivity.

13 R. Simon, Réponse au liurc íntítulé Défense des Sentiments ile quelquesTheologiens de

Hollande sur I'Histoire Critíque duVieuxTestameøt (Rotterdam:7699), as quoted inD. Barthélemy,"Lenchevêtrement de I'histoire textuelle et de I'histoire littérairedans les reladons entre la Septante et le texte mæsorétique," iî De Septuaginta,Studíes in Honor ofJohnWílliamWeuers on his Síxty-Fífth Birthday,eds.A. Pietersmaand C. Cox (Mississauga, ON, Canada: Benben, 1984),37.

74 DeiVerbum, ínVatican Councíl II:The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, ed.Austin Flanriery oP (Nortþort, I{Y: Costello, 1987),no.22.

1s Congregatio de Cultu Divino et Disciplina Sacramentorum, Lituryiam authentí-

cam, March 28,2001 (.'Washington, DC: United States Conference of CatholicBishops, 2007), no.47.

J.

Bool< Symposíum 139

The history of interpretation based on non-Flebrew versions of thàOldTestament.Attention to the various earþ translations ofthe Biblecan have a pastoral impact in that it can facilitate eccess to the historyof biblical interpretation in the Church. Johnson (256) notes thateven when readings and interpretations based on the versions are

pointed out by scholars, people cannot find them in their ownBibles. A fine example of how the treasures of the biblical versionsand the patristic tradition can be e¡ploited in popular commentarycan be seen in Pope John Paul's recent commentaries on the psalms

and canticles of Morning Prayer. There the pope occasionally citesinterpretations of the Psalter based on the text of theVulgate and theSeptuagint alongside of his comments on the Hebrew text.16 In thisway the pluriform nature of the'Word of God is highlighted and therichness of the history of interpretation in both the'W'estern and theEastern traditions, perticularly spiritual and Christological interpre-tation, is made accessible to â new generation.lT

Textual pluriformity and biblical inspiration. Finally I would suggesr

that the developments in textual criticism outlined above make evenmore urgent the call for a renewal of the study of biblical inspirationby Catholic biblical scholars and theologians.ls The fundamental ideabehind the doctrine of inspiration is the secure link between Godtwords as delivered by the prophets and sacred aurhors and the Scrip-ture preserved by the Church. In the not too distant past prominentCatholic biblical scholars have suggested that inspiration is to belocated at the level of particular textual forms of Scripture. George

16 I have consulted an English rranslation of the pope's comment¿ries on the psalmsand canticles of morning prayer titled, Psalms E Cantícles, Medítations and Catech-esìs on the Psalms and Canticles oJ Moming Prayer (Chicago: LIP, 2004). In thisedition examples ofthe pope's use oftheVulgate and Sepruagint alongside ratherthan in place of the Hebrew can be found onp.94 @s 150:1), p. 108 (Ps 43:4),p. 177 (Ps 96:10), and p. 189 (Ps 86:2).The popet practice is similar to that ofJerome, who likewise commented on both Greek and Hebrew lemmæ in hisOld Testament coÍrmentaries; on Jerome's practice see Adrian Schenker, op,"Septuaginta und christliche BlbeIl' Theologische Reuue 91 (1995):461.

17 One might also note in this context that the firsr volume of the Church's Bible(The Song oJ Songq Interpreted by Earþ Christían and Medieval Commentators, eð..

R.A. Norris [Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,2003]) prints complete translarions of theVulgate ând Sepruaginr at the begin-ning of each unit of commentary.

18 D. Janthial ("Liwe et révélation: le cas d'Isaie," Nouuelle Reuue Théologique 126[2004]:16-32) has suggested that recent developments in biblical researchrequire a new articulation of the Churcht teaching on biblical inspiration.

4.

1.40 Book. Symposíum

Montague, SM, for example, has reGrred in the case ofJudith to "thesuperiority of the Greek text in determining the'W'ord of God to theChurch."l9 In this particular case, Montague's position is defensible,given the textual history of this particular book. But one wonders if therecovered Semitic texts of Ben Sira would require H. Duesberg, oSB,

and P,\uvray, who argued in 1958 that it is specifically the Greek textof Ben Sira that er{oys inspiration, to revise their opinion.2o L. Hart-rnân, cssR, specifically identified the inspired biblical text with "theoriginal manuscript of the inspired authorl'27 P Benoit, op, and otherCatholic scholars \Ment so fa¡ in the opposite direction as to arguee4plicitly for the inspiration of the entire Septuagint, an argument madeparticularþ in the 1950s and 1960s, bur one rhat seems ro have beenlargely abandoned.22 I would suggest that these arguments could beincluded in a more general theory of a multiform irupired Bible.

It seems more prudent, and more in keeping with the textualevidence, to locate inspiration at either the level of the book or of theBible as a whole, rather than at the level of particular textual forms,particular manuscripts, or particular authors. E. tllrich has preferred tospeak of canorncity at the level of the book.'With regard specifically tocanonicity, Lllrich notes, "Both in Judaism and in Christianity it is

books, not the textual form of the books, that are canonical."23 Sincecanonicity and inspiration are related, one might infer that Ulrichwould locate inspiration at this level as well. It is not clear that thisparticular formulation is entirely a happy one, for books, of course,have content; they are not empty shells. The question of the textualform remains. In Judaism there is clear evidence that it is specificallythe Masoretic text itselfthat hâs a sacred status not shared by the texualforms of books in the earþ biblical translations such as the Septuagint.

Other scholars, such as Norbert Lohfink, SJ, argue that inspirationshould be located ar the level of the Bible as a who1e.24 Lohfink bases

his argument on the function of the canon.When an individual book

1e G. Montagu e, Slø, The Book of Judith (lrIY: Paulist, 197 3), 13.20 H. Duesberg, oSB, and PAuvray, I-a liure de l'kclesiastique,I-a Saínte Bible,2nd ed,.

(Paris: Cer{, 1958), 22.21 L. Flartman, CSSR, "Sirach in Hebrew and Greek," Catholíc Bibtical euarterþ 23

(196\:4a4.22 For a recent discussion, see M. Müller, The First Bíble oJ the Church: A plea Jor the

Septuagint (Sheftìeld: Shefield Academic Press, 1996).23 E. Lflrich, "The Canonical Process,Textual Criricism, and the Latter Stages in the

Composition of the Bible," in Ulrich, The Dead Sea SuoIIs, 57 .24 N. Lohfink, s1,"The Inerrancy of Scripture," in The Inerrancy oJ Scripture and Other

-Essays (Berkeley: BILBAL, 1992), 24-5I.

Book Synposium 147

is taken into the canon its context is radically reshaped and ie meaningnecessarily modified.This reception into the canon that gives a book itsfinal form can be understood as a new act of authorship, and Lohfinkwould locate the final act of authorship, and irxpiration, here at thislevel. The many individual books, as part of the canon, become oneinspired book, the Bible.As Hugh of StVictor put it:"The whole divineScripture is one book, and this one book is Christ."Whle Lohfink'sinterpretation of inspiration is not without problems, it niceþ empha-sizes the formative role of the Church in shaping the biblical text andavoids speaking of inspired textuel forms of individual bools.

Throughout their book both Johnson and Kurz demonsttate à

concern that Catholic biblical scholarship maintain the highestacademic standards while also building up the Body of Christ. Schol-arþ reflection on the pluriformity of the text of the'Word of Godmay contribute to these goals in two ways. Firstly, such reflectionmay help the Churcht teaching on biblical inspiration ro ûrarure andto avoid the seductive certainties of enlightenment forms of biblicalliteralism. Secondly, maintaining a role for the earþ biblical versionsalongside the original texts in the liturgical and intellectual life of theChurch may also help safeguard the ecumenical catholicity of theChurch and provide it with greater access ro the rich tradition of thesaints and scholars who have gone before us.25 ffi

25 I em gratefirl to Angela Kim Harkins,JodyVaccaro Lewis,lrancis Martin,JamesA. Sanders, Adrian Schenker, Op, and Gregory Tätum, op, for reading earlierdrafts ofthis paper.

II¡t

Nova sr Vsrnn aThe English Edition of the lnternationalTheological Journal

SENron EnrronGeorges Cardinal Cottier, ov, Theologian oJ the Pontfical Household

Co-EorronsMichael Dauphinais and Matthew Levering, Ave María Uniuersity

Assocr¡rn EotronsGilles Emery ov, (Jníuersity oJ Fríboutg

Paul Gondreau, Provídence College

Thomas S. Hibbs, Baylor UnfuersitY

Steven A. Long, Aue Maria Uníuersity

Christopher Malloy, lJnittersity of Dallas

Charles Morerod, ov, Angelia,rn-Rome

John O'Callagþan,Uníversity of Notre Dame

Michael Sherwin, ov, Uniuersity of Fribourg

Bo¡no or AovlsonsAnthony Akinwale, or, Dominícan Instítute, Ibailan, Nigería

John Berkman, The Catholíc Uniuersíty of Ameriea

Steven Boguslawski, oe, Sacreil Heart Major Seminary

Stephen Brock, Santa CrocrRomePeter Casarellz,The Catholíc Uniuersity of Arnerica

Romanus Cessario, ov, St.Johnl Serninary

Fulvio Di Blasi, Collegio Universitarío ARCES

J. Augustine Di Noia, oP, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

Avery Cardinal Dulles, s¡, Fordham Uníuersity

Larru Garcia, Boston College

Mary Ann Glendon, Haruard UniuersitY

Paul Griffiths, tJníversíty of Illinoís at Chícago

Russell Hittinger, University of Thka

Reinard Hütter, Duke Diuiníty School

Fergus Kerr, oe, Oxford Uniuersity

Mother Assumpta Long, ov, Dorninican Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucharíst

Stephen Loughlin, DeSales Uniuersíty

Daniel Mclnerny, Uníversity of Notre Dane

Raþh Mclnerny,Uniuersity of Notre Dame

Francesca Murphy, Uniuersity of Aberdeen

John Saward, Oxford Uniuercity

Richard Schenk, oe,John Paul II Cultural Center

Michele Schumacher, Uniuerity oJ Fribourg

David Solomon, Uniuersity of Notre Dame

Christopher Thompson, (Jniuersity of St. Thomas- St. PauI, MNThomasVeinandy, orn cry,IJnited States Conferenæ of Catholic Bishops

NoVA ETVETERA

The English Edition of the lnternational Theological Journal

rssN t542-7315 Winter 2006 Vol.4, No. I

ArrrcrEsSt.Thomas Aquinas:Theologian and Mystic .......Business Ethics and Catholic SocialThought.. ... .. c.J. McALEER

F¿llible Tþachings and the Assistance of the Holy SpiritReflections on the Ordinary Magisterium in Connectionwith the Instructíon on the Ecclesíaî Vocation

of theTheologíalt,... ...crovANNrsALA,sJ

Francisco Marín-Sola, oP, and the Origin ofJacques Maritain'sDoctrine on God's Permission of Evil . . . MTcHAEL ToRRE

Boor SYMPosruM:The Future of Catholic Bíblical Scholarshíp:A Constructiue Conuersationby Luke TimothyJohnson andWilliam S. Kurz, SJ

The Future of Christian Biblical Scholarship . . . RTcHARD B. HAys

The Future of Catholic Biblical Scholarship:Balance and Proportion...... ..FR,\NKJ. MATERA

The Text of the Bible and CatholicBiblical Scholarship ........SrËpHEN D. RvAN, op

"La Bible en ses Traditions": The New Project of the École bibliqueet archéologique française deJérusalem Presented as a

"Fourth-Generation"Enterprise.... .oLrvrER-THoMAsVENÂRD,op

Re-EnteringtheScriptural'World. .......DAvrDS.yEA.co

Conversation, Conversion,andConstruction.....:..... ....LuKETrMorHyJoHNsoN

Response to the Respondents .. . . ... wrLLrAM S. KuRz, sJ

BooK REVrE$/s

Tiinity ínAquíøas by Gilles Emery op.... ....R.TRENT poMpLUN

Denyíng and Disclosíng Cod:The Atnbiguous Progress

of ModernAtheismby MichaelJ. Buckley, SJ..... .. cRANr K,{ILAN

John Paul II and the I*gacy of Dignitatis Hunanaeby Hermínio Rico, SJ . . RoBERT FÀsrrccr

732

142

159

172

18s

1

17

29

55

95

t20

201

205